By H.E. Mr. Jian Tan, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of Chinato the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
It is a great honour as well as heavy responsibility for me to serve as ambassador of China to the Netherlands.
In my more than three decades of service in foreign affairs, I spent most of the years in multilateral development field. I worked in Geneva and New York. Yet my first posting was bilateral, in Indonesia. My previous one was ambassador to Ethiopia, the roof of Africa. So, I flowed from the highland to the lowland — the Netherlands.
Since my arrival on the Christmas day of 25th December last year, I have reached out to the government, business and academia in the Netherlands. I am quite impressed by the perseverance and openness of the Dutch people. With perseverance, they have turned the lowland into beautiful homeland; with openness, they are the driving force for multilateralism and free trade.
Although situated on the opposite side of the Eurasia continent, our two peoples share many similarities, and the two countries have been building the “Open and Pragmatic Partnership of Comprehensive Cooperation”. There are many bright spots of this partnership and cooperation.
Since the outbreak of COVID-19, leaders from China and the Netherlands have been in close contact through telephone conversations and exchanges of letters. The two governments have worked together in establishing a special cargo air bridge to ensure essential medical supplies to the Netherlands, maintaining a stable industrial and supply chain, and promoting economic recovery.
Climate change is an important area of our close cooperation. In 2019, the Global Center on Adaption based in the Netherlands set its first overseas office in China. In January 2021, China’s Vice Premier Mr. Han Zheng virtually attended the Climate Adaption Summit held in the Netherlands. China has set the goal of peaking carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality before 2060. The job is hard, but our commitment is firm. The Netherlands has been a champion on sustainable development and our cooperation could make a difference in combating climate change.
Both countries support multilateralism. The Netherlands is a role model in international development cooperation. China is for North-South, South-South and Tripartite Cooperation. The two countries maintain consultations on major international and regional issues within the frameworks of the UN, G20, WTO and WHO. There are also practical exchanges and cooperation like on Mali peacekeeping and Somali anti-piracy operations. Together, China and the Netherlands could make important contribution to the international system with the UN as its core, the international order with international law as its basis, the multilateral trading system with the WTO as its corner stone.
Our bilateral trade last year, against all odds, grew by 7.8% to a historical high of 91.8 billion dollars, and Dutch export to China expanded by 14.2%. Our mutual direct investment is also larger than other EU countries. This extraordinary performance during the pandemic is a testament to the resilience and the potential of our economic relations. The sky is the limit. Last year, China was the only major economy registering a positive growth, and became the largest trading partner of the EU. This year it is projected to grow by more than 6%. More importantly, China’s reform and opening up will only be further deepened and widened.
While being optimistic, I am very sober-minded about the challenges ahead.
Both China and the Netherlands commit to protect human rights, though our approach may not be the same given the level of development. While acknowledging people’s political and civil rights, China attaches great importance to the right to development and people’s well being.
We prioritize the improvement of people’s living standard. Over the past four decades and more, China has lifted over 800 million people out of poverty, including about 100 million in the past 8 years. China has completed, 10 years in advance, the goal of poverty reduction set in the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This is a historical achievement for China and for humanity.
We prioritize the protection of people’s life. Faced with the sudden onslaught of Covid-19, the government took quick decision to lockdown Wuhan, a city of more than 10 million people; and Hubei, a province of about 60 million people. There was no hesitation in weighing the health and the economy. Life first.
Recently there have been intensive exchanges on issues related to Xinjiang and Hong Kong. Please allow me to touch each briefly.
The Constitution of the People’s Republic of China stipulates the protection of human rights, the protection of the spoken and written languages and the preservation of traditions and customs of all ethnic groups, the prohibition on discrimination against and oppression of any ethnic group.
Over the past two decades and more, Xinjiang was plagued by terrorism and violence. Thousands of terrorist attacks have caused huge casualties and property losses. Terrorism is the common enemy to the world. The UN Action Plan to Prevent Violent Extremism points out that, poverty, unemployment, lack of education, and distortion of religious belief, among others, are causes for violence and extremism. We therefore have taken measures to address the root causes by providing education and training to those affected, help them get jobs and stay away from violence and religious extremism.
Since 2014, over 3 million people in Xinjiang have been lifted out of poverty. The Uyghur population in Xinjiang increased by 25 percent between 2010 and 2018, and doubled over the past 40 years. China is firmly against forced labour. Besides, given the quality and quantity of Chinese labour force, it just makes no sense, politically or economically, to use forced labour.
Hong Kong has enjoyed a high degree of administrative, legislative and economic autonomy since its return to China in 1997. The implementation of “one country, two systems” is a big success. Still, with the lapse of 24 years after the handover, it’s time to take stock and improve. This is especially necessary given that over the past years, the anti-China radicals in Hong Kong committed vandalism, robbery and arson. They attempted to paralyze the Legislative Council, the government, and the airport, and went so far as to call for independence.
Riots are riots, be it in Hong Kong or other places. Those moves have crossed the bottom line of “one country, two systems”. The decision of the National People’s Congress of China to improve Hong Kong’s electoral system and uphold the principle of “patriots governing Hong Kong” are in line with the Constitution and the Basic Law of HKSAR as well as the established international practices. It is a common sense that a country’s citizens and public servants in particular should love their country and observe the Constitution. “Patriots” covers a wide scope and will not drive out diversity. For sure, Hong Kong’s tomorrow will be much better.
The year 2021 marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China (CPC). Under its leadership, China has realized the task of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects, and will embark on a new journey toward fully building a modern socialist country. In its newly unveiled 14th Five-Year Plan (2021-2025), China aims to foster a new development paradigm for high quality growth. China is focusing on achieving its development goal, including that of the climate change. China is getting more and more connected with the rest of the world, now being the major trading partner for over 120 countries and regions. In 2019, there were as many as 155 million outbound Chinese tourists. As the most populous country, China is becoming the largest consumption market in the world. China’s development is a huge opportunity for other countries.
Recently, we have heard a lot of rhetoric about decoupling, isolation, containment, even a new cold war. It seems that China bashing has become a political correct in some countries. Our goal is to meet the growing aspiration of the Chinese people for a better life. To replace any other country is never our national strategy. We export goods, not political system. It is universally accepted that there is no one-size-fits-all development model and China will continue to develop in a way suited to its own national conditions. This is a diversified world. Countries may differ in civilization, culture, political system and level of development, but no one is to be excluded or isolated.
Developing countries have the right to develop, integrate into the global value chain, move up and have a place in high-tech. Of course they are required to play by the rules including respecting intellectual property rights. Alleging some hi-tech companies from China of spying without evidence is a far cry from free and fair competition. The unprecedented global challenges today require unprecedented cooperation. We aim to build a community of shared future for mankind. Climate change affects every country, virus respects no border. We are living in a global village, and share our fate in the same boat. International cooperation is the only way out.
Next year, China and the Netherlands will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the establishment of our ambassadorial diplomatic relationship. Our relations have withstood the changes in the international landscape over half a century. Our bilateral relationship is termed by our leaders as “Open and Pragmatic Partnership for Comprehensive Cooperation”. We have shared interests, no fundamental interest conflict. As ambassador, I am committed to enhancing understanding and promoting partnership.
The Netherlands is a beautiful place, the Dutch are great people. So, while working hard, I will find time to explore the country, know the people and have a good time.
On the historic date of March 08th – International Women’s Day, a large number of international affairs specialists gathered for the second consecutive summit in Vienna, Austria. This leg of the Vienna Process titled: “Europe – Future – Neighborhood at 75: Disruptions Recalibration Continuity”. The conference, jointly organized by the Modern Diplomacy, IFIMES and their partners, with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, was aimed at discussing the future of Europe and its neighbourhood in the wake of its old and new challenges.[1]
Along with the two acting State Presidents, the event was endorsed by the keynote of the EU Commissioner for European Neighbourhood and Enlargement, Excellency Olivér Várhelyi. One of the most anticipated talks was grouped around Panel III: BREXIT AND FUTURE OF CROSS-ATLANTIC RELATIONS.
Senior researcher and geoeconomics specialist from Berlin, Matthias E. Leitner, elaborated on the New Perspectives on Geopolitics and European Energy Transition, as follows:
I chose the topic of North Stream 2 since it is very timely: project completion coincides with the waning of the “Golden Age of Gas”. In a wider geo-political and geo-economic perspective, it is helpful to remind ourselves that current polarization surrounding the mega-project is not so helpful. Are we having the right conversation about North Stream 2?
