Prosecutor Serge Brammertz addresses the United Nations Security Council Arusha, The Hague, 8 December 2016- Prosecutor Serge Brammertz of the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (MICT) and International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) today addressed the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). In his address, Prosecutor Brammertz updated the UNSC on the ICTY’s final trial and appeal, the MICT’s trial and appeals, the search for the remaining eight fugitives indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the provision of assistance to national jurisdictions prosecuting war crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.
The Prosecutor began by noting that closing arguments are currently underway in the Mladić case, the ICTY’s final trial and one of the most important cases in its history. He reported that the Mladić trial judgment and the judgment in the Prlić et al. case, the ICTY’s final appeal, are both expected by the end of November 2017. The Prosecutor also updated the UNSC on the status of trial and appeal proceedings before the MICT, including the filing of appeal briefs in Karadzic and Šešelj.
Turning to state cooperation with the ICTY and MICT, the Prosecutor stated that the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) “echoes President Agius’ grave concern that Serbia continues to ignore and breach its legal obligations to cooperate with the Tribunal.”
Regarding the search for the remaining eight fugitives indicted by the ICTR, Prosecutor Brammertz informed the UNSC that the OTP has developed strategies to locate and arrest each of the fugitives. He said, “All victims share the same hope: to see those responsible for the crimes against them brought to justice. And so it remains of critical importance that these eight fugitives are arrested and stand trial.”
In relation to Rwanda, the Prosecutor reported that the OTP’s cooperation with the National Public Prosecution Authority and the Prosecutor-General remains smooth and effective. He also highlighted that Rwandan authorities have identified more than 500 suspects in other countries, and encouraged those countries to work with Rwandan authorities and ensure these cases are completed.
With respect to national prosecutions of war crimes in the former Yugoslavia, the Prosecutor recognized positive developments in the work of the Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, he noted that regional judicial cooperation experienced a significant setback with the failure by Serbian authorities to enforce the war crimes conviction in the Đukić case.
Prosecutor Brammertz further reported, “As long as the political environment and mindset do not support war crimes justice, it will be extremely difficult to meet the public’s legitimate expectations for meaningful accountability.” He explained that there is little evidence Serbia is implementing its commitments to support war crimes prosecutions. He also urged Croatia to bring its policies in line with its commitments. The Prosecutor expressed the OTP’s concerns that politicians and government officials from the region are undermining trust in judicial accountability for war crimes, and informed the UNSC that the glorification of war criminals continues.
The Prosecutor concluded, “On behalf of the Offices of the Prosecutor of the ICTR, ICTY and MICT, I thank Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon for standing behind us and giving us his full support, and I look forward to our continued cooperation with Secretary-General designate Antonio Guterres.”
On 8 December, 24 people were arrested and several house searches were carried out in Greece as part of a joint investigation by Greece and the UK, supported by Europol.The individuals were arrested on suspicion of being part of an organised crime group believed to be facilitating the smuggling of Iranian nationals from Greece to the UK, often via France and Spain, by using counterfeit documents or impersonating their legitimate owners.A Europol specialist in illegal immigrant facilitation, equipped with a mobile office, was deployed on-the-spot and assisted national authorities throughout the operation.Investigators believe the group was charging up to EUR 10 000 per person to supply migrants with fraudulently obtained or altered identity documents, and to arrange their onward journeys to the UK.Four forgery facilities, where the group was alleged to have produced the counterfeit documents, were dismantled during the operation. Forgery equipment, EUR 50 000 in cash and hundreds of documents were also seized.In a linked operation, nine suspects were arrested as UK officers were deployed to addresses in Glasgow, Leeds, Manchester and Northampton on 5 December. They were supported on-the-spot by a Europol analyst with a mobile office, who performed real-time analysis and cross-checks against Europol’s databases. Three French police officers also provided support.The suspected criminal network was based in the UK, more specifically in Greater Manchester, and conducted its activities in other Member States. Due to the transnational activities of the network, parallel investigations emerged in the Czech Republic, France, Greece and Spain, under the coordination of Europol and Eurojust. A joint investigation team was also established between the UK and France.Europol has contributed to the investigation by providing tailored analytical reports that enabled investigators to gain a clear picture of the potential case implications and the connections established among the five Member States involved. Eurojust provided legal support to facilitate effective cross-border cooperation, and funded the joint investigation team between the UK and France.
The judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) adopted amendments to seven of the Regulations of the Court during their thirty-fifth plenary session on 6 December . These amendments aim to improve efficiency by allowing all parties and participants in proceedings before the Court to have increased clarity on a range of procedural matters.The amendments are technical in nature, concerning page limits, time limits and other procedural issues. These amendment proposals were placed before a plenary session of the judges by the Court’s Advisory Committee on Legal Texts, which consists of three judges (one from each Division), one representative from the Office of the Prosecutor, one representative from the Registry and one representative of counsel included in the Court’s list of counsel. The judges of the Court adopted the following amendments. Regulation 20(2) was amended to state expressly that Chambers must make public the reasons for ordering that certain hearings be heard in private session, as was already expressly stated in respect of closed sessions. Regulation 24(5) was amended to clarify the permitted scope of a reply. The amendment to regulation 33(1)(d) clarified the time by which documents due on a specific date must be filed with the Registry. Regulation 34 has been modified to amend certain time limits and procedures in relation to responses and leave to reply to responses. Regulation 36 has been modified to introduce certain specifications concerning the format of documents and the calculation of page limits. Regulation 38 has been expanded to include a number of additional documents and the applicable page limits have been modified. Regulation 44(1) has been clarified to reflect practice by which a Chamber has discretion to allow the introduction of expert evidence from persons who are not on the list of experts maintained by the Registry.Pursuant to article 52(3) of the Rome Statute, these amendments took effect upon their adoption. The amendments to the Regulations of the Court will be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months from circulation, there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, the amendments shall remain in force.Regulations of the Court: English, Français
Statement of the President of the International Criminal Court, Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi, on the occasion of Human Rights Day, 10 December 2016
“Tomorrow, the International Criminal Court joins the rest of the world in marking Human Rights Day, which commemorates the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December 1948.
The theme of this year’s Human Rights Day is “Stand up for someone’s human rights today”. It is an important message. The effective protection of human rights requires that we look not only after our own rights and interests, but also those of others, in particular the most vulnerable.
The International Criminal Court embodies the commitment of nations from all continents to protect all victims against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. In the first place, such crimes are investigated and prosecuted by States, but if they cannot or will not do so, it is the ICC’s task to step in.
The Court has made significant achievements since 2002 in prosecuting crimes that are an affront to human rights such as the use of child soldiers, sexual violence in conflict, attacks on civilians and the destruction of cultural property.
Victims are at the heart of the ICC’s work. They can participate in the Court’s proceedings with the assistance of legal aid and they have the right to request reparations for the harm they have suffered. The Trust Fund for Victims associated with the ICC has assisted more than three hundred thousand victims with physical and psychological rehabilitation as well as material support.
The ICC is central to the global system for the protection of human rights, and victims around the world look to it in hope of justice. But its reach is not yet universal, as many States are yet to ratify the Rome Statute, its founding treaty. More support is needed, so that one day all people may enjoy the same protection of the law. Meanwhile, the Court’s work continues, day in, day out, with investigations, trials, appeals and reparations, standing up against impunity, in defense of human rights.”
