Media Populism

Editor
-
0
Media Populism

By Anastasiia Pachina.

In today’s times of media dominance, an entertainment sphere, the economy as well as the political sphere and political activists have to adjust their campaigns and integrate their narratives, actions and expectations into the mass media context. The created content spreads rapidly and is absorbed by news consumers. Thence, media platforms and social networks are widely used by politicians, including populists, as an effective channel for communicating with people and for promoting their ideas to the masses.  

Populism and the media

Despite the fact that the concept of populism is difficult to define because of its “constitutional ambiguity” (Taguieff, 1997, 11), there are several key elements. They involve a request for “popular sovereignty”, the promotion of the interests of a homogeneous group representing “in-group”, that is constructed as “the people” and that is opposite to “other” outgroups including a corrupt and conspiring elite (Mudde, Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017; Müller, 2016; Rooduijn, 2014). Charismatic leadership is also an integral part of populism, which overrides the traditional political institutions (Canovan, 1999).

It is also worth noting that the rapidly growing use of media and the large reduction in costs of communication and mobilization of voters is currently promoting populists and populist parties while the level of people’s trust and confidence in traditional, established parties is declining (Bartlett, 2014, 100-101). The commercial media (such as tabloids and broadcasters) which provides the audience with attractive headlines is considered one of the main promoters of populism (Mazzoleni, Stewart, Horsfield, 2003). Media populism itself is defined as a way of operating by the media which exhibits the following stylistic and ideological elements:

  • Opposition to the elites and the existing institutions of democracy (a binary segregation between an “us” and a “them”)
  • Charismatic authority appealing to moral sentiments (Krämer, 2014, 48).

Media populism can be divided into three perspectives: populism by the media (the media generates populism), populism through the media (the media as a mobilisation tool for populists) (Mazzoleni, 2008, 50), and populist citizen journalism (audience members create populist messages) (Esser, Stępińska, Hopmann, 2017, 3-6). With the democratisation of information and the decline of the authority of traditional media, all three perspectives are actively used. 

With the spread of political mediatisation, demonstrations are moving to the online environment, whereas politicians often turn into media personalities who are expected to attract more followers, publish tweets and post photos on Instagram. On the one hand, these developments provide ample opportunities to engage people in politics, to give them a voice and the right to decide, choose and be elected.

On the other hand, the media are an effective channel for misleading the masses and spreading unreasonable promises which are solely aimed at increasing popularity. Populist division into “us” and “they” are also reflected in the polarisation of the news audience. The information becomes biased, which entails the loss of the main role of the media, which is the creation of critical debates from different points of view in the public space. The way we perceive news, however, also depends on us; whether we will be subject ourselves to thoughtless consumption or thoughtfully analyse incoming information.

About the author:

Anastasiia Pachina

Anastasiia Pachina – Sociologist at Charles University, Prague. Program manager of the UPF – Culture for Peace initiative. Research Executive in IPSOS CZ

References

Canovan, M. (1999). Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies, 47, 2–16.

Esser, F., Stepinska, A., & Hopmann, D. N. (2016). Populism and the Media. Cross-National Findings and Perspectives. In T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reinemann, J. Strömbäck & C. d. Vreese (Eds.), Populist Political Communication in Europe. Routledge, 365-380.

Krämer, B. (2014). Media populism: A conceptual clarification and some theses on its effects. Communication Theory. Vol. 24, iss. 1, 42-60.

Mazzoleni, G., Stewart, J., & Horsfield, B. (Eds.). (2003). The media and neo-populism: A contemporary comparative analysis. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Mazzoleni, G. (2008). Populism and the media. In D. Albertazzi & D. McDonnel (Eds.), Twenty-first century populism. The spectre of Western European democracy (pp. 49–64). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Müller, J.-W. (2016). Behind the New German Right. Retrieved on July 20 2020 from http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/04/14/behind-new-german-right-afd/ [Crossref], [Google Scholar].

Rooduijn, M. (2014). The nucleus of populism: In search of the lowest common denominator. Government and Oppositio. Vol. 49, 573–599.

Taguieff, P. (1997). Le populisme et la science politique. Du mirage conceptuel aux vrais problèmes. Vingtième Siècle. Revue d’histoire, 56, 4–33.

Legacy of antifascism for the common pan-European future

Editor
-
0
Legacy of antifascism for the common pan-European future

From the Victory Day to Corona Disarray 75 years of Europe’s Collective Security and Human Rights System Legacy of antifascism for the common pan-European future

The first July day of 2020 in Vienna sow marking the anniversary of Nuremberg Trials with the conference “From the Victory Day to Corona Disarray: 75 years of Europe’s Collective Security and Human Rights System – Legacy of Antifascism for the Common Pan-European Future”. This was the first public and probably the largest conference in Europe past the early spring lockdown. It gathered numerous speakers and audience physically in the venue while many others attended online.

The conference was organised by four partners; the International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES), Modern Diplomacy, European Perspectives, and Culture for Peace, with the support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna that hosted the event in a prestigious historical setting.

Media partners were diplomatic magazines of several countries, 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. (the entire conference proceedings are available: https://www.facebook.com/DiplomaticAcademyVienna )

Among 20-some speakers from Canada to Australia, talking in three event’s panels was also the bard of Human Rights law, univ. prof. Manfred Nowak. Hereby we are bringing the most relevant parts of his highly absorbing speech prepared exclusively for this conference. 

By Manfred Nowak.

(Exclusive speech for the Conference at the DAW, Vienna, 1 July 2020)

The post WWII architecture is a strong and decisive reaction to the Great Depression, the rise of fascism, the horrors of WWII and the Holocaust. The United Nations, created in San Francisco on 26 June 1945, are built on three main pillars: Freedom from fear and violence, freedom from want and poverty, human rights and respect for human dignity.

For the first time in human history, war has been prohibited in international law with only minor exceptions, namely the right of States to self-defence and the collective security system under the guidance of the UN Security Council. For the first time in human history, the promotion and protection of human rights were acknowledged as a legitimate goal of the international community and international law. For the first time in human history, the main perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity had been brought to justice before international military tribunals in Nuremberg and Tokyo. And for the first time in human history, economic and social development, prosperity and the eradication of poverty have been defined as goals of a new world order.

These ambitious aims and objectives were only possible thanks to the antifascist consensus among the allies, which at that time seemed to be even stronger than the differences between capitalism and communism. When the UN Human Rights Commission, the predecessor of the current Human Rights Council, drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights between 1946 and 1948, this antifascist consensus was still strong enough to achieve a synthesis between the Western and the Socialist concepts of human rights. The Universal Declaration, solemnly adopted in Paris on 10 December 1948, contains civil and political rights together with economic, social and cultural rights and with the vision of a new “social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized” (Article 28).

As soon as the Human Rights Commission started to transfer this historic compromise between liberal freedoms and social security into a legally binding universal convention on human rights, the United States and its allies in 1951 forced a decision in the UN General Assembly to split human rights again into two categories, which dominated the ideological debates during the time of the Cold War. The International Bill of Rights, which was finally adopted after long negotiations in 1966, was divided into the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, favoured by the West, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, favoured by the Soviet Union and its allies. Civil and political rights and freedoms were conceived as immediately binding State obligations to respect and ensure the rights to life, personal liberty, privacy, security and integrity, freedom of expression, religion, assembly and association and the right to participate in democratic decision making processes. Economic, social and cultural rights to work, fair, equal and healthy working conditions, social security, the rights to food, housing, health, education and an adequate standard of living, on the other hand, were conceived as mere “programme rights” to be achieved step by step through progressive implementation.

