Of Multilateralism and Future to Europe Recalibration

Editor
-
0
Of Multilateralism and Future to Europe Recalibration

On the 01 July 2020, the Modern Diplomacy, International Institute IFIMES along with the world’s eldest diplomatic school (that of the Diplomatic Academy Wien) and two other partners (Culture for Peace and Academic Journal European Perspectives) organised a conference with over 20 speakers from all around the globe. This highly anticipated and successful event was probably one of the very few real events in Europe, past the lockdown. 

Among 20-some speakers were: Austrian President (a.D) and current co-chair of the Ban Ki-moon center; the European Commission Vice-President; former Secretary-General of the OECD and Canadian Economy minister (under PM Trudeau); former EU Commissioner and Alpbach Forum President; former OSCE Secretary General and current OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorites; Austria’s most know Human Rights expert; Editor-at-Large of the Washington-based the Hill; Secretary General of the Union for the Mediterranean; Honourable Justice Constitutional Court President, and many more thinkers and practitioners from the UK, Germany, Italy and Australia as well as the leading international organisations from Vienna and beyond. 

Media partners were diplomatic magazines of several countries including Diplomat Magazine, and the academic partners included over 25 universities from all 5 continents, numerous institutes and 2 international organisations. A day-long event was also Live-streamed, that enabled audiences from Chile to Far East and from Canada to Australia to be engaged with panellists in the plenary and via zoom. 

Following lines are a highly absorbing speech of the former Secretary General of the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development in Europe, and former senior minister in several Canadian governments, exclusively delivered to the conference as his key-note.  

Of Multilateralism and Future to Europe Recalibration

The Honourable Donald James Johnston PC OC QC in addressing the future of Europe is invited to answer this question:

“Is there any alternative to universal and pan-European multilateralism? 

For the purpose of my remarks I am interpreting “ universal and pan – European multilateralism’ as moving forward with achieving more EU integration supported by institutions appropriate to a  kind of federal structure in line with the thinking of the Spinelli Group. But it also raises the question of global free trade which I promoted as Secretary General of the OECD and continue to believe must be the word’s future in addressing poverty and opportunity, especially for the worlds developing countries. But it has to be managed in a way sensitive to the challenges of both.

In these brief comments I intend to offer my view on the answer to this fundamental question about the future of Europe.

To begin, I would amend the question by adding the word “good” before “alternative”.

There certainly are alternatives some of which could set Europe on a path back to a collection of independent sovereign states and undo the remarkable progress in building a secure European Union in the post WWII period.

Many years ago when looking at the extraordinary work and vision of statesmen like Jean Monet trying to build a lasting and prosperous European Union, I came across a comment of British Historian H.A.L. Fisher in the preface to his 1936 book, A History of Europe. In part it read as follows:

“[No] question [would be] more pertinent to the future welfare of the world than how the nations of Europe … may best be combined into some stable organization for the pursuit of their common interests and the avoidance of strife. “

Although we appreciate the Marshall Plan’s amazing contribution to the Europe of today, it contributed more to restoring Europe physically while providing humanitarian assistance. Of course, the OEEC which evolved into the OECD in 1961 did provide an important framework and mechanism for economic and social development which continues to this day.

Fisher’s vision of a strong, unified Europe remains very much work in progress and that work really began with Jean Monnet’s initiative to create the European Coal and Steel Commission. I will comment on that in a moment  But I remain convinced that Fisher was right, and the great rebuilding of Europe  and the EU after the Second World War must and will endure notwithstanding the barrage of criticisms  from euroskeptics, now emboldened by the United Kingdom’s Brexit vote of June 2016. Admittedly my conviction is based on the EU having strong, visionary leadership, which has not yet fully materialized. 

Think of this. Although Greece represents less than 3 per cent of the Euro zone economy, euroskeptics used its financial crisis as ammunition to predict its withdrawal from the eurozone and the possible unravelling of the entire EU. The Greeks rejected that option: there was no Grexit.  Austrians also rejected right-wing populist nationalism in the 2016 Presidential election of Van der Bellen, a strong supporter of the EU. 

The support for Brexit in the UK referendum was an unexpected shock for some, but it pleased others who wish to see the EU unravel and claim that the UK attitude reflects views held in other major European countries. I keep hearing and reading that the United Kingdom has rejected the EU, as if it were an overwhelming victory.  Bolstered by misrepresentations and downright lies it was a very slim referendum victory but Brexiters will argue that it was validated by Boris Johnson’s subsequent margin of  electoral victory.

There are also others, especially President Trump who appear to be hostile to the emerging  global role that the European Union is likely to play as it completes its evolution to a unified international force. This has become even more important as the United States under Trump becomes increasingly isolationist and opposed to international multilateralism constructed by visionaries over the past 75 years.

In a stunning commentary in Foreign Affairs (summer 2016), Professor Jakub Grygiel of the Catholic University of America, implies that the upside to the EU crisis will be a return to independent sovereign nation-states across Europe. Indeed, that would be an upside for American isolationists. It would remove from US competition the largest unified single market in history and reinstate the possibility of future wars on the continent that this great European experiment was designed to prevent – as it has. 

Some of Grygiel’s comments appear designed to create a false impression of the views of Europeans. Here is a cheerful observation to support his thesis: “a Europe of newly assertive nation-states would be preferable to the disjointed, ineffectual, and unpopular EU of today. There’s good reason to believe that European countries would do a better job of checking Russia, managing the migrant crisis, and combating terrorism on their own than they have done under the auspices of the EU.” 

Really? What is that “good reason” that escaped the attention of the statesmen and nation builders like Jean Monnet in post-war Europe? Grygiel also says that the EU is ineffectual, which is true in some cases, as it is with many, if not most supranational bodies, including much of the United Nations (UN) activities. And what of the United States itself?

Sadly the world is watching that formerly great republic  floundering in the face of numerous serious challenges both social, economic, even racial, not even capable of effectively addressing the Covid-19 crisis through what is becoming a  dysfunctional government under a Commander in Chief who proudly presents himself as a narcissistic ignorant bully.

And non Europeans, especially Americans, systematically ignore the EU’s successes. One good example being the collective research of 28 networked European countries that produce one-third of the world research’s output – 34 per cent more than the United States and more than China. This was documented at the time of the Brexit debate in New Scientist.  (June 2016). These are the kind of synergies that could be sacrificed should the EU dissolve, and it may already be compromised by the withdrawal of the UK which has much world first class research. 

Hopefully the; United Kingdom will stay united and prosper in the post Brexit period. However, there is good reason for concern as the Financial Times Martin Wolfe wrote at the time (June 24,2016). He said: 

“David Cameron took a huge gamble and lost. The fear mongering and outright lies of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Nigel Farage, The Sun and the Daily Mail have won. The UK, Europe, the West and the world are damaged. The UK is diminished and seems likely soon to be divided. Europe has lost its second-biggest and most outward-looking power. The hinge between the EU and the English-speaking powers has been snapped. This is probably the most disastrous single event in British history since the Second World War. 

Yet the UK might not be the last country to suffer such an earthquake. Similar movements of the enraged exist elsewhere – most notably in the US and France. Britain has led the way over the cliff. Others might follow.” 

Will others follow the United Kingdom over the cliff? Alina Polyakova and Neil Fligstein, writing in the International New York Times at the time of the Brexit vote  ( July 2016), relied on polls that suggest that will not happen. They say, “Britain is not, and never has been, a typical member of the European Union, and in no country but Britain do populists and other euroskeptic forces have the 51 percent of votes needed to pull their countries from the union.” 