On 6 and 7 December 2016, judicial and law enforcement authorities from France and the Netherlands, supported on-the-spot by Europol’s European Migrant Smuggling Centre, took action against an organised crime network suspected of having smuggled some 500 migrants from Somalia to different destination countries in the European Union along secondary routes. Eight suspects were arrested in France (Strasbourg, Modane, Paris) and one in the Netherlands (Geleen) as a result of this joint action.This criminal network, composed of Somali nationals residing mainly in France and Italy, was responsible for smuggling Somali migrants from Italy to different Member States, including Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Germany and other northern European countries. Some of these migrants were smuggled out of Italy by means of car, train or coach, while others were smuggled directly from Africa to Europe by flights transiting via Asian countries using fake travel documents.This operation was preceded by extensive and complex criminal investigations supported by Europol, which coordinated the law enforcement authorities in France and the Netherlands.Italian judicial authorities carried out extensive investigations, with several suspects belonging to this network arrested earlier this year. Eurojust held two coordination meetings over the past year, and was instrumental in facilitating the European Arrest Warrant that led to the arrest of one of the key suspects in the Netherlands this week. This cooperation, combined with international telephone interceptions managed by France, led to the identification in Strasbourg of several network logistics experts.During this week’s action days, Europol provided on-the-spot support by performing real-time analysis and cross-checks against its databases of the information and telecommunication data that were provided by the participating Member States.
By Roy Lie A Tjam.
A dazzling festive Latin jazz concert took place in The Hague on 2 December 2016. Societeit De Witte jazz aficionados Ronald Blom and Robbert Coops were assisted by Marnix Bosman, sound engineer, and Sonia Meijer of the Latin American Table and Honorary Consul of El Salvador.
The concert attracted a slew of jazz and Latin America music lovers. Its ambition was to strengthen ties between Latin America and the Dutch society by means of music.
The Henrique Gomide Quartet, led by pianist and composer Henrique Gomide of Brazil, has a wide musical formation, working both with Brazilian jazz and classical musicians. The quartet’s other members are Caspar van Wijk, a highly-regarded Dutch talent on the saxophone, André Cayres of Brazil on bass, and Antoine Duijkers of the Netherlands on drums.
The interpretation of the Brazilian composer, multi-instrumentalist and music educator Moacir Santos delivered a particular sweetness of sound that was appreciated by the many guests.
Among the concert’s attendees were well known Dutch entrepreneurs, together with leading members of the diplomatic community in The Hague.
The Jazz Concert was the final item on the calendar of the Latin America Table for 2016. Sonia Meijer can reflect on a successful inaugural year of this lively initiative, and look to the future with optimism.
A dinner concluded the delightful evening.
Uzbekistan Liberal Democratic Party 88.61% / Presidential Elections: Preliminary Results AnnouncedThe Republican press centre for the coverage of elections of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan held today at 10 am Uzbek time, a press conference for domestic and foreign mass media to announce preliminary results of the presidential elections.According to the Chairman of the Central Election Commission (CEC) Mr Mirza-Ulugbek .Abdusalomov, ‘the Presidential election was held openly in full compliance with the national electoral legislation and international law’.Over 17 million 941 thousand voters took part in the elections of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan which constitute 87, 73% of all registered voters. He also said that according to the preliminary results of the elections 15 million 906 thousand 724 citizens, or 88.61% of the total number of voters gave their votes for Shavkat Mirziyoyev candidate from the Movement of Entrepreneurs and Businessmen – Liberal Democratic Party of Uzbekistan (UzLiDeP). Mr Shavkat Mirziyoyev, candidate of the Liberal Democratic Party with his family.For Hotamjon Ketmonov, candidate from the People’s democratic party of Uzbekistan voted 669 thousand 187 people, or 3.73% of voters, for Narimon Umarov candidate from the Social-democratic party of Uzbekistan “Adolat” – 619 thousand 972 people, or 3.46% of voters, for Sarvar Otamurodov candidate from the Democratic party of Uzbekistan (DPU) “Milliy Tiklanish” voted 421 thousand 55 people, or 2.35% of voters.
