The post-Corona epilogue of an overheated Sino-American relationship: We have a Winner; Will we have a Game-changer too?

Editor
-
0
The post-Corona epilogue of an overheated Sino-American relationship: We have a Winner; Will we have a Game-changer too?

By Prof. Anis H. Bajrektarević.

Americans performed three very different policies on the People’s Republic: From a total negation (and the Mao-time mutual annihilation assurances), to Nixon’s sudden cohabitation. Finally, a Copernican-turn: the US spotted no real ideological differences between them and the post-Deng China. This signalled a ‘new opening’: West imagined China’s coastal areas as its own industrial suburbia. Soon after, both countries easily agreed on interdependence (in this marriage of convenience): Americans pleased their corporate (machine and tech) sector and unrestrained its greed, while Chinese in return offered a cheap labour, no environmental considerations and submissiveness in imitation. 

However, for both countries this was far more than economy, it was a policy – Washington read it as interdependence for transformative containment and Beijing sow it as interdependence for a (global) penetration. In the meantime, Chinese acquired more sophisticated technology, and the American Big tech sophisticated itself in digital authoritarianism – ‘technological monoculture’ met the political one.

But now with a tidal wave of Covid-19, the honeymoon is over. 

(These days, many argue that our C-19 response is a planetary fiasco, whose size is yet to surface with its mounting disproportionate and enduring secondary effects. All this illustrates – the argument goes – nothing else but the non-transparent concentration of power and our overall democracy recession; lasting consequences of cutbacks, environmental holocaust, privatisation of key intergovernmental and vital national institutions, ill-fated globalisation on (overly allopathic-cantered) healthcare and luck of pubic data commons. 

There are also growing speculations if the lockdown is invasion or protection – whether the aim is herd-immunity of herd loyalty; if is there any back-to-normal exit from the crisis or this disaster ‘turned into planetary terror, through global coup d’état’ will be exploited to further something already pre-designed (with a fear, not as a side-effect, but rather as a manufactured tool to gain control). E.g. Le Monde Diplomatique – while examining the possible merge between tech oligopoly and political monopoly – claims: “Political decisions have been central in shaping this tragedy — from the destruction of animal habitats, to the asymmetric funding of medical research, to the management of the crisis itself. They will also determine the world into which we emerge after the worst is over.” The XXI century frontline is the right to health and labour, privacy and human rights. (LMD, IV20)) 

Still to be precise, the so-called virus pandemic brought nothing truly new to the already overheated Sino-American relations: It only amplified and accelerated what was present for quite some time – a rift between alienated power centers, each on its side of Pacific, and the rest. Is this time to return to a nation-state, a great moment for all dictators-in-waiting to finally built a cult of personality? Hence, will our democracy be electro-magnetised and vaccinated for a greater good (or greedier ‘god’)? 

This text examines a prehistory of that rift; and suggests possible outcomes past the current crisis. 

*                      *                      *                      *          

Does our history only appear overheated, while it is essentially calmly predetermined? Is it directional or conceivable, dialectic and eclectic or cyclical, and therefore cynical? Surely, our history warns (no matter if the Past is seen as a destination or resource). Does it also provide for a hope? Hence, what is in front of us: destiny or future?

Theory loves to teach us that extensive debates on what kind of economic system is most conductive to human wellbeing is what consumed most of our civilizational vertical. However, our history has a different say: It seems that the manipulation of the global political economy – far more than the introduction of ideologies – is the dominant and arguably more durable way that human elites usually conspired to build or break civilizations, as planned projects. Somewhere down the process, it deceived us, becoming the self-entrapment. How?

*                      *                      *                      *          

One of the biggest (nearly schizophrenic) dilemmas of liberalism, ever since David Hume and Adam Smith, was an insight into reality: Whether the world is essentially Hobbesian or Kantian. As postulated, the main task of any liberal state is to enable and maintain wealth of its nation, which of course rests upon wealthy individuals inhabiting the particular state. That imperative brought about another dilemma: if wealthy individual, the state will rob you, but in absence of it, the pauperized masses will mob you. 

The invisible hand of Smith’s followers have found the satisfactory answer – sovereign debt. That ‘invention’ meant: relatively strong central government of the state. Instead of popular control through the democratic checks-&-balance mechanism, such a state should be rather heavily indebted. Debt – firstly to local merchants, than to foreigners – is a far more powerful deterrent, as it resides outside the popular check domain. 

With such a mixed blessing, no empire can easily demonetize its legitimacy, and abandon its hierarchical but invisible and unconstitutional controls. This is how a debtor empire was born. A blessing or totalitarian curse? Let us briefly examine it. 

The Soviet Union – much as (the pre-Deng’s) China itself – was far more of a classic continental military empire (overtly brutal; rigid, authoritative, anti-individual, apparent, secretive), while the US was more a financial-trading empire (covertly coercive; hierarchical, yet asocial, exploitive, pervasive, polarizing). On opposite sides of the globe and cognition, to each other they remained enigmatic, mysterious and incalculable: Bear of permafrost vs. Fish of the warm seas. Sparta vs. Athens. Rome vs. Phoenicia… However, common for the both (as much as for China today) was a super-appetite for omnipresence. Along with the price to pay for it. 

Consequently, the Soviets went bankrupt by mid 1980s – they cracked under its own weight, imperially overstretched. So did the Americans – the ‘white man burden’ fractured them already by the Vietnam war, with the Nixon shock only officializing it. However, the US imperium managed to survive and to outlive the Soviets. How? 

The United States, with its financial capital (or an outfoxing illusion of it), evolved into a debtor empire through the Wall Street guaranties. Titanium-made Sputnik vs. gold mine of printed-paper… Nothing epitomizes this better than the words of the longest serving US Federal Reserve’s boss, Alan Greenspan, who famously quoted J.B. Connally to then French President Jacques Chirac: “True, the dollar is our currency, but your problem”. Hegemony vs. hegemoney. 

House of Cards

Conventional economic theory teaches us that money is a universal equivalent to all goods. Historically, currencies were a space and time-related, to say locality-dependent. However, like no currency ever before, the US dollar became – past the WWII – the universal equivalent to all other moneys of the world. According to history of currencies, the core component of the non-precious metals’ money is a so-called promissory note – intangible belief that, by any given point in future, a particular shiny paper (self-styled as money) will be smoothly exchanged for real goods. 

Thus, roughly speaking, money is nothing else but a civilizational construct about imagined/projected tomorrow – that the next day (which nobody has ever seen in the history of humankind, but everybody operates with) definitely comes (i), and that this tomorrow will certainly be a better day then our yesterday or even our today (ii). 

This and similar types of collective constructs (horizontal and vertical) over our social contracts hold society together as much as its economy keeps it alive and evolving. Hence, it is money that powers economy, but our blind faith in constructed (imagined) tomorrows and its alleged certainty is what empowers money. 

Clearly, the universal equivalent of all equivalents – the US dollar – follows the same pattern: Bold and widely accepted promise. For the US, it almost instantly substantiates extraterritorial economic projection: American can print (any sum of) money without fear of inflation. (Quantitative easing is always exported, value is kept home.)

But, what does the US dollar promise when there is no gold cover attached to it ever since the time of Nixon shock of 1971? 

Pentagon promises that the oceanic sea-lanes will remain opened (read: controlled by the US Navy), pathways unhindered, and that the most traded world’s commodity – oil, will be delivered. So, it is not a crude or its delivery what is a cover to the US dollar – it is a promise that oil of tomorrow will be deliverable. That is a real might of the US dollar, which in return finances Pentagon’s massive expenditures and shoulders its supremacy. 

Admired and feared, Pentagon further fans our planetary belief in tomorrow’s deliverability – if we only keep our faith in dollar (and hydrocarbons’ energized economy), and so on and on in perpetuated circle of mutual reinforcements. 

(Supplementing the Monroe Doctrine, President Howard Taft introduced the so-called ‘dollar diplomacy’ – in early XX c. – that “substitutes dollars for bullets”. This is one of the first official acknowledgements of the Wall Street – Pentagon symbiotic link.)

These two pillars of the US might from the East coast (the US Treasury/Wall Street and Pentagon) together with the two pillars of the West coast – both financed and amplified by the US dollar, and spread through the open sea-routs (Silicone Valley and Hollywood), are an essence of the US posture. 