As WWII had started as a European war between fascist and democratic States, Europe felt a particular responsibility to prevent another war and catastrophe like the Holocaust through economic and political cooperation and the protection of human rights. While the European Communities of the 1950s aimed at preventing another war through economic integration, the Council of Europe was established already in 1949 as a political organization based upon human rights, pluralistic democracy and the rule of law. The Council of Europe was a Western European organization, which defended these “European values” against any form of totalitarianism, whether fascism (as practiced at that time in Spain and Portugal) or communism (as practiced in a growing number of Central and Eastern European States). By adopting the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in 1950, which only contained civil and political rights, the Council of Europe left no doubt that it was a Western organization, which did not feel bound by the indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights, as expressed in the Universal Declaration.

Economic, social and cultural rights played and unfortunately still play in the Council of Europe a subordinate role. The European Convention with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which decides in a legally binding manner on tens of thousands of individual applications per year, is the light-tower of human rights protection in Europe, while the European Social Charter of 1961 and its monitoring system is much weaker and very little known to the public. Nevertheless, this is the time when the social welfare state, based on the economic policies of John Maynard Keynes, was developed in Western Europe, North America and other industrialized nations. The architects of the social welfare state or a market economy with a human face were, however, not even aware that they were implementing economic, social and cultural rights, as these rights were primarily associated with the Soviet Union and its allies. 

During the Cold War, human rights were the subject of fierce ideological battles between Western and Communist States, and to a lesser degree, the newly independent States of the Global South. Nevertheless, this was the time when human rights were codified at the universal and regional level. In addition of the two Covenants of 1966, the United Nations adopted a number of universal human rights treaties, such as the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of 1965, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women of 1979, the Convention against Torture of 1984 or the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989. These core human rights treaties are today almost universally ratified. On the regional level, the two most important treaties, which were largely based on the European Convention, are the American Convention on Human Rights of 1969 and the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights of 1981.

With the implosion of the Communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe and the velvet revolutions of 1989, which quickly led to the fall of the iron curtain and the end of the Cold War, a historic window of opportunity opened for a new world order based upon human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action promised a new era, based upon the equality, universality, indivisibility and interdependence of all human rights, spear-headed by the newly created Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

For the first time, the collective security system of the UN Charter was applied in practice and led to new generations of peace-building missions with human rights components and peace-enforcement actions, which also tackled some of the worst human rights violations. Two ad-hoc international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda were established by the UN Security Council as the first ones after the Nuremberg and Tokyo military tribunals and led to the creation of a permanent International Criminal Court in 1998. In the same year, the 11th Additional Protocol to the ECHR entered into force and transformed the European Court of Human Rights into a full-time court which since then has delivered thousands of judgments every year, most of them in relation to the newly admitted former Communist States in Central and Eastern Europe. In 2000, the EU adopted a Charter on Fundamental Rights, and the United Nations adopted Millennium Development Goals, which promised a better future, above all for the poor and marginalized communities in the Global South. Despite the genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which happened before the eyes of UN peacekeepers, one can conclude that never before were human rights advanced in such a quick, innovative and forceful manner than during the 1990s.

Let’s go back to 1989, which was a truly remarkable year in human history. In addition to the velvet revolutions, the world wide web was created, and with the “Washington Consensus”, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund agreed to adopt the neoliberal economic policies of privatization, deregulation and minimizing the role of the State, which had been advocated for many years by the Chicago School of Economics, thereby replacing the more interventionist economic policies of John Maynard Keynes. This meant that the rapid digitalization and globalization of our world were driven by neoliberal economic and financial policies. As a consequence, the historic opportunity of implementing a new world order inspired by universal human rights, democracy and the rule of law was soon replaced by a new world order driven by transnational corporations and global financial markets.

On the one hand, these policies led to an unprecedented economic growth and global digitalization, which contributed to more prosperity and a significant reduction of poverty, above all in China, India and other Asian States. On the other hand, these policies led to a dramatic increase of economic inequality, which is undermining the social coherence and democratic values of our societies. Radical policies of privatization, which had started already in the US and the UK during the 1980s, include even core State functions, such as the military, intelligence, police, justice and prisons (rise of private military and security companies), as well as providing social security, pensions, health care and education.

The policy of minimizing the role of the State, which is often imposed on governments by the international financial institutions, result in drastic reductions in social security and social welfare and undermine the obligation of States to protect and fulfil economic, social and cultural rights, but also civil and political rights. In this context, we observe the rising phenomenon of failed and fragile states, which lead to insecurity, armed conflicts, the rise of organized crime and terrorism. Finally, the deregulationof global financial markets led to unprecedented speculations, tax evasion, money laundering, corruption and the undermining of the banking system, which directly resulted in the global financial and economic crisis of 2008.

There can also be no doubt that the neoliberal economic policies contributed significantly to the current climate crisis, the ruthless exploitation of nature, deforestation and the destruction of our environment. The slim neoliberal state has no longer the power and the political will to regulate and control transnational corporations and global financial markets, and international organizations, such as the United Nations, the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization or the European Union, which would have the power by concerted efforts to regain political control over global markets, are either at the forefront of neoliberal economic policies themselves or are increasingly undermined by nationalistic and populistic politicians.

The Brexit, attacks by the Russian Federation against the Council of Europe, the sidelining of the United Nations in relation to the armed conflicts in Syria, Libya and other regions, and open attacks by the United States against the United Nations, its specialized agencies, such as the World Health Organization, or against the International Criminal Court are only a few symptoms of the current crisis of multilateralism.

The world was in disarray when the Corona virus appeared on the global agenda at the beginning of a new decade, and when the COVID-19 pandemic led to an unprecedented lockdown of the global economy, a fundamental restructuring of our daily life and drastic restrictions of our most cherished human rights. Our world was certainly not well prepared to deal with this pandemic, which has caused already more deaths worldwide than the tsunami as the worst disaster of the 21st century.

The most neoliberal States, such as the US, the UK and Brazil, which happen to be governed by politicians, who are used to “solve” crisis situations by spreading fake news and searching for scapegoats, seem to be hit most severely. In Europe, States which had cut down their public health and social security systems most radically, such as the UK, Italy and Spain, encountered much more serious problems to contain the spread of the virus than States, where the public health and social security systems had somehow survived neoliberal policies. Even politicians, who for many years had preached that free markets are much better equipped to solve problems than governments, realized that we need strong and well-functioning States to take the necessary measures and that we should listen to experts rather than populists, fake news and social media in order to cope effectively with this pandemic.

It is too early to draw far-reaching conclusions since we are still in the middle of this health crisis and do not know how the coming months will develop. Nevertheless, there is a growing awareness among the people, irrespective of their political opinions and political party alliances, that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way how we are living and that we need to drastically change our economic, political and social world order if we wish to ensure the survival of our planet and a healthy and satisfactory life for our children and future generations.