Hotamjon Ketmonov
Narimon Umarov
Sarvar Otamurodov
The presidential elections monitored by both local and foreign observers and organizations, including 600 representatives of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), as well as Parliamentarians, journalists and academics from 46 countries. Over 37 thousand observers from political parties, international observers and representatives of mass media are taking part in counting the ballots.The CEC did not receive any information from the polling stations on violations of the electoral law.“The high activity of the electorate speaks about the growing political activity of the citizens of Uzbekistan, who are clearly aware that the further development of the country depends on their decision,” said the Chairman of the CEC.Members of the Liberal Democratic Party of Uzbekistan at their headquarters in Tashkent today.In accordance with the national electoral legislation, the message about the results of elections of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan will be published by the CEC in print no later than 10 days after the election day, that is, until 14 December 2017.The Central Election Commission as stated in the Constitution is an independent organization responsible of the organization of the Presidential election. This election is unique:’ after our first President Islam Karimov passed away, last September, we had a very short time for the preparation. We are proud of our people and of the significant international participation.’Uzbek family after voting.
By Ellen Brager-Michiels.
This month’s Meet & Greet, organized by the Embassy of Azerbaijan in collaboration with Nyenrode Business University and Diplomat Magazine, was especially enjoyable.
His Excellency Ambassador Mir-Hamza Efendiyev and spouse Mrs. Sevil Amirova-Efendiyeva, chose the intimacy of their own residence to treat their guests to a lovely violin and piano recital on Monday evening, November 21st.
Adding to the intimacy of the event was the fact that the pianist was none other than their daughter, Nezrin Efendiyeva, while Dr. Eugenio Matos, co-founder of Diplomat Magazine, played the violin. Esteemed guests included heads of diplomatic missions in The Hague, diplomatic representatives from various international organizations, local press and other invited guests.
Biography of artists, repertoire of the night, click here:https://issuu.com/diploflying/docs/event_program_cb38807bcb5dfa For additional Kim Vermaat’s pictures, please open the following link:https://www.flickr.com/photos/121611753@N07/albums/72157673390966704The Ambassador of Belarus, H.E. Mikalai Barysevich and Mrs. Sevil Amirova-Efendiyeva, observing Ms Aliya Aghazada, Tatsiana Barysevich and the Ambassador of Kazakhstan, H.E. Magzhan Ilyassov.
Nezrin Efendiyeva is an award winning musician, composer and singer-songwriter from Baku, who currently lives in Brussels. She studied piano, harpsichord and voice; lately she has been dedicating herself to composing film scores.
She performs regularly both on the piano and vocally, and teaches as well. For the Meet & Greet she played on a very special piano with a remarkable transparent top, made in Azerbaijan by the Beltmann Piano Company, a successful piano factory founded by Johan Beltmann in Holland in 1901 that later relocated to Azerbaijan.
The Ambassador of Kazakhstan, H.E. Mr Magzhan Ilyassov and spouse.
Dr. Eugenio Matos studied the violin in Santo Domingo and in Leningrad. At age 17 he joined the Dominican National Symphony and has had the opportunity to perform in prestigious theaters around the world.
Despite his obvious talent as a musician he became a lawyer and career diplomat and is currently assigned as Minister Counselor to the Dominican Embassy in Buenos Aires. Prior to this post he lived five years in The Hague, during which time he launched Diplomat Magazine. Nevertheless his performance at the Meet & Greet was proof that being a violinist is still a large part of his identity.
H. E. Philippe Couvreur, Registrar of the International Court of Justice, Dr Eugenio Matos and Ambassador Mir-Hamza Efendiyev.Aliya Aghazada, Counselor to the Ambassador, introduced the recital and explained that the repertoire was chosen to celebrate the proclamation of 2016 as the Year of Multiculturalism by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev.“Azerbaijan has been the home to different cultures for many years and strongly supports the promotion of a peaceful and inclusive society”, she said.
The program, therefore, included compositions that spanned around the world.
Pianist Nezrin Efendiyeva.
First on the program was a Larghetto by Willem de Fesch, a Dutch composer and violinist of the baroque era. It was a dreamy piece evocative of the composer’s time that set the tone for the rest of the mostly romantic music choices made for the evening.
After this brief visit to 17th century Holland, the musicians took the audience to 20th century Argentina with a beautiful arrangement of Astor Piazzolla’s famous “Oblivion,” drawing a deep expression of emotions from their instruments. Maintaining the same mood but from Russian origin, Rachmaninoff’s well-known “Vocalise” followed. The piece, originally written for piano and voice, was performed in such a way that the distinction between voice and instrument at times almost disappeared.