This very nature of power explains why the Americans have missed to take the mankind into completely other direction; towards the non-confrontational, decarbonized, de-monetized/de-financialized and de-psychologized, the self-realizing and green humankind. In short, to turn history into a moral success story. They had such a chance when, past the Gorbachev’s unconditional surrender of the Soviet bloc, and the Deng’s Copernicus-shift of China, the US – unconstrained as a lonely superpower – solely dictated terms of reference; our common destiny and direction/s to our future/s.

Winner is rarely a game-changer

Sadly enough, that was not the first missed opportunity for the US to soften and delay its forthcoming, imminent multidimensional imperial retreat. The very epilogue of the WWII meant a full security guaranty for the US: Geo-economically – 54% of anything manufactured in the world was carrying the Made in USA label, and geostrategically – the US had uninterruptedly enjoyed nearly a decade of the ‘nuclear monopoly’. Up to this very day, the US scores the biggest number of N-tests conducted, the largest stockpile of nuclear weaponry, and it represents the only power ever deploying this ‘ultimate weapon’ on other nation. To complete the irony, Americans enjoy geographic advantage like no other empire before. Save the US, as Ikenberry notes: “…every major power in the world lives in a crowded geopolitical neighborhood where shifts in power routinely provoke counterbalancing”. Look the map, at Russia or China and their packed surroundings. The US is blessed with its insular position, by neighboring oceans. All that should harbor tranquility, peace and prosperity, foresightedness.  

Why the lonely might, an empire by invitation did not evolve into empire of relaxation, a generator of harmony? Why does it hold (extra-judicially) captive more political prisoners on Cuban soil than the badmouthed Cuban regime has ever had? Why does it remain obsessed with armament for at home and abroad? Why existential anxieties for at home and security challenges for abroad? Eg. 78% of all weaponry at disposal in the wider MENA theater is manufactured in the US, while domestically Americans – only for their civilian purpose – have 1,2 small arms pieces per capita.)

Why the fall of Berlin Wall 30 years ago marked a beginning of decades of stagnant or failing incomes in the US (and elsewhere in the OECD world) coupled with alarming inequalities. What are we talking about here; the inadequate intensity of our tireless confrontational push or about the false course of our civilizational direction?  

Indeed, no successful and enduring empire does merely rely on coercion, be it abroad or at home. The grand design of every empire in past rested on a skillful calibration between obedience and initiative – at home, and between bandwagoning and engagement – abroad. In XXI century, one wins when one convinces not when one coerces. Hence, if unable to escape its inner logics and deeply-rooted appeal of confrontational nostalgia, the prevailing archrival is only a winner, rarely a game-changer.

A Country or a Cause, Both or None?

To sum up; After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Americans accelerated expansion while waiting for (real or imagined) adversaries to further decline, ‘liberalize’ and bandwagon behind the US. One of the instruments was to aggressively push for a greater economic integration between regional and distant states, which – as we see now, passed the ‘End-of-History’ euphoria of 1990s – brought about (irreversible) socio-political disintegration within each of these states.

Expansion is the path to security dictatum, of the post-Cold War socio-political and economic mantra, only exacerbated the problems afflicting the Pax Americana. That is how the capability of the US to maintain its order started to erode faster than the capacity of its opponents to challenge it. A classical imperial self-entrapment!! 

The repeated failure to notice and recalibrate its imperial retreat brought the painful hangovers to Washington, the most noticeably, by the last presidential elections. Inability to manage the rising costs of sustaining the imperial order only increased the domestic popular revolt and political pressure to abandon its ‘mission’ altogether. Perfectly hitting the target to miss everything else …

Hence, Americans are not fixing the world anymore. They are only managing its decline. Look at their footprint in former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Georgia, Libya, Syria, Ukraine or Yemen – to mention but a few.

*                *                      *                      *                      

When the Soviets lost their own indigenous ideological matrix and maverick confrontational stance, and when the US dominated West missed to triumph although winning the Cold War, how to expect from the imitator to score the lasting moral or even a temporary economic victory?

Dislike the relationship with the Soviets Union which was on one clear confrontational acceptance line from a start until its very last day, Americans performed three very different policies on the People’s Republic: From a total negation (and the Mao-time mutual annihilation assurances), to Nixon’s sudden cohabitation. Finally, a Copernican-turn: the US spotted no real ideological differences between them and the post-Deng China. This signalled a ‘new opening’ – China’s coastal areas to become West’s industrial suburbia. Soon after, both countries easily agreed on interdependence: Americans pleased their corporate (machine and tech) sector and unrestrained its greed, while Chinese in return offered a cheap labour, no environmental considerations and submissiveness in imitation. However, for both it was far more than economy, it was a policy – Washington read it as interdependence for transformative containment and Beijing sow it as interdependence for (global) penetration. In the meantime, Chinese acquired more sophisticated technology, and the American Big tech sophisticated itself in digital authoritarianism. 

But, the honeymoon seems over now. 

Lasting collision course already leads to the subsequent calls for a decupling of the two world’s largest economies. Besides marking the end of global capitalism which exploded since the fall of Berlin Wall, this may finally trigger a global realignment. The rest of the world would end up – willingly or not – in the rival (trade) blocks. It would not be a return to 1950s and 1960s, but to the pre-WWI constellations. Epilog is plain to see: Neither more confrontation and more carbons nor more weaponized trade and traded weapons will save our day. It failed in our past, it will fail again any given day. 

Entrapment in Imitation

Interestingly, China opposed the I World, left the II in rift, and ever since Bandung of 1955 it neither won over nor (truly) joined the III Way. Today, many see it as a main contestant. But, where is a lasting success?

There is a near consensus among the economists that China owes its economic success to three fundamental factors. Firstly, it is that the People’s Republic embraced an imitative economic policy (much like Japan, Singapore, Taiwan or ROK did before) through Deng-proclaimed opening. Second goes to a modest domestic consumption, and German-like thick home savings. Finally, as the third factor that the economists attribute to Chinese miracle, is a low production costs of Sino nation – mostly on expenses of its aging demography, and on expenses of its own labor force and country’s environment. None of it has an international appeal, nor it holds promise to an attainable future. Therefore, no wonder that the Imitative power fights – for at home and abroad – a defensive ideological battle. Such a reactive status quo has no intellectual appeal to attract and inspire beyond its borders. 

So, if for China the XIX was a “century of humiliation”, XX “century of emancipation”, should it be that the XXI gets labeled as a “century of imitation”? 

(The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is what the most attribute as an instrument of the Chinese planetary posture. Chinese leaders promised massive infrastructure projects all around by burning trillions of dollars. Still, numbers are more moderate. As the recent The II BRI Summit has shown, so far, Chinese companies had invested USD 90 billion worldwide. Seems, neither People’s Republic is as rich as many (wish to) think nor it will be able to finance its promised projects without seeking for a global private capital. Such a capital –if ever – will not flow without conditionalities. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the BRICS or ‘New Development’ – Bank have some $150 billion at hand, and the Silk Road Infrastructure Fund (SRIF) has up to $40 billion. Chinese state and semi-private companies can access – according to the OECD estimates – just another $600 billion (much of it tight) from the home, state-controlled financial sector. That means that China runs short on the BRI deliveries worldwide. Ergo, either bad news to the (BRI) world or the conditionalities’ constrained China.) 

How to behave in the world in which economy is made to service trade (as it is defined by the Sino-American high priests of globalization), while trade increasingly consti-tutes a significant part of the big power’s national security strategy? And, how to define (and measure) the existential threat: by inferiority of ideological narrative – like during the Cold War; or by a size of a lagging gap in total manufacturing output – like in the Cold War aftermath. Or something third? Perhaps a return to an inclusive growth.

For sure, there is no intellectual appeal in a growth without well-being, education that does not translate into fair opportunity, lives without dignity, liberalization without personal freedom. Greening international relations along with a greening of social fabrics and its economy – geopolitical and environmental understanding, de-acidification and relaxation is that missing, third, way for tomorrow. 