Obviously, those in the UK who wanted Brexit must have believed it is good for them and presumably for the United Kingdom, even if it means losing Scotland and perhaps Northern Ireland. The City of London will also suffer, but no one can estimate what the damage will be until all the terms of exiting are known. 

Jacques Delors, who has dedicated much of his life to the European dream both in public office and after retirement through his Paris-based foundation, made the following observation in an inter- view in 2012 with the Handelsblatt newspaper: “If the British cannot support the trend towards more integration in Europe, we can nevertheless remain friends, but on a different basis. I could imagine a form such as a European economic area or a free-trade agreement.” 

That might be the happiest outcome in the wake of Brexit. The real beneficiaries of Brexit are the remaining EU members inspired by people of the experience and quality of Jacques Delors and members of the Spinelli Group. The latter founded in 2010 as a network of thousands of politicians, individuals, writers, and think tanks looking to revive the momentum toward a federalist structure for the EU.” 

In fact, the Brexit vote and Johnson’s arrival as Prime Minister may have strengthened the resolve of many EU countries and prominent Europeans to accelerate the integration process in line with federalist thinking. 

Obviously those having the foresight to realize the importance of greater integration and an emerging federalist model, such as the Spinelli Group, would be blocked by a United Kingdom, were it a member, to have reforms move in the opposite direction, consistent with Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s famous Bruges speech in 1988 where she said, 

“We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels. Certainly, we want to see Europe more united and with a greater sense of common purpose. But it must be in a way which preserves the different traditions, parliamentary powers and sense of national pride in one’s own country; for these have been the source of Europe’s vitality through the centuries.” 

This could hardly be seen as an endorsement of a federalist system of any kind, because decentralization, especially with the preservation of parliamentary powers, meaning full sovereignty, is incompatible with federalism. She could have added that the elements she wished to see preserved have also been the source of bloody European conflicts throughout the last millennium, including three wars between France and Germany in the 70 years between 1870 and 1939! 

 Consideration should be given to some steps that must be taken to realize the collective potential of the EU as a major global player, which it could never be if its members revert to sovereign nation- state status. Indeed, as other major countries grow in economic clout, it has been pointed out that not even Germany would be in a new G8. Only a united EU could have influence on the global stage. 

Skeptics like Professor Grygiel, many of them American, seem blinded by the headlines and glare of current events, failing to place them in a broader historical context. Reviewing the remarkable evolution of Europe since the Second World War, I hope that the long-term success of Europe is inevitable. But as the great American judge Oliver Wendell Holmes once noted, “the mode by which the inevitable comes to pass is effort.” European leadership must now make that effort. It is critical not only for Europe, but for the world today. 

A strong, unified Europe is also important for the emergence of global multilateralism and the further evolution of globalization. Since the end of the Cold War we have been living in a world dominated by just one superpower: the United States. Fortunately, that superpower has been a very open market and largely, but not entirely, militarily non-aggressive. Sometimes referred to as the “importer of last resort,” it continued to run current account deficits opposite many trading partners, especially China. 

The American economy had enough strength and resilience to emerge slowly but with growing confidence from the global financial crisis of 2007–08. To become a companion economic locomotive, Europe must continue to open its markets, eliminate distorting trade subsidies, and undergo substantial structural reforms in labour, services, and manufacturing markets to stimulate European economic growth.  I hope that the results of the Europe 2020 exercise and its follow up will help in that regard.

If that does not happen, the United States might use its economic muscle to focus increasingly on bilateral agreements that are becoming a serious impediment to global free trade. 

If Europe had successfully moved to a more centralized and coherent federal model of government it could have reached the objectives adopted by the EU in 2000 (often referred to as the Lisbon Agenda), which was stated in the Lisbon Declaration (24 March 2000) as follows: “The Union has today set itself a new strategic goal for the next decade: to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion.” 

Well, that failed. A review of progress chaired by the former Dutch Prime Minister Wim Kok reported in 2004 that the strategy had fallen well short of its objectives. The diagnosis of the problems of broad structural reform was good, but implementation of reforms was seriously lacking. Kok’s review carried much credibility as he had overseen the continuation and completion of the major Dutch structural reforms originally introduced by his more conservative predecessor, Ruud Lubbers. Kok was also a regular participant in many international conferences, and during our discussions it was apparent to me that he was a talented consensus builder. 

There is much to be said for  such consensus  builders, who enable intellectual and political opponents to better understand competing views. Strengthening such relations between European political leaders will be important in bringing cohesion and stronger integration to the EU in line with the objectives of the Spinelli Group. 

The Lisbon Declaration, now replaced by the Europe 2020 strategy,  has five ambitious objectives related to employment, innovation, education, social inclusion, and climate/energy. The world would benefit greatly from Europe attaining those objectives. 

Today only the EU and Japan might to come close to matching the United States in per capita GDP in the coming years. 

 Demographic projections show Japan’s population in serious decline, but an expanded EU which should evolve with Turkey as a major player, would have a much greater population and a much larger market than the United States. 

The objectives listed above can only be realized when the peoples of Europe achieve a consensus on what kind of legal community they truly wish to be, and so far,  progress to that end has been in fits and starts. The failure of the Lisbon Agenda, the rejection of the proposed constitution in both French and Dutch referenda, and now the  exit of the United Kingdom underscore the difficulty of moving toward a flexible federal structure. 

The use of the word federal seems to be an anathema for many Europeans. It is worth remembering  that with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community inspired by Jean Monnet in 1951, the French government declared that it would “provide for the setting up of common foundations for economic development as a first step in the Federation of Europe.” 

Today there does not appear to be any coordinated and broad- based visionary leadership like that of Jean Monnet that led Europe out of the destruction and chaos of the Second World War. 

Perhaps the Greek crisis, the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU, and continuing economic performance under potential will awaken Europeans to the need for a truly federal-type European Union, with strong central government institutions where appropriate, accompanied by the protection of individual nations’ precious linguistic and cultural identities. The genius of federalism is that it can accommodate great diversity in many areas. 

What is the way forward? Where is the higher vision to achieve what is imaginable but not yet within reach? I suggest that the answer is to reconcile the various goals of Europeans, what I call the three Ms: minimizing frictions, maximizing synergies, and maintaining sovereignty. 

Some believe they can achieve the first two without a dilution of sovereignty. That is not possible. From my Canadian experience with Quebec, however, I know that it is possible to minimize frictions and maximize synergies while maintaining cultures and national identities. In the case of Quebec, the French language, civil law, religion, and culture have been protected since the Quebec Act of 1774, which is one reason why separatist movements have never succeeded. 

I see this kind of flexible federal structure, with necessary variations, in Europe’s future. Loss of Europe’s various languages and cultures would alter the character of the continent, moving it in the direction of the United States. The historical evolution and the nature of the “self-willed” peoples of Europe, as Fisher described them, make that path neither feasible nor desirable. 

I finish these comments with a quote from a recent letter distributed by Thierry de Montbrial, the founder and head of the prestigious French public policy think tank IFRI. 

“But it stands to reason that we in Europe in particular should capitalise on building the Union in order to prove the viability of a third way between the United States, that great democracy which still claims to be a liberal one, and the People’s Republic of China, which still claims to be communist. Most of us want to remain close to American democracy, but we refuse to become its vassals, notably as part of an Atlantic Alliance retrofitted to that end. There is an urgent need to clarify NATO’s truly shared objectives. As for the European Union, despite all the whining in recent weeks, it continues to sail ahead in stormy seas, as it always has…..