H.E. Dimitris Iliopoulos, H.E. Philippe Couvreur, Dr Eugenio Matos, Ambassador of Libya H.E. Mr. Breik A.B. Swessi , Nezrin Efendiyeva, H.E. Ambassador Mir-Hamza Efendiyev , the Ambassador of Belarus, H.E. Mikalai Barysevich and the Ambassador of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Mr Magzhan Ilyassov.
The second part of the concert paid tribute to both musician’s home countries. Fikret Amirov was a prominent Azerbaijani and Soviet composer…and Nezrin’s grandfather. It was a great pleasure for the audience to hear the composer’s granddaughter play his Elegy and Ballade with equal amounts of skill and love. While the Elegy sounded nostalgic, the Ballade was gypsy-like with many folkloric elements that required significant dexterity, especially from Eugenio with a succession of very quick notes moving rapidly along the entire sound range of the violin.
There was also a personal connection with the next composer, Julio Alberto Hernández, from the Dominican Republic. Eugenio said he had known him personally and had had the opportunity to play with him on various occasions. From his repertoire they chose the Serenata, a song for lovers, and the Sarambo, a variation on the typical Dominican dance rhythms of the merengue. Eugenio complemented Nezrin on how well she captured the essence of the Dominican spirit in her playing despite the fact that they only had had one rehearsal and one quick review prior to the concert.
H.E. Ambassador Mir-Hamza Efendiyev and the Ambassador of Israel, H.E. Mr Aviv Shir-on.
After the concert the guests mingled, while they were served a selection of wines and hors d’oeuvres from Azerbaijan. Especially tasty were the “chudu” (pronounced tsjudu) a delicious meat–filled pastry, the “shekerbura”, a delicacy made with almonds, walnuts, sugar, cardamom and other ingredients, and the famous “baklava”, though the Azerbaijani version uses less oil than other known varieties.
Also noteworthy were the beautiful paintings by Azerbaijani artists that decorated the walls of the residence, as well as several miniature replicas of Azerbaijani carpets from the 19th century.
As the evening drew to a close, the last guests to leave were in for a special treat when Nezrin joined her mother, who is a pianist as well and former professor at Baku’s State Music Academy, for a spontaneous quatre-mains.
Seeing them together sharing their passion for music and listening to their mastery of the piano was the perfect ending to an intimate, delightful and beautiful event.
Below, AD The Hague Newspaper´s review, please click the link:https://issuu.com/diploflying/docs/ad.concert.azerbaijan.2016 Visit of violinist Eugenio Matos Gomez to President of the Dutch Senate Ankie Broekers-knol, previous to concert:
By Barend ter Haar.
Investing in armed forces is back in fashion. Since the end of the Cold War the foreign policy of many West European countries, including the Netherlands, seemed to be based on three assumptions: wars between European countries were something of the past, wars outside Europe were of no direct concern to Europe and, anyway, the United States would come to the rescue if things would go wrong.
These assumptions were build on wishful thinking, but they provided the Netherlands government a welcome excuse to focus its diplomacy on economic interests, to economize on international cooperation and to neglect its armed forces. Indeed, when one believes that foreign policy is mainly about promoting economic interests, why invest in armed forces?
Now the Russian military involvement in Ukraine, the flood of refugees from the South, the terroristic threat in Europe and ominous remarks of the next president of the United States, have disproved all three assumptions.
As a result, the requirements of an effective army are taken seriously again. This makes sense (although it remains to be seen whether the necessary funds will indeed be made available), but it is not sufficient.
First of all, a well-trained and well-equipped army is an instrument of security policy, not a substitution for diplomacy. On the contrary, an arms build-up can be destabilizing, unless it is combined with a simultaneous investment in diplomacy and arms control. The stronger the forces, the greater the need is of cooperation with potential adversaries to prevent brinkmanship and misunderstanding with potentially grave consequences.