This necessitates both at once: less confrontation over the art-of-day technology and their de-monopolized redistribution as well as the resolute work on the so-called Tesla-ian implosive/fusion-holistic systems. That would include the free-transfer non-Hertzian energy technologies (able to de-toxicate our troposphere from dangerous fields, waves and frequencies emittance – bringing it closer to Schumann resonance); carbon-sequestration; antigravity and self-navigational solutions; bioinformatics and nanorobotics. 

In short, more of initiative than of obedience (including more public control over data hoovering). More effort to excellence (creation) than a struggle for preeminence (partition). 

‘Do like your neighbor’ is a Biblical-sounding economic prophecy that the circles close to the IMF love to tirelessly repeat. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a formidable national economic prosperity, if the good neighborly relations are not built and maintained. Clearly, no global leader has ever in history emerged from a shaky and distrustful neighborhood, or by offering a little bit more of the same in lieu of an innovative technological advancement. 

(Eg. many see Chinese 5G – besides the hazardous electrosmog of IoT that this technology emits on Earth’s biota – as an illiberal innovation, which may end up servicing authoritarianism, anywhere. And indeed, the AI deep learning inspired by biological neurons (neural science) including its three methods: supervised, unsupervised and reinforced learning can end up by being used for the diffusion of digital authoritarianism, predictive policing and manufactured social governance based on the bonus-malus behavioral social credits.) 

Ergo, it all starts from within, from at home; socio-economically and environmentally. Without support from a home base (including that of Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet), there is no game changer. China’s home is Asia. Its size and its centrality along with its impressive output is constraining it enough.

Conclusively, it is not only a new, non-imitative, turn of socioeconomics and technology what is needed. Without truly and sincerely embracing mechanisms such as the NaM, ASEAN and SAARC (eventually even the OSCE) and the main champions of multilateralism in Asia, those being India Indonesia and Japan first of all, China has no future of what is planetary awaited – the third force, a game-changer, lasting visionary and trusted global leader.

Vienna, 31 March 2020 / Post Scriptum:

To varying degrees, but all throughout a premodern and modern history, nearly every world’s major foreign policy originator was dependent (and still depends) on what happens in, and to, Russia. So, neither a structure, nor content or overall direction of world affairs for the past 300 years has been done without Russia. It is not only a size, but also a centrality of Russia that matters.

That is important as much (if not even more), as it is an omnipresence of the US or a hyperproduction of the PR China. Ergo, that is an uninterrupted flow of manufactured goods to the whole world, it is a balancing of the oversized and centrally positioned one, and it is the ability to controllably corrode the way in and insert itself of the peripheral one. The oscillatory interplay of these three is what characterizes our days. 

Therefore, reducing the world affairs to the constellation of only two super-players – China and the US is inadequate – to say least. It is usually done while superficially measuring Russia’s overall standing by merely checking its current GDP, and comparing its volume and PPP, and finding it e.g. equal to one of Italy. Through such ‘quick-fix’, Russia is automatically downgraded to a second-rank power status.

This practice is as dangerous as it is highly misleading. Still, that ill-conceived argument is one of the most favored narratives which authors in the West are tirelessly peddling. What many analysts miss to understand, is in fact plain to see; throughout the entire history of Russia: For such a big country the only way to survive – irrespectively from its relative weaknesses by many ‘economic’ parameters – is to always make an extra effort and remain great power. 

To this end, let us quickly contrast the above narrative with some key facts: Russia holds the key positions in the UN and its Agencies as one of its founding members (including the Security Council veto right as one of the P5); it has a highly skilled and mobilized population; its society has deeply rooted sense of a special historic mission (that notion is there for already several centuries – among its intellectuals and enhanced elites, probably well before the US has even appeared as a political entity in the first place).

Additionally and tellingly, Moscow possesses the world’s largest gold reserves (on surface and underground; in mines and its treasury bars); for decades, it masters its own GPS system and the most credible outer space delivery systems (including the only remaining working connection with the ISS), and has an elaborate turn-key-ready alternative internet, too.  

Finally, as the US Council of Foreign Relations’ Thomas Graham fairly admits: “with the exception of China, no country affects more issues of strategic and economic importance to the US than Russia. And no other country, it must be said, is capable of destroying the US in 30 minutes.” (FAM, 98-6-19, pg.134).

_______________

About the Author: Prof. Anis Bajrektarevic is chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria.  He has authored six books (for American and European publishers) and numerous articles on, mainly, geopolitics energy and technology. 

Professor Bajrektarevic is editor of the NY-based GHIR (Geopolitics, History and Intl. Relations) journal, and editorial board member of several similar specialized magazines on three continents.

His 7th book, ‘From WWI to www. – Europe and the World 1918-2018’ has been realised last winter.

Coronavirus crisis: extension of temporary lease is possible

Editor
-
0
Coronavirus crisis: extension of temporary lease is possible

By Reinier W.L. Russell, LL.M.

The corona crisis can make it extra difficult to find a new home or a new tenant after the expiry of a temporary lease. In this context one must think, for example, of quarantine, extra shifts for health care workers and redundancy as a result of which people have no time or money for removal. However, when a temporary lease is extended, this will result in a lease for an indefinite period. Many landlords do not want this. As a temporary emergency measure, the temporary law for the extension of temporary leases allows an extension for a limited period of time. What does this law entail?
 

Which leases fall under the Emergency Act?

The scheme applies to leases ending after 31 March 2020 and before 1 July 2020. Both the tenant and the landlord can make a proposal to extend the lease by one, two or three months. The extension may last until 1 September 2020 at the latest. The tenant has to make a proposal for extension within one week after the landlord has notified the tenant of the end date of the lease.
Please note: If the landlord does not report the end date on time, the lease will be extended for an indefinite period of time by operation of law. This notification obligation does also apply to the extended lease.

Did the landlord give notice of the end of the lease before the law entered into force? In that case, the tenant may still submit a request of extension within one week of the entry into force of the law. The parties may also decide by mutual agreement to extend the lease for a few months, without causing a lease for an indefinite period.

If the corona crisis continues, the law provides for the possibility of extending this measure. In that case, also leases that end before 1 October 2020 may fall under the law. Temporary leases that had already been extended under the law may then be extended again.
 

When may the landlord refuse an extension?

If the tenant makes a proposal, the landlord may refuse for one of the following grounds:

  1. The property has been sold to a third party and needs to be delivered empty.
  2. The property has already been re-let and the new lease will take effect before the requested term for extension.
  3. The landlord wants to live in the property and does not have any other residential property.
  4. The landlord wants to renovate the property and has made arrangements with third parties to deliver the property empty before the expiry of the requested term for extension.
  5. The landlord has arranged with third parties that the property will be delivered empty in connection with demolition at a date before the expiry of the requested term for extension.
  6. The landlord may also refuse extension if the tenant has not behaved like a good tenant.

For the first five grounds, the landlord must have made arrangements before 1 April 2020. The sixth reason explicitly includes the abuse of the corona crisis by the tenant, when the tenant pays less or no rent and there is not inability to pay. The landlord must notify the tenant of the refusal in writing within one week.
 

What to do if the landlord refuses extension?

If the landlord invokes one of the six grounds for refusal, the tenant may request the court to extend the lease. If the landlord refuses to extend the lease by the period of time requested by the tenant on a different ground than the six grounds mentioned, the landlord must take the matter to court. The landlord must demonstrate that he/she has a substantial interest in an earlier termination of the lease. As long as the court has not decided on the extension, the lease continues to exist. It is not possible to lodge an appeal against the decision of the court.
 

More information?

Do you have any questions about the emergency law on temporary leasing? Would you like to learn more about how to limit the impact of the corona crisis on your real estate? Please contact Reinier W.L. Russell, LL.M. (reinier.russell@russell.nl)

A Ministry of Common Affairs?

Editor
-
0
A Ministry of Common Affairs?

By Barend ter Haar.

In the late 1800s, almost all issues that governments had to deal with were internal affairs. Foreign affairs were little more than trade and international security.

Since then, the world has fundamentally changed. In 1900, only about 250 million people earned more than the bare minimum. That number has now grown to almost 7 billion.[1] But this enormous economic progress has given rise to new challenges of a comparable magnitude.  

