By Dimitris Iliopoulos. “The Hague has undeniably earned over time the title of “the capital of peace and justice” by becoming the hub of a number of important International Organisations such as the Nobel Peace prize winner Organisation for the prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the Permanent Court of Arbitration and a number of Courts pertaining to specific country situations. It has also become the seat of a number of Regional organisations such as EUROPOL, EUROJUST, a.o. Therefore, one cannot be surprised by the big number of diplomatic missions residing there or being accredited in parallel from neighbouring countries, a clear manifestation of diplomatic importance in tandem with the political and economic importance of the host country, the Netherlands. The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, has introduced a novelty aiming at ensuring the continuity and coherence of the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP). In this light, the European External Action Service (EEAS) has been created along the model of a classical Ministry of Foreign Affairs, headed by the High Representative/Vice President of the European Commission to serve the goals of the CFSP/CSDP and to enhance their visibility and effectiveness. Former Italian Foreign Minister Federica Mogherini is the HRVP since 2014. The EEAS is currently composed by 139 EU Delegations including those that are accredited to International Organisations and Agencies. For reasons pertaining to the organisational and budgetary circumstances prevailing at the time of the creation of the EEAS, no EU Delegation has been established in The Hague to represent the EU to the resident International Organisations. However, as important diplomatic and other international developments unfolded there, the need for an enhanced EU presence has become more than apparent. Relevant action to face this lacuna had been repeatedly voiced by EU Member States that missed the support of the EEAS as in other capitals around the world, the Secretariats and Administration of the International Organisations (especially those to which the EU is making significant voluntary contributions), by non-EU states that requested more interaction and last but not least by Academia and think-tanks. An example in point are the two publications by the esteemed Clingendael Institute, the second one bearing the creative title: “The cavalry has arrived”.

At some point and responding to the requirements of the OPCW due to the Syrian crisis, the EEAS hierarchy has decided in 2013 to start deploying an EU official (the undersigned) on a regular basis and by decision of HRVP Mogherini since 2015 on a permanent basis to follow and report on developments, to interact with the OPCW, EU and non-EU stakeholders and to prepare the basis for the opening of an appropriate permanent delegation whenever the budgetary and other circumstances will allow it. The level of ambition is to incrementally extend the cooperation to the Courts which the EU is generously supporting. The results of the enhanced presence have been very encouraging from the beginning. The level of cooperation with all stakeholders has reached new standards, in particular with OPCW during the critical period of the Syrian chemical weapons removal and destruction and beyond. The visibility of the EU relevant policies and action has become more tangible to non-EU diplomatic missions and the flow of information has been significantly reinforced. The EU Representative now participates in the rich programme of all mainstream diplomatic or state activities. The endeavour has been generously supported by the Dutch Authorities, including the Gemeenten and in particular the Ministry of Foreign Affairs which merits a loud expression of appreciation. The endeavour has the backing of the HRVP, who did not miss any opportunity to participate in important events in The Hague and to promote the visibility and supportive role of the EU. The work of the EU Representative to the OPCW is definitely complicated considering that the size of the task is simply enormous, especially in recent months where some interaction has started with other international or regional entities. Several positive steps can be recorded such as the fact that the EU Representative now has an office, collocated with the European Commission and the European Parliament in the famous Huis van Europa situated in Korte Vijverberg 6, near the Binnenhof. The EU Representative has also been granted Privileges and Immunities according to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Diplomatic accreditation with the organisations will be pursued. Of course the ultimate goal is the opening of a full-fledged EU Delegation whenever the circumstances will allow it. Only then the EU MS states, the International Organisations, the diplomatic community in The Hague and the EEAS itself will be able to take full advantage of the EU potential and interaction to the benefit of international peace, security and cooperation.”   “Dimitris Iliopoulos is Principal Advisor at the Disarmament, Non-proliferation and Arms export control Division (SEC POL 1) of the European External Action Service (EEAS). Before joining the EEAS he has served as Greek diplomat in ex-Yugoslavia, Turkey, Geneva (UN) and as Greek Ambassador to the UAE, Albania, Brussels (Deputy Permanent Representative to the EU). He was appointed as Head of the Geneva Liaison Office of the Council of the EU in 2008 and Deputy Head of the EU Delegation (UN) in Geneva (heading the disarmament section) in 2011. Since his return to the EEAS HQs in Brussels in 2012 he has dealt with various disarmament issues (notably Chemical weapons, the Syrian CW operation, etc) and since May 2015 he is the EU Representative to the Organisation of Chemical Weapons, while following the work of the other International Organisations in The Hague as well.”