Cooperating with non-likeminded countries is probably the most difficult part of diplomacy, but also the most essential part. It cannot be handled as a footnote to economic diplomacy. It requires long-term investment in personal relations, in knowledge and in institutions.
Secondly, increasing the defence budget will do little to address the root causes of international insecurity. To address poverty, bad governance, corruption, climate change, etc. it is essential to increase investments in international cooperation.
However, during the last few years the Netherlands government has gone in an opposite direction by systematically lowering the budget for international cooperation. The Dutch Advisory Council on International Affairs (AIV) has in a written opinion[1]justly criticized the Dutch government on this point.
Investment in defence should therefore be combined with stronger investment in diplomacy and international cooperation.
[1] Briefadvies toekomst ODA (regretfully only available in Dutch)
By: Tomislav Jakić, Foreign Policy Advisor to former Croatian President Stjepan Mesić
Shock! Disbelief! Total surprise! Those media (and politicians) who have in the preceding election campaign totally uncritically, but systematically supported Hillary Clinton, try by using such words to convince the public opinion (and themselves most probably) that the election of Donald Trump as the next American President is a total surprise (a mistake, almost). But – this is not how things really are. This is, simply, not true.
On one hand Trump seems to be a surprise to those who conducted an almost unprecedented media campaign for the former Secretary of State and for those too who allowed to be convinced (if not deceived) by this campaign, but on the other hand Trump’s victory is no surprise at all for those who tried, free of all prejudices, to analyze all elements of the election campaign and its foreseeable result. Of course one could argue about the fact that it is tragic for today’s America and its political scene, dominated by Republicans and Democrats who successfully prevent any “third candidate” to come even close to the presidential race, that in these elections we witnessed the confrontation between an excentric millionare, a somewhat dubious businessman and a figure from the reality shows and a woman directly responsible for destabilizing the whole Middle East and for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. But, there is not one single word about this from those who are “shocked” and “surprised”.
The campaign started with the firm conviction that the winner will be Hillary Clinton, former First lady, former senator from New York and former Secretary of State. Her victory was, so to say, programmed and she was treated as a favorite in everything and in every moment. This went so far (and we know it thanks to Wikileaks) that the leadership of the Democratic party torpedoed, during the primaries, the campaign of Bernie Sanders who portrayed himself as a socialist and announced a political revolution, thus becoming the most dangerous rival of Clinton. Although not young himself, Sanders and his ideas attracted young voters (some surveys conducted after the election show that in some key states, where Hilary Clinton failed, Sanders would have been victorious over Trump).
But, the nomination had to go to Hillary, a favorite of financial circles who financed her campaign either directly, or in advance, paying her enormous fees for lectures in which she said things that she would never repeat in the campaign and before those whose votes she wanted to win. But, besides being a favorite of financial circles, she was a favorite of those political circles too who wanted the continuation of the policy of a “transformed” Barack Obama, a President welcomed with great hopes, who during his first term of Office took a starting position, marked by his speeches in Cairo and Prague, only to become the true successor of George W. Bush, bombing even more countries than he did and inaugurating again, after a short intermezzo, interventionism plus confrontation with Russia as undisputed cornerstones of Washington’s foreign policy.
And so Sanders was eliminated and the nomination went to Hillary Clinton, a women whose intelligence and political experience could not be denied, but who was described by the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, as a person who was eaten alive by her own ambition. On the other side there was Donald Trump, climbing towards the nomination for a presidential candidate, financing in the first stage almost entirely the campaign out of his own pocket. His success was not the result of the policy of the party’s leadership, but mostly of the votes of those who were attracted by his very often extremely rude populism, on the verge of open racism (these characteristics will gradually almost disappear during Trump’s campaign that was to follow). And he got the nomination on a very stormy Republican party’s convention, during which some delegates in protest even left.