Scientific and technological progress have made it possible to increase the average real per capita income of the world population by 500%.[2] The use of advanced technologies, however, is not necessarily always in our best interest. Biotechnology and artificial intelligence, for example, present mankind with unprecedented ethical dilemmas. 

Even more difficult are the challenges posed by our environment because we are using natural resources at an unprecedented scale with little or no attention to the long-term consequences for the environment, nature and climate.

What all these challenges have in common is that they have a direct impact on the lives of ordinary citizens. Therefore, they are “internal” affairs, not “foreign” affairs. What they also have in common, however, is that addressing them effectively requires close cooperation at international level. Dealing with them as “internal” affairs on a national base will not suffice.[3]

Governments are thus confronted with major problems that neither fit in the concept of “internal” affairs, nor in the concept of “foreign” affairs. However, like many other governments, the Dutch government is still organised in the same way as in the late 1800s, as if every problem is either an “internal” affair or a “foreign” affair. Ministries that deal with “internal” issues such as public health, public transport and public education still believe that their responsibility stops at the Dutch border.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has added aid and European cooperation to its traditional tasks, but still shows little interest in global public goods such as health and education. As a result, the Dutch government, like many other governments, was ill-prepared for the Covid-19 crisis, which requires international cooperation in areas beyond traditional foreign affairs.[4]

What to do? Renaming Ministries of Foreign Affairs into Ministries of Common Affairs will not suffice, but it might be a symbolic beginning.

[1] As the world population grew from 1.65 billion in 1900 to about 7.63 billion in 2018, the number of people living in extreme poverty decreased from about 1400 million to 736 million. The number of people with an income above the poverty line therefore grew from about 250 million in 1900 to about 6.9 billion now.

[2] The output of the world economy, adjusted for inflation, grew from 3.4 trillion in 1900 to 101 trillion in 2013.https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/world-gdp-over-the-last-two-millennia

[3] Illustrated by the UK’s post-Brexit decision to seek “something akin to membership” of the EU’s early warning and response system (EWRS). See https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/02/uk-seeks-access-to-eu-health-cooperation-in-light-of-coronavirus

[4] https://www.trouw.nl/zorg/kabinet-negeerde-adviezen-over-pandemie-aanpak

One hundred years of Spanish – Edith Bergansius and the Asociación Hispánica de La Haya

Editor
-
0
One hundred years of Spanish – Edith Bergansius and the Asociación Hispánica de La Haya

With her legendary energy and her usual bright attitude, Edith Bergansius talks to Diplomat Magazine about the 100thAnniversary of the Hispanic Association of the Hague, as well as about her life-long involvement in the Spanish language.

Ms. Bergansius’ outstanding commitment towards Spanish started when she was 18 years old. At the time, she was living with an Anglo-Dutch family in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, for education purposes. During an excursion, the tour-guide recommended her to visit Spain: “back in Europe, you should visit Madrid, it is an extraordinary city”. This suggestion was enough for Edith, who, after having spent five months in Brazil, decided to get in touch with a Dutch-diplomat family in Madrid, where she worked as a tutor for their kids. At the same time, she started learning Spanish in an academy downtown Madrid. 

After a few trips to Vienna to improve her German, Ms. Bergansius immersed herself in the Spanish world, travelling to Ecuador and Peru, where she worked as an English teacher. After coming back to The Hague, she then started working at the Embassy of Uruguay, before taking a post at Noordeinde Palace, where he collaborated for the preparation of the King of Spain’s visit to Queen Juliana.

The investiture of Queen Beatrix – Ms. Bergansius says – “was one of the greatest souvenirs of that time”. 

Following this post, she became Secretary of the Ambassador of Spain in The Hague, and she started her membership at the Hispanic Association. 

Besides following courses of Spanish Studies at Leiden University and the British Open University to get a BA, Ms. Bergansius also studied to become translator and interpreter, as well as many courses in Spanish and Latin American culture and literature.

Then, the call from the Hispanic Association came. “My predecessor at the Asociación Hispánica, professor and historian Chris Nigten, approached me in 2004, when he was looking for a person to replace him”, Ms Bergansius recalls. “In 2005, I followed the necessary training in Utrecht, with Carlos Fuentes as a key speaker, and I ended up as President of the Association in February 2006.” 

“Of course, the position – especially at the beginning – was a big responsibility. But along the way, I got used to it.  My model was my father, a lawyer who during his life held endless honorary positions, such as being president of the Artillery Association of The Hague for 17 years and then honorary president until his death.”

Edith Bergansius, President of The Hague Spanish Association.

Edith Bergansius is a major point of reference for the Spanish language and culture community in The Hague, and she is also a key partner to embassies of Spanish-speaking countries, thanks to her engagement in promoting the Spanish language and the culture by organizing countless cultural events attended by hundreds of guests. 

Even in a short overview, we can remember many events organized by Ms. Bergansius, dealing with a wide range of topic: from the poems of Gabriela Mistral at her 130th anniversary, to Ida Vitale and Pablo Neruda, to the histories of Horacio Quiroga, the works of the Uruguayan painter Luis Alberto Solari during his centenary, the 500 years of La Habana, conferences from prestigious academic institutions like the Complutense University about the 80 Years War in Spain; but also, a lecture of Ernesto Sabato, a screening of the Guatemalan film “Donde nace el sol” (“Where the sun rises”), a conference about the Cuban National hero Jose Marti during his 163rd anniversary, a discussion by a journalist from the Spanish newspaper El Pais, as well as visits to museums, reading groups and more. And, in addition to this, one cannot forget Ms. Bergansius’ contribution to the Catholic community, including her activity at the Nunciature and her participation to the choral every Sunday.

“Every year I go back to Madrid to visit my friend from the Madrid academy in 1969” – Ms. Bergansius told us. Over the years, Edith Bergansius received recognitions and honours from many embassies. One of the most important was the Cruz de Oficial Isabel la Católica, which she received from Spain in 2013, owing to her support in spreading the language and culture of Spanish-speaking countries. “When I became president of the association, together with the director of Cervantes, Isabel Claro Lorda Vidal, we kick-started Spanish courses, which still exist today” – she recalls. 

“The numerous members of the Hispanic Association of The Hague, as well as numbers of native Spanish speakers, attend every event and activity, benefiting from the knowledge and the spirit of fraternity that characterize such events. Thanks to the board of director for their support for almost 13 years in organizing this. Thanks to Montse Barbera, our Secretary, Xander the treasurer, Peggy the webmaster, thanks to Prof Inzaurralde, thanks to all” – Ms. Bergansius concluded.

Diplomat Magazine congratulates the Hispanic Association for its 100th anniversary and wishes Edith Bergansius many years of success.  

Photography by Naldo Peverelli for Diplomat Magazine.

Addressing a Global Challenge from The Hague

Editor
-
0
Addressing a Global Challenge from The Hague

By Her Majesty Queen Noor, Dowager Queen of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

Climate change has created challenges – including natural disasters, conflict over resources, and irregular mass migration – that compound deep-seated problems already facing the global community. This can seem overwhelming, yet, just as danger is generated by a world in flux, human ingenuity and resolve can deliver effective responses. And these responses can often be located at source – by addressing social, political, cultural and environmental issues, we can off-set geopolitical challenges further down the line. 

For much of my adult life I have worked to promote sustainable development, cross-cultural understanding and conflict prevention and recovery. My work in Jordan and the Arab world has focused on national and regional human security in areas such as education, conservation, poverty eradication, human rights and family and refugee health.

Initiatives advanced by the Noor Al Hussein and King Hussein Foundations have introduced best practice programs addressing women, youth and community empowerment, microfinance, and health, as well as the arts as a medium for social development and cross-cultural exchange. Internationally, I have focused on climate change and environmental conservation, refugees and Middle East peacebuilding, disarmament, and human security through various organizations and institutions and a stint as a UN expert advisor on implementation of the Millennium Development Goals. 

My Princeton degree in Architecture and Urban Planning, no doubt, has influenced my unorthodox, more holistic, integrated approach to the resolution of any of these distinct challenges over the past 40 years. This has certainly been the hallmark of the most successful post-conflict recovery work in the field of missing persons, a global challenge that I first became acquainted with when I visited the Balkans in 1996 to bring aid from Jordan to the survivors of the Srebrenica genocide. Since then, I have worked closely with families of the missing from Srebrenica and the Western Balkans as a Commissioner of the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP).