Where does this leave us with respect to the topic of this conference? What can we learn from this short historical overview for a pan-European future, built upon antifascism as a European confidence building block, mutual trust and good neighbourly relations? One conclusion is obvious: In order to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic and other global challenges, such as the global climate crisis, growing economic inequality or global migration, we need to strengthen, rather than weaken, the regulatory functions of States and of international organizations, both at the global and regional (European) level. Secondly, we need to replace the neoliberal economic politics by a new and more social market economy “with a human face”, which is more responsible towards nature, towards economic equality and solidarity with the poor and marginalized sectors of our societies, at the national, regional (European) and global level.

This also means that politics need to regain its power to control and regulate the economy, as has been well illustrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. We need to use this new confidence in a responsible regulatory power of politics to also tackle other global threats, such as the climate crisis. At the same time, we need to strengthen the EU by transferring certain powers in the field of social justice, public health, environmental protection, asylum and migration policies from the member States to the EU institutions. The EU, which, despite the Brexit, is still a major global economic and political player, shall further be entrusted by its member States to pursue and strengthen these socially and ecologically sustainable politics also at the global level, above all in the international financial institutions and the WTO. 

With respect to the Council of Europe, which is a truly pan-European organization with currently 47 member States and a pioneer in international human rights protection, we need to introduce economic, social and cultural rights on an equal level with civil and political rights and try to overcome the deep distrust between the Russian Federation and Western European States. This requires confidence-building from both sides.

The Council of Europe, as a Western European organization, had quickly opened its doors after 1989 and invited the former Communist States to join. Many States used the Council of Europe as an entry door for quick EU and/or NATO membership, which was not always properly coordinated with Moscow and led even to armed conflicts in Georgia and the Ukraine.

Many “frozen conflicts” in Europe, such as Nagorno Karabakh, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Tansnistria, Eastern Ukraine, Kosovo and the Republika Srpska, can only be solved if the Russian Federation is again better integrated into European politics. The Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), provide the necessary diplomatic platforms, but the political will for mutual confidence-building is still lacking. 

Antifascism is no longer a meaningful basis for a pan-European confidence block, and in fact it had played this role only for a few years immediately after WWII. If the Council of Europe, with the active support of the EU, would be able to build a pan-European social welfare system, which is based on the indivisibility of all human rights rather than on neoliberal economic policies, then it would resume its pioneering role as a political organization that is uniting Europe on the basis of common European values.

About the author:

[1] Manfred Nowak is Professor of Human Rights at Vienna University and Secretary General of the Global Campus of Human Rights, a network of 100 universities in all world regions, based in Venice. He founded and was the first director of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Human Rights (BIM) in Vienna. In the past, Manfred Nowak has also carried out various expert functions for the United Nations, the Council of Europe (CoE), the European Union (EU) and other inter-governmental organizations including the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). 

Brazil does not give up

Editor
-
0
Brazil does not give up

Culture and Creativity, Solidarity and Lives

By Edna dos Santos-Duisenberg.

Paraphrasing Jorge Amado, a famous Brazilian literary writer of the twentieth century, in his popular novel ‘The country of carnival’:

“… Sometimes we understand that something is missing in our lives. What is missing? We don’t know.” 

Today, what we do know is that the C-19 event has destabilized the world in a multi-dimensional way. Everything is upside-down. In every corner, we have experienced a shift in human behaviour and daily attitudes. 

Suddenly, the world has moved from globalization to isolation. From hugs and kisses to social distancing. From physical touch to virtual chats. From high-consumerism towards a world with a greater environmental conscience. From egocentrism towards a human-centred approach. Against this controversial background – culture, creativity and connectivity have become the backbone of society – keeping people who are physically apart, tied together.

One example of the importance of culture to Brazilian identity is Carnival, which creates not just joy but revenue, tourism and jobs. Carnival 2020 was held in February, just before the start of the pandemic, which hit Brazil in mid-March. During Carnival, the country explodes with creativity and dancing for three consecutive days. This year it injected R$8 billion into the national economy and offered 25 thousand temporary jobs.

This income has helped to partially mitigate the cumulative losses so far estimated to be R$62 billion resulting from COVID-19 crisis, which is deeply affecting culture and the creative industries, destroying over a million jobs in these sectors. In contrast to the celebrations just a few months ago, tourism, culture and the creative economy, now integrated into the same Ministry, are having to join forces to overcome the current difficulties, trying to preserve jobs and anxiously preparing for post-crisis. 

The economic, social and cultural consequences of this pandemic are far-reaching. The COVID-19 crisis has not only robbed us of over half million lives around the world but it is exacerbating inequality, knocking-down the global economy, re-shaping global governance and free trade, destroying national health systems and urban life and aggravating social instability. Nevertheless, probably the most profound positive legacy of this chaotic situation is the growing sense of solidarity and citizenship that is encouraging people to do better, to engage and to act.

In Brazil, the pandemic has made inequality more visible. Creative and digital industries, in particular the audiovisual sector, social media, online news and press and communications services, have been powerful in showing the cruel reality of poverty at the current time. For the most vulnerable, social isolation is considered a luxury. It is difficult to be at home to avoid contagion when there is no money to be able to afford to eat. It is difficult to be confined in social isolation when a big family lives in a small room in a shanty town. It is difficult to wash your hands several times a day and have hygienic practices when there is no water and proper sanitary conditions at home. Under these circumstances, the Brazilian government has allocated 4.6 per cent of national public budget to implement the COVID-19 emergency package that also includes fiscal and monetary measures to assist small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), micro businesses and the self-employed. The COVID-19 voucher scheme has wide coverage; 65 million beneficiaries have followed instructions for digital eligibility and are receiving financial assistance for three months as compensation for their revenue losses. At the end of June, the government decided to extend the emergency salary for two additional months until August 2020, bringing total governmental expenditures to mitigate the continuous spread of the pandemic during the first semester to nearly R$1 trillion.  

It is noteworthy that digitalization and creative services (in the form of an official mobile app) have made it possible for the government of a continental-sized country to put in place in a relatively short time a massive outreach programme. It not only captures nearly 13 million unemployed people, plus 3.7 million informal workers, but also the self-employed who are left with no income and those who were previously completely invisible (even from the family poverty reduction scheme which covers 15 million families). Hopefully, in the future this big data will be used to design appropriate public policies and more effective educational, training and cultural programmes to address the lack of economic and social inclusion. In this context, creative activities, especially those associated with arts and cultural festivities, are conducive to the inclusion of usually excluded minorities and marginalized youth.

Solidarity and citizenship

In parallel to digital innovation, a feeling of solidarity has emerged and civil society has been mobilized. Citizens have started to act in a collective manner in response to the needs of vulnerable communities. Private sector companies of all sizes have become more engaged with social responsibility. Enterprises are more committed not only to meet customers’ demand but also to be more sensitive to the socio-economic impact of their activities locally. Aid packages including basic food baskets, hygiene products and masks are being widely distributed by firms, non-profit organisations and individuals. 

On a daily basis, the TV news presents a list of projects, campaigns and new creative initiatives to assist those who need them. An example is the Table Brazil SESC-RJ project (SESC) which is engaged in fighting hunger and reducing food waste. The project collects food donations for the poorest while educating them on how to prepare healthier food. There is also a link here between these efforts and cultural institutions, public audiences for theatrical performances and shows presented in SESC’s theatres (before and after social isolation) can get cheaper ticket prices if they bring food for donation. This project, which already existed, was expanded on during the COVID-19 period. Another SESC project is #MesaSemFome through which well-known personalities donate their time, knowledge and experience to support solidarity in many different ways; by calling elderly people for story-telling and shopping for them, by giving musical instrument lessons, and by improving bakery skills. Every week many activities are offered through Instagram’s Lives Solidarias. 