If there is one part of the world where multilateralism is making headway despite countless hurdles, it is the European Union. There is still a very long way to go in Europe and, even more so, on a planetary scale. But history is moving in that direction, for the alternative is collective suicide. There is no doubt that global warming, pandemics and more or less intense wars are foreseeable in the world’s near-term future. At least we can hope to limit the damage, which, after all, was the case during the Cold War. Let us be convinced of the European Union’s responsibility in that regard.”

I agree…who cannot?

_______________________

About the author:

Donald James Johnston is a Canadian former politician, lawyer, and the legendary Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 1996 to 2006. He was senior minister in several Canadian governments.

Supporting for vulnerable groups during the Covid-19: The People’s Movement for “Generosity and Support” in Uzbekistan

Editor
-
0
Supporting for vulnerable groups during the Covid-19: The People’s Movement for “Generosity and Support” in Uzbekistan

By Nozimjon Ortikov.

In the days after the first coronavirus cases were confirmed, Uzbekistan has implemented bold and early health and social distancing measures to depress the spread of COVID-19. As observed in many other countries, the global economic slowdown and domestic containment measures have affected on households and businesses negatively nationwide in Uzbekistan. To lessen the impacts, the government has adopted a package of anti-crisis measures to increase health spending and enlarge social and business safety nets. In particular, the President of Uzbekistan has signed a US$ 1 billion economic relief plan to boost the economy and aid vulnerable population groups. 

Severity of the current crisis requires from countries to take extraordinary responses. Several advanced countries implemented unconditional cash transfer programs that imply handing out money directly to the population. While these countries have an ample fiscal space, most developing countries have no choice but to be creative in terms of finding additional sources for more supporting measures.  In this sense, Uzbekistan has decided to go with unique path which guarantees the macro stability. 

In addition to abovementioned mechanisms, on April 20, the President of Uzbekistan, Shavkat Mirziyoyev put forward an initiative to establish a nationwide movement called “Sakhovat va Kumak” (“Generosity and Support”), a joint effort of state and entrepreneurs to provide, on a voluntary basis, targeted charitable and sponsorship assistance to low-income and needy families. “Obviously, distribute money to everyone might look an easy solution. But no economist can predict what this will lead to tomorrow. Thus, we want to create a nationwide movement, “Generosity and Support” – said the President.

In order to implement this initiative, “Sakhovat va Kumak” Fund was established with the Government Decree of 22 April. The budget of the fund is set to be accumulated from the sponsorship and charitable funds of businesses and individuals and to be used primarily for targeted assistance during the quarantine period for families with many children and in need of social protection, persons with disabilities, elderly persons living alone, persons who are temporarily unemployed and who have lost their income. Means of support includes giving cash, food, daily consumer products and medicines. The Board of Trustees of the Fund “Makhalla” manages accumulated funds at this fund, at the level of oblasts, districts and cities – corresponding Councils of people’s Deputies in regions. The activities of the people’s movement “Generosity and Support” are carried out in cooperation with the territorial offices of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry, banks and territorial divisions of social protection agency.

On April 27, 2020, the Presidential Decree «On additional measures to support the population and businesses during the Coronavirus pandemic» was issued. This decree establishes that the donation of funds, goods and services to «Mahalla», «Generosity and Support», «Mehr-shavkat va Salomatlik», as well as to individuals who are on the list of persons in need of social support are deducted from income tax. Goods and services transferred for charitable purposes are not included in turnover tax and are exempt from value added tax.

The Decree also stipulates that grants shall not be regarded as income of individuals if the beneficiaries are included in the list of persons in need of social support. Also, individuals are given an interest-free deferral on the payment of tax on the income of natural persons derived from the lease of residential and non-residential properties. Besides, the Decree introduces a procedure whereby, in 2020, the amount of material assistance exempt from income tax paid to an employee is increased from 4.22 to 7.5 times the minimum wage.

What is the rationale behind this decision? Given the financial constraint that countries face in crisis times, the best approach would be supporting the most affected people, not everyone. Secondly, as is the case in many developing countries, informal sector or people who work unofficially accounts for the significant part of employed population. That means, local entrepreneurs are equipped the most reliable information who are really in need of support. In other words, helping people through “Generosity and Support” mechanism will minimize the problem of information asymmetry.  

Thus, in analysing the social policies adopted in the context of the pandemic, it can be seen that it uses all possible mechanisms and instruments to mitigate the decline in the income and living standards of as many citizens as possible, particularly the most vulnerable. And using the mechanism of social partnership of the state and business, expands the possibilities of the implemented policy in this direction.

The creation of the popular movement “Generosity and Support” is reportedly widely welcomed by the public. Many entrepreneurs are already actively assisting the State in assisting vulnerable sectors of the population, including through participation in the Sponsorship Coordination Centre of the Ministry of Makhalla and Family Support. It should be emphasized, however, that this initiative is entirely voluntary and that any action aimed at forcing business to sponsor assistance will be severely suppressed. 

The creation of new formal jobs by entrepreneurs, in view of the preferences granted to them by the State, will also be an important factor in the reduction of the shadow sector and informal employment in the economy, which is in the interest of and operating under all business rules. Going forward, as pointed out by the President, “We must resolve without delay such pressing issues as guaranteed food and other necessary supplies for the 34-million people, prevention of loss of income of citizens, support of citizens needing help”. The President indicated that 14,000 new jobs could be created through agricultural cooperatives and home-grown greenhouses. In so doing, the State will grant a deferral or tax installment or credit to those farmers and entrepreneurs who will help poor families to farm on household plots, to allocate plots in their lands for the cultivation of secondary crops, promote home-based work.

This will not only significantly reduce the social impact of the pandemic, but also contribute to the country’s economic potential through the creation of new jobs and increased production, which in turn help to improve the long-term income and living standards of the population.

About the author:

Mr. Nozimjon Ortikov is a Senior Researcher from the Center for Economic Research and Reforms in Tashkent.

Georgia Celebrates 102th Anniversary of the Independence Day

Editor
-
0
Georgia Celebrates 102th Anniversary of the Independence Day

By Vakhtang Makharoblishvili, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Georgia.

Georgia marks the Independence Day – 102 years ago, on May 26, 1918, Georgia’s National Council established the First Democratic Republic. Although Georgia lost its independence as a result of Soviet occupation in 1921, the First Democratic Republic has remained a symbol of Georgia’s freedom, its values, as well as its pride. Modern Georgia is also a legal and political successor of the short-lived First Republic.

Over a century ago, Georgia started to build a state based on democracy, equality and individual freedoms. To build a free and democratic state, the country needed to succeed in two main directions – to liberate from Bolshevik Russia’s political influence and to develop effective democratic state institutions. These goals remain relevant today. Georgia has been consolidating its democratic institutions, developing its growing economy, asserting itself as a viable trade route between Europe and Asia, and, importantly, advancing its integration into the European and Euro-Atlantic institutions regardless the Russian efforts to derail Georgia’s independence.

Georgia’s geographic location has been an asset for the country’s economy – we are slowly becoming a regional hub for tourism, international business, logistics, education and innovation. Among the main roads connecting Europe to Asia, the road through Georgia is the most stable and secure and serves as an entry gate for the Central Asian landlocked countries to Europe. Georgia is an important knot for regional trade flows and has a unique geographic advantage for market integration with the rest of the world, including the European Union. 

