Swarovski is pleased to announce Giovanna Engelbert as Creative Director. Giovanna Engelbert will oversee the full creative direction of the company and re-imagine the product portfolio across all divisions.
First products designed by Giovanna Engelbert will be showcased in the Spring/Summer 2021 collection.Ā
āOur 125-year history is witness for the power of our company to transform and reinvent itself and I am pleased to welcome a brilliant creative mind and strong female leader like Giovanna to our company.
With her remarkable track record in the industry and compelling point of view, she will explore new frontiers and become a vital part in writing the next chapter of our success storyā, says Robert Buchbauer, CEO Swarovski.
Ambassador Franc But & Ambassador Francisco Ribeiro de Menezes – Image by Slovenian Embassy to Germany.
Thursday, 14 May 2020, Embassy of the Republic of Slovenia to the Federal Republic of Germany: Portugal’s Ambassador to Germany,Ā H.E. Mr. Francisco Ribeiro de MenezesĀ and Slovenia’s AmbassadorĀ H.E. Mr. Franc ButĀ met in Berlin to discuss further activities in the framework of the German-Portuguese-Slovenian presidency trio. A focus was given to potential digital engagements.Ā
This novel trio begin with Germany taking the helm of the European Council from July 2020, followed by Portugal from January 2021, and subsequently Slovenia in July 2021. Incumbent holder of the presidency is Croatia, for the very first time.Ā
Portuguese Ambassador Ribeiro de Menezes was accredited on 19 February 2020 before the German Federal President,Ā Dr. Frank-Walter Steinmeier.Ā
Our first thoughts must be with the victims and survivors of the Rwandan genocide. Advocating on their behalf is an immense professional honor for my entire Office.
For international justice, Kabugaās arrest demonstrates that we can succeed when we have the international communityās support. This result is a tribute to the unwavering commitment of the United Nations Security Council, which established the Mechanism to continue the accountability process in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.
It is important to also recognize the many other partners whose contributions were essential, including law enforcement agencies and prosecution services from Rwanda, Belgium, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Luxembourg, Switzerland, the United States, EUROPOL and INTERPOL. This arrest demonstrates the impressive results that can be achieved through international law enforcement and judicial cooperation.
Earlier this year my Office visited the Ntarama genocide memorial in Rwanda to honor the memory of the victims and renew our commitment to justice. Todayās arrest underlines the strength of our determination.
Kabuga was indicted by the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in 1997 on seven counts of genocide, complicity in genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, persecution and extermination, all in relation to crimes committed during the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda.
Following completion of appropriate procedures under French law, Kabuga is expected to the transferred to the custody of the Mechanism, where he will stand trial.
French police arrested Kabuga in a sophisticated, coordinated operation with simultaneous searches across a number of locations.
By H.E. Rawan Sulaiman, Head of the Palestinian Mission to the Netherlands.
Today, May 15th, we Palestinians commemorate the catastrophe (al Nakba), the forced expulsion and displacement by Zionist militias of about three quarters of the Palestinian population from their cities and villages, making them refugees. Also my own family was made a refugee; forcibly moved out of Jaffa. Seventy two years of segregated life under military rule, occupation, and in refugee camps is what has followed. Also today, the EU Ministers of Foreign Affairs will convene to discuss the threat of annexation; Israelās next step in its colonial conquest of Palestine that was recently agreed upon by its new government and facilitated by the Trump administrationās so-called āPeace Planā.
The fact that annexation is now at the table should not come as a surprise to anyone, as by its actions Israel has proven again and again to be interested only in stealing maximum Palestinian land with minimum Palestinian remaining on it. By this design, Israel has ensured confinement of Palestinians in the areas where they already lived, while promoting the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements and their associated regime. Now only 13% of East Jerusalem is zoned for Palestinians, mostly already built-up, and only 1% is left of the so-called Area C, which represents 60% of the West Bank, all the while illegal Israeli settlements spread all over Palestinian territory.
On this land there are now two sets of rules and rights dividing two peoples. It needs no reminding that in this conflict, one party is the inherently violent occupier, a system established and maintained by military force, while the other is confined and occupied, deprived of its basic human rights, sovereignty and freedom. A situation resembling Apartheid.