In fact, I propose that the huge challenges of European energy transition and digital transition require a wider perspective. The continent’s gas supply does not depend on Russia alone. Germany’s opportunities from utilizing North Stream 2 in the diversification of the European energy mix are a case in point. For a few years now, the unquestioned “western energy community“ from the postwar era is replaced by more competitive relations between gas producers and consumers globally, including (but not limited to) the U.S. shale gas bonanza.
Looking at this new interplay of interests amidst global challenges such as climate change holds the clues for a new dialogue on energy security and sovereignty. This dialogue, I would like to argue, could be more democratic and oriented at shared challenges, instead of exclusionist political and commercial views.
Crispation of Positions around North Stream 2
Hardly any infrastructure project on the European continent has been more controversial than North Stream 2. Debate has intensified and created “more heat than light” and I would not like to go into all the details here. There has been a flurry of reactions as the 1,230km long pipeline is about to be completed. It will double the Russian gas supply to Europe to 110 BCM.
The Project launched in 2015 became a convenient political punching ball in German domestic politics, between EU Member States especially in eastern Europe, and in the context of changing transatlantic relations. There is little shared understanding of the “Energy Sovereignty” concept and aligning with the European Energy Union. Fears of Ukraine becoming more exposed to Russian strong-arming have aggravated these tensions.
North Stream 2 was placed under U.S. extraterritorial sanctions, which generated a flurry of reports and corporate/ government evasive actions.
EU Fundamentals and German Contributions
I would like to recall that the fundamentals for Europe’s global positioning industrial development between the U.S. and China lie beyond North Stream 2. The new EU Strategic Foresight Report of October 2020 focused on the EU dual transition (digital and green energy) and China as systemic rival. The EU is keenly aware of its need to secure critical raw materials for the new green economy.
Top EU officials are clear about using a three-tier approach against Russia, instead of blanket economic sanctions: push-back against violations of international human rights norms, robust response to cyberattacks/disinformation, while preserving a modus vivendi in areas of shared interest or “limited engagement” which includes energy supply flows. Responding to Russia’s breach of legal certainty and procedures in the Navalny Case, the EU Council applied a new global sanctions regime against Human Rights violators for the first time in late February 2021.
I would like to note that Germany can benefit from the larger Russian gas flows as a regional hub for distribution, minimizing transit risks and creating industrial synergies. Gas experts point to possible solutions which facilitate the phase-in of renewables. Germany’s declared exit from coal and nuclear energy in 2022 is not far away. Therefore, gas provides a convenient substitute in the short run and offers “cleanest in quantity”. Nurturing mutual interdependence through ‘compartmentalization’ in energy versus security policy has been Germany’s underlying principle since the North Stream 1 Pipeline was opened.
Energy Transformation Challenges – Diversification of Southern Gas Routes
EU goals of climate adaptation under the Paris Agreement by 2030 (and reaching net zero emissions by 2050) will require a monumental restructuring in the energy sector. In any future energy mix, LNG imports are also an option.
Even a more modest post-Pandemic economic recovery in the EU compared to the U.S. might depend on reliable energy supply in the form of gas. Ultimately, lasting changes in emission levels depends on changing consumption patterns throughout the economy, requiring broad systematic education in consumer habits.
The EU also receives gas from Azerbaijan via the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) and its three trunks via Anatolia in Turkey and through the Adriatic to Greece, Albania and on to Italy. Although these gas volumes are smaller (31 BCM annually), some 10 BCM of gas are destined to southern Europe. I would draw your attention to the fact that Azerbaijan is also both gas producer and operator like Gazprom in North Stream 2. European credit financing was made available for the SGC project.
Together with Turkey’s ambition to become an “Energy Bridge” between Asia and Europe, Russian and Central Asian gas is set to become a fixture in some southern European countries. However, other more complex gas schemes involving Turkmenistan (the world’s largest holder of known gas reserves) and branch lines from Iranian gas fields have not materialized so far for a variety of reasons.
Towards Pan-European Energy Community Dialogue
In the age of waning gas, a tendency to inter-link energy and political geostrategic and geoeconomics considerations has crowded out other approaches among technocrats and energy experts. Energy links have become echo chambers of Cold War paradigms, often without full understanding of new global developments. Conversely, far less attention has been given to transparency over mitigating the environmental costs, educating the end-users about the transition to a new economy.
Democratizing the discussion and establishing dialogue among labor unions and consumer associations, scientists and climate experts on gas supply, storage and conservation might be possible. I would argue that this can provide confidence building as well as prevent instrumentalizing energy links in the short term. In a pan-European setting, the OSCE is well placed to intensify such dialogue. Under the OSCE approach of comprehensive security, this has been on the a in Vienna where we are speaking todaysince 2006.
People-to- people contacts in transboundary energy flows would help address misperceptions between major gas import and export countries. Additionally, relevant labor safety and employment standards in gas industries could be boosted in cooperation with UN Agencies such as ILO. I would like to conclude by mentioning that a common interest in upskilling the energy workforce in Europe and its neighborhood could benefit from such an initiative , which creates resilience to the huge challenges ahead in energy transition and digital transformation.
Sources:
Dornfeldt, Matthias, Hoffen auf die Südschiene. Internationale Politik (DGAP Berlin März-April 2018).
Felbermayr, Gabriel, Die Blockade von Nord Stream 2. Wirtschaftswoche (5 March 2021).
Fücks, Ralf, Die fossile Großmacht und der Klimawandel. Internationale Politik/ DGAP Berlin (March-April 2021).
Lo, Bobo, La Russie et le changement climatique: entre deni et adaptation. Notes de l’Ifri (Centre Russie/NEI Mars 2021).
OSCE Secretariat, Energy Security Brochure (OSCE-OCEEA Vienna 2017).
Schmidt- Felzmann, Anke, Instrument russischer Geopolitik. Internationale Politik (DGAP Berlin März-April 2018).
Westphal, Kirsten, Strategic Sovereignty in Energy Affairs. SWP Commentary (January 2021).
About the Author:
Matthias E Leitner, Senior Adviser/ International Coordinator with ICSVE Center Washington, DC (USA), Berlin-based Matthias Ernst LEITNER has over 20 years’ experience in international peace and security, mainly in UN and regional peace operations across Africa and in the Middle East. His professional focus is on governance/ accountability, national dialogues and coalition building as well as on project development for preventing violent extremism and radicalization. Mr. Leitner has held senior management positions with UN Special Envoy Offices. His ongoing interest is in UN reforms, peacebuilding and innovative approaches for resilience to the C-19 pandemic. His academic background from Bonn and Oxford Universities is in languages and history.
The Role of the Representation of the European Commission in the Netherlands
By H.E. Mr. Didier Herbert, Head of the Representation of the European Commission in the Netherlands.
The European Commission has Representations in the 27 countries of the European Union. The role of the Representation is to be the ‘ears, eyes and voice’ of the European Commission in the Netherlands. What we do is listen, inform and report. The Embassies of the European member states in the Netherlands have similar tasks, among others, and with them, we naturally maintain narrow contacts through our regular meetings of the Heads of Missions of the EU Member states in The Netherlands.
The first aspect of our task consists in connecting with Dutch citizens and authorities at different levels on expectations and questions regarding European action. Secondly, we discuss and inform about European policy in general and important European policy topics that affect the Netherlands as a whole or Dutch regions and cities in particular. Last year, one of the main topics was about EU actions and cooperation in response to the coronavirus. Few people know how in the first months, when all borders were closed, we joined forces in the EU to bring back over a 100,000 citizens stranded outside the EU to their home country and created “green lanes” through which lorries could bring Dutch vegetables to clients in neighbouring countries.
Our work also means dispelling misconceptions in some cases. Some time ago, the newspapers reported that the EU was planning to force cat owners to keep their pets on a leash, because cats were said to be dangerous for biodiversity and for the survival of birds. There was, of course, absolutely no intention to do that – apart from whether the proposition is correct whether cats are dangerous for the survival of certain bird species. So there we clearly indicated that the Commission did not intend to submit anything on that.
In addition to listening and informing locally, we provide country-specific knowledge, analysis and advice to the President and all Members of the Commission. So that they are able to consider these elements at an early stage. Just imagine if the discussions about a common European Recovery Programme could have led so quickly to such an ambitious result had the negotiators not been aware of the expectations and sensitivities in each European country.
How to involve Dutch citizens
We engage with citizens in several ways – we are active on social media, we organise trips and events, and we work together with our network of Europe Direct Information Centres throughout the country. Citizens’ dialogues and visits to various cities and provinces are also a fixed element of the Representation’s menu. In recent years, for example, the Commission and the Representation have organized a large number of citizens’ dialogues. A Commissioner, often Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans, comes to visit one or multiple places in the Netherlands. For example, we went to Emmen, Breda, and Leiden to talk to citizens about European policy.