The country has written a remarkable story of transformation whereby Government has taken significant steps to deregulate the economy and streamline bureaucracy, thus, creating a favorable and welcoming business environment, as well as inclusive growth opportunities.

The global pandemic of COVID-19 has posed us a severe and unprecedented challenge. To contain, delay and mitigate the effects of COVID-19, the Government of Georgia started implementing the relevant measures at the earlier stage of the pandemic. Coordinated efforts were directed to three principle directions: healthcare, law and order, economy. 

The effectiveness of the measures has translated into the relatively low COVID-19 numbers in the country. Georgia is one of the successful nations to duly address the global crisis and prevent large negative impact. The country has been praised for its effective coordination and communication. The Government has cushioned the economy with tax deferrals, allocation of funds, mobilizing international financial aid, etc. which has secured opportunities for swift economic revival. Apart from the policies and strategies, the Government has been transparent and open in its crisis management.

As a consequence of successful containment of the virus in Georgia, we will soon be able to open up to international tourism, which is one of the fast-growing industries of Georgian economy. Our country has received up to 9.4 million visitors in 2019, which is a 7.8% increase compared to the year before. Georgia has become a popular travel destination for Dutch tourists during past years that have been demonstrated in elevated number of travelers (18 204 visitors in 2018, while in 2019 – 22 908 visitors). 

Fortunately, successful response to pandemic allows our country to open its tourism sector to both domestic and international travelers.  Provision of domestic tourism services will begin on the 15th of June while the country will be ready to welcome its foreign tourists as of 1st of July through safe corridors and in strict pursuit of health and sanitary standards. The Georgian government rigorously adheres to the guidelines of the World Health and Tourism Organizations in its decisions to make travel to Georgia as safe as possible.

Even if Georgia has a lot to celebrate, we still have a part of the territory occupied by the Russian Federation. The country is divided by barbed wire fences erected by Russian FSB troops along the occupation line, we continue with our positive reform agenda and country’s democratic transformation. Throughout years, we have faced Russia’s constant violations of the EU-mediated 12 August 2008 Ceasefire Agreement, intensive military build-up in both Georgian regions of Abkhazia and Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, while close to half a million of IDPs and refugees are deprived of the right to return to their homes in safety and dignity.  

Those, who remain in the occupied territories, have become target of grave human right violations and ethnic discrimination. Despite Russia’s continuous provocations, the Georgian Government unwaveringly pursues the peaceful conflict resolution policy aimed at the de-occupation of its territories and reconciliation of people divided by the occupation line. Almost a century ago, the Russian Red Army invaded Georgia and disrupted its development for the following seventy years. However, after the fall of the Soviet regime, the country has become one of the most successful young democracies of the region. As an associated Partner of the European Union and a NATO aspirant country, Georgia is becoming another success story of democratic transformation and Western integration in Europe. 

These achievements are rooted in the democratic aspirations of the people of Georgia who have come a long way to earn their independence, their freedom and their right to choose. This is why the Independence Day of Georgia is not just a day of remembrance of the past victory, it is most of all a day that celebrates the future of Georgia: free, democratic and united.

How the European Parliament copes with COVID-19

Editor
-
0
How the European Parliament copes with COVID-19

By Eduard Slootweg, Head of the Dutch translation service, European Parliament.

This is the tenth week that most of the staff of the European Parliament were asked to work full time from home. Time to share how the European Parliament, as a supra-national organization, responded to the COVID-19 crisis.

The European Institutions are, by nature, were vulnerable to international disruptions. The different places of work, national officials flying in from their home countries for meetings of the numerous committees, among others. Brussels-based European officials coming from all Member States and, in the case of the European Parliament and the Council, the participants of their plenary meetings (Plenary sessions, Committee meetings or Group meetings or Council meetings), are also travelling to and from all Member States. In the European Parliament,  Members and part of their staff, travel each week from their constituency to Brussels or Strasbourg. 

When the Member States one after the other went into lockdown, the European Institutions could, in theory, carry on. But in practice, this was not the case. Not only because of the disruption of a train and air traffic made travelling impossible, but more importantly, all those national measures were implemented to contain as much as possible the COVID-19 virus. So, in practice, the response of the European Institutions, such as the European Parliament, was very much in line with national measures.

The COVID-19 virus caught the European Parliament as an institution also its 705 Parliamentarians and around 7800 staff members completely by surprise. 

The European Parliament is one of the two legislative arms of the European Union. The other legislative arm is the Council of Ministers. The European Commission is the executive arm of the Union. In order to function, and, adopt legislation, both institutions must agree with the legislative proposals presented by the European Commission. Current essential topics are the discharge over the 2019 budget and the negotiations over the multi-annual financial framework 2021-2027, the long-term budget. But also the follow-up of the Brexit, the refugee crisis, environmental issues (Green Deal) and the enlargement of the Union.

All of the crucial and weighty topics that have to be discussed and voted on. On top of this, the EU as the world’s largest trade power and with an internal market of 50 million consumers has put legislation in place, which needs constant reviews to cope with new developments both inside and outside the EU. The EU’ s decision making-machine cannot stop.

Let us focus on the European Parliament. Parliament is represented as an institution in all Member States by a Liaison Office. Politically, the European Parliament is represented in the Member States by its Members, who are directly elected in their Member States. The political work takes place mainly in Brussels (Committee meetings, Group meetings, and negotiations with the Council) and Strasbourg for the monthly plenary sessions. In Luxemburg are located some Directorates General, such as for translations, human resources, building maintenance, information technologies and finance. 

Already at the beginning of March, Parliament cancelled all meetings involving visitors to its premises, ranging from official hearings to visits by students. Also, all external meetings were cancelled. Parliament itself remained operational, all internal meetings such as Committee meetings and Group meetings were not cancelled at this early stage. 

The first real hit of the pandemic occurred in Parliament’s premises in Luxembourg. After the outbreak of the virus in the North East of France, a large part of the Luxembourg based staff- but living across the border in North-East France- were cut off. They could not go to work. Office buildings had to be closed due to a lack of essential staff (firemen, security). A large part of the staff was sent home and started to telework.

After a few days, all staff in all working places were instructed to stay home and telework when possible.

__________________

Photography by Martin Lahousse.

“COVID-19 is pandemic, but poverty remains the real “plague” So, please don’t keep your eyes off the real “plague”

Editor
-
0
“COVID-19 is pandemic, but poverty remains the real “plague” So, please don’t keep your eyes off the real “plague”

Interview with Ambassador Sheikh Mohammed Belal, Managing Director of the Common Fund for Commodities on post COVID-19 world.

Q:   We know it is challenging time. This is almost a different world than what we have been living only a month or two ago. As a CEO of an organization dedicated to poverty alleviation, through commodity value chain upgradation, how do you see the future? 

A:   Thanks to Diplomat Magazine for making this space as we fight to deal with this pandemic of COVID-19 (C19). Indeed, it is hugely challenging time. But it is also far too early to know exactly how much the post C19 world will be different. 

On March 11, the World Health Organization declared the spread of Covid-19 a global pandemic. The United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has described the COVID-19 crisis as the most significant test humanity has faced since World War II. UNSG called for the creation of a $2 billion fund to support the most vulnerable countries during this crisis. 