For more than two decades, ICMP has been helping countries and communities to respond – systematically and effectively – to the challenge of large numbers of missing persons. In 2015, ICMP moved its Headquarters to The Hague, where it is an active member of the diplomatic and intergovernmental community in the City of Peace.

Although it was established in 1996 to help authorities in the Western Balkans account for the 40,000 people who were missing as a result of the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, in 2003, ICMP’s mandate was expanded, enabling it to work throughout the world and to deal with the issue of missing persons arising from disasters, human rights abuses, organized crime, irregular migration and other causes, as well as conflict.

In 2015, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Belgium and Luxembourg were the founding signatories to the Agreement on the Status and Functions of the ICMP, and it was under the terms of the Agreement that the organization established its new Headquarters in The Hague.

There are many reasons to choose the Netherlands as a base of operations. Logistics and efficient infrastructure, of course – not to mention the extraordinarily positive character of Dutch society and the Dutch people. ICMP’s move to The Hague, however, was determined by a more specific consideration. Its mandate to secure the cooperation of governments required its relocation to a diplomatic hub. As an intergovernmental organization with a global remit, The Hague is ICMP’s natural home.

Today, ICMP has programs in the Western Balkans, Iraq, Syria, Colombia and Mexico. It is also working to address the issue of missing Mediterranean migrants. In addition to its country programs, ICMP deploys cross-cutting core programs in and from its Hague Headquarters. Institution and Civil Society Development, Science & Technology, Data Systems & Data Coordination, and Assistance to Justice, are complemented by ICMP’s Center for Excellence and Learning (CEL), which facilitates the transfer of knowledge and expertise to government and civil society stakeholders around the world. In September this year, the CEL was formally named after the late Wim Kok, the former Dutch Prime Minister, who died in October 2018 and who had been an ICMP Commissioner since 2002. 

The Commissioners wanted to honor Wim Kok because not only did he bring remarkable energy and commitment to ICMP’s mission, as an experienced political leader he consistently made the case for a systemic response to the complex global challenge of missing persons.

In the Balkans, ICMP led an effort that has made it possible to account for more than 70 percent of those who were missing, including 7,000 of the 8,000 who went missing after the fall of Srebrenica in July 1995. The legacy of missing persons in other countries is even greater – as many as 100,000 may be missing from the conflict in Syria, more than 100,000 from the conflict in Colombia, between 250,000 and one million missing in Iraq – and this is just a snapshot. Societies across Africa and Asia are struggling to address huge numbers missing as a result of conflict, migration and disaster. 

The nature and the scale of the problem goes far beyond a short-term, humanitarian response. It has to be tackled in an integrated and sustained way over a long period and it has to have the needs and aspirations of victims at its center. I know this from my own experience.  

I have been in mass graves. I am still haunted by the memory. But I have also witnessed the courage and determination of those who were bereaved by those mass graves. Working for more than two decades with the Mothers of Srebrenica, I have witnessed and supported their proactive and resolute search for justice and truth.

The experience of families in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been mirrored across the Western Balkans and indeed across the world, where conflict or disaster or other causes have resulted in large numbers of missing persons.

The need for truth, the need for justice is universal, and survivors will work across ethnic, religious, political and economic divides – often more willingly and creatively than their political representatives – in order to establish what happened to the missing and to secure justice. 

Societies recovering from trauma will not make progress as long as large numbers of people are missing. Peace building efforts will be confounded as long as families of the missing do not know the fate of their loved ones. Governments will not secure and maintain the confidence of citizens if they fail to uphold the right to truth, to justice, and to compensation.

ICMP has developed an approach that is fundamentally embedded in upholding the rule of law and this is one of the things that make its mandate so distinct.

In November 2018, at the Peace Forum organized by French President Emmanuel Macron, ICMP unveiled a set of eight Paris Principles derived from the Declaration on the Role of the State in Addressing the Issue of Persons Missing as a Consequence of Armed Conflict and Human Rights Abuse, which was signed by four heads of government from Southeast Europe in the summer of 2014.

The Paris Principles assert that resolving the fate of missing and disappeared persons and protecting persons against disappearance are integral to fulfilling the responsibility of states to support peace, reconciliation and social cohesion, and are key elements in upholding basic human rights. The Principles highlight the fact that missing persons investigations must be capable of establishing the facts, and that cooperation among states and international institutions is indispensable. They also emphasize that persons who go missing or are victims of enforced disappearance are entitled to protection under the law, regardless of citizenship or residence status, and that all measures to address the issue of missing migrants, for example, must uphold and advance the rule of law.

Accounting for the missing is a moral obligation, but it is also – and this is crucial – a legal obligation; fulfilling this obligation advances and strengthens the rule of law. This is ICMP’s operating principle: it is a principle entirely consistent with the ethos embraced by the community of organizations that, like ICMP, have their Headquarters in The Hague.   

——————————–

Her Majesty Queen Noor is an international public servant and advocate for cross-cultural understanding and conflict prevention and recovery issues such as refugees, missing persons, poverty, climate change and disarmament. Her peace-building work has focused on the Middle East, the Balkans, Central and Southeast Asia, Latin America and Africa. Her Majesty has been a Commissioner of the International Commission on Missing Persons since June 2001.

——————————–

Photography by Helene Wiesenhaan/Getty Images for IMCP.

Just a diplomatic spouse

Editor
-
0
Just a diplomatic spouse

By Alexandra Paucescu.

When it comes to trailing diplomatic spouses, as we are most often called, it seems there are quite a lot of clichés, inspired of course also by decades of Hollywood glamour.

Most movies still picture us, the life partners of Foreign Office servants, as ever smiling, glamourous women, an epitome of elegance and grace, perfect housewives, polite hosts, raising perfect children, drinking cocktails at sophisticated parties every night… ‘la dolce vita’!

Indeed, looking from outside it is definitely a privileged life. You get to see the world, meet lots of interesting and powerful people, and have lifetime experiences. You live in a protected world, that gives you immunity, only diplomatic though… not for your feelings and soul!

There is certainly more to it than just tax-free, nice housing, less parking tickets and a special status, and it is not always that idyllic, as people often think. ‘Worry free’ life, they say…

I also remember someone asked me once, half joking but half serious: ‘Oh, you have diplomatic immunity, so you basically could kill me and get away with it?’… Another example of the totally wrong ideas people might have about us.

Besides the obvious advantages (though most of them clearly exaggerated by people outside this circle) there is a whole roller coaster of emotions and mixed feelings. The fact that you move every couple of years to a completely new country puts you under an enormous amount of stress. After all, moving is rated as the third most stressful situation in life, after death of someone close and divorce.

Everything you knew and was familiar to you is suddenly gone: new house, new rules, new language, new neighbours…You’ve got to be strong to adapt, to get to know the insides of this kind of life and be able to make the best out of it. When you move you leave not only your family and friends behind, but also, most often, your job and career. Let’s be honest, regardless of the high academic level and training, that most of diplomatic wives have, many of us are still regarded as ‘housewives’, which try to reinvent themselves and try to stay professionally relevant.

Some of us do freelance, consulting work, some became recognized bloggers and influencers or do volunteer work, myself included. But don’t be fooled by appearances… most of the time this professional reconversion may be quite difficult, tedious and not all that successful.

I recently put down on paper my thoughts and adventures, as a diplomatic spouse over the last more than ten years. My book, ‘Just a diplomatic spouse’ (available on Amazon), is a collection of events, rules of diplomatic protocol and ranking, advices to other women at the beginning of a similar journey, funny stories and deep emotions.

Most of our life as diplomatic wives, we are completely associated with our husbands, the ‘plus one’ on the invitations, highly regarded or not, many times only depending on our husbands’ diplomatic rank. Few people bother to see behind the titles…

But we are not just diplomatic spouses, we are educated women from all over the world, we dedicate our time and efforts to best represent our countries, setting sometimes our own dreams and aspirations aside, giving up a certain level of esteem and recognition that society most often shows when you are a professionally accomplished person. We may not have any officially acknowledged titles but we always have the best intentions at heart and the desire to honour our origins and homeland.