That gives you a good sense of what is going on in the Netherlands. I see it as part of my job to regularly visit various provinces and cities. Coming here in 2019, I intended to go to all the Dutch provinces; I still have that intention and I am planning to do so as soon as restrictions will ease. In The Hague, you only have one view of the Netherlands. As Brussels is not representative for Belgium, Paris not for France and Madrid not for Spain, I think it is essential to learn more about different aspects of the Dutch country and culture.
Our diversity is a plus in Europe. But explaining why and what we do together in the EU is equally important: in that vein, I want to draw your attention to the bi-lingual (Dutch and English) newsletter on the latest European policy developments, which we send out on Friday every week. People can register via this link.
H.E. Mr. Didier Herbert, Head of the Representation of the European Commission in the Netherlands.
What is next on the agenda for the Representation?
Due to the corona crisis, some of our priorities temporarily moved to the background – health was the main priority for all of us the last months – but we are now also changing our focus towards the recovery after the pandemic. But essential issues, such as global warming have not disappeared.
We managed to come to an unprecedented agreement on NextGenerationEU: based on the National Reform Plans that each country will draw up, this instrument should help to repair the economic and social damage caused by the pandemic. As well as catering for future challenges: this important Programme is to help ensuring a sustainable and inclusive recovery that promotes the green and digital transitions.
We furthermore look forward to the start of a vast exercise agreed on by all European countries, the European Parliament and the Commission. The aim is to reach out and engage with citizens in a wide-ranging debate on how they see and what they suggest for the future of the European cooperation project in the coming decade and beyond. We hope many Dutch people will participate and join this Conference on the Future of Europe.
About the author:
Didier Herbert, started his career in business and law and went on to spend the vast majority of his career working for the European Commission in Brussels. After being Director for Internal Market & Competitiveness and Chairing the Regulatory Scrutiny Board of the European Commission, he is now serving as Head of the Representation of the European Commission in the Netherlands.
Despite the attempts, that humanity is making to protect itself and predict possible options for the development of its future, despite the high costs of health care and safety, increase in life expectancy and constant improvement in all of these areas, our society remains risky. At the end of the 20th century, the sociologist Ulrich Beck already defined our society as risky (Beck, 1995). In the modern world, even inaction can bring its own risks.
Two approaches to defining risk
There are two main approaches to defining risk. The realist approach comprehends “risks” in scientific and technical terms. The premise of this approach is the possibility of calculating the risk and its consequences, where the risk is the result of the probability of occurrence of the hazard and the scale of its consequences (Bradbury, 1989). Risk is the product of probability and hazard. It is defined as an objective fact of the surrounding world, as a danger that is calculated independently of sociocultural processes.
The sociocultural approach determines risk as a socially constructed attribute that is dependent on processes within society. It implies that social perception and our values go hand in hand with the definition and evaluation of risk. Even objective indicators and risk assessments are accompanied by subjective judgments and opinions. Media as a subsystem of society also has some influence on the construction of risk.
Media and risk perception
With the advent and popularization of media, the speed of information dissemination has significantly increased. Accordingly, the transfer of information about risks is accelerated. News about a catastrophe in a certain country in a matter of hours and sometimes minutes spreads all over the world. Media not only accelerate but also bring information about possible risks closer to us. An incident that happened many kilometers away from us is already perceived as something real and very close to us. The amount of information also plays an important role. The more information the media provides, the stronger the effect it has on risk perception (Wahlberg, Sjoberg, 2000). The more news we receive about a particular problem, the more we perceive it as to be real and the more real the risk is.
On the other hand, the media does not cover all events. The media is a public arena, which has its own carrying capacity (Hilgartner, Bosk, 1988). Since public attention is a scarce resource, there are limitations to the issues that the media can cover. Problems constantly compete for attention. This dynamic process opens up new issues that require our attention, and allows us to forget about others for a while. The agenda is changing; events are replacing each other, which means that the danger of other risks and threats comes to the forefront.
I don’t think that a couple of years ago, many people would have imagined life during a pandemic. The threat of terrorist attacks, natural disasters or another economic crisis seemed more real. We can only wonder and try to predict what awaits us in the future, what risks await us and how quickly they spread around the world, including through the media.
References
Beck, U. (1995). Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk. London: Polity Press.
Bradbury, J. A. (1989). The policy implications of differing concepts of risk. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 14(4), 380-399.
Hilgartner, S., & Bosk, C. L. (1988). The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model. American journal of Sociology, 94(1), 53-78.
Wahlberg, A. A., & Sjoberg, L. (2000). Risk perception and the media. Journal of risk research, 3(1), 31-50.
About the author:
Anastasiia Pachina
Anastasiia Pachina is a Sociologist at Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
‘Take your dreams seriously‘… ‘Make yourself proud’… ‘Choose happy’… these are just a few of the words that I usually see on her social media, sharing optimism on a daily basis.
‘Everyone has a story to tell’… indeed, let’s discover hers!
Olga Tapiola or ‘Madame EU’ as she is called in Bangkok, where she is currently living with her husband and stepson, is a complex and inspiring woman. She is originally from Ukraine but married a Finnish career diplomat who now represents the European Union in Thailand. Turning into a ‘trailing spouse’ did not come easy. She could grasp the substance and representational parts as she initially studied international relations and political economy and worked as a policy expert for a number of years.
Olga Tapiola, photography by Sommart Puengjudoom
Her greatest passion of all is psychology, which she studied later on in life and practiced. ‘I am particularly fond of group psychology, especially my favourite method called psychodrama. It has a beautiful dynamics; I am fascinated about the way groups interact and work. I am curious about people and love to discover their stories. In Thailand, I had the chance to conduct groups for parents of children with developmental and behavioural special needs, as a volunteer for a local NGO. It gave me so much joy.’
‘The world is dark enough, there are so many challenges, it is only up to us to find the light in ourselves and others’ she says, and then I remember another one of her beautiful Instagram quotes ‘The secret to life is knowing how to make the bad times good and the good times unforgettable’.
But life is not always as perfect as on Instagram … she sometimes misses the greenery and the four seasons in Europe, she misses her extended family and people she called friends for many years and are now living thousands of miles away. She is no stranger to human pain and challenges through her therapy work.
Olga Tapiola by YSIS Co.
She tells me: ‘home is where I am now, in this moment, with my closest family. In order to succeed, a diplomatic couple needs to build a strong partnership between the spouses, with support going both ways. The second important thing is to have something which brings you joy, something that lights you up, while your diplomatic partner is going to the office. There is so much beauty in this world, so many fascinating people who are waiting to be discovered. One just needs good company and a supportive shoulder.’
She also runs a support group for ambassadors’ spouses in Bangkok. Although it was not intended as a therapy group, it offers safe space to the spouses to share their news and talk about challenges without being judged. It serves as a platform to discuss ideas and simply get support from likeminded friends. She says: ‘Being a diplomatic, and in particular an ambassador’s spouse, is a great privilege and at the same time a big responsibility. More can be done to help spouses both enjoy their lives and be able to support their diplomatic partners’. Her latest discussion paper, still unpublished, looks at the potential and challenges of ambassadors’ spouses in the 21st century.
While being an ambassador’s spouse often takes a large part of her time, COVID-19 lockdown allowed her to rediscover another old and forgotten passion: painting.
‘Trust the magic of new beginnings’…
‘I have taken painting classes for three years, back in Ukraine and had exhibited my work before, both in Kyiv and in Brussels. But during the lockdown, I was lucky to reconnect with my inner artist. I found a new routine which was very fulfilling’.
Her paintings are beautiful, full of colour and inspire the same optimism that she transmits through her words.
‘Things That Bring You Joy – is the title of my space where I exhibited two subsequent collections of paintings in Bangkok. When asked to name this space, I remembered my father’s favourite phrase – “Whatever you do, always do things that bring you joy”. Indeed, I saw that many times in life: when you do what you like, and, if your heart is fulfilled, everything else follows. Being able to do so is a privilege that I really appreciate.’
‘The process of painting, colours, time spent in my studio – bring me infinite joy right now. I like to escape my diplomatic bubble and express myself in a different way. My art is about happiness – happiness of small things, joy of small steps – that can help us overcome all the difficulties. I listen to my heart and paint out what’s in it right now. Nature, feelings, moments, I get inspiration from everywhere.’
Because of her, psychology and art met. Her wisdom and professional experience merged with her artistic inspiration and create beauty every day.