The International Labour Organization (ILO) recently predicted that 25 million jobs could be lost worldwide as a result of COVID-19. For Africa – which should be creating 12-15 million jobs annually to keep up with a growing population – these figures could be catastrophic. The global downturn risks putting the continent into a negative, downward spiral.

As you are aware, developing countries, by virtue (or vice) of their commodity dependent economy is going to face the impact almost across the value chain. The largest fall in global commodity prices on record (-20.4% between February and March 2020), as reported by a UN document,  already made it abundantly clear that commodity sector deserve our utmost priority. A 9% year-on-year fall in global production and manufacturing output, now casts that the value of global merchandise trade will fall by almost 27% in Q2 2020. On the social side,  barring the  shocking loss of employment – a decline of almost 10.5% in total working hours, the equivalent of 305 million full-time workers. The crisis will push an additional 40 – 60 million people into extreme poverty. The impact is being felt in every region.

GDP in sub-Saharan Africa is projected to contract by –1.6 percent this year—the worst reading on record.While the effect across countries is expected to differ depending on factors like extent of diversification and dependence on tourism, no country will be spared. The ability of sub-Saharan African and a good many Asian and Latin American countries to mount the necessary fiscal response will require ample external financing on grant and concessional terms from the international community.

Q:      What the CFC is doing about the coronavirus outbreak?

A:      We, in the CFC (Common Fund for Commodities), are working hard to keep track of events and eventualities the best we could. Despite the lockdown, we have been trying our best to keep us in business. Given our robust IT infrastructure and cloud computing capability, the CFC is uniquely capable of working from remote.

Braving all the failings of lockdown, we are happy to see our member states lived up to its mission, when they responded so overwhelmingly to make our first ever virtual Executive Board Meeting (EB69) a huge success.   On 08 April 2020, interestingly when I formally took up my assignment as Managing Director of CFC, the Executive Board held its first ever zoom meeting, where Executive Directors of our Board participated from across the globe. 

The Executive Board considered and approved all projects recommended for financing. Executive Directors from Brazil to Ethiopia to Kenya to Senegal and Yemen attended the meeting. The recurrent theme of the discussion of the meeting was to keep the businesses of the Fund ongoing so that marginal people can get their livelihood maintained and mitigation for their losses could be undertaken, where necessary. 

CFC is only a tiny player in the big game of poverty alleviation and achievement of sustainable development goals. Without global solidarity and unity in addressing the root causes of poverty, we could hardly move beyond where we were. This pandemic truly proved that real plague is “poverty”, C19 is only an expression or symptom of that real plague. Unless and until, we get united to root out the plague of poverty, C19 could only be an avoidable eventuality. But the devastation that it has caused, should make us convinced that building walls or blocking travelers are hardly any solution to this problem. The real solution is only in working us together as a united humanity.

We, in the CFC, as an organization devoted to the socioeconomic development of commodity producers, remain acutely aware of its enhanced duties even at this time of pandemic, to provide all necessary support to our clients to see that projects remains on course, as best as it could. The CFC is, therefore, working hard to remain in touch with the project implementing authorities and thereby minimizing the effect of C19.

The CFC Secretariat will continue to monitor the situation and take all reasonable measures to protect CFC personnel and its clients, while minimizing the impact of the outbreak on the implementation of the CFC’s activities for 2020 and beyond. In the meanwhile, the CFC will like to the highlight the essentiality of enhanced global cooperation to keep the commodity supply chains as minimally impacted as possible, which is at the center of the CFC’s mission as an UN affiliated International Financial Organization.

The CFC will continue its quest to keep itself in a state of readiness so that resiliency in the supply chain maintains when lockdown restrictions imposed due to C19 begin to ease. We will have to work in unity and with solidarity with all our partners and peers to come out of it with as less disruptions as possible, while taking note of the positive silver linings, like more network preparedness and the necessity of online business connectivity between developing and developed world. We invite our clients and well-wishers to write to us at   COVID19-RESPONSE@COMMON-FUND.ORG   if they have any comment/suggestion/idea to share. 

Q:      What impacts are you anticipating due to COVID-19?

A:      On March 11, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the spread of C19 a global pandemic. The United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has described the C19 crisis as the most significant test humanity has faced since World War II. UNSG called for the creation of a $2 billion fund to support the most vulnerable countries during this crisis. But actual cost may require substantially more. For every bankruptcy, closed store, unpicked crop or drop in online orders, people will lose jobs and families will, in many cases, lose their only income.

The International Labour Organization (ILO) recently predicted that 25 million jobs could be lost worldwide as a result of C19. For Africa – which should be creating 12-15 million jobs annually to keep up with a growing population – these figures could be catastrophic. The global downturn risks putting the continent into a negative, downward spiral.

According to the World Trade Organization, 87.5% of goods exported from LDCs are sold in 10 major markets, all of which are either severely or moderately affected by the C19 outbreak. Due to a fall in demand in these markets, LDCs are certain to lose a significant portion of their export revenues. This decline will make it impossible for LDCs to achieve Target 11 of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 17 to double their share of exports.

A shortage of raw materials from China, due to supply chain disruptions will affect many LDCs. For example, shutdowns at Cambodia’s garment factories, which procure 60% of their raw materials from China, could affect 160,000 workers in a worst-case scenario.

LDCs are equally affected by declining orders or the cancellation of ready-to-ship orders by Western clothing brands, some of which have already closed outlets. As a result of these closures, Bangladesh alone has seen garment orders worth $3.0 billion being cancelled, affecting more than 1,000 garment factories and thereby putting almost 2 million jobs on the line.

On the whole, the developing countries need, in addition to support for their health sectors, is carefully thought out support packages to keep their economies afloat and protect micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (M/SMEs) from going out of business. The mitigation drive to keep them afloat is, therefore, a huge challenge for CFC. We are working, internally, to develop an emergency liquidity facility in consultation with the member states to mitigate the fallout of C19.

Avocato project

Q:      What lessons we could take from COVID-19 crisis?

A:      If previous crises are anything to go by, demand and export prices may well take a long time to rebound, while the limited supply and high cost of finance will likely further depress developing world economies. Longer term structural changes in demand are also likely. While the actual impact to rural communities will necessarily differ across countries and value chains, the economic livelihoods of smallholders are likely to be affected by a number of common factors.

It is anticipated that the reduction in the labour force will directly affect agricultural production, especially for labour intensive crops. Restrictions on trade and movements may also become a huge challenge in the short-term with producers failing to connect with their markets. On the mid and long-term, the lack of access to essential inputs such as seeds or fertilizers will impose additional complications to producers.

The pandemic is also changing consumers behaviour. Although food demand is generally inelastic and the effect on overall consumption will probably be limited, dietary patterns may change. So far, the most affected countries observed an increase in both staple and ready-to-eat food that can be stored for longer periods. However, learning from the experience of the 2008 financial crisis, it is expected that on the long-run food demand will also shrink as the global income is severely affected by the quarantine restrictions.

In-between the primary producers and the end-consumers, there are SMEs/SMMEs, the CFC is working with. They are key to connecting consumers with essential food supplies and producers with the income crucial to their livelihoods. And if supply chains break down now, these disruptions may become permanent unless early mitigations are not provided with. For example, even the best performing SMEs can go out of business because of liquidity crunch, something that is entirely preventable by providing emergency liquidity funding.