One should never underestimate the diplomatic power of spouses!

About the author:

Alexandra Paucescu

Alexandra Paucescu- Romanian, Management graduate with a Master in Business,  studied Cultural Diplomacy and International Relations.

She speaks Romanian,  English,  French,  German and Italian. Turned diplomatic spouse by the age of 30, she published a book about diplomatic life, writes articles and also gives lectures on intercultural communication.

Judicial cooperation: it all starts with trust

Editor
-
0
Judicial cooperation: it all starts with trust

By Ladislav Hamran, President of Eurojust.

A fellow prosecutor recently reminded me of what it was like to send out a request for judicial cooperation to another European country some twenty years ago. “I felt a bit like Robinson Crusoe”, he said. “It seemed like putting a message in a bottle and throwing it in the sea, not knowing where it would end up and when. Luckily we now have Eurojust.” To me, this perfectly illustrates the incredible progress we have made in the field of judicial cooperation since then. 

When I started working as a prosecutor over two decades ago, crime was much more confined within national borders than it is today. As a consequence, so were prosecutors and judges. Whenever there was a need to work together, we had to rely on lengthy, often unpredictable diplomatic channels. We stayed within our own borders, followed our own legal procedures and faced many challenges in the exchange of information and evidence. In an increasingly globalised world, we knew that something had to change. Organised crime and terrorism started to rapidly expand across borders and the need for better cooperation between EU Member States became ever more apparent.

Eurojust

It was with great foresight that the European Council decided to step up judicial cooperation and create Eurojust back in 1999. The EU Heads of State and Government clearly understood that providing a safe and secure environment to live, work and trade together is one of the core tasks of the European Union. Moreover, they understood that cross-border cooperation between judges and prosecutors was going to be a crucial factor in holding criminals accountable for their acts and giving victims of crime the justice that they deserve.   

The role of Eurojust is to facilitate this cooperation. We share our unique expertise with national authorities through legal advice and analytical support. We assist with the execution of European Arrest Warrants (EAWs) and European Investigation Orders (EIOs). We set up coordination meetings, allowing prosecutors from different countries to meet in person and agree on the most effective prosecution strategy. We organise coordination centres, enabling the execution of arrests, searches and seizures in several countries at the same time during joint action days. Furthermore, we provide legal, practical and financial support to Joint Investigation Teams in major cross-border cases. 

Trust

At Eurojust’s premises in The Hague, you will find prosecutors from 27 EU Member States and 8 third countries working together under one roof. In many of our cases, they join forces with Eurojust Contact Points located in 52 countries all over the world. Each of these legal professionals comes from a different national jurisdiction, with its own legal system, customs, traditions and practices. So how do we manage to bridge the gap between so many different jurisdictions? How do we make judicial cooperation work in this highly complex playing field? 

Whenever I am asked about the secret of our success, I limit my answer to one simple word: trust. Trust means making the conscious decision to work together despite of our differences. It means respecting each other’s sovereignty and being open to compromise. It means acknowledging that we may have different ways of working, but all share the same ambition of protecting our citizens and making this world a safer place. 

At the same time, establishing trust cannot be done overnight. It is a delicate process that requires tact and, above all, diplomacy. In fact, one can easily argue that 50% of our work at Eurojust is based on our legal expertise and the other 50% on judicial diplomacy. Our support may take the shape of a highly detailed legal analysis, but can equally be as practical as providing translation by specialised interpreters to make sure that prosecutors and judges can communicate freely with each other. It is therefore only fitting that Eurojust is located in the City of Peace and Justice, where we have created the right environment to foster dialogue and remove practical barriers to cooperation. 

Progress

I am convinced that the careful cultivation of trust through judicial diplomacy is at the root of the major progress we have seen in the field of judicial cooperation in the past two decades. Because of the increased trust between countries, the efforts to fight cross-border organised crime and terrorism have moved from individual to joint, from isolated to coordinated, and from local to regional or even global. 

In parallel with this increase in trust, we witness a continuous growth of Eurojust’s casework. In 2019 alone, we dealt with more than 8 000 cases – a 17% increase compared to the year before. These are not just numbers, because each case has a direct impact on the safety of our citizens. Making it concrete: in one years’ time, Eurojust’s support contributed to the arrests of nearly 2700 suspects, the seizure or freezing of €2 billion in criminal assets and the end of drug trades worth €2.7 billion. 

It is fair to conclude that what we do at Eurojust works. The level of judicial cooperation we have achieved in the EU is unprecedented and we regularly receive prosecutors and judges from all over the world who want to learn from our experience. I sincerely hope that our model will form a blueprint for similar cooperation in other continents, making it easier for judicial authorities to join forces at a global level.

Looking ahead 

While I am incredibly proud of what we have achieved so far, I am also acutely aware of the many challenges still ahead of us. Digitalisation, for instance, is profoundly affecting the criminal justice field. On a global level, cybercrime is the most rapidly expanding form of organised crime. Becoming a victim of cybercrime is no longer a remote risk and geopolitical tensions may well have repercussions for our virtual security. But digitalisation is not just a catalyst of cross-border crime, it is also part of the solution. The coming year will be decisive for Eurojust’s Digital Criminal Justice initiative, with which we aim to give prosecutors across the EU the modern digital tools they need to work together even better. 

Further globalisation is equally inevitable. It will not only lead to an increasing interconnectedness in the political, economic and cultural domain, but also have a significant impact on how easily criminals join forces and what we can do to stop them. Eurojust will continue to bring together prosecutors and judges from all over the world. Our goal is to carefully cultivate trust amongst them, with full respect for each other’s national jurisdictions and legal traditions. Judicial diplomacy plays a key role in this process, and I consider it an absolute privilege to be working closely together with the diplomatic community in The Hague.

By promoting the work of Eurojust and connecting us to the judicial authorities in their home countries, our colleagues from the embassies and international organisations are making a vital contribution to ensuring that justice is done. I can only hope to continue this excellent cooperation in the future.    

Classical Encounters goes online on Sunday, May 17

Editor
-
0
Classical Encounters goes online on Sunday, May 17

A chamber music festival – can it be done digitally? The new reality in which we’ve suddenly found ourselves is challenging us to find new possibilities. We want to investigate what still remains possible, or rather: what has now become possible?

As musical pioneers of the “new normal”, Classical Encounters has decided to rise to the occasion. The festival, which has always looked for connection, will also embrace the online encounter! After all, music creates connection and offers solace, elements that are indispensable for both musicians and listeners, especially in these trying times. That’s why Classical Encounters is elated and excited to announce its first digital edition: Classical Encounters Online. 

Violonist 
Eva Stegeman, the founder and artistic director of Classical Encounters

Artistic director Eva Stegeman invites everybody who has a monitor and an internet connection to join us for a digital festival on Sunday, May 17, live from the Lourdes Church in The Hague. During the live stream, which will last from noon until six pm, you will be treated to non-stop concerts, brief introductions, a short lecture, interviews, and surprising musical intermezzos, all presented by Dieuwertje Blok.

The online version will be unified under the theme Variations, which was the original theme of the offline edition that was supposed to take place from May 13-17. 

Famous pianist Kit Armstrong who is a regular guest in the serie Masterpianists in the Concertgebouw.

The young master pianist Kit Armstrong will perform in his local church in Northern France, playing Bach’s Goldberg Variations. The Rembrandt Frerichs Trio will be playing in the Lourdes Church with their own program, just like Erik Bosgraaf and Ernst Reijseger, who will present a program of Bach-inspired improvisation. The Nexus String Quartet (Pieter van Loenen, Eva Stegeman, Hannah Strijbos, Sietse-Jan Weijenberg) will perform – from the Lourdes Church – Beethoven’s String Quartet op.74 ‘Harp’ as well as a new piece for string quartet – a world premiere – composed by Rembrandt Frerichs. 

We have also compiled a series of short concerts specifically for this online edition. In ‘Carte blanche for…’, you will hear a number of leading musicians. Violist Sylvia Huang (finalist Queen Elisabeth Competition 2019) will travel to The Hague and play a solo sonata by Ysaÿe. From across Europe, musicians who are much-appreciated guests of our festival will join the live stream from their homes. Violist Gordan Nikolic will play from his living room in Antwerp, cellist Ursula Smith will treat us to Sibelius from England and, from his home in Rosmalen, percussionist Jeroen Geevers will play, among others, the theatrical piece Case History – for one percussionist with trunk.