‘Never give up on your dreams’ she says. ‘Let joy be your heart’s name’
As has been the case in many sectors of public and private life, diplomacy has also been affected by the coronavirus pandemic. The virus has spread all over the world from Alaska to the remote Andaman archipelago and beyond with tremendous consequences. The high-level meetings of the 75th session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2020, was a video messages spectacle of leaders delivering pre-recorded video presentations. There was certainly no room for boring and unstimulating presentations.
Foreign Ministries without any doubt will learn vital lessons from the pandemic. Consular services, for instance, have surpassed most other business at embassies worldwide in 2020. Consulates played an important role in assisting their citizens by steering them through a world replete with pandemic restrictions. Besides, consular work facilitates opportunities to interact closely with the diaspora.
Due to lockdowns, curfews and other restrictive measures, diplomatic functions such as receptions, conferences, seminars, book launchings and the like have been scaled down and have been reorganized via Zoom conference or other digital platforms. These new measures have served as an avenue for the diplomatic community to pivot and continue networking and explore business opportunities. Additionally, the pandemic has prevented diplomats from gathering in person to celebrate their respective National Days.
Interesting to note that no one can escape video conferencing, not even the Queen of England. Last week HM Queen Elizabeth II took time out of her busy schedule to join a Zoom conference to discuss matters relating to science, technology and space travel. The virtual conference was part of an event to celebrate British Science Week which was held from 5th -14th March 2021. The event celebrated the role played in society by science and aims to inspire a new generation of British scientists. The monarch was joined by space scientist Dr. Maggie Aderin-Pocokc, Professor Caroline Smith and schoolchildren from Thomas Jones Primary for the virtual presentation.
No need to give up in despair, digital diplomacy is not the end of diplomacy, rather, it is the re-discovery of diplomacy! Because of the coronavirus, diplomats can interact without meeting face-to-face. Digital diplomacy is now perceived as a medium of diplomacy and involves the use of various digital platforms and features of communication in the exchanging of ideas. Diplomacy had to change and the role of the ambassador continues to change accordingly.
The pandemic and you
There is no doubt that the pandemic has had an impact on your life for over a year now, right? Why not try beating the pandemic fatigue by making the best of your current circumstances. Using your time wisely can help you to stay positive and avoid excessive worry. Rather than focus on what you can no longer do, look for ways that you can take advantage of your current situation. For example, are there projects that you now have time for or hobbies that you can now pursue? Can you spend more time with your family and friends?
The COVID 19 pandemic has impacted diplomacy and the lives of diplomats. You may wonder, will digital diplomacy be the way of the future? Well, take courage, sooner or later the pandemic will peter out and life will go back to (a new) normal. Nevertheless, there will be some changes in the diplomatic sphere.
On the historic date of March 08th – International Women’s Day, a large number of international affairs specialists gathered for the second consecutive summit in Vienna, Austria. This leg of the Vienna Process event titled: “Europe – Future – Neighbourhood at 75: Disruptions Recalibration Continuity”. The conference, jointly organized by four different entities (the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, Scientific Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace) with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, was aimed at discussing the future of Europe and its neighbourhood in the wake of its old and new challenges.
Among other notable speakers there was also a prominent EAF Lawyer of Latvia, Andrejs Pagors. His polemic, but very constructive views and suggestions contributed to the greatly mesmerising flow and outcome of the central conference’s panel. Central to his address was the question: A political bias and economic wellbeing – is reconciliation between the two possible? Following lines are his contribution to this highly successful Vienna Process event:
Latvia, like the rest of Europe, is experiencing the consequences of the Covid 19 (C-19) measures, which directly affects the economic state of the country and regions.
Small and medium-sized businesses are especially affected, for which the government has not yet developed a system of assistance, and the criteria for assistance do not allow all enterprises to apply for assistance from the state.
It should be noted that the crisis in Latvia did not begin in March 2020, but at the end of 2019. The drop in GDP was associated with a drop of transit and production sectors. A crisis or an epidemic has become the perfect cover for the lack of an economic development plan for the country.
The inadequate and purely concepted economic conduct of the government has led to the fact that the economic crisis will continue, and a more powerful wave awaits us, experts say. The government was not ready for the second wave of C-19 and the third wave is approaching for which we are not ready again.
Latvia is unique in that we are not trying to apply restrictive measures to save businesses that work in other European countries, but we come up with our own illogical measures that do not work, and we see that the number of cases is growing. Correct and logical measures will help to return to normal life, and this will allow the business to work productively and develop.
In all countries, except for Latvia, the government tried to support and prevent a drop in consumption of the inhabitants of their country, thereby supporting production. In Latvia, an unfortunate measure to ban trade in a number of goods led to the closure of production, which ultimately reduced tax revenues to the state treasury by 18.5%.
White flags at shopping centers symbolize a decrease in turnover and that the safety factor is running out. Enterprises that, due to restrictions, were unable to sell seasonal goods, did not receive working capital to purchase new goods. The government was slow to realize the opportunity to support the business by allocating money for working capital that could be used to pay off rent and pay utility bills.
A political bias and economic wellbeing – you can not have both
At the same time, the current authorities did not take any measures for state economy or rejection of non-priority projects. If we compare with other countries, the reduction of government officials began everywhere. In Latvia, the number of officials has not been reduced, even with a decrease in the amount of work. From every 1 euro of tax paid to the treasury, 0.15 euro is spent on the maintenance of the state apparatus.
At the same time, during the C-19 measures, Latvia turned out to be one of the leaders of the sanctions policy that was deadly for business. For 30 years Russia and Belarus have been using Latvian ports. And objectively for central Russia, Belarus, our three leading ports of Ventspils, Riga and Liepaja are more profitable than the Russian Ust-Luga. The tariffs are 25-30% lower, the speed of cargo clearance is faster.
However, the result of many years of anti-Russian rhetoric was Russia’s refusal to work with Latvia. The Kremlin used the administrative resource, and the goods went bypassing the Baltic countries. At the moment we have lost banking business, transit and trade with our neighbors Belarusians and the Russian Federation. Consequently, the economy became hostage to politics. There was hope for China. Moreover, scientists are sounding the alarm and note the slowdown of the Gulf Stream, which could nullify all the efforts of Russia and China on the northern sea route.
China has a well-known project – “One Belt – One Road”, it is also called the “New Silk Road”. Beijing was ready to work in both Latvia and Estonia. However, following in the wake of American policy, the Chinese were not allowed to enter the Baltic. And now, after the breakdown of the EU-China investment agreement due to the Uyghur agenda, there is no need to wait for investments from China. Hence, due to political problems, port complexes – just few years ago still among the most promising in the Baltics, is now threatened.
At the municipal or city level, the situation is the same as on the state level. Let me use as an example my own birth city: Jelgava (Mitava), 800 years of history and development. Where 20 years ago minibuses of the European level were produced and one of the largest sugar factories worked.
At the end of the 90s, the RAF plant with 4,000 employees was liquidated, and in 2006 the Jelgava “cukurfabrika” was liquidated, which produced sugar for the whole country and for export, gave jobs and developed agriculture, which was engaged in the cultivation of sugar beets. The political elites made concessions to the EU in exchange for positions and places in the Brussels apparatus. Now, Latvia buys sugar in Denmark. In 2010, a major investor in the production of railroad cars came to the city, but again political interference prevented the start of large-scale production in the city, although the amount of financial injection into the city was equal to the entire annual budget of the city. This time, the investor was from neighboring Estonia. But politics intervened here too.
Rocky 2020 showed us that things are not changing for the better. In addition to the war of sanctions with Russia and China, the “war of vaccines” was added. At the same time, the old national political establishment continues to live according to the principle “the state is us”, prioritizing its own interests, and not the country’s economy. I note that the C-19 measures have demonstrated the weaknesses of the EU. Recently, the European Commission diversified the procurement of vaccines returning it onto the Member States level – each country has the right to purchase it independently.
What will than happen next? If the EU cannot resolve important issues, maybe we, the EU states, need more autonomy in economic matters, in the implementation of national projects, too. And in the change of political teams that turned out to be inadequate to effectively tackle the mounting C-19 induced socio-political and economic crisis.
About Author:
Eugene Matos
Eugene Matos de Lara, publisher of the academic journal Border Crossing, he is an International Private Law specialist of the University of Ottawa, Canada.
On the historic date of March 08th – International Women’s Day, a large number of international affairs specialists gathered for the second consecutive summit in Vienna, Austria. This leg of the Vienna Process titled: “Europe – Future – Neighbourhood at 75: Disruptions Recalibration Continuity”. The conference, jointly organized by four different entities (the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, Scientific Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace) with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, was aimed at discussing the future of Europe and its neighbourhood in the wake of its old and new challenges.[1]
The event was probably the largest gathering since the beginning of 2021 for this part of Europe.
