By Corneliu Pivariu. The First World War led, among others, to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and that brought with it a new configuration of the Middle East. One of the consequences of the Second World War was the collapse of the British and French colonial empires with the downsizing of France’s and Great Britain’s influence in the Middle East and, after the 1956 Suez Crisis, the USA’s and Russia’s (USSR at the time) influence became one of the important characteristics of the region. Gradually, up to the end of the Cold War, Russia (USSR) lost its key positions in the Middle East mainly in countries such as Egypt, Iraq, Libya including the naval bases at the Mediterranean and succeeded only in preserving its positions in Syria and the small naval base in Tartous. The end of the Cold War and then the collapse of the USSR was followed by a period in which the USA’s influence in the Middle East increased, yet different errors committed by the Administration in Washington in managing its relations with the countries in the area (including Iraq’s invasion and the actions carried out in this country) parallel with Moscow’s actions of recovering the lost positions, mainly during president Putin’s last mandate, led to a spectacular, we may say,  increase  of the Kremlin’s influence in  the Middle East. All these were favored by the American foreign policy (or, better said, the lack of an appropriate foreign policy) in the Middle East during the two mandates of Barack Obama. Nevertheless, mention should be made of the American intention of redrawing the borders of the Middle East during George W. Bush Jr.’s mandates, materialized in the  map of the illustrious unknown Ralph Peters and the denomination of the New Middle East used by the American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in June 2006, during her visit to Israel. The map (analyzed by us, too, even from the very beginning of issuing Geostrategic Pulse) contains numerous errors which neither the time that passed so far has validated, nor the foreseeable future will do. However, it was used in the framework of some training courses for NATO high ranking officers.  The so-called Arab Spring grew towards complicating even more the geopolitical developments in the Middle East and North Africa. After what the USA and the European Union (but not Israel) saw, during the first years, an evolution towards democratization  following the elimination of dictatorial regimes, the stage of ungovernable states with huge economic and social problems was reached, the violence increased and the self-titled Islamic State (Daesh) emerged and,  apart from taking control of important areas in Syria and Iraq, it turned to committing  terrorist acts in Europe as well. The problem of the refugees from the Middle East became a global concern and especially of the EU. The evolution of the civil war in Syria brought Russia again at the forefront of geopolitics in the Middle East as the Kremlin cleverly exploited ever since 2013 the USA’s and its Western allies’ irresolution, as well as the lack of EU’s unitary action. Russia intervened directly, militarily as well, in supporting Bashar Al Assad regime, even from the fall of 2014, by developing a system of maritime and terrestrial bases that led to strengthening its position and role not only in Syria but also in the whole of the Middle East. The never-ending conflict between the Sunnis and the Shiites evolved to Iran’s benefit which, after the elimination of Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq, strengthened even more its influence in this country and through the important support granted to Assad regime, to the Lebanese Hezbollah and to Hamas movement is strengthening the achievement of its strategic goal of having a terrestrial corridor to the Mediterranean Sea, by profiting from the dissensions affecting the relations among the Arab countries with Sunni majorities. New tensions emerged among the Arab countries of the Gulf on this background marked by the June 2017 diplomatic crisis between Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries (Bahrein, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt) including breaking off relations, blocking the terrestrial borders, banning maritime and air traffic and other economic sanctions. The tensions between Qatar and Saudi Arabia are not new, they date back since some decades after Ryiadh withdrew its ambassador to Doha (from 2002 to 2008 and later in 2014) and on June 5th, 2017 it broke off completely the relations with Qatar. The small Qatari peninsula has important oil and gas reserves (the third country in the