Our festival will be enriched with several short segments. Leo Samama provides short introductions and will deliver a miniature lecture. Edwin Rutten will offer us some musical solace with his hourly segment ‘My musical medicine cabinet’.

Classical Encounters, Chamber Music Festival May 2020

Talent Support has been an important part of Classical Encounters since its founding in 2003. The eleven-year-old violist Adinda van Delft and the 11-year-old recorder player Christiaan Blom will play live from the Lourders Church. Also, a number of young singers from the Academy of Vocal Arts in The Hague will take the stage, led by their artistic director Daniëlle van Lieshout.

All who want to join the festival on May 17 can simply navigate to the festival website. The live stream is available free of charge. Visitors can choose to buy a virtual festival ticket by way of making a donation.

The program is available at www.classicalencounters.nl, which is where you can join our festival as well. 

About Classical Encounters

Classical Encounters is the international chamber music festival in the region of The Hague and Leiden. Since its establishment in 2003, Eva Stegeman has curated a surprising and refreshing program every year, with concerts that are characterized by innovative and touching encounters between musicians and audience. The (analog) edition of Classical Encounters was originally planned for May 13-17. 

Le français…mais pourquoi donc?

Editor
-
0
Le français…mais pourquoi donc?

Par S. Exc. M. Philippe Couvreur, Juge ad hoc et ancien Greffier de la Cour internationale de Justice.

On ne peut que se féliciter que Diplomat Magazine, dont le nombre de lecteurs n’a cessé de croître, et qui est désormais diffusé dans l’ensemble du Bénélux, ait décidé d’ouvrir ses colonnes, de façon plus pérenne que par le passé, à des contributions en langue française. L’auteur de ces lignes se sent honoré d’avoir été invité à participer au lancement de cette heureuse initiative.

Aucune occasion n’eût pu être plus opportune pour rappeler brièvement comment, historiquement, le français a émergé et s’est progressivement répandu, non seulement comme grande langue de culture, mais aussi comme langue par excellence de la diplomatie et du droit, et d’exposer pourquoi il est aussi juste que nécessaire qu’il garde aujourd’hui une place de choix dans ces domaines, aux côtés d’autres langues.

Nul ne contestera qu’une « langue » est – et doit être – , comme telle, bien plus qu’un simple moyen de communication, comme l’a si à propos observé la philologue et académicienne Barbara Cassin. La langue est l’instrument privilégié de l’élaboration et de l’expression d’une pensée, elle-même toujours en interaction avec un contexte culturel donné. La phrase fameuse de Hegel, selon laquelle « c’est dans les mots que nous pensons », n’avait d’autre objet que de formuler, de façon ramassée, cette évidence. La pensée ne peut, tout naturellement, qu’être marquée par les concepts et les mots que la langue choisie met à sa disposition et, en définitive, lui impose. 

Utiliser une langue déterminée à l’effet d’exprimer une idée n’est partant jamais une démarche neutre. Si la langue infléchit la pensée, celle-ci influe aussi indubitablement sur celle-là, si bien qu’elles sont toujours inextricablement liées.

Il s’ensuit que le multilinguisme, loin de constituer un facteur de fragmentation et d’ériger des frontières, est un puissant instrument d’ouverture de l’esprit, d’intelligence et d’écoute d’autrui, générateur d’échanges authentiques et responsables, et donc d’enrichissement général dans la durée. Sur la scène internationale, il tend, avec le multilatéralisme, à la création d’espaces de dialogue hors des logiques de domination et dans le respect de la diversité, c’est-à-dire, en définitive, des espaces de convivialité et de paix. C’est pourquoi il échet d’œuvrer sans relâche à sa promotion. Goethe n’écrivait-il pas que celui qui ignore les langues étrangères ne connaît rien de sa propre langue? Et Wittgenstein que les limites de la langue de chacun sont les limites de son univers?

Hélas, le monde « globalisé » qui tend à s’imposer à nous aujourd’hui, et qui, comme le voudrait la logique de l’émergence d’un cadre de vie plus authentiquement universel, devrait être porteur de libre épanouissement des langues et des cultures, apparaît au contraire, à cet égard, par trop souvent réducteur. 

C’est que, bien plus que d’un souci d’avoir raison des barrières qui engendrent méfiance et incompréhension entre les peuples, il procède à la base d’une volonté davantage matérialiste de favoriser les « affaires », au sens le plus large du terme. Non que celles-ci constituent inéluctablement, en elles-mêmes, un obstacle à l’ouverture, au dialogue et à l’enrichissement mutuel. Tout au contraire, et l’histoire nous le prouve à suffisance! Mais le véritable problème réside dans l’emprise sociétale aussi généralisée qu’insoupçonnée qu’a si vite et si radicalement acquis l’esprit « affairiste » qui semble animer ce monde. « Globalisation » est ainsi à maints égards devenu synonyme, notamment, d’aspiration quasi-obsessionnelle à une uniformité et à une simplicité aussi artificielles qu’excessives de tous les comportements humains, à un formatage des individus cédant invariablement à des impératifs utilitaristes de conformisme superficiel, d’opportunité et d’immédiateté, qui ne sont jamais neutres, ni politiquement, ni culturellement, ni éthiquement. 

Et l’on est en droit de se demander, sans verser dans un apocalyptisme démesuré, si la chasse faite dans un tel cadre – volontairement ou involontairement – à toute forme de singularité et de différence, voire de réflexion quelque peu approfondie sur la véritable nature des choses, et finalement d’humanisme, peut réalistement connaître, à terme, un point d’aboutissement autre que la réduction ultime de l’homme au statut inconscient d’ « objet planétarisé » autant dépourvu de spiritualité que de racines et de valeurs propres, et désormais incapable de s’interroger comme de s’exprimer, de façon libre et autonome, sur les problèmes fondamentaux de son être. 

Cet inquiétant processus s’accommode de l’avènement progressif d’une manière de langage inter-individuel « formalisé », lui aussi prétendument
« global », et, pour reprendre les mots très parlants du philosophe Jean-Luc Marion, « sans littérature, sans lieu, sans peuple, qui résulte d’une abstraction utilitariste googlisée et ne vise qu’à permette le commerce d’informations, qui n’informent que pour le commerce ».

L’apprentissage des langues et l’ouverture à l’infinie richesse des cultures sont plus nécessaires que jamais aux fins de se prémunir de semblables affres; et, sur une note plus positive, on doit assurément se réjouir que notre monde mette aussi à notre disposition des instruments de communication éminemment performants pour ce faire. Dans ce contexte, la langue française ne laisse de présenter, encore à ce jour, un intérêt indéniable. Non seulement parce que, de par sa riche histoire, elle continue d’imprégner, bien au-delà des espaces francophones, des aspects très divers de l’activité humaine, mais aussi compte tenu de ses remarquables propriétés intrinsèques.

Au XVIème siècle, l’usage du français était déjà très répandu dans toutes les cours d’Europe. De l’aveu même de Charles Quint, souverain polyglotte d’un empire cosmopolite « sur lequel le soleil ne se couchait jamais », s’il parlait espagnol – la langue de l’âme de son peuple – avec Dieu et italien – celle de la séduction – avec les dames, c’est en français qu’il réglait avec les hommes les affaires d’Etat…En France, la célèbre ordonnance de Villers- Cotterêts, signée par François Ier en 1539, fixa définitivement le français comme langue du droit et de l’administration; il y allait certes d’un choix politique, traduisant la volonté du monarque d’unifier son royaume, mais il s’agissait aussi et surtout d’assurer la bonne administration du droit et de la justice ( « que les arretz soient clers et entendibles » ), ainsi que la sécurité juridique, à un moment où la connaissance du latin déclinait et où les erreurs d’interprétation des textes conçus dans cette langue se multipliaient. 