Along with the two acting State Presidents, the event was endorsed by the keynote of the EU Commissioner for European Neighbourhood and Enlargement, Excellency Olivér Várhelyi. Besides discussing the strategic neighbourhood and the Union’s approach to it, underlaying leitmotif was deliverability of the Union’s ambitious New Green Deal for Europe. Numerous panellists (nearly all of the Conference’s Panel II and III) warned that there will be no success in the EU Green Deal without balanced and politically unbiased approach to Energy and Transport.
The problems of the port complex and the creation of new traffic flows in northeastern Europe, raised by the numerous speakers of the Conference on March 8th are relevant for the whole of Europe. The loss of the Baltic countries of Russian transit, the connection, first of all, not with the pandemic, but with the desire of Russia to deprive the Baltic countries of income within the framework of the sanctions war. Rising unemployment and the closure of port facilities will necessitate more funding for these countries from Brussels, and politically could be an economic and political victory for Moscow.
At the same time, officially, Russia’s actions regarding the refusal to use the Baltic ports are not part of the anti-European sanctions and, of course, the issue could be partially resolved in favor of the Baltic States with the appropriate will of all parties to dialogue.
In parallel, Eastern Europe is an object of interest for China, within the framework of its “one belt, one road” project, and this transport corridor simply does not have enough Russian resources either in the Arctic or in a small section of the Russian Baltic. Businesses willing to work with China are not happy with Brussels’ refusal to conclude a financial agreement with China, the signing of which is linked to the human rights situation in China.
At the same time, it is obvious that China will not make concessions to either the EU or the US on this issue, but economic ties with it are important for Europe. Is a unified approach to Chinese investments in the EU and Chinese transport projects through the territory of Russia possible? This is the question that must be resolved for the early recovery of the pandemic-stricken economy in Europe.
Discussions around Nord Stream 2 are primarily of a political nature, exacerbating relations within the EU. Attempts to disrupt this project are no less dangerous for central Europe than for Russia itself, which will find other ways to sell its resources.
The discussions around Nord Stream 2 are primarily political in nature, thus aggravating relations within the EU and, in fact, splitting the single European camp, indirectly playing into the hands of the Kremlin. Attempts to disrupt this project are no less dangerous for central Europe than for Russia itself, which will find other ways to sell its resources.
All this necessitates the emancipated and indigenous, pan-European recalibration of politico-military but also of the economic relations based on reciprocity and unbiased, non-preferential approach. For the EU and Europe as whole this remains the question of all questions – point of failure or success in delivering to its future generations.
About the Author:
Audrey Beaulieu of the University of Ottawa (Globalization and Intl Development Department), specialised in Public and Private International law, international development and global politics.
a Few Things on ”The Great Reset” and ”The Social Distancing”
Motto: “Whatever happens in your life is the result of two facts: something that you have done or you haven’t” – Albert Einstein
By Corneliu Pivariu
The Great Reset
There’s a lot of talk lately about The Great Reset[1]. In fact, the idea is not new. At the 2012 World Economic Forum meeting (WEF), the stakeholders considered ”The Great Transformation” as a solution to the current global challenges. At the 2016 meeting of the same forum there was talk of ”The Fourth Industrial Revolution”[2]. In 2019, the WEF meeting was titled “Globalisation 4.0 – Modelling the new global architecture in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution”. Actually, the Hungarian-American economist Karl Polanyi suggested much earlier (in 1944) a re-thinking of the economy he called then “The Great Transformation”, whereby the market economy and the nation-state were understood not as two distinct elements but as a whole Polanyi named ”the market society”.
It is worth mentioning that 2019 marked an expansion of the WEF network for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, created in 2017 when more than 100 governments and businesses joined, including 5 members of G7 and some international organizations[3].
Recently, The Valdai Discussion Club published an evocative infograph concerning COVID-19 and the Fourth Industrial Revolution[4] (see below).
Without being impressed by the formulations of the WEF documents, many of which can be considered staggering, we find out, as Naomi Klein[5] says, that the initiatives of the Davos Forum wish to create a plausible impression that the big winners of the world economic system “are on the point of willingly leaving the greed aside and start seriously solving the boiling crises that are radically destabilizing our world”. That is not at all the case and statistics abundantly prove the contrary. Even at the WEF meeting of 2016, different interventions mentioned that the poor and rich divide in the world is more and more obvious and that the said inequality increased by 47% during the last five years. In 2016, 1% of the world population owned 99% of the world wealth. The latest data shows that the world billionaires’ wealth reached at 31 December 2020, 11.95 trillion $ (increasing by 3.9 trillion$ between 18 March and 31 December only). The wealth of the first 10 billionaires of the world increased in 2020 by 540 billion $[6].
As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2021 meeting of the WEF was held online during four days. The stated purpose was rebuilding trust and buiulding principles, policies and partnerships for 2021. The event attracted as usual the participation of certain heads of states and governments, prominent international business leaders, leaders of civil society and global media.
A in-person Special Annual Meeting is scheduled between 25-28 May in Singapore. According to Klaus Schwab’s statement, “The Special Annual Meeting 2021 will be a place for leaders from business, the governments and civil society to meet in person from the start of the global pandemic. Public-private cooperation is needed more than ever to rebuild trust and address the fault lines that emerged in 2020.” Ahead of The Global Technology Governance Summit, a meeting scheduled to find ways for using the emerging technologies in the framework of a public-private collaboration will be held in Tokyo from 6-7 April 2021. The WEF will return to Davos for the 2022 Annual Meeting.
The Great Reset has three components:
a fairer market in accordance with a stakeholders economy, at all social levels;
– investments driven by common objectives such as ”equality and sustainability”, according to a new system, more resilient – for instance green infrastructure and industries with better track records of their social and environmental impact;
– the public good should be supported by addressing the social and public health problems based on harnessing the technological innovations of the fourth industrial revolution.
perpetual and economically controlled pandemic lockdowns until the population gives in the medical tyranny;
medical passports and monitoring the interpersonal contacts as part and parcel of day-to-day life[8];
censorship of all voices opposing the agenda;
a slowed down economic activity on behalf of reversing the ”climate change”;
impoverishment and the loss of private property;
setting up ”the universal basic income” for a generation of dependent and desperate persons;
a cashless society and a digital monetary system where the confidentiality of all transactions is completely removed;
creating a ”common economy” where nobody will own anything (apart from the ”elites”) and the independent production is banned;
removal of the national borders and the end of sovereignty and self-determination;
the global political power will be centralized in the hands of the ”elite”.
Yet on the WEF site it is said that the situation associated with COVID-19 should not have as a legacy ”a tragedy” only but, ”on the contrary, the pandemic represents a rare and narrow window of opportunity for reflecting, reimagining and resetting our world so that we create a fairer, more prosperous and more just future”.
An important conclusion drawn at January 2021 WEF meeting is that a key element of the situation is to restore public trust “which was eroded by the perception that the Corona virus pandemic was wrongly addressed”.
Angela Merkel’s speech at the WEF was interesting too and we noticed for this article that the pandemic ”showed us our global connections oraddictions” and identified ”the lack of digitalisation in our society” as a weak point as well as the necessity to act for ”the climate neutrality by 2050” as the EU was already committed to. I noticed that the German leader raised the issue of The Great Reset: ”Do we really need this Great Reset?”, she questioned and added that ”isn’t it rather obviousthat we need less a new start in establishing the objectives but we need to be more resolute in our actions?”
WEF leadership have presented for some time their ideas and proposals as implacable ones which have to be implemented and that was what Klaus Schwab tried this time too to induce to the audience by insisting on the sentence presented in his latest work ”Stakeholders Capitalism”and declared he was ”amazed by the ideological resistance it aroused”. The issue needs a broader approach but we confine ourselves to quoting Wall Street Journal which commented on: ”… on the sentence that the business leaders make a better world pursuing social objectives additional to the profit we would expect a discussion about the most important counter argument – namely that the business leaders could worsen the world…stakeholders capitalism can be in the end a more profitable version of the classical capitalism – because people are fooled and the field is washed”.
The President of the European Commission spoke at Davos about the need to regulate Big Tech and said: “The business model the online social platforms use has had an impact not only on the free and fair competition but also on our democracies, on the security and the quality of information. This is why limiting the huge power of the big digital companies is needed. We want that the values we cherish in the offline world be observed online too. … We cannot accept that decisions with major impact on our democracy be made on a computer software”. ”A body of rulesbased on our values – human rights, pluralism, inclusion and privacy protection is needed”, Ursula von de Leyen added.