The CFC supports many good SMEs in its portfolio, and the Fund will continue to make sure they survive the crisis and flourish afterwards. The CFC is closely monitoring the situation of the commodity producers and it is actively engaging with its borrowers to understand the particularities of their challenges. The CFC has the facilities and experience in managing the necessary instruments and further measures will be taken to support qualifying SMEs to mitigate their losses and thereby weathering this storm. This will directly serve the mission of the CFC bringing the principles and fundamental goals of the CFC into practice.

On the whole, one fundamental lesson of the C19 is the realization that unless poverty is addressed globally, with a renewed sense of urgency, the spread of killing viruses like C19 could always run the risk of wreaking havoc in both developing and developed world.

This is why we have to start preparing now and encourage ourselves to herald a return to normal. There will, however, be no normal if we forsake the idea of humanity and turn our backs on those forgotten people, near and far. 

Therefore, CFC would remain on the lookout for being a part of a good ecosystem of business support actors, with shared objectives and complementary strengths, with priority for the more vulnerable at the margin, to deploy solutions for resilience and recovery.

Ambassador Sheik Mohammed Belal.

Q:      Do you mean to say that real pandemic is not COVID-19, it is poverty? Why?

A:      As I already mentioned about the real “plague” of poverty, I would urge all to pay greater attention to the elements of poverty and please don’t take your eyes off the real plague of “poverty”. This C19 pandemic should help us to know how dearly we need to address persistent structural problems facing the entire world. As this pandemic ought to aggravate deep seated inequalities between and within countries, we have to work extra harder to address the real plague of “poverty”.

As UNCTAD research already showed convincingly that the interplay between the C19 outbreak, the contraction in demand and the free-fall of international commodity prices will likely reverse the limited progress that has been made in poverty reduction. Meaning, this will take us further away from achieving the first United Nations Sustainable Development Goal of ending poverty in all its forms everywhere.

The results of UNCTAD research showed a three-percentage point decline in LDC poverty headcount, with more than 33 million additional people living in extreme poverty. C19 is affecting rich and poor differently and accordingly, the impact will also vary, and their treatment should also be different. As we came to experience that smokers’ run higher risks of aggravated C19, the society with advanced achievements in SDGs and the Paris Agreement on Climate change, would do better in facing the challenges.

We, therefore, must seize the opportunity of this crisis to strengthen our commitment to implement the 2030 Agenda and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. By making progress on our global roadmap for a more inclusive and sustainable future, we can better respond to future crises and pandemics.

Q:      How CFC could work to avoid the negative impacts of COVID-19 in its member countries?

A:      We are aware of the fact that SMEs are likely to experience the worst outcome unless helped. The research conducted by the International Trade Center (ITC) showed four phases, either successively or simultaneously, as global trade stumbles – from shutdowns to disrupted supply, depressed demand, and eventually bouncing back in recovery. ITC has cautioned that SMEs in different sectors are affected in different ways, and policy responses must be carefully tailored. Therefore, the case has never been stronger for meeting Target A of SDG 8 to increase the Aid for Trade allocation to LDCs to promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all.

In CFC, we are also trying to equip ourselves with relevant knowledge and expertise so that we could encourage our clients to keep track of traceability information on production and sustainable production so that they can meet enhanced expectation of consumers. Consumers are increasingly asking a variety of questions answered, such as: does your supply chain have poor labour conditions at farms or processors sites? What are the carbon emissions of your products? Do any links exist with deforestation and if so, how can these be improved? Adding to the resilience of farmers is our priority now.

We are also asking member states to guard enablers like creating economies of scale and, consequently, fast productivity growth. In such a strategy trade and external finance have important roles to play as enablers of domestic economic forces. In fact, if handled well, this pandemic could be turned into an opportunity to break away from conventional but self-defeating policy prescriptions like lower investment in health, education, environment and gender inclusiveness etc. This is why, we, in the CFC, are trying our best to work out with our clients to make them avail strategic choices to deal with this pandemic, while working for an emergency liquidity facility as well.

Q:      How do you like in Amsterdam? Do you miss The Hague?

A:      I miss The Hague. In a big way. Probably more than I thought I will be. 

Due to lockdown, I haven’t had enough opportunity to know Amsterdam more than I am already aware of. For me, the CFC is as much in Amsterdam as it were to be in The Hague. Not only we are anchored in all those embassies, representing our member states or Dutch Ministries and agencies providing us with assistances, keep us linked to the Hague much more than one could possibly think from distance. I personally remain deeply grateful to the Hague fraternity for their support and encouragement to me to take up this challenging duty. Indeed, those of us, who are fortunate to enjoy the bounties of the Hague fraternity, make us confident that we will come out stronger in a post-C19 world, if we remain united in our quest for a poverty free world for the humanity. Let love and compassion be our  compass as we follow this roadmap.

Project on sustainable cocoa & coffee production

NOTE: The Common Fund for Commodities (CFC) is an Amsterdam based autonomous intergovernmental financial institution established within the framework of the United Nations. The Agreement Establishing the Common Fund for Commodities was negotiated in the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) from 1976 to 1980 and became effective in 1989. The CFC has 101 countries as its member where it aims at achieving following mission and vision.

Mission: “To contribute to poverty alleviation by strengthening the income generating capacity of commodity producers and mitigating vulnerability to their economic well-being.”

Vision: “To strengthen and diversify the commodity sector in developing countries and transform it to be a major contributor to poverty alleviation and sustained economic growth and development.”

__________________

Picture at Intro @BestSolicitors

Plaidoyer pour la Justice Pénale Internationale

Editor
-
0
Plaidoyer pour la Justice Pénale Internationale

Par M. François Roux. Avocat Honoraire. Ancien Chef du Bureau de la Défense au Tribunal Spécial pour le Liban. 2009-2018.

La Justice Pénale Internationale est en grande difficulté, et même en position d’accusée.

Critiquée pour sa lenteur, son coût, ses décisions, ses errements.

Comme je l’ai fait à plusieurs reprises pour des accusés devant les Tribunaux Pénaux Internationaux je veux bien prendre sa défense… si elle plaide coupable !

Si elle accepte de reconnaître ses erreurs et mieux, de les corriger.

Ce n’est pas si difficile. Le grand écrivain français Albert Camus disait « mal nommer les choses c’est ajouter au malheur du monde ».

Alors nommons-les. La Justice internationale pénale souffre d’un vice originel : le système de procédure accusatoire dans lequel on l’a plongée.

Outre les systèmes régionaux et traditionnels que nous aurions bénéfice à mieux connaître et utiliser, particulièrement en ce qui concerne les réparations dues aux victimes, il est constant que le monde se divise en deux grands systèmes nationaux de droit pénal :

La common law  (adversorial ou accusatoire) d’une part et le droit romano-germanique   (inquisitoire) d’autre part.

Voici comment le Juge canadien Baudouin les résume dans la préface de l’excellent ouvrage des Professeurs Beliveau et Pradel « La justice pénale dans les droits canadiens et français : étude comparée d’un système accusatoire et d’un système inquisitoire ».

« On pourrait presque, dans un certain sens, caricaturer les deux régimes de la façon suivante : le critère d’excellence du système français reste la découverte de la vérité à travers une procédure inquisitoire, visant précisément à faire la lumière, toute la lumière, sur l’affaire et à permettre au magistrat de bien saisir l’individualité du délinquant ; le « bon » procès au Canada est, au contraire, celui au cours duquel les règles de preuve et de procédure ont été scrupuleusement respectées et donc où leur principal but, soit le respect des droits individuels de l’accusé, a été atteint. On pourrait presque affirmer que, dans un certain sens, la recherche de la vérité reste au second plan. La mesure du succès est donc très différente parce que les règles de procédure et de preuve n’ont aucune commune mesure ».[1]

Le diagnostic est ainsi assez simple.