To obscure this reality, aggressive and coordinated campaigns of our oppressor and their supporters have been set up to continuously rewrite history, framing us as; violent, barbaric and anti-Semitic. The other myth, that Palestine was āemptyā before it was āmade to bloomā, persists even today in the form of disregard and denial of our existence; our history, our heritage and our nationality. These distractions and myths are pushed aggressively, as without them it becomes impossible to defend the current situation with rational, moral and legal arguments.
If one does not remember and acknowledge the severity of the catastrophe of what the Nakba was, namely the loss of our historic homeland, one cannot comprehend the magnitude of the sacrifice Palestinians agreed to when giving up 78% of it, in the hopes of finding peace in the form of the two-state solution.
This internationally agreed solution for us is not a goal in itself, but justice and peace, in that specific order, are.
Now, even this historic compromise is openly rejected and subverted by Israel in the pursuit of further annexation of Palestinian territories, in ultimate breach of any commitment to peace, international law and United Nations Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 2334, and the UN Charter.
The international community was clear in its condemnation of Israelās illegal actions. The Security Council, the General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, and now the ICC Prosecutor, all converged in their stance on the illegality of these policies and practices and in their call on Israel to put an end to them. But these calls have been disregarded.
The International consensus was clear, but because it was never followed up with consequences, Israel proceeded in its course at will. A bully condemned without consequence only feels emboldened. They see that others recognize their power, but since they go unchallenged, they continue to claim, seize, and steal whatever they wish through threat or use of violence. Colonial powers never act out of goodwill. The cost of the enduring occupation, now more than ever, needs to outweigh its benefits.
What is more at stake, are fundamental principles of the rules-based multilateral order, that have always and unequivocally been upheld by international responsible players such as the Netherlands and the EU. These principles include the absolute inadmissibility of the acquisition of land by force, and with it the prohibition of annexation. What will be done to uphold the credibility of this principle, when Israel proceeds with annexation nevertheless? As a member of the Quartet, the EU is a key player in making sure that we salvage the two-State solution before it is too late, as the alternative is perpetual conflict and a system of subjugation and discrimination against a population confined in fragmented areas, akin to Apartheid. No country of moral standing can remain friends with such a situation.
The Nakba is commemorated each year by every Palestinian because the wound is still open and the instruments of oppression and expulsion are still active. Those who were made refugees still did not see their right of return, enshrined in international law, respected and fulfilled. Nevertheless, we have unequivocally declared our readiness to immediately resume peace negotiations under international auspices and based on the longstanding terms of reference, building on the progress achieved in previous rounds of negotiations.
The State of Palestine has proposed the convening of an international peace conference that can provide the necessary impetus and momentum for these negotiations that should lead to a final peace agreement resolving all final status issues within one year. That is the path we should be engaged in, and that can only happen if the path to annexation is blocked.Ā
In the picture H.E. Mr, Peter Hoekstra and his wife Diane.
The Embassy of the U.S. in The Hague published a fresh new online newsletter today with the latest reports about their activities. In the welcome address, the Ambassador of the USA, H.E. Mr, Peter Hoekstra and his wife Diane stressed that āStaying in touch is now more important than ever.ā
This newsletter will become a periodic update on U.S. policy, the Dutch-American relationship, and happenings at the Embassy in The Hague and Consulate in Amsterdam.
āOur first note will be a disappointing one.ā said ambassador Hoekstra āFor us, the Independence Day celebration has always been a time to connect with our friends. It is a highlight for all of us at the Embassy. Unfortunately, this year it will need to be canceled. We want to be in total support of the Dutch governmentās efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic. ā
The Venezuelan Foreign Affairs Minister, Mr Jorge Arreaza, announced that the case presented by Venezuela before the International Criminal Court earlier this year, which concerned the imposition of unilateral US sanctions on his country, has been assigned to the ICCās Pre-Trial Chamber III.
Mr Arreaza had come to The Hague last February 13thĀ to present a formal request to the ICCās Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, asking the Court to investigate US unilateral sanctions imposed on Venezuela as crimes against humanity.
The referral, consisting of a 60 pages long briefing, detailed the negative impact of the US sanctions on the Venezuelan economy ā an impact that, according to the Venezuelan government, amounted to a violation of the human rights of the Venezuelan people, and specifically their right to health, food, and economic development.Ā
“It is an economic war against the peoples who want to make their own decisions and who are willing to do anything to assert their sovereignty and self-determination. Sanctions are a means of achieving a change of government, with a terrible, devastating impact on the people of Venezuela. This is similar to the persecution of the Jewish people during the holocaust. ” he explained.