Artificial intelligence and robotics are also playing a role in fighting the pandemic. With a population of 217 million people, Brazil does not have an adequate number of COVID-19 medical tests for all of its inhabitants. In order to cope with this deficit situation, the Health Ministry is using robots to call elderly people with high risk of contagion for a brief diagnosis by phone. The TeleSUS platform started in early April monitoring the flux of contagion with the aim to reach millions of people through an active search by phone and consultations by tele-medicine. Though this initiative has not been sufficient, it has been positive for enhancing a feeling of citizenship. 

Cultural policy responses

In terms of culture, all cultural spaces such as cinemas, theatres and museums have been closed and events including artistic shows, festivals and exhibitions were suspended in mid-March 2020, to comply with social distance measurese. Art and culture brings about R$170 billion annually to the Brazilian economy providing jobs to five million people accounting for nearly six per cent of the national workforce. Artists, cultural producers, technicians and creative professionals were the first to stop their activities as a consequence of the pandemic and will probably be the last to restart, making them one of the most affected categories. Thus, a Law for Cultural Emergency (Lei Aldir Blanc) was finally approved by Congress allowing the use of resources from the Federal Cultural Fund (R$3 billion) to provide emergency aid for three months to help compensate for the loss of revenue and to provide tax exemption for up to six months for the cultural industry and creative businesses.  

Guidelines for implementation of cultural projects during the COVID-19 pandemic have now been revisited. Projects should be well documented and producers should provide evidence for every action taken, in particular for projects financed by the Law for Stimulating Culture (Lei Roanet). Three measures were designed to alleviate the pandemic’s impact and guide the execution of projects: 

1. Projects will be allowed to use up to 20 per cent of the estimated capital

2. The project can now be modified at any time (previously, there was a limit)

3. Project evaluation will be more flexible in the form and use of resources. 

Furthermore, special measures were adopted related to the cancellation of services and events in the areas of tourism and culture during the pandemic. The measures cover cinemas, theatres, digital platforms, artists and all professionals contracted to work in cultural events and shows. Those affected by the lock-down who were unable to perform, will have up to one year to provide the services already contracted. 

For the State of São Paulo, cultural and creative industries account for 4 per cent of GDP. This year, the loss in the state caused by COVID-19 is estimated at R$34.5 billion and over 650 thousand people have been left with no revenue. A credit line of R$500 million for SMEs and R$150 million for microcredit was offered with special conditions for micro, small and medium business in the cultural and creative sectors. In addition, Festival #CulturaemCasa is a platform launched by the Secretary of Culture and Creative Economy of São Paulo to stimulate social distancing while improving the access to virtual cultural contents from public cultural institutions. Through the platform the public can visit shows, concerts, museums, talks, conferences, read books, see films, watch theatre and plays. There are many different options for a range of ages and interests, and content is freely available and updated daily. This streaming platform was successful in reaching 850 thousand views in two months from 107 countries. All cultural content will remain available for the extent of the COVID-19 lock-down.    

The Secretary for Culture and Creative Economy of Brasilia formalized a financing scheme of R$750,000 to assist local artists and cultural creative professionals affected by the cancellation of festivals and cultural shows. The scheme provides three differentiated credit lines for micro business, self-employed artists, as well as loans and investments to support cultural and creative SMEs. The Secretary of Culture and Creative Economy in the State of Rio de Janeiro launched an official bid for online cultural production projects. #culturapresente will receive R$3.7 million from the State Fund for Culture. It will cover music, literature, visual arts, audiovisual, dance, theatre, circus, fashion, museums, typical cultural food and new cultural popular expressions. Another project “Story-telling by phone” called volunteers to contact elderly and people who live alone to tell stories, as a way to minimize the feeling of solitude. This allows poets, musicians and story-tellers to be engaged by offering hope and solidarity to lonely people.

Cultural experiences in the digital age

Creative initiatives by artists and institutions have also emerged, and some are likely to remain post COVID-19. Two strong trends from these initiatives have been solidarity and live streaming media. These two trends may end up dominating culture in the “new normal” – the combination of live streaming and solidarity has already resulted in the “Lives Solidarias”. In Brazil, more than 120 shows online raised R$17.6 million in donations to fight COVID-19 in poor communities. The mobilization of artists brought about innovation and is a way to engage celebrities and individuals in social causes. 

Livestreaming concerts like #tamojunto became the Saturday night fever during the pandemic. Top Brazilian singers (particularly country music singers), are performing at home, attracting a huge virtual audience and millions of ‘likes’ on YouTube and Instagram. Among the top 10 most attended live concerts worldwide, seven are from Brazilian artists. Marilia Mendonça, who received 3,31 million ‘likes’, was ranked number one globally, followed by Jorge & Mateus with 3,24 million. This is partially explained by the fact that 70 per cent of the music consumed in Brazil is locally produced. Moreover, the country ranks thrid among the major producers of creative digital content and as consumers of digital services.  

During confinement, online festivals like Festival EuFicoEmCasa are bringing entertainment to people through social networks. As shows and concerts have been cancelled, musicians and visual artists are working virtually to provide entertainment and expand their audience and network via Instagram and YouTube. The first festival gathered 78 artists, providing over 40 hours of music during the first weekend at home. Thanks to its success, the same format is being used for festivals which now take place every weekend. 

In summary, after more than 100 days of social distancing, the cultural sector and creative industries without day-to-day activity are re-inventing themselves in their struggle for survival. Paradoxically, online cultural consumption and creative production are escalating. Music is leading innovative models with live concerts but theatre companies are also producing plays for web performances with no public audience. Drive-in cinemas are back. Virtual short-film festivals are attracting newcomers. E-books and a new generation of smart video games are in high demand. Auctions of visual and street art are attracting culture lovers, and TV audiences have increased with re-runs of older broadcasts and small format productions. 

Web channels, podcasts, live streaming, film series, conscious donations, hybrid collaborative creative productions, crowd funding and virtual public are emerging alternatives. Certainly, there are more questions than answers. As live streamers are using social platforms that were designed to be ephemera, will live cultural experiences survive? How do we ensure that online cultural productions will resist the continuous search for novelty? If a social platform closes, will its whole cultural content disappear? Famous artists are finding big sponsors but a great majority of artists are offering their services for free or small fees. How do we ensure that artists and cultural institutions will be able to survive in the long-run?   

More than ever, creativity is needed to optimize digitalization and find feasible monetization and sustainable solutions. The present circumstances are a challenge and the future is uncertain but art and culture will always find its way in contemporary society.  

About the author:

Edna dos Santos-Duisenberg, economist well-known for her pioneering work in shaping the policy and research agenda about the creative economy and its development dimension. At present, she is associated expert for the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR). She is also vice-president of the International Federation on Internet and Multimedia (FIAM). She collaborates with universities in Europe, Asia, in the United States and Brazil. 

Ms. dos Santos had an international career of nearly 30 years at the UN in Geneva. She founded and became chief of the Creative Economy Programme at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD); directed and is the chief author of numerous UN Creative Economy Reports (2008 and 2010), and set-up the UNCTAD’s Global Database on Creative Economy providing world trade statistics for creative products. Ms. dos Santos graduated in economics and business from the University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and from the Sorbonne University in Paris.