Alors qu’à la suite des tragédies que représentent les crimes de masse, les Etats créent des juridictions internationales en disant aux populations traumatisées « on va rechercher la vérité sur ce qui s’est passé et on va indemniser les victimes », on plonge ces juridictions dans un système de procédure accusatoire, de common law, … qui ne cherche pas principalement la vérité, qui ne reconnaît pas les victimes comme parties au procès pénal, qui n’entend pas la voie de l’accusé, puisque s’il veut s’exprimer il ne peut le faire que comme un témoin et donc en prêtant serment, ce que son défenseur lui déconseille fortement. C’est ainsi que des accusés ont assisté à leur procès pendant des années en observateurs, privant les victimes et les Juges de leur précieuse parole pour comprendre ce qu’il s’est passé.

LA question que nous devons tous nous poser après les 25 premières années de la Justice Pénale Internationale est bien celle –ci : le système pénal de common law ou système adversorial, qui repose sur un affrontement entre l’avocat de l’accusation et l’avocat de la défense devant un Juge arbitre, chacun essayant de gagner sa cause avec des stratégies dissimulées le plus longtemps possible à la partie adverse, est-il véritablement adapté aux jugements de crimes de masse avec des milliers de victimes ?

Nous savons que les tribunaux de pays de droit romano germanique, en Europe et en Amérique latine notamment, ont organisé quant à eux des procès dans lesquels de très nombreuses victimes étaient présentes comme « parties civiles » et où les Juges essayaient d’approcher la vérité judiciaire, en donnant la parole aux victimes et aux accusés, sur la base d’un dossier commun aux parties préparé à l’avance par un Juge d’instruction.

Nous savons que des tribunaux internationalisés comme les Chambres Africaines Extraordinaires ont été capables de juger sans retard et avec un coût très réduit Hissene Habré sur la base d’un dossier d’instruction, et d’accueillir au procès des centaines de victimes parties civiles, souvent assistées de juristes de common law intervenant dans le cadre d’ONG des droits de l’homme.

Un autre avenir serait donc possible ?

Aucun des deux systèmes n’est a priori meilleur que l’autre, chacun a ses mérites propres et ses qualités incontestables, et aucun n’est sans faille.

Mais en tant que juristes internationaux il est de notre responsabilité d’inventer LE système de droit pénal international de demain en empruntant à chacun des deux grands systèmes nationaux le meilleur de ses procédures et de ses pratiques, afin d’être en capacité de juger au niveau international des crimes de masse, qui par définition, impactent l’humanité toute entière.

C’est à ce travail que se consacrent depuis plusieurs années des juristes internationaux provenant des deux grandes cultures juridiques.

Ce travail a été présenté en 2016 dans la Grande salle de Justice du Palais de la Paix à La Haye, et en 2017 à la Cour Suprême espagnole sous le titre : « Construire dès aujourd’hui la Justice Pénale Internationale du XXII° Siècle, projet Solpérières ».

Il est actuellement en voie de finalisation et fera prochainement l’objet de nouvelles présentations publiques. 

Il incorpore notamment deux textes internationaux récemment élaborés.

La Déclaration de Paris sur l’efficacité de la Justice Pénale Internationale adoptée le 16 Octobre 2017, qui établit des principes de compétence et de déontologie indispensables pour les Juges des Juridictions Pénales Internationales.

Le Code de Nuremberg, présenté dans la salle historique du procès de Nuremberg le 7 Novembre 2017 en présence des plus grandes organisations internationales d’avocats, qui a vocation à établir un code de déontologie commun à tous les avocats intervenant devant les Juridictions Pénales Internationales, quel que soit leur pays d’origine.

En conclusion

Attendu que la Justice Pénale Internationale représente un immense progrès pour l’humanité. 

Qu’elle est encore très jeune, un quart de siècle, et que si elle connaît aujourd’hui des difficultés réelles, elle a en son sein des juristes hautement qualifiés, qui croient en elle, en sa mission, et qu’elle a donc les capacités de mettre en place rapidement les remèdes qui s’imposent et ne sauraient être plus longtemps différés.

Attendu qu’elle a plaidé coupable de ses erreurs,

Attendu qu’elle a fait part de sa bonne volonté à se réformer rapidement,

En  conséquence, j’ai l’honneur de solliciter pour elle, devant le Tribunal de l’histoire, le bénéfice d’un sursis… avec mise à l’épreuve et obligation de se soigner.

Et ce sera Justice.

——————–

Auteur François Roux, Avocat Honoraire. Ancien Chef du Bureau de la Défense au Tribunal Spécial pour le Liban. 2009-2018.

Dernier ouvrage paru : “Justice Internationale, la parole à la Défense” in Indigène Editions. Français/Anglais. 

1 Pierre Béliveau et Jean Pradel, La justice pénale dans les droits canadien et français : Étude comparée d’un système accusatoire et d’un système inquisitoire, 2e édition, Éditions Yvon Blais,  2007, préface, p. xiv.

The Saarland welcomed France’s Montchalin

Editor
-
0
The Saarland welcomed France’s Montchalin

In the picture Premier Tobias Hans & State Secretary Amélie de Montchalin – Picture by Saarland.de.

Friday, 5 June 2020, The Saarland, Germany: Premier Tobias Hans received the French Secretary of State for European Affairs, Amélie de Montachalin, she is furthermore responsible for the Franco-German cooperation. 
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Saarland has treated many patients from the Far East region in France, which was terribly affected. Amélie de Montchalin, thanked Minister President Tobias Hans personally for this assistance during her jaunt. French Secretary of State for European AffairsFriday, 5 June 2020, The Saarland, Germany: Premier Tobias Hans received the French Secretary of State for European Affairs Amélie de Montachalin, she is furthermore responsible for the Franco-German cooperation. 
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Saarland has treated many patients from the Far East region in France, which was terribly affected. Amélie de Montchalin, thanked Minister President Tobias Hans personally for this assistance during her jaunt. 

As per statement below Premier Hans said: “The Covid-19 pandemic has put our Europe of open borders to the test. We have felt this particularly clearly in the Franco-German border region. We had to keep our distance from our friends on both sides of the border and this border, which had not really been one for many years, suddenly became visible again. But this distance in no way undermined the profound friendship between Germany and France, we mastered the situation side by side and helped each other. The coronavirus has impressively demonstrated that solidarity is the only possible way forward, and it will give new impetus to our close ties of cross-border cooperation. »

Amélie de Montchalin, State Secretary to the Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs with responsibility for European Affairs, and also responsible for Franco-German cooperation: “I am very pleased to come to Saarbrücken for my first trip abroad since coming out of confinement. During this unprecedented health crisis, the solidarity between our two countries has remained intact. Now, more than ever, Franco-German friendship remains at the heart of the European project. »

Jean Rottner, President of the Moselle Departmental Council: “I am very pleased to see Premier Tobias Hans again today. We are in a very unprecedented context, and Franco-German friendship is becoming more ambitious every day. Today, Saarland is a very valuable partner for the Far East Region, a border state with which we have daily exchanges through concrete and structuring policies. Today, more than ever, we must, more than ever, recall the absolute necessity of this European cooperation that we have once again tested in this crisis with transfers of patients with COVID 19. »

The programme of the visit included a meeting at the State Chancellery with the Ambassador of France, Anne-Marie Descôtes, the President of the Grand-Est region, Jean Rottner, the President of the Moselle departmental council, Patrick Weiten, the Consul General of France in The Saarland, Catherine Robinet, the MP Christophe Arend, the Minister of Finance and Europe, Peter Strobel, and the State Secretary at the Ministry of Finance and Europe and Plenipotentiary for European Affairs, Roland Theis, as well as a joint visit to the Winterberg Klinikum Saarbrücken in the presence of the Mayor of Saarbrücken, Uwe Conradt.