The Venezuelan Foreign Minister gave an example of private Venezuelan business people whose accounts in the US and Europe are closed without reason.He also mentioned unilateral coercive measures against VIASA, the national airline that has more than 2,000 workers.
āItās persecution; itās a modality that includes the use of force through the economy; it is a war through the economy, which generates death, destruction and disease in Venezuela.Ā We came today to present our demand before the ICC; thus using international law we can all stop the barbarism that is causing the US Government. We ask the ICC to determine responsibilities and prosecute those responsible for the suffering of the Venezuelan people.”
The Foreign Minister explained that Venezuela, as a member of the ICC, could denounce the alleged crimes taking place on its territory, thus falling within the jurisdiction of the court ā which was created to punish international atrocities such as war crimes and genocide.
During his short stay in The Hague, Mr Arreaza talked to the media after his visit at the ICC. In this context, he stressed that āthe consequences of US coercive unilateral measures are crimes against humanity, a death sentence for tens of thousands of Venezuelans per year and violate both international laws and the United Nations Charter.āĀ
To follow-up the referral by Venezuela, the International Criminal Court opened a preliminary investigation on February 19th, resulting in the current assignment of the case to Pre-Trial Chamber III.
Over time, the US has been imposing increasingly broader and tougher sanctions on Venezuela, targeting the government in Caracas and supporting instead the leader of the political opposition. The latest rounds of economic sanctions have been enacted through executive orders, in which the US has accused Venezuela of āhuman rights abuses and anti-democratic actions.ā
The sanctions prohibit the Venezuelan government from accessing their accounts in the US and cut the ties between the US and the Venezuelan markets, including in the trade of oil and other goods.
While the current investigation focuses on crimes allegedly suffered by Venezuela, the ICC also has an already ongoing investigation into crimes allegedly committed by the Venezuelan government. The investigation ā which has been assigned to the Pre-Trial Chamber I of the Court in September 2018 ā came to birth after six American states (Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay, and Peru) filed a request alleging crimes committed by the Venezuelan government in the context of the demonstrations and the political unrest takin place in the country, and especially the use of force against political opponents.
In line with these statesā claims, Human Rights Watch has also claimed that Venezuelan security forces have tortured and killed civilians, using excessive force against them.
In particular, it has been alleged that state security forces have frequently used excessive force to disperse and put down demonstrations, and that they have arrested and detained thousands of members of the opposition ā several of whom have been allegedly subjected to severe abuse and ill-treatment in detention. It has also been reported that some groups of protestors used violent methods, resulting in members of security forces being injured or killed.
On February 19th, the ICC decided to assign both requests, the first from the group of American Countries against Venezuela and the second from the government of Venezuela against the United States, to Pre-Trial Chamber III.
āLegal decision by the International Criminal Court assigning the complaint presented by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (referred by the Courtās Prosecution),ā tweeted Minister Areaza.
Legal decision by the International Criminal Court assigning the complaint presented by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (referred by the Court's Prosecution) to the Pre-Trial Chamber IIIhttps://t.co/CfMsYwDpVp
Johan Ramirez, Vice-President of Venetur and H.E. Ms. Haifa Aissami Madah, Ambassador of Venezuela to International Organizations.
Often known for having the largest oil reserves in the world, Venezuela is also famous for another dark product: cocoa. With its perfect grains, Venezuelan cocoa excels by the worldās quality standards, and it is often the main ingredient of premium chocolates produced globally.
A Venezuelan delegation of chocolatiers and chocolate producers, accompanied by officials from the Ministry of Tourism and Foreign Trade, MITCOEX, came to Amsterdam earlier this year to participate in the Chocoa International Fair. The group of Venezuelans attending the event was accompanied by Johan Ramirez, Vice-President of Venetur and led by H.E. Haifa Aissami Madah, Ambassador of Venezuela, Permanent Representative to the International Organizations.
Among the producers attending the fair there was Arvicacao, with Ocumare cocoa from La Primogenita Farm, and Cakawa Chocolates, a business venture led by Venezuelan women dedicated to producing and promoting a unique collection of fine dark chocolate.