By Barend ter Haar. Russia and the West are confronted with the same fundamental challenges: a relative decline of their geo-political position, global threats that require more international cooperation and internal pressures to withdraw from that. Because the countries of the West, Russia and Japan were the first to industrialize, they reached a level of development that gave them an enormous advantage on other countries and provided them with the opportunity to extend their power over the rest of the world. This period is now coming to an end. The countries of the South are catching up and the relative position of the countries of the North is declining. The USSR used to be one of the two global superpowers. The Russian Federation remains very important, but not necessarily more important than China, India or Brazil. Even the relative power of the United States is declining. The relative position of the countries of Western Europe is in continuous decline. Take for example the Netherlands. Between 1945 and 1975 it lost more than 97% of its territory. In 1962 it was one of the founding members of the G10, the group of ten most important Western industrialized countries, but in 1999 it did not receive an invitation to become a member of the global group of twenty countries, the G20. The war in Syria gives the impression that the world is still basically an anarchy. However, a comparison with the situation a century ago makes clear that it is an exception to the global trend in the direction of a rule-based global order. The wobbly international order that is slowly developing might to a large extent be an accidental result of globalisation rather than the consequence of a common vision of countries, but that makes it no less real. As technological and economical developments proceed, countries have no choice but to accept a growing acquis of rules, encompassing inter alia communication, international finance, trade, scientific standards, public health and environmental protection. Possibly the toughest challenge for both most Western countries and Russia is to engage in intensive international cooperation to deal with global challenges, while an important part of their population wants to go in opposite direction. What the movements that seek refuge in isolation have in common is that they blame “foreigners” for everything that goes wrong and therefore want to have as little as possible to do with the outside world. Typical examples are the Dutch referendum against an association agreement with Ukraine, the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom and the rise of Donald Trump in the United States. Although blaming the outside world for everything that goes wrong is not a very fruitful long-term strategy, governments are tempted to sing to the tune of these groups, as they comprise a sizable part of the electorate. Both Russia and the West are tempted to seek refuge in antagonistic isolation instead of constructive engagement to adapt to a changing world order. However, in the longer run the only alternative for cooperation is self-mutilation.  

By Liu Po-liang, Commissioner, Criminal Investigation Bureau, Republic of China (Taiwan). Growing internationalization underlines the urgent need for Taiwan’s involvement in the global fight against transnational crime. The 2016 InterNations Expat Insider survey of more than 14,000 expatriates globally ranked Taiwan as the best destination in the world. About 34 percent of expats in Taiwan are extremely satisfied with their work environment, more than double the average ratio worldwide. With a population of 23 million, Taiwan is a major transportation hub and an important economic and trade center in the Asia-Pacific region. In 2014, it was listed second among the top-10 safest countries of the world. However, in order to sustain a high level of public security at a time when cybercrime and terrorism continue to spread, it is imperative for Taiwan to participate in Interpol and work together with law enforcement agencies worldwide.  Taiwan’s absence in Interpol affects global security. Taiwan became a member of Interpol in 1961 under the name the Republic of China, but was forced to withdraw in 1984 due to political factors. More than 30 years have passed since then, and at present only Taiwan and North Korea are excluded from the organization. However, Taiwan is vastly different from North Korea. The fact that Taiwan enjoys reciprocal visa waiver privileges with more than 100 other countries around the world indicates that the ROC passport might attract the attention of those engaged in transnational crime. Taiwan’s exclusion from Interpol—in effect denying it timely access to key intelligence as well as preventing it from participating in seminars and training workshops—creates a major loophole in the global security and counterterrorism network.  Taiwan requires Interpol assistance, while Interpol requires Taiwan to ensure a comprehensive security network. Taiwan is ready and willing to participate in global police endeavors in fighting crime. Since 2009, Taiwan police agencies have collaborated with counterparts overseas to resolve 235 cases and arrest more than 12,000 suspects involved in organized fraud as well as transnational trafficking of drugs and persons, including children. Although Taiwan police have spared no effort in combating transnational crime, their requests for Interpol assistance have met with little support, as reflected in the fact that a response was received in only 27 of 90 enquiries made in the first nine months of 2016. In a world shaped by globalization, an international security network that does not include Taiwan inevitably leads to higher law enforcement costs for all parties concerned. For example, only after Taiwan police had solved a US$2.2-million ATM heist perpetrated in the country by 22 foreign nationals in July 2016, did they realize that European nations were highly interested in the case when Taiwan’s Criminal Investigation Bureau was invited to discuss it at a special meeting convened by the European Police Office. However, Taiwan police were unable to promptly share information they had uncovered on more suspects in the upper echelons of the crime ring; nor were they able to gain access to intelligence they needed. As crime is no longer subject to geographical constraints, Taiwan’s exclusion from Interpol creates a major loophole in the prevention of international crime, becoming a cause of concern for countries worldwide. Politics should not override public security; we urge you to support Taiwan’s participation in Interpol as an observer. Taiwan’s police, as part of the global police community, have the obligation, responsibility, willingness, and capability to participate in Interpol and work jointly with other police forces around the world. So as to avoid sensitive political issues, Taiwan is willing to attend the Interpol General Assembly as an observer. Although participation in this annual event would not lead to direct and prompt exchanges of intelligence with member countries, or access to their crime databases, Taiwan’s attendance at various meetings and events would facilitate interaction and compensate for the current lack of intelligence exchanges. This could serve as an initial step to meet basic needs for transnational law enforcement cooperation, without touching on political issues. Fighting crime is the police’s mission and responsibility. As police officers, we should transcend geographical, ethnic, and political differences, so that the global police community can work in concert to ensure social justice. We urge you to speak up for Taiwan at relevant occasions and support its participation in Interpol.