world as far as gas is concerned) and is the greatest world exporter of LNG, a position that might be soon taken over by Australia. Qatar is the country with the highest GDP per capita  in the world – 129,700 $ (2016), and it is followed from the Gulf countries by Kuwait, that is yet on the 9th place only (71,300 $). Officially, breaking off relations with Qatar was due to the support Doha would have granted to Muslim Brotherhoods (it backed especially the Egyptian Brotherhood and Mohammad Morsi), Hamas and Daesh. Saudi Arabia reproaches with Qatar as well of maintaining close relations with Iran (mention should be made that the great Qatari gas deposit “North Dome” extends to the Iranian territorial waters where it is called ”South Pars” . Another Saudi’s discontent is the presence in Doha of the TV station Al Jazeera,  set up in 1996 and which represents a new media approach, different from the one in the area, including the domestic and regional controversial problems which generally the Arab media approaches reluctantly or at all. The station shocked part of the Arab audience when in presenting the issue of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict it conveyed Israeli opinions as well. Turkey is another Qatar’s faithful ally which in 2014 agreed upon  setting up  a military base where, after breaking off the relations by the abovementioned countries, sent  a symbolical contingent of 150 military that, according to Turkish media of the time, could reach in the end 1,000 military. Besides, Qatar is the Gulf country where the biggest American contingent is placed at Al Udeid base (11,000 military) where there is a Command Center for coordinating the air strikes against Daesh in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Turkey, which had excellent relations with Bashar Al Assad regime until the civil war was triggered (in May 2009 the president Abdullah Gul paid a visit to Damascus) pronounced itself firmly against Assad regime particularly after the first lot of 3,000 Syrian refugees arrived in Turkey after the fights in Jisr as-Shugur. The Turkish Minister of Foreign  Affaires of the time, Ahmet Davutoglu declared “We suspended all trade relations and all understandings between Turkey and Syria were suspended”; in June 2012 a Turkish military aircraft was downed by a missile launched from Syria and the situation deteriorated even further later on in connection with the complications of the emergence of Daesh and the fighting in the Syria’s northern zones where the Syrian Kurdish forces still play an important role. The policy of ”zero problems with the neighbours” could not be materialized and Ankara, confronted with the coup attempt of the summer of 2016, turned towards Russia and the relations between Putin and Erdogan became closer and closer (Putin visited Ankara on September 28th 2017). Although Russia backs Bashar Al Assad and Turkey the opposition, the relation Moscow-Ankara-Tehran strengthened in the framework of the Astana negotiations by setting up the de-escalation zones and Turkey is to play an important role especially in Idlib area. There are analyses foreseeing a Turkey’s extension in northern Syria up to somewhere south of Aleppo, yet that is too early to estimate. For the time being, the situation is further complicated by the referendum for the Iraqi Kurds independence (92.7% in favor), an action that does not enjoy regional or international support and which Turkey does not accept in any way.   Daesh is as well defeated in its declared capital – Raqqa, and it is a matter of at most a few weeks until the end of the offensive, yet that does not mean the end of the organization which will find other forms of manifestation. The fluid and destabilized situation of the Middle East is beneficial to Israel that sees the possible Arab enemies more and more weakened and divided. The great powers try to position themselves as better as possible in the Middle East for the next geopolitical global negotiations in which the Middle East region has no more the same importance as in the XXth century. A world peace cannot anymore be predicted from the Middle East only, and the latest developments in Asia and Europe at least fully prove that. —– About the author: Corneliu Pivariu, former first deputy for military intelligence (two stars general) in the Romanian MoD, retired 2003. Member of IISS – London, alumni of Harvard – Kennedy School Executive Education and others international organizations. Founder of INGEPO Consulting, and bimonthly Bulletin, Geostrategic Pulse”. Main areas of expertise – geopolitics, intelligence and security. —– Photographer: Ionus Paraschiv.    