Le « grand siècle » ( XVIIème ) vit quant à lui le français s’imposer dans les salons et le monde lettré, ainsi que dans les cercles diplomatiques, en même temps qu’était créée l’Académie française (1635) pour lui « donner des règles certaines…et…le rendre pur, éloquent, et capable de traiter les Arts et les Sciences ». La langue française devint langue diplomatique auxiliaire du latin à Nimègue (1678-79), où le traité entre la France et les Pays-Bas fut conclu en français seulement. Elle fut définitivement consacrée comme langue diplomatique par excellence à partir du XVIIIème siècle. Ainsi, dès 1714, la version française du traité de Rastatt entre la France et l’Autriche, qui mettait fin à la guerre de succession d’Espagne, fut reconnue comme unique version officielle. Cette réalité nouvelle fit écrire bien plus tard au grand juriste américain James Brown Scott: « en laissant tomber le sceptre de la puissance matérielle, la France était devenue le porte-drapeau du monde intellectuel… La défaite de Louis XIV fut en fait la plus éclatante victoire de la France… ».

Le français consolida sa suprématie comme langue diplomatique tout au long du XIXème siècle, le « siècle des Congrès » ( Vienne (1815), Paris (1856), Berlin (1875), etc. ). En même temps, il devint le véhicule des systèmes de droit écrit, garants du respect de l’égalité des individus, et assura la diffusion quasi-universelle des grands textes hérités des Lumières, tels la Déclaration des droits de l’homme et le Code civil, auxquels leurs caractères de clarté et de concision ont conféré une force particulière. 

On dit que Stendhal aimait à parcourir le Code civil, tant il aspirait à s’imprégner de ses exceptionnelles vertus stylistiques…Le doyen Savatier décrivait pour sa part le « style Bonaparte » comme constitué de « phrases, brèves, nettes, coupantes, qui font image, qui parlent…des traits de feu… ». De fait, aucun code n’allait connaître de rayonnement si prodigieux que le Code Napoléon. Rien d’étonnant donc à ce que le droit international moderne, issu des réflexions suscitées par des phénomènes tels que l’émancipation des colonies espagnoles ou les processus d’unification allemande et italienne, se développe en français, et se nourrisse aux sources des valeurs et des concepts consacrés par les instruments juridiques dont cette langue était le vecteur. 

Voltaire n’avait-il pas déjà soutenu que le droit des gens constituait le « droit civil de l’univers, dans le sens que chaque peuple est un citoyen »? C’est ainsi à la « logique civiliste » que répondent encore aujourd’hui maintes règles de base du droit international, dans des domaines aussi variés que les sources ( primauté de facto des sources écrites, garantes de la sécurité juridique, et interdiction pour le juge de rendre des arrêts de règlement ), le droit des traités ( emprunté à la théorie des contrats ou obligations, et consacrant l’autonomie de la volonté, sous réserve des impératifs d’« ordre public » ), ou encore le droit de la responsabilité internationale ( « corollaire de l’égalité » ( De Visscher ) des sujets, même si l’on s’emploie désormais à affranchir ce droit du « dommage » fondant traditionnellement la responsabilité civile ).

Au XXème siècle, l’anglais est apparu comme langue diplomatique auxiliaire à Versailles, en 1919, comme conséquence immédiate de l’effort de guerre aussi considérable que décisif fourni par la Grande Bretagne et les Etats-Unis; l’italien n’a pas connu la même fortune, en dépit des énormes sacrifices consentis par l’Italie durant le conflit et de l’opiniâtreté de Vittorio Emanuele Orlando. 

Il s’ensuivit que le français et l’anglais constituèrent, dans cet ordre, les langues officielles de la Société des Nations et organes assimilés ( y compris la Cour permanente de Justice internationale ) tout au long de l’entre- deux guerres. La rupture assez radicale avec l’ancien ordre global et la diversification progressive de la société internationale à partir de 1945 eurent raison de la suprématie absolue du français comme langue des relations internationales. 

En 1947, le premier cours en anglais fut donné à l’Académie de droit international de La Haye par Hersch Lauterpacht. Jusqu’à ce jour, le français n’en est pas moins demeuré, aux côtés d’autres, langue officielle et de travail de toutes les organisations universelles, ainsi que de maintes organisations régionales et institutions académiques et scientifiques internationales. 

Son autorité et son poids comme langue diplomatique et juridique en ce début de XXIème siècle sont encore indubitables ( ainsi, la Cour de Justice de l’Union européenne continue de ne délibérer qu’en français ), même s’il est parfois des velléités de les réduire, pour des motifs variés, tenant souvent, officiellement, à des considérations de « pragmatisme », mais qui cachent mal certaines frustrations diffuses, d’ordre politique ou culturel, aussi réelles qu’inexprimées. Sans parler, bien sûr, des efforts indéniables qu’exigent l’apprentissage et le bon usage d’une langue rigoureuse et relativement peu flexible, obéissant à des règles souvent quelque peu complexes. Le regretté Kofi Annan observait, non sans réalisme, et avec une pointe d’humour désabusé, qu’à l’Organisation des Nations Unies la langue française, pour ne pas être toujours « châtiée », n’en était pas moins fréquemment « punie »…

Que conclure alors de ces quelques brèves réflexions? Assurément, que le multilinguisme est une nécessité impérieuse pour préserver la diversité des cultures et leur coexistence harmonieuse. Mais aussi que le français y a sa place. Et que, dans certains domaines, comme celui du droit, cette place est même privilégiée car c’est une conception propre et éminente de cette discipline que véhicule la tradition juridique d’expression française: l’idée, si magistralement exposée par Portalis dans le Discours préliminaire du Code civil , que le droit doit être formulé dans un langage direct et clair, apte à décrire des règles générales et impersonnelles, accessibles et intelligibles, et garantissant tout à la fois la sécurité juridique et la flexibilité de leur application.

“Les opinions ici exprimées sont celles de l’auteur”

_________________

Photographe Hester Dijkstra

Redefining US politics before presidential elections

Editor
-
0
Redefining US politics before presidential elections

By Dr. Tiberio Graziani.

Due to the pandemic, it is challenging to make predictions about the US presidential election.

Until a few months ago, Trump’s re-election was taken for granted. The global lockdown due to Coronavirus, the increase in unemployed (estimated between 25 and 30 million), the collapse of the price of the oil and Trump’s “original” claims combine to create a climate of distrust towards the current administration. This, however, does not automatically translate into an advantage for the Democratic Party which still struggles to compact behind Biden.

The blows made by Trump during his term against the so-called Deep State destabilized not only the Democratic Party but also the cross-cutting alliances of large and powerful pressure groups in the fields of industry and finance. It could be said that, in this period, in the US, but also in other countries of the so-called Western world, politics is not in good health.

The general climate of mistrust among all Americans will most likely reward the candidate who will best be able to negotiate with the US lobbies, the Fed and the Pentagon from now to November and who, above all, will demonstrate his reliability. Following this logic, the winning candidate should be Biden. However, whether Biden is elected or Trump is reconfirmed, the Americans will have a presidency “commissioned” by large industrial groups, finance and investors in digital infrastructures, which, thanks also to the pandemic, are taking on an increasing role.

In the case of an upcoming administration led by Joe Biden, the great US strategy in the international arena will not change. The enemies will always be Beijing and Moscow: the two lungs of the Eurasian continental mass. Probably, the new administration will try to play, depending on convenience, Moscow against Beijing, Beijing against Moscow, New Delhi and Moscow against Beijing. Likewise, Washington will attempt to further weaken France and Germany with the aim of strengthening its manufacturing production.

The new US administration will have the task of redefining the traditional alliances that arose after the second world war in the context of a reformulation of a new international order. Washington will be forced to strengthen its relations with the UK, Israel and Japan. The reinforcement of the special partnership with London will aim to help Washington control the countries of continental Europe, contain the hegemonic aims of Paris and Berlin and, internationally, influence the global financial market. Still, within the framework of the control of Europe and the “containment” or, better, destabilization of Russia, Washington will continue its “friendship” policy with Warsaw, Kiev and Tbilisi.

A renewed friendly relationship with Israel, also due to the unpredictability of Erdogan’s Turkey, will allow the United States to maintain its role in the Near East in particular in the dispute with the Islamic Republic of Iran. A probable new relationship with Tokyo will be based on the common opposition with Beijing.

1...335336337...894Page 336 of 894