The geopolitics of space and the Colleferro Italian leadership

Editor
-
0
The geopolitics of space and the Colleferro Italian leadership

By Domenico Letizia.

Over the last few years, we have witnessed the flourishing of a strategic competition between great powers for the conquest of space, which has become a terrain of competition and the object of growing global interest. 

China and the US are the leaders of this competition, in which both states aim at reinforcing their relative strength. There is therefore a real “geopolitics” of space exploration. For Europe too, space has become strategic, and in fact space diplomacy has become a new area where the geopolitics of states develops. An incredible opportunity for the growth and development of our country.

The European Space Agency, with its current 22 members, is very active in guaranteeing autonomous access to space to the European countries that are part of it through two programs: the Ariane program, intended to place large and heavy satellites in geostationary orbit, and the Vega program, which consists mainly of a launcher, a smaller and lighter missile that is used to place artificial satellites in low orbit.

Avio S.p.A, an Italian company heir to an industrial tradition that began operating in 1912 in Colleferro, Lazio, plays a fundamental role in both European programs. For the Ariane program, Avio produces the additional solid propulsion engines that allow the large launcher to detach itself from the earth’s surface.

Avio is also thinking about research on Mars in collaboration with the space districts of Campania and Sardinia. Unlike the missions of the Emirates, China and Russia, Avio’s initiative with the Campania and Sardinian partners aims to carry out a relatively cheap mission, using smaller satellites. Furthermore, we recall a very important program: the agreement concluded by Avio with the United Nations Space Office located in Vienna.

On the basis of this agreement, Avio offered to place nine mini satellites in orbit free of charge, for countries that are now entering the international space scene. In this way Avio intends on the one hand to contribute to the peaceful use of space and the diffusion of technology, and on the other to reduce the technological gap between the nations that use satellites and those who do not.

The Italian State is concretely supporting the sector with substantial investments, to the point that the Office of the Prime Minister keeps in its portfolio the responsibility for managing the secret services and the aerospace sector. The Lazio Region is the only Region in Europe that hosts the aerospace supply chain internally, and Governor Nicola Zingaretti includes it in his Smart Strategy.

Colleferro has the task of creating a value chain in this field: from industry, very well represented by Avio and its related activities, to the involvement of universities and the skills of young people coming from all over Europe. The challenge is to become an attractive pole in Europe in the domain of space.

 

About the author:

Domenico Letizia.

Domenico Letizia Journalist. Radio speaker of “RadioAtene”. Researcher, publicist and social media manager of the “Water Museum of Venice”, member of the UNESCO World Network of Water Museums. Public relations manager of the Mediterranean Academy of Culture, Technology and Trade of Malta. Expert in geopolitics, green, blue economy, digital and agri-food.

Photo: Domenico Letizia.

Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam – Emerging Diplomatic Dimensions

Editor
-
0
Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam – Emerging Diplomatic Dimensions

By Jim Dennis Okore.

The decision of Addis Ababa to proceed with the filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), off the Blue Nile, continues to exacerbate the already existing geopolitical tensions. With stakes higher, this might culminate into military confrontations. The GERD and the waters of the Nile are increasingly becoming foreign policy imperatives, thus informing the Regional Security Complex of the region. 

The activities of Addis Ababa have caught regional and international attention. Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, requested the US to mediate into the Egypt-Ethiopia hydropolitics. With no sight of probable solution, the US Administration is contemplating withholding of non-humanitarian foreign aid to Ethiopia, as a means of leveraging the negotiations. In asserting its power, Ethiopia refused to sign the US-brokered deal. 

It is also noteworthy to say that the Ethiopia-Egypt hydropolitics of the Nile has become an international diplomatic arena (an internationalization of transboundary water conflict). The feuding parties are Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan. The Mediating parties are the African Union (AU), the US, and the Arab League. This means that two regional assemblies of the AU and the Arab League are drafted in as mediators.  

Hydropolitics of the Nile and the Riparian States: What are the issues between Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan?

  • The pace of filling the reservoir
  • Livelihoods and drought mitigation
  • Water as the lifeline downstream (water supply).

For Ethiopia:

  • Over $4.6 Billion funded by the Exchequer
  • Probable source for hydroelectric power
  • Source of national pride
  • Ethiopia construes the Dam as symbolic of it as a regional hegemon. 

For Egypt:

  • Concerned with the strangulation of water supply downstream
  • Nile waters area national wealth (2012 constitution)

Egypt has historic rights on the Nile waters. The 2014 Constitution, specifically Art. 44, ‘the State commits to protect the Nile River, maintaining Egypt’s historic rights, thereto, rationalizing and maximizing its benefits, not wasting its waters or polluting it’. This is a transboundary message and takes a different approach from the 2012 Constitution. Critical here is water management and environmental concerns.

Egypt’s historical rights are tied to colonial treaties. In the 1929 Treaty, for example, Britain acted on behalf of Sudan and other protectorates. Also, Egypt, at this time, had no ‘Full Powers’ since it had no political independence. 

In 1950s, the Aswan High Dam sparked Egypt-Sudan crisis hence the 1959 Agreement. Egypt considers the Agreement as the cornerstone of its historic rights. Egyptian president by then, Gamal Abdel Nasser, backed Ibrahim Abboud during the 1958 coup in Sudan. This agreement became unpopular in Sudan. The opposition to Egypt’s claims of historical rights were even more rampant in the 1960s and are also illustrated in the Nyerere Doctrine. 

The Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties, in its Art. 34 postulates that a treaty does not create obligations or rights for a third party without its consent and this is customary law. Therefore, upon independence, the riparian states of the Nile were not bound to the treaty. 

Important to note, Ethiopia was not colonized. In 1957, Ethiopia advanced that it has the rights to use the Nile waters with hindsight of inter-generational equity. And that treaties not involving Ethiopia have no legal effects on its utilization of the waters of the Nile. 

Duality of Claims: A Conceptual Understanding                                             

  • Egypt / Historic Rights                           
  • Riparian States such as Ethiopia and Sudan / Source and Utilization
  • 16,000 GW hours of electricity aimed to double the current power generation.
  • 44% of Ethiopians have access to electricity.
  • ¼ of the 44% are on off-grid solutions.
  • Egypt, on the other hand, has 100% electricity coverage. 
Nile Bank village. Image by DEZALB.

The GERD as a positive initiative

  • It seeks to fulfill the SDG 7: Universal access to affordable and reliable sustainable energy by 2030.
  • The Blue Nile as a source of irrigation, hence food security and food sovereignty.
  • The revenue from the generated electricity will be a significant source of foreign exchange and also help mitigate the national debt burden.
  • The GERD will have the potential to export electricity to Eastern Africa.
  • Since power interruptions affect revenue, productivity, employment and export performance, the GERD will seek to cater for these deficits.
  • Electricity is central to poverty alleviation, economic growth and industrial production. 

Regional integration is probable. Egypt should acknowledge the regional benefits of the GERD, and Ethiopia’s right to equitable utilization of its natural resource.

Ethiopia and Egypt should embrace shared responsibility especially during low rainfall and drought. The GERD can result into a greater coordination and cooperation between Egypt and Ethiopia. 

Main picture: Nile River, Cairo. Photography by Remon Samuel.