Their stand ā which contained an exclusive selection of Venezuelan cocoa ā was one of the most visited during the fair.
Soraya Achkar and Ester Rojas, a professor and an art teacher and one of the businessā founders, recounted how the adventure started. āWe started making chocolates five years ago as a hobby, seeking to distract ourselves from the intellectual work of teaching, and also looking for a different source of income that could give us independence.
Then, we started to get more and more interested in making the chocolate, bean to bar process, choosing cocoa beans, as well as putting in our personality, creating original combinations of texture and flavours with Venezuelan cocoa of creole and trinitarian originsā.
The Venezuelan production of cocoa ā she explained ā features a wide variety of beans.
āWe started with beans from Barlobento, Bahia de Barinas, Rio Caido, Rio Caribe, Bahia de Patanemo, Sur del Lago, Carabobo, Carenero. These are very distant regions, each having its own characteristic flavour depending on the composition of the soil. Visiting the plantations for years, we created a solid relationship with the producers, assisting them in taking care of the post-harvest process.ā
āThe farmers taste the chocolate we make with their beansā ā she continued ā āand we discuss how long the beans will dry to get the flavour we are looking for, or how long the fermentation process needs to be to get the best aroma. Then, we receive the selected beans, and we make a second selection at the lab. Our products are 100% original chocolate, coming in tablets of 40, 86, and 90 grams. For the filling, we use only local tropical fruits and fruits from the Amazonas. We work with doctors, gyms, and different companies who want their chocolate with medical specific standards or with their logoā.
The fair proved to be a useful venture for the chocolate producers. āWe are delighted with our participation in the Chocoa Fair. We have made exciting contacts with customers who want to buy our productā ā Ester Rojas explained, stressing that āVenezuelan chocolate is unique for its qualityā.
āJoris Ivens and Viet Nam, 75 years of solidarity ā
In appreciation for the contribution of Joris Ivens to the achievement of peace and national independence of Vietnam, the President of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam – Nguyen Phu Trong – decided to posthumously confer the Friendship Order on Joris Ivens. Therefore , a ceremony took place at the Embassy of Viet Nam in The Hague on Thursday, 16th of January 2020.
The ceremony was well attended. A delegation of the Nijmegen based European Foundation led by board member Mr Andre Stufkens was present at the ceremony. Colleagues of Ambassador Ngo Thi Hoa, from Tanzania, Chile, Belarus, ASEAN and others also came by.
Madam Annemiek Nooteboom and the Ambassador of Viet Nam.
On the program, were speeches and the screening of Joris works.
Mr Gerben de Jong, a former Dutch Ambassador to Vietnam delivered a powerful speech. He was followed by Mr Andre Stufkens who also delivered a speech and presented the book Joris Ivens and Vietnam to Ambassador Ngo Thi Hoa.
H.E. Ngo Thi Hoa after her discourse, presented the instruments pertaining to the Order of Friendship to madam Annemiek Nooteboom, a representative of the Ivans family. Madam Nooteboom express her gratitude for the honor that has been bestowed on Joris Ivams posthumously.
A resume of Ambassador Ngo Thi Hoa discourse follows hereby.
” Joris Ivens is a well-known filmmaker of the Netherlands and the world in the 20th century, who is famous for his documentary films. He was nicknamed the āFlying Dutchmanā as he spent most of his life travelling around the world to make films condemning inequality, injustice, war and imperialism.
In 1965, Joris Ivens first came to Vietnam at the invitation of the Vietnamese Government. He made the short film āLe Ciel, La Terreā to protest the US bombing in Vietnam. This is the very first film Ivens made about the Vietnam war, which is a realistic report of the ongoing war in both regions of the country. It shows the audience the massive consequences of the conflict on the lives of the Vietnamese people. A year later, he returned to Vietnam to film āFar from Vietnamā in order to continue protesting against the war that was waging in the country.
Mr. Gerben de Jong, a former Dutch Ambassador to Vietnam, madam Annemiek Nooteboom, a representative of the Ivans family, H.E. Mrs. Ngo Thi Hoa, Ambassador of Vietnam and MrAndre Stufkens.
When Ivens came to Vietnam for the third time in 1967, he created the film āThe 17th parallel ā Peopleās warā in Vinh Linh, Quang Tri province. The film won the Lenin International Peace Prize in 1967 and became a hit with international peace-loving audiences. It was also in this place in 1977 that the Medical Committee Netherlands ā Vietnam established the Dong Ha or Ha Lan hospital to help locals affected by the war.