Important speeches were delivered by the Chinese President Xi Jinping[9] and by the Russian leader Vladimir Putin[10]. Reading between the lines outlines indeed the specific interests of each of them.
The COVID-10 pandemic is in full swing and at the date of issuing this material one year has passed since the pandemic was declared and a few months from the start of the vaccination campaign.
The UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres declared on 17 February 2021[11], in a UN virtual meeting that the purpose of the vaccination for the entire world population is ”the greatest moral test towards the global community” and emphasized that anyone, anywhere should be included in the vaccination process. ”So far, the vaccination process was wildly unequal and unjust as 10 countries administered 75% of the whole COVID-19 vaccine.At the same time, more than 130 countries did not receive even a single dose”, the UN Secretary General said. On 26 February the UN Security Council adopted a resolution calling for equity as far as the access to vaccines against COVID-19 pandemic is concerned, a resolution reflecting in a way a certain return to unity of the international community[12]. Let us not deceive ourselves as there is a great distance from words to deeds and the international community did not demonstrate yet the needed maturity for completely and efficiently implementing such a provision.
There is enough lack of confidence concerning the very evolution of the globalisation process and there are voices saying that one cannot arrive at The Great Reset with ”the same old globalists”. Plutocracy indeed will play a part of the first magnitute in the process trying to control and limit the power of states, something that seems easily attainable considering the rather precarious condition of the leaders of the present world political class.
A new multipolar world order consensually agreed upon is for sure preferable to a world war waged for the globalisation of any way of life and some would equate that with admitting defeat without fight.
But what would be the possibilities and the guarantees of durability of such an understanding, indeed if the idea is accepted? At a certain moment the world could become again bi or unipolar. It is quite impossible to establish a durable equilibrium in between the hubris of the great powers, especially when plutocracy is putting the pedal to the metal of global changes.
It all looks more and more like an ongoing planetary takeover. The power axis is the leadership in Beijing and a handful of ultrarich American families (who eventually emerged as Big Pharma and Big Tech leaders too). It seems we are witnessing a full-blown war, except fot its classical component (which would be more costly and would suppose a loss of life many a states cannot afford on the background of nowadays demographical evolutions). It is wished that this war culminate with a Final Solution – which I do not want to name – something impossible without a massive crime against humanity.
We witnessed and still witness the misuse in many occasions of this term[14], especially in the media as a result of the provision concerning the observance of a physical distance among persons for preventing the spread of SARS-COV2. You are tempted to ask yourself whether the misuse of these words is not intentional as it is the case with other usages, an interesting topic which is not the intention of this approach.
Fact is that social distancing has become more evident in 2020, when the world billionaires enjoyed a spectacular growth of their wealth, as it can be seen:
In September 2020, Jeff Bezos could have given to all his 876,000 employees a bonus of 105,000 $ and he remained as rich as before the WHO’s declaring the pandemic.
Timid steps were made in 2018 and 2019 for eradicating poverty globally (it diminished by 1.2% and 1.5%, respectively), yet in 2020 poverty increased by 7.1% so the progress registered previously was reversed and the poverty deepened.
According to data published by the World Bank in September 2020, climate changes is another factor that will contribute to poverty increase globally by bringing between 68 and 132 million people into the poor ranks.
At first sight we could say this is a reason why The Green Deal is needed. Definitely, but what about the billionaires who are so worried about the planet’s status and the situation of the people living on Earth? The billionaires are some of the most important polluters as they own multiple polluting sources such as yachts and other means of transportation (planes, helicopters, cars).
At the same time, world’s billionaires made consistent donations for fighting Covid-19: Mackenzie Scott (Jeff Bezos’ former wife) donated at the end of 2020 4 billion $ to a support fund for fighting the pandemic; Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey donated 1 billion $ for the same cause; Bill and Melinda Gates granted 1.75 billion $ in response to Covid-19 pandemic and for the development and delivery of test kits and vaccines[15].
The media outlets promoting the social distancing may rest assured as a research of a World Bank[16] showed that in 2020 the extreme poverty (people living with less than 1.9$/day) affected 9.1-9.4% of the globe population. The Covid-19 pandemic has thrown between 88 and 115 million people into extreme poverty in 2020 and it is estimated that the total will reach 150 million people in 2021.
It is not about the whole media indeed but just the part of it able to penetrate the targetted mediums and which benefitted from charity donations granted by the billionaires. According to an analysis of 20,000 charity donations made by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the journalist Bill Schwab found out that more than 250 million $ went to journalism[17].
We think that the human society did not reach yet the solidarity and maturity of seriously addressing the mankind’s stringent problems. The World Bank estimates that the number of cancer cases will reach 28.4 million, an increase of 47% as compared to 2020.
Ending the approach of this subject, I will give some examples showing us that the social distancing is well embeded in today’s human society: 1% of the richest people in the world possess double the amount possessed by 6.9 billion people; 4 cents only of every tax dollar represent the property tax (at the same time the super rich avoid paying around 30% of due taxes); 258 million children (one in five) cannot go to school; 10,000 people die everyday due to the lack of medical assistance; men own 50% more wealth than women.
The widening rich and poor divide affects not only the fight against poverty but also the economic growth and leads to social division.
Inequality is not something unavoidable, it is a political choiceRomania in the global geopolitical context
The start of Covid-19 pandemic and all its economic, political and social implications surprised Romania in a less-than comfortable position[18], due to the almost 31 years that passed since the events of December 1989 and during which the Romanian political class as a whole demonstrated a narrow vision of the development of the country. The limited aims, party connected and sometimes personal ones prevailed in front of the national aims. Except for the main achievements of this period, i.e. joining NATO (2004) and the European Union (2007), Romania was not able until now to establish a country project capable of mobilizing all the forces of the nation for the next two to three decades. Limited objectives are chosen, with no national coverage and with no vision while the indebtness grows in a record-breaking pace and the future of the next generations is pawned without knowing exactly for what.
The lack of transparency was facilitated by the two months lockdown at the beginning of the pandemic and then by imposing on a month-by-month basis the state of alert. Moreover, Romania hurried up to notify the Council of Europe of activating the provision of the European Convention for the human rights allowing by way of exception to violate certain rights under the lockdown rule imposed as a result of the pandemic, accordinf to France Presse quoted by Agerpres. Similar notifications were sent by the Republic of Moldova, Latvia and Armenia but by no other EU member country. That means that with the exception of the right to life and forbidding the torture one can waive any other human right. A unnecessary extreme measure as some magistrates[19] said.
Furthermore, the schools were closed most of the time since the declaration of the pandemic and were reopened nationally on 8 February, 2021 a date after which new restrictions and closure of schools were applied. The obligation for the pupils to wear masks during sport classes was strongly criticized (there are no other EU member countries imposing such a measure).
A controversial episode was the Romanian seasonal workers leaving for Germany for harvesting asparagus during the lockdown (decreed on 16 March 2020 by the Romanian president) when without observing the rules in force thousands of workers crowded the charters bound for Germany from the Cluj, Sibiu and even Bucharest airports, a situation reflected by the international media too. Likewise, a railway corridor was set up in the spring of 2020 from Timișoara to Austria for thousands of Romanian women attending carers (more than 33,000 Austrians need to be permanently taken care of 24/24h and part of this assistance is provided by Romanian persons).
This is just part of the problems generated by the migration from Romania which can be summarized this way:
Romania is second in the world (after Syria) as number of migrating population, 9 Romanians per hour, 17% of the active population, one fifths of the entire population;
we have lost 40,000 physicians (2007-2017), 84,000 young people under 36 (2016), of whom 19% with higher education (61% women);
we are suppliers of qualified workforce for Austria, Hungary, France, Germany and super qualified workforce for the US and Canada.
The hospitality industry was badly affected, it registered great losses and it is assessed that the sector was among the first affected industries and among the last ones to recover. The numbers of employees in the sector decreased every month, certain capacities were closed for good while numerous others have a precarious financial position. It is estimated that in 2020 only the HoReCa losses amounted to 7 billion euro.
It is the auto industry and IT[20] that are dominating now in what remained of the 1989 country’s economy while the agriculture is confronted with serious problems starting with the irrigations systems[21] and going through different crops. Speaking of sugar one sees that before 1989 the imports represented 20% of the consumption while now they top 80% of it, while the potatoes production decreased continuously during the last 10 years. So did the cultivated areas. Ten years ago, 3.5 – 4 million tons of potatoes were harvested on an area of 200,000 – 250,000 ha that has decreased during the last five years below 200,000 ha. Before 1990, potatoes were cultivated on 275,000 ha. Now Romania imports 70% of its potatoes consumption. 40% of Romania’s arable land has been sold to foreigners.