And the arena was ready for the confrontation between a political amateur, “racist, sexist and vulgar person” with an experienced politician (although he would say that her experience was a bad one). In this moment the political-media machinery started to work “full speed”. About Trump nothing good could have been said or written, despite the fact that in his first foreign policy speeches, as a presidential candidate, some new and encouraging tones were registered, while at the same time it was not possible (or allowed), at least in the mainstream media, to either say or write anything negative about Hillary Clinton, despite the never brought to end scandal with her using an unprotected server for sending messages as Secretary of State and despite the fact that she obviously lied saying she did not erase any of the messages and that not a single one dealt with matters of national security.
The curtain was up for a battle between the “evil” Trump and the “good” Hillary. In reality the curtain was up for a mud-wrestling between two candidates who were not selective at all choosing the instruments to destroy each other. And the propaganda machine continued to work full speed. After each TV confrontation public opinion surveys were published showing Hillary was “convincingly better” in comparison with her opponent (there was, as far as we know, only one exception). After that voters opinion surveys were published, all of them giving Hillary great chances to win and Trump almost none.
Thus the stage was set for the final act – the ritual execution of the candidate who refused to accept that everything was over, until he himself comes to the conclusion that it is over – despite his sometimes openly racist statements and their public echo (mainly abroad) and despite his sexual scandals (real or fabricated, most probably both). But, and this is obvious now, Trump was not acting without knowing what he was doing. Repeatedly invoking the silent majority, he played on the card of the Americans (and there are not only a few of them) abandoned by the society and those who feared they could experience the same destiny. It might be a paradox, but it is true: in the eyes of these people the blonde billionar appeared as some sort of a Robin Hood. In him they saw their last straw. He promised to bring back the factories that fled to “cheap countries”, he announced big projects for modernizing the infrastructure, he spoke about opening new working possibilities and “making America great again”.
Former Secretary of State could not respond to this with her cheap slogan about America being great “because it is good” (most probably her staunchest supporters were afraid that someone could ask people from Libya or Syria what they think about both America and her being good). Above all she made both a strategic and tactical mistake: she did not want to deal with Trump as an unworthy opponent; instead of him she choose as her opponent the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, degrading Trump to his mere puppet. Consequently her speeches were more and more anti-Russian intoned and cold war colored, so that Trump with his announcement of talks and deals with Russia (especially in the fight against global terrorism) started to sound moderate and common sense driven (to those who wanted to hear and understand, naturally).
The day of the decision came. And it was, as it was. And we have today President-elect Donald Trump, elected with a convincing majority (of electoral votes, popular votes are not decisive, due to the specific American system of electing the President).His first speech after Hillary Clinton conceded in a phone call to him was well calibrated, low key, but not without substance, it was the address of a statesman. The pledge that he will ban all Muslims from entering the USA disappeared from his web page. And while he is preparing to take over in direct talks with the current President who was obviously forced to join the anti-Trump hysteria, proclaiming him totally unfit for the highest position in the state, some media who all of a sudden see clear, or the Russian media, who never openly sided with Trump, but never demonized him either, have fun exposing politicians form the West with their statement before the US elections and after. Just one example, the British foreign minister, Boris Johnson. Before the elections he boasted how he avoids certain streets in New York, out of fear he might bump into Donald Trump. And after the elections he is “looking forward to work with President Trump’s administration”.
It seems realistic to expect that Trump will disappoint both the European extreme rightists (who are overwhelmed by his victory), as well as liberals (not necessarily of left orientation) who are despairing and exchanging messages of condolences. Trump is without any doubt a conservative, but he comes not out of the same nest as the European neo-fascists who are more and more aggressive with every day passing; he played without any scruples the lowest instincts of the voters to get as many votes as possible, but his domestic policy will most probably be similar to those of Nixon and Reagan. These were, one must admit, not the best times for liberals, but neither were they put before committees for investigating anti-American activities, nor were they forbidden to work. In the field of foreign policy Trump will enter the path of calming down the relations with Russia (that are almost on the boiling point), which is still his “magnum crimen” in the eyes of some European politicians, prisoners of the past; he will enter the path of strengthening (but with Russia and not against it) the fight against global terrorism. Otherwise he will orient America towards itself, putting it in a semi-isolation and giving the US an active role on the international scene only when American interests are in question (and not necessarily interests of the Wall Street). To many he might appear as dangerous, simply because he is an unknown.