Ivens was one of the foreign filmmakers honored to meet President Ho Chi Minh ā the national hero of Vietnam – and had valuable footage of Uncle Ho, as shown in the film Vietnam Honors Dutch Cineast Joris Ivans.
The film captured President Ho Chi Minhās images and words during a meeting with young heroes from 2 parts of the country in Hanoi; just a few months before the President died. This was one of the last films to record the words of President Ho Chi Minh.
The documentary films of Joris Ivens voiced the desire for peace for the Vietnamese people with the world, from which Vietnam has received valuable support from international friends; contributing to the victory in the struggle for national liberation. The victory of the Vietnamese people on April 30th, 1975 certainly had the participation and support of many international film artists including Ivens and his wife, Marceline Loridan, who always protected justice, despite having to put themselves in danger and even facing death. They always believed in a brighter future for Vietnam.
In addition to contributing valuable historical films to Vietnam, Ivens also had a great influence on filmmaking methods for Vietnamese cinema and television. He is considered to be the initiator of the direct cinema style in Vietnam, which is a style of capturing reality and representing it truthfully.
The valuable historic documentaries of Joris Ivens as well as many other materials have been handed over to the Vietnam Film Institute by the European Foundation Joris Ivens and the Medical Committee Netherlands ā Vietnam in recent years.
I would like to express my sincere thanks to them for their efforts in preserving and transferring these valuable materials to the Vietnam Film Institute. All of these films and materials have been preserved and widely introduced to the public audience and future generations of Vietnam and the Netherlands in order to enhance the mutual understanding and friendship between our 2 nations.
It is also our way of dedicating our appreciation to the legendary filmmaker. In addition, the Vietnam Film Institute produced a documentary in 2018 titled āJoris Ivens and the Wind of Vietnamā, in order to honor Joris Ivens, his life and work. This film won 2 Silver Kite Prizes and the Silver Lotus Prize last year.
I am very happy to announce that in appreciation for the contribution of Joris Ivens to the achievement of peace and national independence of Vietnam, the President of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam – Nguyen Phu Trong – decided to posthumously confer the Friendship Order to Joris Ivens. We are honored to have here with us Mrs. Annemiek Nooteboom, who will receive the Order on behalf of Joris Ivensā family.Ā
Today, we will have the opportunity to listen to the presentations and remarks on Joris Ivenās life and career from friends who have been the companions of Vietnam for many years/”
A lavish Vietnamese dinner-buffet concluded the Joris Ivens ceremony.
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted the economic, social, political and structural weaknesses of the European Union. It has resulted not only in human tragedy, but also in political conflict, loss of trust, uncertainty in the future on the part of citizens dealing with lackluster MS and European responses and, ultimately, in an economic crisis whose severity, length and secondary impacts are yet unknown.
The likelihood of kneejerk policy reactions in the direction of restricted travel, protectionism and ābeggar thy neighborā policies should concern the leadership of the European Union. The answer to these issues is to begin laying a foundation for a more resilient European Union when it comes to public health crises, one in which good policy mixes with operational capability and strategic communication to ensure both the predictability and the efficacy of responses to future outbreaks. This will require not only the efforts of individual nations and cooperation between them, but also the coordinating capacity of the European Union.
This white paper argues that the existing European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection is one of the most important building blocks for future safety from pandemics. It offers, in its European and national iterations (where health is already present in the critical infrastructure taxonomy), a conceptual toolbox for understanding the systemic impact of crises such as the pandemic, including beyond the sphere of health, and the means for planning, organizing and implementing measures to increase the resilience of European societies to such crises.