Jim Okore

About the author:

Jim Okore is an Expert in the Remittances Experts Program of the African Institute of Remittances (AIR). The African Institute of Remittances (AIR) is a subsidiary of the African Union (AU).

He also teaches International Relations in Nairobi, Kenya. His interests are in Diaspora Remittances, International Law, International Political Economy, Diplomacy, and Leadership and Governance. He holds a B.A and M.A in International Relations from the United States International University-Africa (USIU-A). 

All for Global Citizens: President Fischer on 75 years of triumph of antifascism

Editor
-
0
All for Global Citizens: President Fischer on 75 years of triumph of antifascism

In the picture President Dr. Heinz Fisher with his co-chair, Ban Ki-moon.

Early summer days of 2020 in Vienna sow marking the anniversary of Nuremberg Trials with the conference “From the Victory Day to Corona Disarray: 75 years of Europe’s Collective Security and Human Rights System – Legacy of Antifascism for the Common Pan-European Future”. This was the first public and probably the largest conference in Europe past the early spring lockdown. It gathered numerous speakers and audience physically in the venue while many others attended online. 

The conference was organised by four partners; the International Institute IFIMES, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, Academic Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace, with a support of the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna that hosted the event in a prestigious historical setting. 

Media partners were diplomatic magazines of several countries, 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. (the entire conference proceedings are available: https://www.facebook.com/DiplomaticAcademyVienna ) 

Among 20-some speakers from Canada to Australia, talking in three event’s panels were top scholars and practitioners. The event was opened by the welcome address of the former President of Austria, Dr Heinz Fischer who currently serves as a co-chair of the Ban Ki-Moon Centre for Global Citizens. The following lines are a brief reference on President’s highly anticipated and absorbing key-note address prepared exclusively for this conference. 

The last few months have roughly hit the world and especially the European continent. As countries chose to close their borders in order to control the spread of the coronavirus, this decision might endanger cooperation’s efficiency. In a very thought-provoking speech, tinted with personal thoughts and experiences, Dr. Heinz Fischer, former President of the Republic of Austria, demonstrated how cooperation has always succeeded to find its place through harder periods of history and unveiled his expectations for the future. 

In the first part of his speech, former President Fischer went through marking events of World War II (WW2). The abovementioned explained how the April 1944 battle in Vienna was unavoidable but also how incredible the destruction has been. Indeed, during this period, more than tens of thousands of people were killed. President Fischer underlined the fact that the end of the war, translated by the military defeat of the German Wehrmacht, has been a long-awaited moment but that, already by the end of April, before the end of the war, a new government was built, and the declaration of independence was published. According to him, this new chapter carried a lot of hope for the ones who had suffered from the war. 

Former President Fischer pointed out how this new chapter brought many novelties in terms of cooperation. Among them, in June 1945, was the creation of the United Nations (UN), the most important institution of international cooperation to this day. This initiative showed the will of the international community to move toward relations based on cooperation. A few years later, in November 1948, was also published the well-known Human Rights Declaration which focused mainly on human dignity. Fischer believes that even if, still nowadays, there is still work to do in terms of putting those words efficiently into practice, we can say that wars and history have been teaching the world great lessons; the 75 years since WW2 demonstrated positive changes. 

Still going through striking episodes of history, Fischer noted that, in Europe, the idea of cooperation, more specifically economic cooperation, started to be omnipresent and strongly supported by great European figures. Yet, according to Fischer, it was hard to imagine such a thing in a context where tensions between East and West were still very present, so present that they led to a war; the famous Cold War. Nonetheless, the former President indicated that the war didn’t stop cooperation’s growth on the Western side where the Treaty of Rome was accepted between six European countries. This marked the beginning of European community. 

Fischer continued by voicing how the death of Stalin, in March 1953, allowed a wind of change on the Russian side. In fact, when Khrushchev took power, some reforms were made and Western countries realized that it was now possible to easily negotiate with Russia since Khrushchev was more flexible than Stalin. In October 1955, the Russian soldiers and all other occupation soldiers left Austria. Fischer indicated that it was the moment where Austria was finally officially a free and independent country. However, according to him, this wasn’t exactly the case yet in Germany where the situation was more complicated and where antagonism was growing. 

Built in 1965, The Berlin Wall became the symbol of the division of East and West. On the one side NATO was founded as a military alliance, and on the other side, the Warsaw Treaty. Fischer underlined that the arms race was dangerous and expensive for both sides. So, in the 1970s, the idea of peaceful coexistence was growing and finally resulted in the signature of the Helsinki Treaty in 1975. Former President observed that it was a step in the direction of reducing the political tensions. 

On the other hand, after the death of Mao in 1976, Fischer noted that China obtained a leading position in the global economy and global power. A little more than a decade later, the world assisted to the collapsing of several communist regimes in Eastern Europe starting by the fall of the Berlin Wall. Then came the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The economic cooperation in Europe started to expand. According to former President Fischer, the expansion of NATO to the borders of Russia was considered, for some, not so-clever as political tensions started to grow again. 

With President Trump, Xi Jinping, the Brexit and coronavirus, the year 2020 brings whole new perspectives and questions. Ban Ki-moon Centre co-chair, Fischer stressed the importance for the world to keep being successful on the fields of cooperation, disarmament, actions against the damage of our climate and democracy and democratization. Fortunately, the former President was very optimist for the future and emphasized on the positive changes that the sustainable development goals of the UN, supported by all of its members, foreshadow for the near future. 

About the Author:

Audrey Beaulieu of the University of Ottawa (Globalization and International Development Department), specialized in public and private International law, international development and global politics.

Temporary posting of employees: amended obligations for foreign EU employers

Editor
-
0
Temporary posting of employees: amended obligations for foreign EU employers

By Jan Dop.

The Terms of Employment Posted Workers in the European Union Act (WagwEU) regulates a number of obligations for EU employers who temporarily post employees to the Netherlands as part of the transnational provision of services. What do these obligations from the WagwEU entail? And what are the changes as of 30 July 2020?
 

Transnational provision of services

The WagwEU is an implementation of the revised European Posting of Workers Directive and imposes obligations on foreign employers who temporarily post employees to the Netherlands as part of the transnational provision of services. There are three types of transnational provision of services:

  • Pure posting: the making available of an employee to the service recipient under the direction and supervision of the service provider to work in another Member State as part of the agreement between the service provider and service recipient.
  • Intra-group posting: the making available of an employee of the company to a branch of the company or a company of the same group in another Member State.
  • Temporary agency work: the making available of an employee, for remuneration, by the service provider to the service recipient to perform work in another Member State under the direction and supervision of the service recipient.
     

Obligations WagWeU

The obligations under the WagwEU for foreign employers are as follows:

1. Minimum terms of employment
The foreign employer must guarantee the employee he temporarily posts abroad at least the most significant terms of employment under Dutch law (the hard core of the terms). This regards, inter alia, the minimum wages, sufficient rest periods, safe work conditions, equal treatment of men and women, and the entitlement to a minimum number of days holiday.