Discriminating and difficult to cope with measures have been adopted such as limiting the acces of persons over 65 to stores for buying essential goods to two hours a day (Military Ordinance No.3 /24 March 2020 set the mandatory hours – 11.00-13.00 and Military Ordinance No.10/27 April 2020 modified the hours to 07.00 – 11.00 and 19.00 – 22.00). Although there were expectations that this discriminating measure be strongly opposed and criticized, public positions were sporadic at best. It is worth mentioning the position of the president of the Romanian Academy, academician Ioan Aurel Pop[22] from which I quote: ”Old people are (still) humans like all humans. They are now endangered by plague too, yet they are not dangerous. Do not ”protect” them beyond the measure because you will crush their humanity and tarnish their dignity. You cannot destroy or tarnish their humanity because they have plenty of and pour it relentlessly into this sick world.”
Despite the fact that most of the population have observed and observe the imposed limitations, the political leadership insisted on the coercive branch of the state and gave firm instructions to the police to impose fines on the population. Until the beginning of May 2020 only, more than 300,000 fines have been applied amounting to around 120 million euro.
Data published on the WHO site[23], show that by 6 march 2021 there were registered 816,589 cases of Covid-19 in Romania and a number of 20,684 people died. Until 22 February 2021, 1,274,421 vaccine doses were administered. I underline the EU’s role in securing the vaccine doses proportionally to the population of all its member states. Romania donated to the Republic of Moldova 21,600 veccine doses from the doses it received. Alltogether, Romania promised to deliver to Chișinău 200,000 vaccine doses.
As occured in other European states, the political leadership committed many communication errors including wrong statistical data and demonstrated lack of transparency which did not contribute to boosting the confidence of the population in the adopted steps. However, the demonstrations and the public manifestations against the restrictions were less numerous or of lesser magnitude as compared to other European states (France, Great Britain, Germany, …). I think that this situation will not last indefinitely and announcing new restrictions as a result of the start of the third wave of the pandemic and declaring the red scenario for new areas (more than 3 cases/1,000 inhabitants), with the already imposed restrictions, all that could trigger a new wave of protests, more powerfull, with which the coalition of the right parties brought to power by president Iohannis at the end of 2020 could be confronted with. The austerity measures adopted and certain political and economic measures[24] that an important part of the political class and population do not agree upon should be added to the context.
Currently we see hope in the Recovery and Resilience Facility set up by the EU at 11 February 2021 (672.5 billion euro ) from which 30.5 billion euro are set for Romania (13.8 billion euro as grants and 16.7 billion euro as loans) that could contribute to the country’s economic recovery.
The facility is meant to help member states to deal with the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuring at the same time that their economies achive the green and digital transitions and become more sustainable and resilient.
In order to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility, the EU countries are requested to set up in their national plans a coherent package of projects, reforms and investments in six policy fields:
green transition;
digital transformation;
intelligent, sustainable growth favourable to inclusion and employment of the workforce;
social and territorial cohesion;
health and resilience;
policies for the next generations including education and competencies.
The EU member states will officially submit their national recovery and resilience plans to the European Commission by 30 April 2021, in order to be assessed and approved. A first version of the plan sent by the government was already rejected as it did not take into account the provisions established for drawing up the plan.
Romania has an enormous development potential if we take into consideration its natural resources. The mineral deposits discovered are estimated at 734.8 billion euro. We are one of the few European countries with known deposits of crude oil and gas. When the national oil and gas company Petrom was privatized, 80% of the onshore blocks with economic potential were leased to the Austrian investors (who now want to turn the Targoviste Combine of Special Steels into scrap). The natural gas reserves are estimated at 660 billion cu.m. in the sub-Carpathian Arc and at more than 200 billion cu.m. offshore, in the Black Sea. Gold and silver deposits are estimated at 225 billion euro and the copper ones at 900 million tons. We have polymetalic ore deposits worth more than 30 billion euro. Coal deposits are estimated at around 190 billion euro yet there are only 4 mines now under exploitation out of the 24 mines in the Jiu Valley and out of the 55,000 miners working there before 1990 only 3,000 remained. The redundant personnel was completely neglected instead of being used for specific works or works needing a minimum requalification (highways and railways construction, etc).
Romania has also tellurium[25], a rare metalloid found in countries like China, the US, Canada and Australia while in Europe Sweden and Romania only have such deposits. A part of these deposits are leased to Canadian companies.
Hydro and Aeolian resources and mineral water have to be added to the mentioned resources. In case of new investments of 10 billion euro, wind mills could deliver around 6,000 MW within the next ten years[26] (the wind mills parks in Romania, most of them in Dobrogea, supply presently 3,000 MW).
Nevertheless, the incumbent government borrowed in 2020 only around 20 billion euro (without being very clear for what the amount was spent) and thus the public debt increased from around 36% of the GDP in 2019 to circa 44%. Or, as the poet said: “Our mountains full of gold and we beg from door to door”[27]. An actual addition says: “we demolish for scrap any industry as it is much easier than investing in modern technologies and if we get upset we let other foreigners to sell our resources and we accept pickings!”. The main strategic resources are already in foreigners’ hands.
This is why 20% of the Romanians who left their country declare they will never return to Romania and 23%of them have foreign citizenship (Hungary, Italy, Spain, Grance, Canada, the US).
We could reach in a short time the point where, even if we wish, we don’t have with whom and with what to amend the situation. This is a distress signal the governing class did not seem to have heeded!
“The Romanian politicians should understand that there are other things too, more urgent and more important, beyond the domestic disputes. Besides the party priorities there is the national interest we have to define, power and oposition, the Romanian society in general since there is no one coming from abroad to bring it to us in a sealed envelope”[28].
A mobilization of all responsible political forces for agreeing upon a new country’s strategic objective whereby the economic development and education must be placed on top is an urgent need.
Brief conclusions
The Covid-19 pandemic has multiple consequences worldwide and in each country. It is for the first time when such comprehensive measures are taken worldwide (for a disease that killed until the date of this article around 2.6 million people) since the Spanish flu (1918-1919 who caused between 50 and 100 million fatalities). For drawing meaningful conclusions, we have to answer the classical question: Qui prodest?
Obviously besides China, the only country which succeeded in maintaining a positive rate of development, the big corporations benefitted (as they did every time under difficult circumstances) and so did segments that grew by rapidly adapting themselves to the new situation or which were already involved in the respective fields such as pharma and medical equipment sector, IT, courier services, etc.
The contest between the big corporations and the political world advanced and entered a new stage whereby the political world that relies on the continuous flow of money is discovering the danger represented by the corporations’ increased power and tries to preserve its privileges. The corporate elites that control since long time the oil resources, the banks, the steel industry, automotive industry and others have already taken over the control of education (universities), health (Big Pharma), media and IT (Big Tech) and defense.
I think that 2021 proves to be much worse than 2020 – authoritarian lockdowns, the Big Tech censorship, an increase of social hysteria, manipulations and fake news so that the fight for democracy, human rights and psychical health[29] should be continued with even more resolution.
Nothing new under the sun. Here it is what a Romanian writer said almost 100 years ago:
„Three phenomena of our times: the barbarians’ vertical invasion, the rule of the monkey-brains, the betrayal of the decent people.
First: it is not the barbarians from other continents who invade from bottom to top but the scoundrels. These barbarians take over the leadership places.
Second: the monkey-brains and the benighted acceded, plain and simple and in the most cathegorical sense, to power and, despite all economic laws and political rules they are monkeying around as ignorants do.
Third: instead of standing against, the decent people adopt condescending expectations, and by pretending they don’t see and don’t hear, they’re simply betraying. They don’t do their duty. The unbiased and the confident ones record (what is going on) and remain silent. They are the guiltiest”.[30]
The conclusions can be much more alaborate yet two questions linger on: why is it so hard to learn the lessons of the past? And especially “Qui prodest?”.
Corneliu Pivariu Military Intelligence and International Relations Senior Expert
A highly decorated retired two-star general of the Romanian army, during two decades he has led one of the most influential magazines on geopolitics and international relations in Eastern Europe, the bilingual journal Geostrategic Pulse.
[1] The Great Reset was on the agenda of the 2020 WEF meeting in Davos that brings together not only the the world plutocracy but also heads of states and governments and the globalist elites. Incidentally, Klaus Schwab, the WEF founder and executive chairman has published last year the book “COVID-19 The Great Reset” (co-author Thierry Malleret). The book runs through the main global trends in economy, environment and technology in a supposedly distinctive key for the WEF. In fact, Schwab says in the introductory note that the book is placed “on the borderline between an academic research and an essay”.