On the picture Ambassador Professor Dumitru Chican.  Copyright INGEPO Consulting, photographer Ionus Paraschiv. By Ambassador prof. Dumitru Chican.        As-Salamu aleikum wa Rahmat Allah wa Barakātuhu, Peace be upon you I say and I say Allah’s mercy and blessings be upon you, a friend of yours say whom you don’t know yet he knows you having the privilege of speaking your fascinating Arabic language through which you define yourselves, of having lived among you, at your home, with you and of having discovered you not only through the noble sense of the value called Diyāfa –the hospitality of the water carafe offered as a sign of welcome to he who passes the threshold of your house or make a halt in the shadow of your tent inherited from venerable ancestors;  I discovered you in the names of your scientists who laid foundations to the development of universal culture and civilization – Averroes and Avicenna, Al-Kindi, Ibn Khaldun and so many others, I tracked you in the flight of the pigeons under the arches in Cordova, Seville and  Toledo, through your poets who were a source of inspiration for a Dante Aligheri and I placed you in the books I wrote about you, in the Arab poems I glossed for making them known to my fellow citizens with the hope of building bridges for a better mutual knowledge, appreciation and to value the treasures of culture and spirituality of the Arab nation and those of my people. I was acquainted with you and admired you, giving you friendship and enjoyed the friendship you bestowed on me. What happens today with you and with that fascinating secret garden which is tha Arab world and the Islamic universe? Too many times when looking at the TV screens and listening to the brutal news about a new massacre perpetrated in an European place I am wishing, without words, that the perpetrator or perpetrators have not been Arabs, have not been Muslims. And almost every time the nude reality contradicts me, leaving the bitter taste of finding out that Look! there is no longer a secret for anyone that the Arab-Islamic world is creating, with inconscience, the image of the entire mankind’s ennemy. I am absolutely convinced that the Arab youth coming to Europe  in search of better horizons of life but accept to kill – with a vehicle turned into a killing bolide, with a machete or a knife – innocent people in the Western towns and little towns do not represent the true image of the country and people where they were born and to which they belong through identity, history and culture. I know too well that fanaticism and hatred are not the exclusive monopoly of an area of the world, of a certain confession. Violence and rejecting the other only because he does not think like us accompanied the mankind’s entire history. But in this first century of the third millennium we have to recognize that the origin of the overwhelming number of aggressions against the innocents – women, men, elderly people and children – incuding Muslim faithful but declared “infidels” because they do not belive in the radicalism of the Salafist and takfirist patterns is in this Arab-Islamic world which religion proclaim – as you do not get tired of telling us – love, tolerance, peace. I confess, my dear Arab Muslim friends, than whenewer I see the terrible images of the dead cut down by a fanatic death, many of them mere tourists wishing to see the beauties of the world, I feel pressed down by the inner need to appologize to the family of the Japanese or French, British, Belgian, German or Romanian whose corpses lie on the streets, public squares and on the promenades in Barcelona, London, Paris, Brussels, amid the monuments of Luxor or in bazaars of Falluja, Beirut, Baghdad, Sinai and having frozen in their last glance the perplexed question:why? Why do you allow the fanaticism ruled by its own Islam of the outskirts to stain with blood the world’s map and to make the planet’s citizens mourn? For they chose to look to the future while you remained anchored in a past that still dreams for the utopian rebirth of the Muslim caliphate? For the Arab-Islamic world failed in its few efforts of edifying the modern state and its institutional values? For you think together with Ibn Taymiya, with Abdel Wahhab, with Hassan Al -Banna,  or with Sayyed Qotb and with Ayman Al-Zawahiri that democracy is just ”the bastard child of the western civilization”? For you have been raised with the contempt for  the secularism of this West where you do not hesitate to send your children to universities and academies in the hope of an as ”western” as possible life? How did you, Arab-Islamic nation, react when seeing that from your own body this monstruous djinn was born and rose and was called with uncontrolled pride ”Islamic State”? “I do not identify myself with this malformation” you said, ”this is not Islam”, you fought back. Yet the Islam which proclaims that ”there is no compulsion in it”  (La Ikrāh fi-l-Islam!), this Islam did not rise solidary and unwavering to explicitly proclaim its denial of accepting this savagery of the present, even if the declaratory denial is far from being enough for stopping the monstrosity as long as the proclamation is not followed by curative steps and especially by the awareness of the need of self-criticism and of recognizing one’s own hesitations and weackness. You, dear Arab and Muslim community, you contented yourself with deliverying speeches inspiread, almost all of them, from the preachings intoned from the pulpit of the mosque and then, with the comfotable feeling of the ”respected and fulfilled duty”, you turned every time to the atavic custom of accusing the others as universal substitute of the indignant cry and of the pragmatic opposition. Those who perpetrated during the last years terrorist attacks under the cry “Allah Akbar!” were, in their overwhelming majority, Muslims and Arabs.  Kouachi brothers, the assassins at “Charlie Hebdo” (January 2015), Mahmud Abu Hilal – (Nice, 2016), Anis Al-Ameri (the driver killer in Berlin, on December 19th, 2016), Khaled Masoud (Westmister, Londra, March 2017), Suleyman Ramadan Al-Abdi  (Manchester, 22nd of  May 2017), Younes Abu Yaakub (Barcelona, Rambla, August 2017) and many, many other are Arabs, many of them had probably as ABC the Quran glossed by a preacher or sheikh whose only job is making assassins from these tullab, young “students”, alike the Talibans (“students” as well) of Afghanistan where once, on behalf of Islam, able to destroy, under cannon blows, the pre-Islamic statues in Bamyan or to blow up the archaeological treasures   of Palmyra and Nineveh on the ground they  represented a heretical iconography? My dear Muslim and Arab friends, as I am loving and admiring you, I allow myself to subject you to a sincere criticism which the honest friendship and love only make it possible and wonder if my love is really supported by moral arguments. As the geographic distance gives me the space of perspectice, it allows me, at the same time, to see things you cannot or do not want to discern and to ask questions you do not want or cannot ask. For what this monstrosity called “Islamic State” used and was allowed to use the Islam’s face, which is the spiritual face of each of you, in order to show its savagery? Why Islam’s face and not any other face? Where are your scientists and inventors, where are your illuminees carrying for you the guiding torch towards the freedom of thought and towards the daring innovative reforms? Where are your universities, the higher education institutes, the great public libraries, the scientific discoveries and the introspective curiosity? What fruits brought to you the metaphorical revolutions of the Arab spring? And how can’t you understand and accept what the great Syrian poet Adonis  was saying with no trembling voice and was writing with no shaking hand, namely that the revolutions moulded in the mosques and in the shadows of the minarets are inevitably doomed to collapse in a frozen and annihilating winter of the consciences who further hope for freedom, dignity and wellbeing? A winter under which snows other ”caliphates” and other vipers, other ”Islamic States” are sprouting as well as other barbarities and denials of humanism that were born in the haze of the Dark Ages? Into which soil are thrusted the roots of evil preventing you to unchain the superabundance of creative energies and be, in the universal contexts, an efigy of the dinamic participation to the collective construction of a world reconciled with itself? The truth which, as any truth irritates, is that the roots of evil are in yourselves, my dear Arab and Muslim friends, the djinn, this malefic spirit of hatred was not born on alien planets but within the permissive matrix of the Arabic-Islamic body, from the endless oscillation between present and past, from the contradictions and  lack of will of edifying their dignified place in the concert of world’s nations and peoples. And such monsters will go on emerging as long as you will turn down with apathy to confront the truth and to cleanse your body of the roots consuming normality and creative energies. It is high time, my dear Arab and Muslim friends, to remember your grandfathers Rifa’a Tahtawi, Mohammed Abdo, Rachid Rida, Jubran Khalil Jubran, Francis Marrache and others who, in the XIXth century, achieved the first Nahda, Renaissance or Arab “revival” spiritually, culturally and nationally, and the fact that the genuine meaning of the word “jihad” is that of fighting with self and for unremittingly refining the self. It is high time for you to depart, through your own endeavour,  from the harmful schisms among sects and rites politicized  from mercantile reasons and to revive in the Arab ordinary conscience the generous meaning of that Al-Nafs Al-‘Ammāra – the “building spirit” thanks to which you came out of the obscurantism of pre-medieval ignorance for making yourselves builders of bridges among civilizations. Do not give up that “building spirit” just because “peripheral spirits” exploits your fatalism, your past-ridden cult, ignorance and convenient carelessness for keeping you in the darkness and in the endless grievance and you blame the rest of human community for that. Salam Aleykum I say to you, my dear Muslim and Arab friends! ————- Article first published by Geostrategic Pulse, www.ingepo.ro  

Prof. dr Willem van Genugten presenting the book during The Hague Open Doors. Photography by Annette M. R. van Kooten. On the presentation of the book “Discover International Law, with special attention for The Hague, City of Peace and Justice” during The Hague International Open Day 2017 By Prof. dr Willem van Genugten, Tilburg University. International law does belong to everybody and influences the lives of all human beings worldwide much more than one is often aware of. And while we feel that daily lives should not be ‘judicialised’ more than needed, we also think it is important to create more awareness of existing rights and duties, for states, individuals, companies, knowing that such ‘legal frames’ can help solving problems without having to resort to the use of ‘muscles’ (read: military power, terrorist means, authoritarian use of governmental powers).

International law is about peace and security, trade relations, the fight against climate change, and, for instance, the protection of human rights. Here today we are also exercising human rights, such as the freedom of speech and the freedom of association. And should you fall ill while listening to me, you will have access to adequate health care, a human right as well.   All this is about public international law. The second international law ‘leg’ relates to private international law: should you fall in love with a foreign student – or as foreigner with a Dutch student – and should you want to marry him/her and have to divorce next to that, with quite a dispute about the division of the material wealth you did build up together, what law will then be applicable and what court to go to? We are then in the domain of private international law. The key purpose of the book is to contribute, in very accessible style, to the understanding of the state of the art of public and private international law, including trends and highlights. Doing that, the book also makes clear that it doesn’t make sense to speak about international law in one ‘bundle’: it is composed of quite a number of ‘chambers’, all of them having their own history, supervisory procedures etc. A second purpose of this book is to present the long existing ties between international law and the city of The Hague, ‘the legal capital of the world’ (Boutros Boutros-Ghali), or better to my mind: ‘An epicenter of international justice and accountability’ (Ban ki-Moon). At the end of the book, we present a few overriding observations, overall being optimistic ones, despite all the misery visible in the world on a daily basis in each and every domain covered by international law. That optimism seems to be warranted if one looks at developments with historical eyes, and see ‘where we come from’. To take but two examples: the 1899 Hague Peace Conference made clear that states should solve their conflicts not by fighting but by arbitration, and before the 1970s nearly nobody talked about international agreements on environmental issues. Such an optimistic approach is needed in the view of the authors in order to see progress and not to stick to the ‘negative hypes of the moment’.

Dreams and ideals are needed, but they should not be naïve. The UN for instance is an intergovernmental organisation with a huge variety amongst its member states in terms of political systems and of endless different views on numerous topics. That is the reality one has to face – with positive sides as well: cultural diversity! – while talking about further developing international law and about the role the UN should play and actually plays in strengthening and enforcing it, with humanisation of the international legal order as the lead concept. In words of the book: there is room for ‘conquering terrain upon rude power politics’, which is what law makes law. Together we stand for ‘the future of international law’. The field deserves it, the world needs it. ————– “Discover International Law, with special attention for The Hague, City of Peace and Justice” is written by three authors, Prof. Nico Schrijver, Ph.D. student Daniela Heerdt and I myself. It is available in English and Dutch, and soon in French and other UN languages. Our deepest thanks and appreciation to Wolf Legal Publishers. Prof. Dr Willem van Genugten, em. Professor of International Law at Tilburg University, extra-ordinary professor of International Law at the North-West University, South Africa. President of the Royal Netherlands Society of International Law. ———— Photography by Rene Gonzalez de la Vega.  

                            Dr. Abdur Rehman Cheema, photography by Noor Muhammad. By Dr. Abdur Rehman Cheema and Samra Anwar. The power still runs through the barrel of the gun though many in Pakistan would celebrate the completion of the two democratic governments next year, how far democratic regimes have been able to secure control over affairs of the country remains in question. The Army Chief’s statement indicating the issue of rising debts and deteriorating current account balance was viewed as encroachment of the military on civilian space. Clearly, the army is not the economic manager of the country. However, the Prime Minister, perhaps learning from the mistakes of his party head, reaffirmed the Army Chief’s stance saying the later has the right to comment on the country’s economy. Well, too simple to assume that the Army Chief should be assumed to have used his right to speak at par with an ordinary citizen under the constitution, it speaks of the long legacy of command, control and influence on all the institutions of the country. Why not the Army Chief should leave the task of commenting on the economic situation to the finance minister who is mandated for this purpose? One of the areas where civil and military regimes struggle to align is that of the foreign policy. Historically, the Pakistan’s foreign policy has been driven by security interests. More so, around half of the country’s life under military rule, it was obvious. Theoretically, military is part of the government and in essence, should be subject to the civilian authority. However, as a matter of realpolitik, matters are run differently than they appear. As a matter of fact, where Pakistan stands today in geo-political paradigm, major interventions with regards to foreign diplomacy have been led by military regimes. Some of the examples are General Ayub’s signing of pro-US accords, General Yahya’s failure to solicit Chinese and US support in 1971 war, General Zia’s Soviet Jihad and General Musharraf’s war on terror. These were major decisions of foreign policy taken by military-led governments. As for civil governments, Mr Liaqat Ali Khan’s cancellation of USSR visit was something that caused havoc to the Pakistan since friendly relations with Russia might have resulted in a different Pakistan in terms of peace and prosperity. The other example is the concept of pan-Islamism which is a political movement and advocates for the unity of Muslims under one Islamic State that should act like an umbrella. Mr Zulifkar Ali Bhutto-led civil government also endorsed the idea and worked towards the collectiveness and togetherness of Islamic countries by facilitating the Islamic Summit Conference at Lahore. Pak-China friendship started in 1950 and the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr Liaqat Ali Khan played a major role in bringing the two countries closer. Similarly, the Pak-Saudi friendship has a long history. The friendship between the two countries has lasted ever since Pakistan came into existence. With the continuity of the political process, civilian leadership has made several inroads in gaining some of its lost space to the military bureaucracy. In fact, as it is said, first deserve then desire, civilian leadership has not only shown increased maturity with the smooth transition from one government to the next government but with the changes of prime ministers with in each government.

On the whole, as a nation and from the military and civilian institutions, Pakistani people have done better in many instances where many feared that things might go wrong. Firstly, learning from the mistakes of General Musharraf, the military showed restraint once Imran Khan and Tahir-ul-Qadri had their sit-in in front of the Parliament in 2014. Secondly, though the end is to be seen, the judiciary showed courage to proceed against General Musharraf. The judiciary and the civilian regime again demonstrating confidence to implement the death sentence of Mr Mumtaz Qadri, the murderer of the Governor Punjab, Mr Salman Taseer. Mr Mumtaz Qadri was the official guard of the Governor who opened fire on him for the Governor’s siding with the Christian woman charged with blasphemy. Blasphemy is an extremely sensitive topic in the country where many misuse this law to settle their personal scores with their rivals. With the demonstrated unity among government institutions, different factions in the Pakistani society also showed restraint and no instance of law and order situation was created as many feared. Parliamentary Diplomacy is primarily the actions and duties of the parliament with regard to foreign interventions. With the continuity of the political process, onus lies with the parliamentarians to demonstrate their commitment and grip over the state affairs with their well thought out professional judgments. For this to happen, the political parties have to have competent bureaucrats and think tanks who should articulate and brief politicians on government policies. Parliamentary friendship groups need to be strengthened and empowered. Moreover, the functioning of these groups should be made public. Parliamentarians to Parliamentarians’ dialogues should be held frequently in order to be on the same page and to know what is going on in other democracies. For instance, there are certain parliamentary watchdogs that facilitate parliamentarians to parliamentarians’ dialogues. Again these dialogues should be purposeful in terms of learning from other country’s experiences as well as maximizing the outreach to the world by means of communication and connection and not merely a source tourism on public expense. Additionally, path dependence and decades’ old legacy inertia would not be overturned in any short duration. It’s a good omen that in many aspects, political, civil and military elite has increasingly prioritised economic security as the key component for stability of Pakistan. The recent convergence of civilian and military interests to carry forward the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) demonstrates this understanding. Easier said than done, the pathway to civilian supremacy demands demonstrated commitment, sincerity, professionalism and courage on behalf of the civilian institutions of the state and more from the political leaders.   ———— About the authors: Dr. Abdur Rehman Cheema is Charles Wallace Fellow at the Sustainable Places Research Institute at Cardiff University, UK. E-mail: arehmancheema@gmail.com With a doctorate in development studies from Massey University, New Zealand, he has been actively involved in teaching, research, design and implementation of development theory, planning and practice. His areas of interest have been looking at the interconnected issues of socio-economic development including governance, education, agribusiness, environment and climate change and of regional developments, for example, China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Samra Anwar is a development consultant with interest in issues of public policy and governance based in Islamabad. E-mail: samraanwar@gmail.com. Samra Anwar is a development practitioner experienced with a demonstrated history of working in the development sector with major focus on electoral reforms, democracy, good governance, legislative reforms, political parties’ oversight and reforms, governance oversight and reforms, democratic oversight and reforms and political economy. Her areas of interest are research & development and advocacy & lobbying. ­­­­

By Jhr Alexander W. Beelaerts van Blokland LL.M. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) are a new set of goals constituted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 2012 and adopted by the world leaders at a UN Summit in 2015. As part of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the SDG’s form the core of the UN’s Post-2015 Development Agenda. The SDG’s succeed the Millenium Development Goals (MDG’s) which were designed to combat all forms of poverty. The SDG’s are part of the 17 Global Goals that give direction to the world wide action for sustainable development till the year of 2030. SDG 16 is about peace, justice and strong institutions. Being the world’s international city of peace and justice, the City of The Hague wants to play an active role in SDG 16: in promoting peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, providing access to justice for all and to build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. The implementation of SDG 16 can be achieved by applying twelve targets in which (local) governments, civil societies (such as businesses) and