Before we begin, we should add that the wider European efforts in this area should respect the following principles:
Inter-disciplinarity ā where medical expertise is combined with logistics, strategic communication, economics and diplomacy to ensure effectiveness of efforts; this is fitting because of the multidimensional nature of these crises, transcending health concerns;
Non-discrimination ā European health efforts when it comes to collective challenges should not be subject to āmulti-speed Europeā or āvariable geometry Europeā rhetoric and planning. All European countries have to work together in this regard and all initiatives, even if they start from a smaller group of nations, should eventually encompass the whole of the EU. Ultimately, any discriminatory or exclusionary practices will result in new vulnerabilities with regards to health crises;
Promoting resilience ā all European efforts should be geared towards promoting societal resilience, which is not only a measure of the ability to deal with crises, but also to mitigate the impacts and recover as soon or as smoothly as possible to the level of normal economic, social and political functioning in society. Otherwise, we may find that more human tragedy will result from overzealous but politically appealing policies than from the health crisis itself;
Long-term perspectives ā the EU should not be preparing for the next coronavirus or the next pandemic, but for the next health crises, also in interconnection with other crises such as food, water, energy, a.o., which may involve different scenarios and the admission that full prevention, while it must be attempted, is not feasible; the EU must āexpect the unexpectedā.
The European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection (EPCIP), while based on a series of documents of reference describing a wide variety of critical infrastructures of interest, is currently focused on energy and transport infrastructures, with designated infrastructure lists, while the EU also acknowledges ITC and space as European critical infrastructures through other initiatives. Health infrastructure is included, in theory, but not in practice.
Our main recommendation is for the EU to begin applying EPCIP to the health infrastructure sector and to increase the European Commissionās involvement in supporting critical health infrastructure protection in Member States.
The European Union defines critical infrastructures as an āasset, system or part thereof located in Member States which is essential for the maintenance of vital societal functions, health, safety, security, economic or social well-being of people, and the disruption or destruction of which would have a significant impact in a Member State as a result of the failure to maintain those functionsā. European Critical Infrastructures respect that definition but their disruption is felt across two or more Member States.
Through the active and rapid inclusion of health into EPCIP, the National and European authorities would begin identifying and designating European Critical Health Infrastructures (ECHI) and including them in the National and European systems for Critical Infrastructure Protection.
Whether these infrastructures are hospitals, laboratories, production facilities and others, their owner / operator would be obliged to file and update an Operatorās Security Plan, to adjust the organizational hierarchy in order to include a Security Liaison Officer within a Department of Security and to aid the competent authorities in establishing lines of communication that reach to European levels.
The research process through which ECHIs would be designated will surely bring up unexpected results in terms of European dependencies, but also awareness of the natural interdependencies which European integration, division of labor and mobilities have fostered. The European Union must work together with the Member States to not only protect the ECHIs, but also to plan and fund increased resilience in the future ECHI system, a process which goes beyond the remit of EPCIP.
What follows are some suggestions for European initiatives in this regard, some of which may be overlapping or contradictory. They are meant to highlight the wealth of possibilities., not to provide a coherent roadmap to European pandemic resilience:
The creation, within the EU, of a European Anti Epidemic Force (EAEF) in inter-operability with NATO’s similar structures, taking advantage of the current civil-military cooperation experience. This may be militarized, or rather a military structure can provide the logistics backbone for operationalizing a plan or a strategy for intervention in an epidemiological crisis affecting one or more Member States, or even the European Union in its totality. In accordance with democratic principles, the planning and strategy would be provided and approved by the political authorities, but an initiative such as this would provide the standardizations necessary for a key factor in collective action, which is interoperability, which both NATO and EU always stress. To avoid bureaucratic complications, legislative issues, and to shorten the time necessary for its creation, we believe we could initially start from the Permanent Structured Cooperation initiative, which took nine years to bring to fruition and which already counts among its projects a Multinational Medical Coordination Center (MMCC) and a European Medical Command (EMC). Initial funding may be sourced partly from the European Defence Fund. Cooperation with NATO is key, as well as with the emergency situation response organizations from the different Member States. NATO already has internal structures dealing with NBC issues, in which all NATO MS are represented. Either starting from those, or creating similar military structures at EU levels, could provide an initial basis for planning specific measures.
The European Union may consider funding and developing a European network of research centers in public health and infectious disease to support, in an academic, R&D and logistics capacity the EAEF and other initiatives of its type. This would generate cooperation between the centers of excellence in Western Europe but may also involve the creation of new centers on a geographic, regional and economic basis (in order to avoid concentration in Western Europe), as well as targeted development of existing institutions such as the Cantacuzino Institute in Romania. With professional management, competitive hiring open to all European experts, multi- annual funding and clear lines of cooperation and communication, just as in the model being used for basic research in Physics, it would be possible to create a robust European infrastructure for inclusion in ERNCIP (European Reference Network for Critical Infrastructure Protection). These centers would be National and regional focal points for cooperation with Universities, public and commercial labs, private companies and health authorities.