For further information:
https://www.saarland.de/SID-3B77922B-EB131603/6767_256140.htm

Anders Ahnlid to promote Swedish trade

Editor
-
0
Anders Ahnlid to promote Swedish trade

Thursday, 4 June 2020, Stockholm, Kingdom of Sweden: The Government has announced the appointment of former Swedish Representative to the European Union, and incumbent Ambassador to Finland, Anders Ahnlid, as the novel director general of the National Trade Board (Kommerskollegium). The latter is the authority charged with promoting foreign trade, within the internal market as well as setting up the country’s trade policy. 

Ambassador Anders Ahnlid is ideal for the position being an experienced negotiator in trade issues. As per statement the Foreign Trade Minister Anna Hallberg stated highlighted that ‘the authority has an important task above all in improving possibilities for Sweden’s international trade in many ways’

Ahnlid begins his position as director general on 17 August 2020 for an authority that goes back to 1651. He has served as Swedish Permanent Representative to the European Union in Brussels, Delegate before the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in Paris, adviser for trade issues at the Foreign Minister, and has served as diplomat in at the Swedish Representation in Geneva, and at the country’s embassy to the United States in Washington D.C.

For further information:
Press release by the Swedish Government: https://www.regeringen.se/pressmeddelanden/2020/06/ny-generaldirektor-for-kommerskollegium/?fbclid=IwAR33pIYKgjBLNJvqR_I5lBHkFPvFmNpJW2V0Rba17AYss2dNo83x18vVKBw

Anders Ahnlid’s CV: https://www.regeringen.se/49baf2/globalassets/regeringen/dokument/eu-representationen/cv/cv-anders-ahnlid.pdf

National Trade Board: https://www.kommerskollegium.se/en/

Anders Ahnlid – Picture by Katinka Igelberg/Kommerskollegium

Ambassador Hoekstra’s declaration on recent events in the US

Editor
-
0
Ambassador Hoekstra’s declaration on recent events in the US

Recently, together, we commemorated Memorial Day at the Netherlands American Cemetery at Margraten.  In my opening remarks there I quoted our Founding Fathers who famously wrote, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”.

Recent events in America, demonstrate we still need to work hard to achieve that vision outlined at our nation’s birth.  Racism and discrimination have no place in a society based on these principles.

George Floyd’s death was tragic and heart-wrenching to watch.  The resulting peaceful demonstrations are what a free and open society allow.  They encourage us to focus attention on serious issues that must be addressed.  The demonstrations that devolved into rioting resulting in further loss of life and property only compounded the pain many of us already felt.

Yes, the events have been painful to us as a country and as individuals.  Most Americans know a city, community, or someone that has been deeply affected. Yet even in the midst of our distress, we can take comfort in the fact that the expressions of grief and anguish at Mr. Floyd’s brutal death and the demands for justice have come not just from one group or region of the country, but from the country as a whole.  The calls for justice we have witnessed here in the Netherlands and across Europe and the world are similarly heartening.  It is evidence of our shared values and the expectation that we do better.

U.S. Department of State Seal

In the coming days and weeks, we as a nation will move to confront the challenges we face. We hope and pray for recovery from the pain.  We are confident that we will continue to move forward to make “home” a better place.  The aspirations of our Founding Fathers are still bedrock principles to which we are committed.

To our Dutch friends who have expressed their concern and support for our families and our communities as we heal, we say thank you. Jullie zijn echte vrienden.

Sincerely,

Ambassador

Summer exhibition ‘Textiles from Egypt’ in Leiden

Editor
-
0
Summer exhibition ‘Textiles from Egypt’ in Leiden

For the first time in almost 25 years, the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in Leiden (the dutch National Museum of Antiquities) shows a beautiful selection of textiles from Egypt most of which are over 1,000 years old.

This summer, the colourful exhibition ‘Textiles from Egypt’ focuses on fanciful canvases, fragments of garments and interior textiles from the first millennium AD, in stories about fabrics, styles, weaving techniques, materials, motifs and symbolism. In the hot desert sand of Egypt, these textiles have been exceptionally well preserved for centuries. Nowadays, the material is very fragile and is therefore rarely exhibited.

Modern textile art by thirteen artists of textile group QS2, inspired by the museum’s collection, is displayed alongside the centuries-old fabrics. ‘Textiles from Egypt’ can only be visited for a few months due to the fragility of the antique fabrics, from 1 June until 27 September 2020. All visitors are required to book a start time via www.rmo.nl

Egyptian fabrics were cherished as precious possessions. They usually consist of a simple linen base with beautiful woven, embroidered or stitched details in coloured wool. Some fabrics were used daily, and other pieces were specially made for burials. Almost all fabrics in museum collections were excavated at the beginning of the last century and sold  via the art market. Coloured parts were particularly interesting for trade. They were therefore often cut out of the garments, after which the rest was thrown away.

The exhibition ‘Textiles from Egypt’ gives visitors a spectacular impression of the craftsmanship of ancient textile artists and of the wardrobe and personal taste of the Egyptians in Late Antiquity. It It highlights materials and techniques, and the economic role of textiles in Egyptian society.

On display is a wide selection of fabrics and ornaments with motifs from Greek mythology, ancient Egyptian culture, and Christian faith, sometimes in a wondrous mix. There is also an abundance of geometric and figurative images. Eye-catchers include an ornamental piece with scenes from the biblical story of Joseph from the collection The Phoebus Foundation in Antwerp. Several other objects are on loan from the Allard Pierson in Amsterdam, the Textile Research Centre in Leiden and the dutch National Museum of World Cultures, including masterpieces such as a complete embroidered tunic, a cap and a colourful sock. 

Modern textile art

At the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden, textile group QS2 is exhibiting new work inspired by the museum’s collection as an integral part of the exhibition ‘Textiles from Egypt’. Visual artist Monika Auch coached QS2 in the developments of these contemporary interpretations of Egyptian textiles.

More summer exhibitions

In addition to ‘Textiles from Egypt’, the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden is staging the exhibition‘Romans along the Rhine’ for families and the come back of the successful exhibition ‘GLASS’, which was shown earlier in 2019 (both until 28 February 2021). Also on display is the (small) exhibition ‘Saqqara – Living in a City of the Dead’ about the museum’s archaeological excavation in Egypt (until 22 November 2020).

Main image: Orbiculus decorated with the story of Joseph
On this ornament, the story of Joseph is told in nine scenes. On the left, you can see how he is thrown into the well and how a brother takes away his multicoloured cloak. On the right, Joseph is taken by the Ishmaelites on a camel to be sold to Pharaoh.
Linen; c. 650-900 AD; from Egypt
© The Phoebus Foundation, Antwerp, inv. 625

1...303304305...867Page 304 of 867