communities work together. For those twelve targets multiple tasks arise. A number of NGO’s in The Hague as well as several international courts and tribunals in The Hague showed their interest for SDG 16 as well. An example is the implementation of the Global Legal Inclusion Program (GLIM) made by MicroJustice4All for a Coalition to establish SDG 16 in multiple cities. The GLIM maps ‘marginalized groups’ such as victims of conflict and disaster and people at the bottom of the social / income pyramid and their legal rights. The target is to provide legal identity for all, including birth registration. On November 7th, 2017, the Mayor of The Hague and the Alderman for International Affairs will be present to show their commitment at a conference of MicroJustice4All. The City of The Hague will continue to involve the NGO’s , courts and tribunals in the implemention of SDG 16. To be continued ! ————— a.beelaerts@planet.nl About the author: Jhr. Alexander W. Beelaerts van Blokland LL.M. is Justice (Judge) in the (Dutch) Court of Appeal and honorary Special Advisor International Affairs, appointed in 2004 by the Mayor and Aldermen of The Hague  

By John Dunkelgrün. As you have probably experienced, there is no shortage of restaurants in The Netherlands, especially in Amsterdam. New ones are being opened all the time, often trying to distinguish themselves by the most outlandish and inappropriate combinations of ingredients. It is rare that you’ll find a restaurant that offers a truly WOW experience with its food, its ambiance and the location. We entered through the new Hudsons Bay department store which is decorated in all brightly lit white, the design chic rather than clinical. Taking the lift up to the fifth floor, you come in a totally different world. Colour comes at you from all sides, literally. Even the floor is decorated with an intricate pattern of brightly coloured shiny marble. We were welcomed in the most charming way by two young ladies. One of them took us to our table which was at the far end of the restaurant, allowing us to take in the scene. We were awed like a couple of country bumpkins. The restaurant is a long rectangle with a vaulted ceiling, somewhat reminding us of a traditional railway station. Down the middle is a long eating bar, which is also partly kitchen. The arches are sprinkled with lightbulbs so even on a cloudy night this rooftop restaurant lets you dine under the stars. Through the windows, the view of Amsterdam by night is fabulous. It is like you’re hovering above the city in a Google Earth sort of way.

When we were there, at dinner you could not eat á la carte, but had to take the full Monty: six dips, six meses, a main course and deserts. This has since been changed, as it was so much, we couldn’t even look at the deserts. The food is Eastern Mediterranean, with heavy emphasis on Lebanese and Israeli cooking. You’ll find lots of chick peas, pomegranate, eggplant and tajini among the ingredients. We were enjoying ourselves so much that I forgot to take notes and the tasting menu consisted of so many dishes, it isn’t possible to describe them all. This may be a good thing, so there will be some surprises left for you. There were some Middle East perennials such as humus and baba ganoush, which were just a little bit different. The humus was served tepid with some whole chick peas in it, the baba ganoush the best I have ever tasted. Our favourite was the roasted eggplant with saffron yogurt, basil and pomegranate. Even the ubiquitous tzatziki was special. It was not watery as it so often is, but firm like Turkish yoghurt and delicately flavoured. You should just go and let yourselves be surprised. The wine list too is original. It is a good list and not too extensive to confuse you. It offers many wines from “new” wine areas and is moderately priced. We had the “Vergelegen” Shiraz from South Africa, which was superb. The service, while still a bit uncertain, was exceptionally friendly. The maitre’d went from table to table not just with the obligatory “Everyting fine?” but asking specific questions about which foods we liked best and really listening. We have eaten several times at Ottolenghi in London, recently in some of the best restaurants in Israel, as well as in various simple specialised humus places on three continents and have found that the food at Nacarat compares very well. Every restaurant has its minuses, especially in the beginning. The service was still a bit uncertain, but Nacarat is still very new and the large crew still had to become a real team. The whole menu was simply way too much food, too much in volume and too overwhelming in its rich variety of flavours and scents. There are two disadvantages to the premises. The toilets are two floors down and if you have to leave after Hudsons Bay closes, it is a bit of a cold shower. You are escorted in the elevator to the ground floor where you exit in an darkish alley off the Rokin. There is security there so you don’t need to be worried, but one way or another this should be changed. All in all, we came away with a wonderful feeling and will be back soon. You should really try to experience the magic of Nacarat. ——– Nacarat nacarat.nl 020-7900320 Rokin 49, Amsterdam