Regardless of the structures and initiatives being implemented, cooperation with NATO is key to ameliorate collective vulnerability and prepare for crises. There are already success stories for NATO-EU operational cooperation in cybersecurity. The common Declaration of 2016 had 42 recommendations for its implementation in 7 different areas and with 32 concrete actions. Yearly reports are released on the state of the cooperation and the 74 proposals currently under implementation. Public health issues and resilience in the face of pandemics can easily be included in an expanded set of priority cooperation areas that already includes countering hybrid threats, maritime cooperation, cyber defense and security, common exercises, increased defense capacity and strengthening political cooperation and dialogue.
It is vital for the European Commission to be involved and, alongside other European institutions, to take a central role in coordinating common efforts. For instance, there is already an Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) and a European Crisis Management Laboratory responding to the EU Commissioner for Crisis Management. Its role and authority should be expanded, as well as its resources, in order to make possible more timely action than has been registered during the current crisis.
The improvement of National and European responses to health crises, including those related to infectious diseases, must rely on the existence and use of capabilities in modelling and simulation for training, scenario building and planning.
The European Union mayformulate recommendations regarding best practices for avoiding supply shocks of basic and specialty goods (masks, medical equipment, drugs etc.) to be implemented by states or by subnational administrative units. It may even be possible and desirable for the EU to invest in the creation of strategic stockpiles of important categories of goods under its control for disbursement in case of necessity. There are several examples of such constructs in the wider region and they can become the topic of cooperation and exchange. These models provide for bases which stock and control warehouses within a given region for emergency use by remote activation in the initial phase of a disaster occurring.
The European Union should create a Macroeconomic Working Group for Crisis Response involving the Commission, the European Central Bank and MS representatives in order to pre-plan and pre-negotiate measures for ensuring macroeconomic stability and recovery during crises that start outside of the economy, such as those caused by pandemics. It has been painfully obvious that even the best prepared nations have been caught unaware by the economic consequences of individual state action and pandemic management methods and they were forced to create ad-hoc toolboxes and experience long hours and several days negotiations for agreements to protect their economy, labor markets and capital markets.
The EU should consider extending the currently applicable exceptions to EU bidding and competitiveness rules from the area of national defense into that of national health as a determinant of national security. The current crisis was aggravated by fragile and inadequate supply chains for goods with centralized production, such as masks, personal protective equipment and others. It would be ideal for some of this production to be decentralized, but this is difficult in the context of market forces without state assistance. However, such a decentralization could improve pandemic limitation efforts, ācurve flatteningā efforts and the saving of human lives. In general, we should identify those areas in which market processes and EU rules lead to outcomes which have a negative impact on European resilience in various circumstances.
There are models in place and functioning well which sidestep the difficulties of achieving consensus at European level. For instance, the European Defence Agency started with a small number of Member States and then expanded to include almost all others after it had proven its merit. Alternatively, there is the example of the European Space Agency, an intergovernmental organization whose membership clearly overlaps with that of the EU, but is not part of the EU. However, it has established a long-term partnership with the EU as a main beneficiary of its largest collective projects. A similar agency dedicated to fighting pandemics (like a European CDC) could conceivably fulfil this function for the EU without being a part of it, but indissolubly linked through funding and implementation. Starting from a ācoalition of the willingā may be politically difficult in a climate of political anxiety regarding āmultiple speed Europeā, but it may be the right choice so long as all MS are allowed to join, should they wish to, once it has proven itself.
The EU may also consider transforming the European Programme for Critical Infrastructure Protection into a European Critical Infrastructure Protection Agency with a better-defined hierarchy, role, authority and toolbox to ensure pan-European resilience where two or more Member States are affected and coordinate European funding for resilience enhancing measures.
EU actions proposed for improving EU readiness for dealing with pandemics in the long-term:
The EU may instruct the Joint Research Centers, mainly ISPRA, dedicated to the research of citizen security, to lead a Consortium to develop a European Epidemic Preparedness Index and offer every Member State the funding and capability to assess their EEPI and specialized funding to close gaps in the most cost-effective and immediate areas; also a future International Health Event Scale can use the experience existing in the nuclear domain (International Nuclear Event Scale). We can consider the transfer of EU expertise in sustainability, climate change, with a view towards developing a new “health agility” at local, national, and EU level. Also, the European Parliament could draw on existing legislation in other domains such as nuclear, oceans, outer space, and others, in order to draft a legal framework for health security.