The revised Posting of Workers Directive will be implemented by 30 July 2020, which means that:

  • The term “salary” will be replaced by the term “remuneration”, clarifying which allowances are covered by this term.
  • The hard core of the terms (the terms and conditions of employment which service providers must at least guarantee for their posted workers) will be extended to include housing conditions and certain allowances and compensation.
  • The extended hard core of the terms is applicable to a posting of 12 months maximum, which can be extended to 18 months under certain circumstances.
  • After a posting of 12 or 18 months in the Netherlands, even more terms of employment will be applicable. As a result, the rights of the posted temporary workers are almost fully aligned with those of national temporary workers (except for dismissal law and supplementary company pension schemes).
  • Temporary employment agencies remain responsible for the application of the mandatory terms of employment with regard to the posted worker, even if the service recipient forwards the posted worker to a subsequent service recipient.

2. The obligation to provide information
If requested, the foreign employer must provide the Inspectorate SZW with data and information so the Inspectorate SZW can establish whether the posting company actually performs substantial activities to post employees in the context of cross-border provision of services and whether the posting is indeed temporarily.

3.The obligation to designate a contact person
The foreign employer must designate a contact person in the Netherlands. This contact person must be available during the posting period and must stay in the Member State to which the employee is posted. The contact person is available for sending and receiving documents and notifications regarding the service provision and acts as the contact person for the service provider, who is the contact person for the Inspectorate SZW.

4. The obligation to report
The foreign employer must report the arrival of all posted employees to an online reporting counter, that sends the reported information to the Inspectorate SZW, the Social Insurance Bank and the Tax and Customs Administrations. In any case, the following information must be reported:

  • The identity of the person reporting, the customer/principal and of the employee(s) posted to the Netherlands
  • The designated contact person
  • The sector in which the activities in the Netherlands are carried out
  • The address of the workplace
  • The nature and expected duration of the activities
  • The identity of the person responsible for salary payment
  • information regarding the country where the social contributions are paid for the employee(s)

5. The obligation to keep records
Finally, the foreign employer must ensure that certain documents (written or digital) are available at the workplace. This regards the following documents:

  • A copy of the employment contract
  • The salary slip
  • Information the employer has to provide to the employee about the essential elements of the employment contract
  • Overview of the hours worked by the employee
  • Documents proving the contribution for the social security legislation, the identity of the service provider, the service recipient, the posted employee and the person responsible for paying the wages
  • Proof of payment of wages
     

Administrative fine

If the obligation to report, to keep records and/or to provide information is not met, an administrative fine can be imposed on the foreign employer. In the event of multiple violations, a fine will be imposed per violation. However, there is room for moderation of the administrative fine, depending on the nature and seriousness of the violation, the degree of culpability and the proportionality.
 

Conclusion

There are quite a few obligations, you, as a foreign employer, have to meet if you post employees to the Netherlands. If you fail to meet the obligations, you run the risk of incurring a substantial penalty. So make sure to be well informed about the obligations!
 

More information

Do you want to know whether your posting falls within the scope of the WagwEU? Are you looking for a contact person in the Netherlands to meet the obligation to designate a contact person and the duty to report? Or do you want more information about the obligations – and the sanctions/penalties imposed thereon – you, as an employer, have under the WagwEU? Please contact us. @: jan.dop@russell.nl / +31 20 301 55 55

About the author:

Jan Dop

Jan Dop assists national and international enterprises in all facets of their day-to-day business operations. He specializes in personnel, real estate and issues involving public authorities. Jan is Head of our Embassy Desk, that serves Embassies, Consulates, diplomats and expats. He has been a lawyer at Russell since 1995, and became a partner in 2011.
 


 

Colors and passion from Uzbekistan

Editor
-
0
Colors and passion from Uzbekistan

Diplomat Magazine’s photographer Hester Dijkstra made several trips to explore Uzbekistan, a country with a magnificent historic architecture and a rich crafts tradition. 

Following the invitation from the Embassy of Uzbekistan in Brussels, Diplomat Magazine had the opportunity to visit Uzbekistan’s 1st Handcrafters Festival in Kokand where Hester fell in love with several provinces she visited accompanied by her husband Carl. She discovered with her camera the unknown for most of us. 

Hand crafter in Kokand, Uzbekistan, Photography by Hester Dijkstra.

Please take a look at Hester Dijkstra’s work full of professional images and unforgettable pics from Uzbekistan and buy the book at esterdijkstra.nl or the website of Blurb: https://nl.blurb.com/b/9435401-uzbekistan-masters

Uzbekistan mastes by Hester Dijkstra.

Don’t avoid what is easy – diplomacy meets art

Editor
-
0
Don’t avoid what is easy – diplomacy meets art

Harbour for Cultures – Yerevan cards

Individuals should and need to feel like they have the right to want. That is the message that artist Anastasia Lemberg-Lvova is continuously expressing through her artwork. Exemplifying socially-engaged art, Lemberg-Lvova aims to be a part of a much broader political movement which discusses important historical and modern-day social processes through creative means. 

The second-wave feminist movements from the 1960s is one example of such a powerful movement. With their infamous quote, ‘The personal is political’, authored by millions of voices of women collectively rather than one feminist author, the message that every individual has the right to a voice was heavily stressed. 

As personal experiences took center stage and the individual became a political platform during the feminist movements, crowds of individuals also gained new meanings of courageous collectivity. Ultimately, the movement gave opportunity for previously ignored and taken-for-granted personal circumstances to be framed in a bigger picture – a picture that women as minorities were often left out of.

Anastasia avatud stuudios Kogo galeriis (foto Mariia Nedosekova).

Continuing to portray the central message that movements such as the feminist strikes and many other historical crusades have fought for, Lemberg-Lvova uses her own art to focus on the younger European generation, highlighting the vast diverseness of the voices that live in Europe and sending a bold message that evidences a heterogeneity which needs to be more thoroughly discussed amongst the European community.

With her projects, she is able to recognise the ways in which the systemic infrastructures that exist around the individual leave them feeling insecure or insignificant in relation to their voice and its right to exist in public. By initiating healthy conversation and focusing on this very elemental act of daring to express one’s desires towards public space, she has created a platform that encourages individuals to learn to voice their opinions more often, ultimately leading the person to be engaged as the multiplicities of voices are amplified to lead to more diverse discussion and perhaps outcomes. 

Her exhibition, ‘Don’t Avoid What is Easy’, on show from August 14th – September 9th at the Freedom Gallery in Tallinn, Estonia, is thus the result of 2 years of research conducted mainly through interviews of younger generation individuals during her own expenditures through Europe. Although seemingly humble in its outcome as portraits, there is a strong message behind Lemberg-Lvova’s work, depicting the notion that we should feel more confident to voice our opinions about our public surroundings, Lemberg-Lvova uses art and representations to give a voice to over 100 participants from 24 European countries. 

What to maintain_ – Lemberg-Lvova 2020

By painting vibrant oil portraits of a selected 7 individuals whom she interviewed, she touches on the concept of art and its political capacity by explaining “There will be portraits of participants with a visual interpretation of their wish as the background. The experience of, as we often say, “putting a face to a name” has a profound effect and is more intuitively understood than just going through text or trying to grasp abstract ideas. Painting as a form of expression is immensely malleable and useful when getting ideas across.” The desire to initiate discussion and give it a platform within the context of a gallery means Lemberg-Lvova’s art is inherently social and public. These qualities make for an intriguing space where the audience can identify small changes that resemble the tip of a much bigger iceberg– or at least the ignition of confidence and curiosity. 