[2] The Fourth Industrial Revolution we supposedly are in, refers to the the introduction of technology into the physical, biological and digital world. We are talking about nanotechnology, robotics, 3D printing, biotechnology and much more – cf. Corneliu Pivariu, Mutări importante pe tabla de șah a geopoliticii 2014-2017, pag 90-91, Ed. Pastel, 2017.
[3] Corneliu Pivariu – Geopolitica înainte și după Covid-19, 2017-2020, Editura Marist, 2020, pag. 118.
[5]Naomi A. Klein (born in 1970) journalist, authored more than 15 books, social activist, known for her political analyses and criticism of the corporatist globalisation.
[6] The Inequality Virus Report – Oxfam International, 25 January 2021
[7] According to the article Sfârșitul democrației:“Marea Resetare”, by Ambrus Bela, Q Magazine 03.02.2021
[8]Already under way of implementation. IATA (The International Air Transport Association), that reunites more than 90% of the airlines had losses of 118 billion$ as a result of the decrease of the number of passangers by around 60%. It tests an app that will be available on smart phones probably by the end of March, 2021 which integrates all the steps needed for air travel in the context of the pandemic.
At the 24 February EU on-line summit, chancellor Angela Merkel said that all states agreed on introducing digital vaccination certificates which will be probably available before the summer of 2021. The Member States will decide shortly how the application will be used and the evolutions concerning the decisions on the subject are presently fluid.
[12]Resolution 2656/2021, unanimously adopted by the 15 UN Security Council members reiterates nevertheless the provisions of the Resolution 2532/2020 calling for a general and immediate cessation of all hostilities, in all the situations to fight the pandemic.
[13] I warmly recommend the article of Prof. Anis H. Bajrectarevic: 2020– A Year when Distancing became Social – Vienna, 20 Dec. 2020 on the same topic.
[14]In a notice of 20 March 2020, even the WHO announced it was distancing itself from the term ”social distancing” (initially promoted by the organisation). Maria Van Kerkhove, an epidemiologist of infectious diseases with the WHO reiterated this stance in a press conference. ”We said physical distancing because it is important to remain physically separated yet socially connected”, she said adding that people should take care of their mental health and of the loved ones during pandemic when social connections are more important than ever.
[15] The Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation is an important funder of the WHO too, covering, according to the organisation’s site, 11.2% of its total budget (December 2020) and during the summer of 2020 it represented 45% of the donations made by non-government entities.
[18] A brief radiography of today’s Romania can be found in the article România la 101 ani de la crearea statului național unitar and can be accessed on https://corneliupivariu.com
[19] Cristi Dănileț, judge at the Cluj Court and former member of the Higher Magistracy Council declared on Facebook: “Erdogan’s Turkey did that in order to arrest and sentence, by-passing the rule of law, the regime’s opponents. I do consider Romania’s request far-fetchedand and as a judge I am compelled to denounce it publicly. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT! We are not at war with people or with a state but with a miserable virus”.
[20] The Romanian company MetaMinds is among the first ten European companies in the cybersecurity field that has had a turnover of 1 million euro in its first year and reached 25million euro in 2019.
[21] Romanian farmers irrigated an area of 508,000 ha of arable land in 2017, more than 6 times less than in 1989 when 3.2 million ha were irrigated.
[22] He published on 14 April 2020 an essay titled The dangerous old people, available on the Academy site and retrieved by numerous media outlets.
[23] See https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/ro
[24] It is rumored that shares of state companies such as the Constanta Port, CEC, the only bank with 100% Romanian capital, Hidroelectrica,etc. are to be put up for sale when the international context is not favourable at all and all European countries seek to protect their indigenous capital under difficult circumstances.
[25] Used in the aero-space, energy, military, IT fields.
[27]Octavian Goga (1881 – 1938) the poem Our mountains
[28]Liviu Mureșan – chairman of EURISC, speech delivered at the second edition of the event Black Sea Forum, organized by Financial Intelligence, March 2021.
[29]“Disconnect yourselves from the excessive load of information (especially mass-media), disconnect yourselves from the excess of technologies (attend a digital diet), forget about the smart phone at least one day a week, enter airplane mode whenever you can. Use your brain for creating and not for repeating the fears you have been injected with …” – Ana María Oliva – engineer with a PhD in biomedicine.
[30]Nicolae Steinhardt (1912-1989), Romanian writer, essayist, jurist and publicist, Paris 1937.
On the historic date of March 08th – International Women’s Day, a large number of international affairs specialists gathered for the second consecutive summit in Vienna, Austria. This leg of the Vienna Process event titled: “Europe – Future – Neighbourhood at 75: Disruptions Recalibration Continuity”. The conference, jointly organized by four different entities (the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, Scientific Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace) with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna, was aimed at discussing the future of Europe and its neighbourhood in the wake of its old and new challenges.
Among other notable speakers was also the International Chancellor of the President University, Schott Younger. Following lines are his contribution to this highly successful Vienna Process event:
I want to address two distinct areas, namely the political sphere and trade.
The USA has been in somewhat of a turmoil in the past few years, marked by the years of the Trump presidency which brought it to a head. It highlighted that there was an underlying white supremacy movement which went back to the Civil War Years, the mid 1800s, and only needed a maverick President, as Trump was, to bring it to the fore. This has not gone away. In fact, the FBI are more worried by the white supremacy movements for domestic terrorism than the international variety. Trump, having survived two impeachments, and with a weak, somewhat docile, Republican party, he will try to take it over and cause problems for the Democrats and Biden.
This will be one significant issue that Biden will face in his 4-year term and he will have to address that. One can only hope that Trump’s time will be absorbed by defending back taxes owed and shady deals. The USA, however, will re-engage with NATO, WHO and Climate Change and other bodies which Trump withdrew the USA from.
However, Biden is going to struggle whenever he comes up against the stateswide judiciary or the Supreme Court when it comes to having important decisions passed and where Trump has placed arch conservatives. Therefore, I am not hopeful that Biden will be able to attend to as much as he would like on trans-Atlantic matters.
With Brexit done, the new American administration now have two entities to think about., UK and the EU. With Johnson as Prime Minister Trump considered he had a good rapport with the UK, and one could conceive that a top priority would have been a trade deal with the UK, although UK people had misgivings over some important contents of the deal, the outline of which was up for preliminary discussion. The trade between UK and US, although not as high as between Britain and Europe, is significant. But Biden is more ambivalent despite the closeness of the relationship; his forebears are Irish! I think that Biden would be interested in the Europe-US trade option. My caveat would be that there would be many things to discuss and several years to bring anything to a conclusion. Some key standards are different. The two deals, with EU and UK, could be run in parallel but I don ‘t see them coming to fruition in the near term.
This next puts attention on the EU-UK trade deal which was hastily signed up at the eleventh hour by Johnson, as he promised, although the deal that he signed was little different from that of 6 months previously. This then draws attention to the promises made by the Brexiteers in 2016. Little by little it is coming out that the message that they gave to the British people was full of holes. Not to put to fine a point on it they spoke a lot of terminal inexactitudes, to quote Churchill when he was pulled up for saying that someone was lying in the House of Commons. Unparliamentary language! This is gradually going to come out and there will be a lot of unhappy people. There is much to blame Cameron and other Remainers for.
They assumed that there was no problem and went to sleep and let Farage vent and Brexiteers tell their untruths unchallenged. We have not seen the end of this at this juncture. The demographics are changing in Britain, most of the younger people want change, and the outer parts that make up the UK are restive, particularly in the north, Scotland. That is another story. The UK might be different at the end of the decade!
In summary, Europe and trans-Atlantic relations will be easier with the new US administration pulling in the same direction, with the US rejoining the western World, and behaving more in tune with what most of Europe espouses to be. If the trans-Atlantic link is improving diplomatically this will make it easier to push the important agendas which should exercise the minds of those in positions to do this, namely the ongoing muddle which is the Middle East and the disgrace of a humanitarian situation, an aggressive China with a dictatorial touch but still open to trade with Europe, as well as India and ASEAN and Africa.
Today, Europe is ideally placed to trade with places East. There is an attempt to open up the old Silk Road and China is not averse to promote its use. A railway link has been established between China and right across Europe. This can cut the journey time by sea by as much as 2/3rds. Further the rail connections to ASEAN are improving
The EU has a vital leadership part to play in World affairs and is ideally placed to do it. The question is will they embrace the opportunity?
About the author:
J.Scott Younger
Prof. J.Scott Younger, OBE
International Chancellor of the President University