The EU should fund research into the macroeconomic consequences and responses of the pandemic and formulate resilience-enhancing guidelines for the Member States as well as better European policies, especially as regards the Eurozone Member States;
The EU should direct a special focus on the development of a health security culture among European citizens, not just with knowledge on disease prevention and proper use of equipment such as masks, but also on the appropriate sources of information, social responsibility, their role inside their communities and modelling expectations regarding health measures and the citizensā role in their success, to increase the trust between citizens and authorities, and by promoting “resilience and perceptions” as a new construct;
The EU could encourage transatlantic cooperation in this regard by introducing health and pandemics on the agenda of future summits and interactions. One possibility is to organize a Transatlantic Health Dialogue similar to the Transatlantic Business Dialogue and the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue created during the institutionalization of stakeholder interaction for regulatory purposes in the early 2000s. Further efforts can be hosted under the High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Forum between the EU and US, which has not met in the last few years. The health dialogue is especially important since the current US pandemic was also caused by spread from the EU and the close economic, trade, culture, tourism and other bonds between the EU and the US favors the spread of future pandemics;
The EU may also position itself as a key actor in the ācoronadiplomacyā initiatives by cooperating with China, Russia, as well as the US, by institutionalizing dialogue on health issues, exchanges and aid at higher levels, rather than simply expressing anxiety at bilateral cooperation with countries such as Italy. The Health Silk Road within discussions already initiated by China and Italy can be operationalized at the level of the European Commission.
These proposals and the interaction between the EU and the Member States or between the Member States themselves is part of a new multilateralism based not on asymmetry of interests and valuations, but on mutual dependence for health outcomes and eventual economic recovery;
It would be interesting to see a High Level Consultation Forum and Public Health and Pandemic Response organized under DG HOME and bringing together stakeholders from EU institutions, MS Ministries of Health and Interior, private companies and academia in order to develop documents of reference for the European Commission and to formulate and select project ideas (infrastructure, research etc.) that would then be funded by the EU and the MS governments on a voluntary basis;
The EU may set up a European Critical Infrastructure Protection Agency to manage the interdependencies among the different critical infrastructures, starting with the health domain a.o. The EU may introduce and develop the idea of the critical health infrastructure dimension and health cooperation in the future iteration of the European Union Global Strategy, considering a European Health Governance approach as a necessity;
Ultimately, the best policy and action mix is unknown at this time, so the EU must foster a debate at all levels of authority (political, administrative, social, expertise) to identify possibilities and how workable they are under real world conditions. We may be surprised to find that critical health infrastructure decentralization is more resilient and politically and financially more palatable, that regional integration has been anti-resilience to a certain extent and that new attitudes are necessary to overcome the negativity inherent in crisis periods.
The EU should also consider continuing a systematic approach to the development of health infrastructures and the systems they support, which has been steadily growing out of EU documents of reference, research and policy agendas. Among these, we include:
The Public-Private Partnerships in the health sector during normal times, but also during crisis and emergency situations;
The promotion of medical research and of the digitalization of the health sector;
The improvement of the health and security culture of European citizens, through the provision of adequate information and education programs;
Tackling the problem of counterfeit medicine and medical equipment;
The hybrid threat perspective of critical health infrastructure protection, including cybersecurity, physical disruption and supply disruption;
The actual structure for cooperation between existing center for excellence in all areas of medicine, including military medicine. For emergency situations, we could envision cooperation with the NATO Centre of Excellence for Military Medicine.
Authors: Drafted by a Group of Concerned People
Flavius Caba-Maria, Septimiu Caceu, Victor Cionga, Carmen Cirnu, Radu Dop,
Alexandru Georgescu, Adrian Gheorghe, RÄzvan Ionescu, Viorel Isticioaia-Budura,
Florin Luca, Alexandru Mironov, Liviu MureČan, Radu MuČetescu, Adelina Palade,
Adrian PĆ¢rlog, Florin PÄsÄtoiu, Corneliu Pivariu, Dorin-Dumitru Prunariu,