This focus on the first and easiest step sometimes being the hardest is something of great importance for Lemberg-Lvova as she explains “An inhabitant of a city logically has the right to express ideas or wishes when it comes to their surroundings – it is, after all, their home. But they are often stuck in the belief of not being able to change anything. In this instance, I am not talking about taking action or creating a plan. This is about the simplest first step that does not require anything – feeling like one is entitled to express a wish. It doesn’t have to lead anywhere; just remember that you have the right to want something. What follows is a different matter, but it is clear that nothing will happen without this first step.”

An interactive wall installation where participant answers are projected for all to see will pay homage to the importance that Lemberg-Lvova holds for communities to listen to the expressions of their surrounding civilians. She explains “From an early age, our heads are flooded with subliminal messaging and that often diminishes internal self-worth. Let me explain this from the point of view of a woman – a frame of reference I am most familiar with. As a woman one feels that unless they have perfect dazzlingly white teeth, flawless hair, a tiny waist and the right kind of shoes they are not worthy of expressing an opinion. Because if you do not fulfill all of the criteria above, no one will listen to you or even consider you worthy of attention. This is a cliché, yet it exists because it is true. It describes the reality of many women, because we are surrounded by sources reaffirming it – adverts, friends, sometimes parents or spouses, fitness centers and the list goes on. At the exhibition, I am striving to fill the space with messaging that reiterates one’s right to express their wishes whoever they are.”

Her message is clear – we should not avoid formulating our wishes in matters that concern us. Her persistence to initiate discussion and to give it a platform within the context of a gallery means her art is inherently social and public. These qualities make for an intriguing meeting space for the artist as well as her audience amongst each other.

Open Studio at Kogo Gallery, Widget Factory (Aparaaditehas), Tartu, Estonia: 08.07-01.08

Exhibition “Don’t Avoid What is Easy – Diplomacy meets art” at Vabaduse Gallery: 14.08-09.09

About the author:

Tiiu Meiner is a writer and freelance curator based in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. She is currently working on а performative workshop “The fragility of Truth”, and on a film project about the geo-political narratives of sand quarries.”

Valeriya Billich also contributed to this article. Photos: Mariia Nedosekova

Where do we go from here? – revisiting words of Steve Clemons

Editor
-
0
Where do we go from here? – revisiting words of Steve Clemons

By Anna Kassai.

On 1 July 2020, the first real-time conference in Europe past the early-spring lockdown took place at the Diplomatic Academy Vienna. This highly anticipated event, entitled From the Victory Day to Corona Disarray 75 years of Europe’s Collective Security and Human Rights System Legacy of antifascism for the common pan-European future, was organized by the International Institute for the Middle East and Balkan Studies, Media Platform Modern Diplomacy, Scientific Journal European Perspectives, and Action Platform Culture for Peace. (the entire conference proceedings are available: https://www.facebook.com/DiplomaticAcademyVienna )

After the end of World War II, the United Nations was founded in 1945 to maintain international peace and security, build relationships among nations, promote social progress, better living standards, and human rights. The Nurnberg and Tokyo trials (1945-1948) prosecuted war crimes and contributed to the development of international criminal law as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). These laid down the foundation for the liberal international system that is based on the shared interest in maintaining rule of law, the cooperation to resolve security issues, and to maintain an open, stable system, in which institutions reinforce cooperation and collective problem-solving. 

The first panel reflected on the legacy of World War II, collective security, Human Rights, and the importance of mutual trust within alliances. Discussions emphasized the testing times that we are living in, which unwittingly remind us of the set of challenges that the international system must overcome. Challenges that will commend other solutions, while testing the integrity of the current international system. During the first panel, discussions touched upon a crucial and complex issue, which came under the spotlight due to the severe worldwide effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the state of international institutions as well as the transatlantic relations. 

As the health crisis started to unfold rapidly, an unprecedented macroeconomic shock was triggered. To slow the spread of the virus, national governments-imposed sanctions, lockdowns, curfews, closed educational institutions, and non-essential businesses. National borders were shut down in a matter of hours, governments started to look for unilateral solutions to solve their lack of medical and food supply, and suddenly it seemed like the globalized world and the relevance of the international organizations are fading away, as the interest to act in concert would not exist anymore. 

National crisis management aimed at containing the spread of the virus and minimize the economic damages, at the same time sent an immediate warning that the collective problem-solving mechanisms are not functioning properly. It also demonstrated how interdependent the economic, social systems are and this magnitude of crisis cannot be dealt with unilaterally within national borders. As Mr. Steve Clemons, Editor-at-large, HILL pointed out in his intervention, the course that a nation should take is more in question than it has ever been before. ‘When you look at the Transatlantic experiment, it looked like it succeeded enormously until it stopped succeeding and working.’ 

As the C-19 crisis demonstrates, the scale of transnational threats cannot be dealt with on a national level. Combatting interstate terrorism, cybercrimes, climate change, the slow pace of clean energy transition, migration, global pandemics require transnational solutions. Meanwhile, countries are putting more emphasis on strengthening their positions as a nation in the international discourse and seeking a different role by redefining themselves and embracing other core values and institutions. 

Attempts to look for alternatives and transform the existing institutional structure put in place after World War II have surged in the last decade, especially after 9/11, the financial crisis in 2008, but with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the world arrived at another tipping point. As Mr. Clemons phrased it: ‘A point of diminishing return that these institutions need to be rethought, reconsidered, and recalibrated, that the power players that now guide much of the world need to be reassorted. There is no doubt that countries like Brazil, India, etc. are not included in those power centers, and yet they have enormous stakes in the way global affairs occur.’

A global power transition has been taking place for years, the question is how the shift from unipolarity will accommodate rising powers, who will be able to take the lead and fill the power vacuum that the United States leaves behind. As opposed to the rules of the liberal value-based world order, a new set of rules is being written by rising powers. Some of the political leaders turned back to ideologies like nationalism and populism, as a potential alternative to liberalism. Conflicts in recent years reinforced this tendency, like disputes between Hong Kong and mainland China, the Ukraine crisis, and Turkey`s autocratic behavior. In addition to this, the United Kingdom left the European Union and Hungary changed its raison d’état by redefining itself as an illiberal democracy. 

Even the United States is less committed to the post-war world order. Demonstrating that by leaving institutions that it helped to build, such as the World Health Organization, the Paris Climate Accord, questioning the legitimacy of NATO and certain UN institutions. Mr. Clemons stated that the United States has become a serious competitor with its allies to a certain degree and the notion of shared interest has diminished. He emphasized the different stand that the United States took in the C-19 event as oppose to its position in World War II: ‘The United States has chosen not to be the kind of leader that it has been in the past. It did not step forward in the C-19 crisis to help become a broker of strength and benefits and help support nations around the world. We may have done something here and there, but nothing on the scale.’

The set of challenges put the resistance of decade long alliances to a test. At the same time, they create the opportunity to find comprehensive solutions and more efficient problem-solving mechanisms for the future, by revitalizing and reforming institutions that are the cornerstones of long-standing regional orders, cooperation, and collective problem-solving. To stand resilient against global challenges like C-19, the transatlantic relationship must come back to its core values and redefine itself. Therefore, as a first step, it must be acknowledged what led to this harsh world without much leadership. 

The strength lies within like-minded alliances and sharing the same core values as well as in the ability to come together despite the differences and finding a common ground again. That is what happened 75 years ago, after the end of World War II, when the United Nations was founded. Let us remember that. 

Vienna, 12 July 2020 

1...313314315...894Page 314 of 894