Potentially he is really dangerous if he insists on denying the global warming and transforms this into American policy. But it seems to us prematurely and simply not serious to judge him today completely negative only because he avoided (in accordance with the law) to pay for years the federal tax and because of his sexual escapades (does anybody still remembers Bill Clinton, the Oval Office and Monica Levinsky?). Equally not serious is to state that his election victory is “a surprise” and “totally unexpected”. This author published in July this year an article under the title “President Trump?”, stating as follows: “The rich businessman whose biggest advantage is that he owes nothing to anybody, because he is until now more or less financing his campaign out of his pocket, presented a mixture of populism, demagogic approach, sounding phrases and pure politics.” Further: “Repeating constantly that he will bring back the sense of security to every American, he openly pledged his support to homosexual community, promising to protect it from any kind of violence (and thanked – as a Republican – the audience for applauding him after this). And he made sure that among his supporters there were representatives of other races (such as ‘Koreans for Trump’).” And finally: “Trump’s first big political speech shows that the battle for the white House will be waged between two at least equal rivals; Trump will without any doubt repeat the slogan used in his speech on the Convention: She says: ‘Everything will stay as it is.’ And I say: ‘Nothing will remain as it is.’ And with some sarcasm, but not without effect: ‘She is asking her supporters to say that they are with her. And I am telling you and the whole of America: I am with you, I will be your voice, I will be your champion.’” Published in July 2016.
In the meantime the “champion” became President-elect. He will take over in mid-January next year. Until then the horror of those who played (for their own interest, but wrongly) on the card of Hillary Clinton, as well as the horror of those who without any real basis believed the she is the Godgiven President of the US, will calm down. Donald Trump, the man who described himself with the words: “I know the system best. So I am the one who can fix it” – 45th President of the USA. So, why not?
The Henrique Gomide Quartet, led by pianist and composer Henrique Gomide of Brazil, has a wide musical formation, working both with Brazilian jazz and classical musicians. The quartet’s other members are Caspar van Wijk, a highly-regarded Dutch talent on the saxophone, André Cayres of Brazil on bass, and Antoine Duijkers of the Netherlands on drums.
The interpretation of the Brazilian composer, multi-instrumentalist and music educator Moacir Santos delivered a particular sweetness of sound that was appreciated by the many guests.
Among the concert’s attendees were well known Dutch entrepreneurs, together with leading members of the diplomatic community in The Hague.
The Jazz Concert was the final item on the calendar of the Latin America Table for 2016. Sonia Meijer can reflect on a successful inaugural year of this lively initiative, and look to the future with optimism.
A dinner concluded the delightful evening. 
The presidential elections monitored by both local and foreign observers and organizations, including 600 representatives of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), as well as Parliamentarians, journalists and academics from 46 countries. Over 37 thousand observers from political parties, international observers and representatives of mass media are taking part in counting the ballots.
The CEC did not receive any information from the polling stations on violations of the electoral law.
“The high activity of the electorate speaks about the growing political activity of the citizens of Uzbekistan, who are clearly aware that the further development of the country depends on their decision,” said the Chairman of the CEC.
As the evening drew to a close, the last guests to leave were in for a special treat when Nezrin joined her mother, who is a pianist as well and former professor at Baku’s State Music Academy, for a spontaneous quatre-mains.
Seeing them together sharing their passion for music and listening to their mastery of the piano was the perfect ending to an intimate, delightful and beautiful event.
Below, AD The Hague Newspaper´s review, please click the link:
https://issuu.com/diploflying/docs/ad.concert.azerbaijan.2016
Visit of violinist Eugenio Matos Gomez to President of the Dutch Senate Ankie Broekers-knol, previous to concert:
