The Netherlands is set to invest 1.5 million euros to make it more difficult for people smugglers to operate in the Sahel region. Those were the words of the Minister of Foreign Affairs Bert Koenders on Wednesday, following talks with Angel Losada Fernandez, the new EU Special Representative for the Sahel region.
âThe situation in the Sahel region is turbulent and unstable. As a result, the region is rife with smugglers and extremist movements. The international community needs to invest in the area in order to put an end to this,â remarked Mr Koenders, who also called on other countries to do more in the Sahel region.
Combats organised crime
The Dutch contribution comprises support for the UN programme that combats organised crime in the Sahel region, which ought to reduce the opportunities for human smugglers. In addition, together with the United States, the United Kingdom and Denmark, investments are being made in improving security in the border area between Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso. By supporting collaboration between the security services and locals across the national borders, the borders should become less porous.
The funds are on top of the 3 million euros which the Netherlands previously set aside for the Sahel region at the large migration summit in Valletta and the Dutch contribution to water, food security and entrepreneurship programmes in the region. The previous contribution will mainly be used to combat the root causes of migration and radicalisation.
Opportunities for young people
The Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation, Lilianne Ploumen, also spoke to Mr Losada on Wednesday. According to her, it is essential for young people in the Sahel region to have more opportunities. âIn the Sahel region over forty million young people are at risk of ending up in a hopeless situation due to a lack of education, jobs and prospects for the future. By investing in young people, they will have a brighter future and we will reduce the chances of them falling victim to smugglers or extremists,â said Ms Ploumen.
According to the ministers, attention is needed for the Sahel region in order to improve the situation on Europeâs borders. Mr Koenders and Ms Ploumen are concerned that the distressing number of refugees will only continue to rise if the situation in the Sahel region does not improve. âIf we donât tackle these problems, the influx of migrants could increase quite dramatically in two to three years,â remarked Mr Koenders.
The road to Europe that travels through the Sahel region â Chad, Niger, Mali, Mauritania and Burkina Faso â is currently one of the deadliest and most dangerous smuggling routes in the world. Approximately 120,000 African young people now travel through Niger to Libya and Europe each year.
 In order to cope with the turmoil in a less secure world, it is obvious that we need more defence. The Dutch armed forces are therefore being strengthened. As an important first step the Ministry of Defence will receive an extra 220 million euros next year in order to improve the readiness of the forces. A figure that will rise to 345 million euros in 2020. The annual budget for the deployment of Dutch forces in international missions will also be increased by 60 million euros. Moreover the Dutch government has announced its readiness to further invest in the armed forces. There is no question that we are living in an era of rapid change with uncertain outcomes. The demands placed on our armed forces are likely to increase even more. We must continue to invest in future-proofing our military. This requires a steady hand in a gradual and long-term approach. By H.E. Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, Ministry of Defence of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Minister visits Dutch Marines on a mountain training mission in Schotland.
The world in turmoil
There is no question that our security environment has changed for the worse. The instability and conflicts surrounding Europe are undeniably having a deleterious impact on our societies. The recent terrorist attacks on Paris as well as a number of foiled terrorist attempts are a potent reminder of this. Youngsters from Europe are moreover lured to participate in gruesome acts of terror in the Middle East. Bad governance, religious extremism, demographic developments, climate change and a scarcity of natural resources have resulted in a toxic mix in much of the world. This toxic mix of mishap has also induced an increasing number of migrants to knock on the European door. In addition, Russia continues to be a liability to European security.
Europe needs to bring stability to the arc of conflict that now surrounds it. This truly is a daunting challenge. It probably even is a generational challenge, involving the whole gamut of (policy) instruments that we have at our disposal. But it is the challenge at hand. And it is clearly in the interest of all our nations. For everyone involved, there is much at stake and no time to lose. We simply need to protect and defend everything we hold dear, our security and our freedom above all.
Erbil, northern Iraq. 14 May 2015.
Improving the readiness of our forces
Our first priority is to strengthen the Dutch armed forces’ basic operational readiness. In NATO, we are helping to improve the responsiveness of the forces in order to deter — and, if necessary, defend against — any attack. The Netherlands is actively contributing to implementing the Readiness Action Plan and the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF). Recently, we have also signed the founding declaration for the Joint Expeditionary Forces.
By making more people and military materiel available and exercising them more often, we can enhance the rapid deployment of our operational units. And with more reserve parts, stocks can be increased, allowing for faster repair of materiel. It will take time until the effects of measures become tangible at the level of operational units. In the coming years, however, they should lead to a substantial improvement in the armed forces’ basic operational readiness and deployability.
In the coming years, the Dutch government intends to also strengthen the combat support and combat service support units as well as the combat units of the Dutch armed forces. And yes, we need to ensure that we can replace indispensable military capabilities.
North Atlantic Council meeting.
Intensifying international cooperation
I am a strong proponent of greater European defence cooperation. Europe needs to be a much more convincing and credible security provider than it has been. In addition to enhancing our basic operational readiness, the Dutch military will therefore continue to build on its already intensive collaborative partnerships. One example is the treaty the Netherlands signed last March with Belgium for joint air policing. Another is the integration of the Dutch 43rd Mechanised Brigade into a German armoured division. A German tank battalion – one company of which will be staffed by Dutch military personnel – will in turn become part of this Dutch brigade. This arrangement allows us not only to retain our knowledge and skills in operating tanks but also to enhance the deployability and sustainability of our armed forces. The Dutch military is keen to further intensify its cooperation at the European level.
In the first half of 2016, the Netherlands will assume the Presidency of the European Union. During those six months, we will strive to make defence cooperation in Europe less noncommittal. A stronger Common Security and Defence Policy is in the interests of not only the EU but also of NATO. It is high time to tackle the European overreliance on the US.
Way ahead
I am pleased with the path we have embarked on. Clearly, we are not yet where we should be. But the reality is that we are once again moving forward.
Visit Norwegian Minister of Defence.Planned deployment of the Dutch armed forces in 2016In addition to strengthening the armed forces, the Netherlands will continue in 2016 to deploy units for overseas missions. The deployment of the armed forces will be focused on the fight against ISIL, with four operational F-16s and approximately 200 soldiers. We will also be providing 130 trainers for the Iraqi and Kurdish security forces in Bagdad and North Iraq. The Dutch military contribution of some 450 soldiers to the UN mission in Mali (MINUSMA) has been extended until the end of 2016. The Netherlands also contributes to the Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan. In 2016, a number of small contributions to missions in Africa and the Middle East will be continued, including the contributions to the European Union Training Mission in Somalia and the Capacity Building Mission Iraq. The Dutch government will decide before the end of this year whether to continue the Netherlands’ contribution to the EU operation Atalanta against piracy in the Horn of Africa in 2016. Vessel Protection Detachments will continue to be used to protect merchant shipping.Moreover, in 2016 the Netherlands will be providing an extensive contribution to the new NATO Response Force. In the second half of 2016, the Netherlands will also contribute to the EU Battlegroup.For Information:https://www.government.nl/ministries/ministry-of-defencePhotography:Â Minister van defensiveÂ
By Barend ter Haar.Back to Diplomacy is the title of the report of a Panel of Eminent Persons that was presented to the Ministerial Council of the OSCE in December 2015. Because of the climate conference that simultaneously took place in Paris, the report received little attention. However, it should not only be read by diplomats but also, and in particular, by their political masters, because implicitly the report addresses their role in promoting and subsequently neglecting peace and security in Europe and in the wider world.
The main task of the Panel was to consider how the idea of co-operative security could be re-launched. This question goes not only to the heart of the future of the OSCE, but also the heart of the future of the European Union and the United Nations. These three organisations differ in several respects, but they have a lot in common. They were all founded by politicians that dared to look beyond the short-term national interests of their countries and dared to express their vision of security as a common project. In other words: they recognised that lasting security cannot be attained at the expense of the security of other states, but only by building common security.
That requires a common view on what the threats are. The panel noted that since a number of years this common view is missing. There is in particular âno agreed view, no common analysisâ of the issues that keep Russia and the West apart.
What makes things worse is that many of the current generation of politicians pride themselves on having no vision and no willingness to look beyond short national interests. For them diplomacy is a superfluous luxury. Why should you listen to others if you are not interested in their point of view? Why should you look for common ground if you are only interested in promoting your own interests?
Off course, there are very strong arguments for doing just that: listening to others and looking for common ground, in short: for diplomacy. But many politicians seem to think that their voters only want direct action, such as building new iron curtains and bombing enemy positions, and seem to fear that their voters will run away if they use their common sense.
Diplomacy alone will not suffice to address the current crises, but it is essential. It is therefore to be hoped that in 2016 more politicians will have the courage to go back to diplomacy.
On the picture, Europol headquarters in The Hague.Operation Blue Amber against organised crime results in nearly 900 arrests in 2015.
Â
Nearly 900 arrests and 7.7 tonnes of drugs seized: these are only a few of the final results from Operation Blue Amber, a series of international actions in 2015 led by EU Member States and supported by Europol.
Operation Blue Amber is a unique operation that led to law enforcement officers from 28 EU Member States, 31 non-EU countries and other international partners joining forces to disrupt organised crime groups and their criminal infrastructure. In 2015, several simultaneous interventions and action weeks took place across the world.
Operation Blue Amber is a series of global actions to target organised crime. The operation, which follows the successful one-week Operation Archimedes in 2014, focused on âEMPACTâ[1]riority crime areas such as drugs trafficking, irregular immigration, organised property crime and counterfeit goods. Coordinated interventions took place throughout 2015 at airports, border-crossing points, ports and specific crime hot spots in towns and cities.
The final results of Blue Amber include:
Nearly 900 arrests made relating to drugs trafficking (257), property crime (281), and facilitation of irregular immigration (60);
263 arrests of fraudsters during the Global Airline Action days, which targeted criminals suspected of fraudulently purchasing plane tickets online using stolen or fake credit card data;
5 tonnes of cocaine, 2.1 tonnes of cannabis, 280 kg of synthetic drugs and 82 kg of heroin seized;
254 vehicles, 190 tonnes of counterfeit pesticides and almost EUR 140 000 euros in cash confiscated;
1400 tonnes of stolen metal seized.
The Luxembourg Presidency of the Council of the EU organised Operation Luxcar, focusing on vehicle theft. âMore than 250 stolen vehicles were seized in a two-day international coordinated action, several new investigations were initiated with the support of many police officers in the EU and the support of Europolâs experts,âsays Steve Schmitz, the coordinator of Luxcar for the Luxembourg Police. âProperty crime, and more specifically vehicle crime, continues to pose a threat to all EU citizens.â
âThese operational activities, with a comprehensive focus on EU illicit drug entry and transit points, served as an example of how effective coordinated and joined up LE action can be in the fight against determined organised crime groups facilitating the trafficking of dangerous drugs into Europeââ.
Keith Ditchamâ Coordinator drugs action week â NCA â UK
By Elizabeth Naumczyk and Duke Michael of Mecklenburg (reported on Judge Howard Morrisonâs speech).
Commemorative lecture ‘70 years Nurembergâ
To commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Nuremberg Trials against the principal perpetrators of the Hitler regime the Peace Palace Library held the Commemorative Lecture â70 Years Nurembergâ in the Auditorium of the Academy Building of the Peace Palace on the afternoon of 14 November, 2015.
After the opening remarks by the Director of the Peace Palace Library, Mr Jeroen Vervliet, the three speakers were introduced: H.E. Justice Shirin Avis Fisher, Residual Special Court of Sierra Leone (SCSL), H.E. Judge Howard Morrison, International Criminal Court (ICC) and Mr. Alex Fischer, researcher at the Philipp University of Marburg, Germany.
Judge Fisherâs topic was Gender Crimes in International Criminal Justice. She started by saying that the Nuremberg Trials, despite their criticism as victorâs justice, their legacy and uniqueness as part of the annals of jurisprudence, including the establishment of foundation legislative documents cannot be disputed. There were four judges from four countries, five different legal systems and four different languages. Between 1945-1949, 22 of the important leaders of the Third Reich were put on trial, culminating in 13 trials. The Charter of the Tribunal does not mention specifically gender crimes and âwar and rapeâ are not listed.
The Nuremberg Trials other legacy was that it provided an accessible record in all the six United Nations official languages, with press coverage to assure the German population of the substantial evidence at hand. Evidence requires participation with particular subjects being accommodated to provide testimony and have their voices heard, even if corroboration is not always possible. The Nuremberg Trials facilitated this and now we can identify the gender crimes of sterilization, medical experiments, rape and sexual humiliation. We now see that such crimes cannot be treated as gender neutral.
Trials are important to the development of gender law and 50 years later at The International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, 1993) and The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR, 1994) sexual violence and rape were regarded as a serious crime in international law as any other crime because of the disproportionate sexual violence. At the ICTY and ICTR rape was illegal under customary international law and in Article 2 and 5 of the Statute of the ICTY it states it is a crime against humanity, alongside torture and extermination. In 2001, the ICTY became the first international court to find an accused person guilty of rape as a crime against humanity.
In 1998, the ICTR became the first international court to find an accused person guilty of rape as a crime of genocide. Rape against Tutsi women was used to perpetrate genocide and constituted a war crime and crime against humanity.
The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) expanded rape, as a crime against humanity to include sexual violence in many forms such as prostitution and forced pregnancy, Article 2 (g) (i) of the Statute of the SCSL. The definition of forced marriage was not listed separately under its Statute but was developed through case law as a crime against humanity and a crime of sexual violence. Judge Doherty in her partially dissenting opinion in Trial Chamber II in The Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) case, said forced marriage qualifies as an âOther Inhumane Actsâ causing mental and moral suffering, which was upheld on appeal.
The creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Rome Conference in 1998 allowed the drafters to adopt the Rome Statute which came into force in 2002. The OTP issued a Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender Based Crimes in June 2014 https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/OTP-Policy-Paper-on-Sexual-and-Gender-Based-Crimes–June-2014.pdf and the Executive Summary states âThe Statute of the ICC is the first international instrument expressly to include various forms of sexual and gender based crimes including – rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilisation, and other forms of sexual violence – as underlying acts of both crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in international and non-international armed conflicts. The Statute also criminalises persecution based on gender as a crime against humanity. Sexual and gender based crimes may also fall under the Courtâs jurisdiction if they constitute acts of genocide or other acts of crimes against humanity or war crimes. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence ⊠and the Elements consolidate important procedural and evidentiary advancements to protect the interests of victims and enhance the effectiveness of the work of the Court.â The Office of the Prosecutor has made sexual and gender based crimes one of its Key strategic goals in its Strategic Plan 2012-2015.
The second speaker was Judge Howard Morrison from the International Criminal Court, who gave his personal perspective on the Nuremberg Trials, their development and legacy.
He began by saying that at the time of the Nuremberg Trials and its military courts international law and procedures were being developed on a daily basis.
Initially, the most important war criminals were tried before the International Military Tribunal (IMT). Judgements were issued quickly giving rise to criticisms of victorâs justice. Despite the political nature of the trials and the necessity for justice, there was a determination to apply the rule of law and underscore the abhorrence of the crimes against peace and the crime of aggression and the jurisprudence developed with subsequent trials.
They were lengthier and fairness as well as consistency became part of the proceedings. The Allies believed in the historical value of the trials and that they would be judged by future generations. The Nuremberg Trials were a precursor to the UN ad hoc tribunals, the ICC and the development of international criminal law and international humanitarian law. âThe ICC is intended to complement existing national judicial systems and it may therefore only exercise its jurisdiction when certain conditions are met, such as when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals or when the United Nations Security Council or individual states refer investigations to the Courtâ. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court The ICC was created using both common law and civil law traditions and like the Charter and the Judgment of the Nuremberg Tribunal the Rome Statute recognizes the principle of individual responsibility for crimes under international law.
Judge Morrison said, it is important to understand that Germany was not on trial, but the war criminals who as leaders had obligations to the stateâs past and for its future.
He stated, âaggression is the biggest problem of the elements of crimeâ, and he defined âa crime of aggression as a crime of the leadership, due to the leaders control over their forcesâ. The Rome Statute was amended by Article 8 bis adding the definition of the crimes of aggression, adopted at the first review conference of the ICC in Kampala, Uganda, in June 2010. However the Court will only be able to prosecute individuals for these crimes when the amendment has entered into force for 30 states parties and on or after 1 January 2017, the Assembly of States Parties has voted in favor of allowing the Court to exercise jurisdiction.
He then predicted that in the future there would be other types of wars linked to our fundamental needs as humans being food, water and living space. He foresees a direct link between climate change, conflict and terrorism. These kinds of wars have already been fought in the past, for instance World War II was also a war about living space, âLebensraumâ. A significant consequence of past wars is that they caused mass migration, a result of changes to demography. He foresaw demographic changes in the future and this is already evident as a result of the conflicts in the Middle-East and the recent terror attacks in Paris. Therefore, he believed we are at the beginning of the development of new laws.
Furthermore, Judge Morrison described how in the future the crimes against humanity might be expanded to include arms trade and environmental crimes, such as illegal logging or oil spillage at the North Pole. Could transnational corporate crimes be classified as crimes against humanity and a species of war crimes? The ICC could expand its remit, provided it received the appropriate funding.
Mr Alex Fischer spoke, as the third speaker about International Criminal Law as a Success Story â The Nuremberg Trial Films of the U.S. Authorities. The films were produced by the OSS Field Photographic Branch/War Crimes, Office of Military Government, United States (OMGUS) and the U.S. Signal Corps.
He explained how the United States wanted to shape the Trial explaining to the public in Germany and worldwide the most heinous and mass crimes. The lead U.S. prosecutor, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson and the OSS Field Photographic Branch/War Crimes were involved in rebuilding the trial site and enhancing the film aspect of the first Nuremberg Trial (formally known as the International Military Tribunal) convened November 20, 1945 and the verdict rendered October 1, 1946.
The purpose was to show the German public that the Nazi leadership had been given a fair trial. It promoted the US Constitution idealizing American democratic values to stabilize Europe and create legal certainty as well as to create a historical record and an enduring lesson for mankind. Jackson and the OSS decided on how the trial should be told emphasizing the criminal character of the perpetrators who were viewed in compromising situations, essentially convicting themselves. Their âevidence filmsâ used elaborate editing to tell the story, rather than simply film evidence.
Despite disagreements between the Americans the 78 minute film Nuremberg: Its Lesson for Today was shown to German audience in November 1948 in Stuttgart and received mainly positive reactions from the German people who did not see it as propaganda. On Thursday November 26, a movie screening of this documentary will take place in the Auditorium of the Academy Building. Door open at 16:30.
In conclusion, Mr Jeroen Vervliet mentioned that in the foyer is a selection of the drawings of the defendants, prosecutors and Geoffrey Lawrence (1880-1971), President of the Judges at Nuremberg made by Gunter Peis (1927-2012) an Austrian journalist and historian who was present at the Nuremberg Trials. The drawings were printed in : Nuremberg Court Cartoons, photographs of the Judges and Prosecutors. Cartoons of the Defendants and in The Nurnberger Extra Blatt. This project was made possible by the generous contribution of the Austrian Embassy in The Hague. The drawings are part of the archives of Peter Martin Bleibtreu, an Austrian journalist and a reporter at the Nuremberg Trials, recently purchased and added to the special collections of the Peace Palace Library.
Picture by tabletmag.com
By H. E. Guillaume Kavaruganda, Ambassador of Rwanda in Singapore and in Indonesia, former member of Diplomat Magazine during his assignment in The Hague.
For so long, many people for so many times have considered the African Continent as a hopeless one. Africa, especially Sub-Sahara Africa, has been identified as a place whereby it is a common to find wars, genocide, diseases, illnesses, poverty, corrupted leaders, illegal immigrants and so on. Many have been wondering what was wrong with Africans and many good wishers have lost their patience and abandoned their noble causes. Can we blame them after those described negative qualifying adjectives? I do not think so.
But, if we look carefully, a starting point of change and hope is raising for the last 10 years. Let us not loose the momentum. Of course, all those negative adjectives that I described above can still be found in some areas of Africa, but let us avoid to go into harsh generalization.
Take an example of Rwanda. This small country, in East Africa, overpopulated with 12 millions habitants, who has succeeded in attracting so many investors and tourists due to its safety, clean cities and good governance. For the last 10 years, Rwanda has always been ranked number one to have a big number of women in Parliament (64%); in that tiny country, where you find easily very tall women and men, it has been a custom that in every decision making organs, at least a third must be women. This one example on gender equality is one among the many.
Few Singaporean investors have decided to make Rwanda their home. They did not regret their decision. The number of tourists from Singapore to Rwanda has increased by 8 in the last 5 years. Trade between both countries is also booming.
In 1994, Rwanda went through the worst genocide in the history of humanity; the genocide against Tutsi claimed over 1 million people in just three months. From the ashes, Rwanda is cited worldwide as a model in different fields.
The Rwandan example gives hope for Africa. If they did it why not other African nations cannot? It was high time for things to change in that desperate continent. As the saying goes âbetter late than neverâ. Let us as well change our mindset on Africa.
âIt was the best of times; it was the worst of timesâ So begins Charles Dickensâs novel A Tale of Two Cities. It is an observation that could equally apply these days to NATO. By Jamie Shea, Deputy Assistant Secretary General Emerging Security Challenges NATO.
In the first place, Russiaâs annexation of Crimea and its military incursion into Eastern Ukraine, have given the Alliance a new lease of life. In the 18 months since the Kremlinâs actions upended the post-Cold-War European security order and raised alarm bells regarding the extent of Russia revisionism, NATO has been busy around the clock organizing exercises, and deployments in Central and Eastern Europe.
These have intended to reassure the Eastern Allies that NATO will stand by them if Russia attacks. The Alliance has substantially changed its force posture to be ready to respond with new high alert multinational reaction forces.
It has placed six new Headquarters on the territories of its Eastern Allies and overhauled its command and control arrangements and air defences, so as to be able to handle the requirements of large-scale manoeuvres and major incoming forces should it come to the worst case scenario.
As it heads towards its next Summit in Warsaw in July 2016, the question will be just how many soldiers and how much hardware NATO will need to station durably in Eastern Europe to deter Russia as well as reassure its own member nations. Enough to prevent war â or to successfully fight one â but not so much that Vladimir Putin concludes that Russia is now locked into a long-term confrontation with the West; nor so much that the Alliance has no forces left for crisis management or the next generation of military interventions elsewhere.
Getting this balance right between a capacity for military escalation on the one hand and political de-escalation on the other will be the crucial task for NATO ambassadors and their military colleagues in the months ahead. T
his said, the spring in its step that the Alliance is getting from returning to its classical mission of collective defence should not make us think that NATO is now condemned to be successful, or that security is once again automatic. It is also, if not the worst of times for NATO, certainly one of the most demanding and challenging in its entire history, and this for a number of reasons.
First is that defence budgets do not necessary follow new threats. Governments will try to avoid cutting their military forces further but the costs of re-settling hundreds of thousands of refugees and bailing out the weak Eurozone economies, will make it difficult for many Allies to respect their NATO commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defence. Currently only five out of 28 Allies do this.
The modern demands of security with the focus on terrorism, border controls and intelligence services, also means that the classical military no longer has the monopoly on security funds that it once enjoyed.
Many governments will take a gamble that they can re-establish effective deterrence relatively on the cheap through more military activity and joint multinational units rather than new capabilities and additional soldiers. This will make risk assessment a very important topic on the NATO agenda.
Secondly, what if Russia does not pose a direct military threat to NATO, given NATOâs overall superiority in budgets and capabilities, but tries instead to exploit the Achilles Heel of hybrid warfare? This involves intelligence operations, infiltrating special forces, economic pressures and propaganda campaigns to intimidate an adversary and undermine his will to resist.
We saw this with the âlittle green menâ in Crimea and the way in which Russia rapidly took over key facilities and the entire communications system of the local Ukrainian government and armed forces.
Although it is beyond question that NATO countries are less vulnerable than Ukraine to hybrid warfare, it will still be a challenge for the Allies to identify the early warning indicators of this type of covert campaign and to sort out who is the best responder: the nation, the EU with its economic instruments or NATO with its military forces? How does NATO help its member states to identify their vulnerabilities and improve their resilience against hybrid warfare? The third issue concerns the South where the threats stemming from the breakdown of governments and sometimes entire societies in North Africa and the Middle East are arguably as severe as those posed by Russia â and certainly not something that any diplomat can negotiate his way out of in the foreseeable future.
Success here will require patient conflict resolution and institution and defence capacity building to help legitimate local governments stand on their own feet. Ultimately, interventions on the ground may be needed to eliminate the most radical and extremist elements, like the Islamic State, which unfortunately are also the best equipped, financed and organized and unlikely to submit to pressure from air campaigns alone.
Here the Alliance is not 80% of the solution, as it is in dealing with the military threat posed by Russia in the East and its brain power in forging alliances with local actors and other organizations like the UN and the EU, will be as important, if not more so, than its military brawn. So ultimately, the pressures on NATO have never been more diverse.
Gone are the days when the Alliance could deal with one challenge at a time and have it more or less under control before a new challenges arises. Moreover after 20 years in which NATO member states have had partnerships and cooperation and stabilization missions as the principal DNA of NATOâs raison dâĂȘtre and daily activities, restoring NATOâs reputation as a major military power to be feared as well as respected will not be straightforward.
It will not be the task that many NATO ambassadors would have looked forward to at the beginning of their mandate or that Alliance-watchers had hoped would be necessary in the new Europe after the Cold War; but it has become, whether we like it or not, the new prerequisite for transatlantic security in the decades ahead.
What makes a university stand out from the crowd? For the discerning, internationally mobile individual, what are the main qualities and opportunities that a university can offer?Nyenrode Business Universiteitis the only private research university in the Netherlands. It was founded in 1946 with a clear mission: to serve society by developing globally-active and responsible leaders and entrepreneurs through action-oriented education and research. Built upon the motto: âFor business by businessâ, its founding fathers include Air France-KLM, Shell, Unilever, Philips, Heineken and AkzoNobel. Together, they defined Nyenrodeâs purpose as being to develop ânew business leaders who are action-inclined and internationally-orientedâ. Thus the university has always placed a major emphasis on serving the international community.
Nyenrode is dedicated to fulfilling its mission through diverse education and development programs for talented, enterprising and ambitious individuals who are result-oriented and have global perspectives. The many personal and professional development options offered by Nyenrode are best represented by its values: Leadership, Entrepreneurship and Stewardship.
Nyenrode is also known for its personal approach to education, and is committed to providing students with the highest levels of personal attention. Each and every aspiring global talent is respected and nurtured, so they can become the best leaders they can be. All of its practical courses and programs focus strongly on career and personal development, enabling the students to embark on a journey of self-discovery which can ensure maximum Return on Education.
Nyenrodeâs flagship degree programsBachelor of Science in Business Administration (BSc)
The Bachelor of Science in Business Administration (3 years, full-time) is a three-year program on Nyenrode campus. By experiencing the intense campus life, students will be able to develop their passion and strength while improving their understanding of business.
Master of Science in Management (MSc)
The Master of Science in Management (16 months, full-time) provides students with the best tools to enter the global labor market as a skilled starter. Nyenrodeâs close connection with the corporate world ensures that students experience the reality of business through the program.
International Master of Business Administration (IMBA)
Business is not run as a set of courses or islands of knowledge. Rather, business is run based on interconnected and interdependent business practices. Nyenrodeâs recently redesigned International MBA (1 year, full-time) revolves around intergraded business practices and in-company projects rather than traditional individual courses.
Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA)
Executive MBA (part-time, 21 months) provides a learning environment for seasoned professionals that mirrors the realities and pressures of business: one boot camp after the other. The intense 2-week modules ensure that the program is easy to combine with participantsâ busy lifestyles.
Register now for the upcoming events!
February 5th-6th, 2016: EMBA Experience Weekend
February 13, 2016: BSc Open day
February 26th-28th, 2016: IMBA Campus Weekend
March 4th-5th, 2016: MSc Business Game
For more information, visit www.nyenrode.nl
By Joseph RomĂĄn.
The terrorist attacks committed against Paris by Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) operatives on 13 November 2015 brokered shock and disgust by heads of state and government and citizens around the world.
Terrorist attacks of any sort are always committed in the name of a political aim and intentional or not, civilians bear the brunt of and the response to that violence. Paris is still in the minds of many. Questions about why ISIS operatives cold-bloodedly slaughtered 130 people and injured 368 people remain unanswered even though explanations have been tendered.
Perhaps the attack was a response to the Westâs intervention against ISISâs barbarism in the Levant. Perhaps Paris was a sort of one-upmanship between ISIS and al-Qaeda in the battle of being the voice of Islamists. Whatever the case may be, as of this writing, French authorities are still sorting through the motives behind November 13. If anything can be gleaned from the attacks on Paris, though, countries need to rethink national security by shifting their focus onto securing cities. After all, is there a better place to maximize death, destruction, and fear than terrorizing a busy city centre?
Borders have been and continue to be the preoccupation of states. Monitoring and controlling borders and the people who seek to pass through them are undeniably essential for national security. Yet, as important as border security may be, it becomes irrelevant when the threats to citizens originate in local neighbourhoods. While calls for beefing up national intelligence services in the wake of a terrorist attack are not unexpected, national governments would be better served by providing local police forces with the necessary human and material resources to build relationships with residents in high-risk communities.
Relationship building is less about monitoring local populations and more about local police forces having an awareness of the dynamics and personalities of neighbourhoods by building a rapport with residents in order to acutely recognize when something is amiss. There are clear benefits for securing cities in this manner. The criminalization of entire populations can be avoided when local police officers obtain everyday knowledge through conversations with local residents and observing the daily rhythms of neighbourhoods. Moreover, cities will not have to be fated to becoming citadels as a âjust in caseâ response to terrorism. Indeed, turning a city into a fortress in the name of security kills public space far more efficiently and effectively than any terrorist attack. The ways in which Los Angeles has planned its urban spaces with general crime in mind certainly confirms this. So, even as Parisians gleefully demonstrated their resilience and commitment to going about their daily life to spite Islamists, the likelihood of this happening in a beautifully mundane way diminishes once fear becomes the foundation for city planning.
Needless to say, securing cities in the way that has been suggested will not be foolproof. Radicalization will happen no matter what, but there is nothing inevitable per se about the scale of the attacks that occurred on November 13. Undoubtedly, local actions must be connected to national efforts for a more robust response to increasingly localized forms terrorism. Yet, as long as attention is paid to neighbourhoods only when the worst possible scenario materializes, governments will be running on a treadmill to address national security.
Joseph RomĂĄn, obtained his PhD from Carleton Universityâs Department of Political Science in 2011. He currently teaches at the University of Ottawaâs School of Political Studies and his primary research interests revolve around urban politics and international relations.
Nearly 900 arrests and 7.7 tonnes of drugs seized: these are only a few of the final results from Operation Blue Amber, a series of international actions in 2015 led by EU Member States and supported by Europol.
Operation Blue Amber is a unique operation that led to law enforcement officers from 28 EU Member States, 31 non-EU countries and other international partners joining forces to disrupt organised crime groups and their criminal infrastructure. In 2015, several simultaneous interventions and action weeks took place across the world.
Operation Blue Amber is a series of global actions to target organised crime. The operation, which follows the successful one-week Operation Archimedes in 2014, focused on âEMPACTâ[1]riority crime areas such as drugs trafficking, irregular immigration, organised property crime and counterfeit goods. Coordinated interventions took place throughout 2015 at airports, border-crossing points, ports and specific crime hot spots in towns and cities.
The final results of Blue Amber include:
For information: https://www.europol.europa.eu/
As it heads towards its next Summit in Warsaw in July 2016, the question will be just how many soldiers and how much hardware NATO will need to station durably in Eastern Europe to deter Russia as well as reassure its own member nations. Enough to prevent war â or to successfully fight one â but not so much that Vladimir Putin concludes that Russia is now locked into a long-term confrontation with the West; nor so much that the Alliance has no forces left for crisis management or the next generation of military interventions elsewhere.
Getting this balance right between a capacity for military escalation on the one hand and political de-escalation on the other will be the crucial task for NATO ambassadors and their military colleagues in the months ahead. T
his said, the spring in its step that the Alliance is getting from returning to its classical mission of collective defence should not make us think that NATO is now condemned to be successful, or that security is once again automatic. It is also, if not the worst of times for NATO, certainly one of the most demanding and challenging in its entire history, and this for a number of reasons.
First is that defence budgets do not necessary follow new threats. Governments will try to avoid cutting their military forces further but the costs of re-settling hundreds of thousands of refugees and bailing out the weak Eurozone economies, will make it difficult for many Allies to respect their NATO commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defence. Currently only five out of 28 Allies do this.
The modern demands of security with the focus on terrorism, border controls and intelligence services, also means that the classical military no longer has the monopoly on security funds that it once enjoyed.
Many governments will take a gamble that they can re-establish effective deterrence relatively on the cheap through more military activity and joint multinational units rather than new capabilities and additional soldiers. This will make risk assessment a very important topic on the NATO agenda.
Secondly, what if Russia does not pose a direct military threat to NATO, given NATOâs overall superiority in budgets and capabilities, but tries instead to exploit the Achilles Heel of hybrid warfare? This involves intelligence operations, infiltrating special forces, economic pressures and propaganda campaigns to intimidate an adversary and undermine his will to resist.
We saw this with the âlittle green menâ in Crimea and the way in which Russia rapidly took over key facilities and the entire communications system of the local Ukrainian government and armed forces.
Although it is beyond question that NATO countries are less vulnerable than Ukraine to hybrid warfare, it will still be a challenge for the Allies to identify the early warning indicators of this type of covert campaign and to sort out who is the best responder: the nation, the EU with its economic instruments or NATO with its military forces? How does NATO help its member states to identify their vulnerabilities and improve their resilience against hybrid warfare? The third issue concerns the South where the threats stemming from the breakdown of governments and sometimes entire societies in North Africa and the Middle East are arguably as severe as those posed by Russia â and certainly not something that any diplomat can negotiate his way out of in the foreseeable future.
Success here will require patient conflict resolution and institution and defence capacity building to help legitimate local governments stand on their own feet. Ultimately, interventions on the ground may be needed to eliminate the most radical and extremist elements, like the Islamic State, which unfortunately are also the best equipped, financed and organized and unlikely to submit to pressure from air campaigns alone.
Here the Alliance is not 80% of the solution, as it is in dealing with the military threat posed by Russia in the East and its brain power in forging alliances with local actors and other organizations like the UN and the EU, will be as important, if not more so, than its military brawn. So ultimately, the pressures on NATO have never been more diverse.
Gone are the days when the Alliance could deal with one challenge at a time and have it more or less under control before a new challenges arises. Moreover after 20 years in which NATO member states have had partnerships and cooperation and stabilization missions as the principal DNA of NATOâs raison dâĂȘtre and daily activities, restoring NATOâs reputation as a major military power to be feared as well as respected will not be straightforward.
It will not be the task that many NATO ambassadors would have looked forward to at the beginning of their mandate or that Alliance-watchers had hoped would be necessary in the new Europe after the Cold War; but it has become, whether we like it or not, the new prerequisite for transatlantic security in the decades ahead. 
As it heads towards its next Summit in Warsaw in July 2016, the question will be just how many soldiers and how much hardware NATO will need to station durably in Eastern Europe to deter Russia as well as reassure its own member nations. Enough to prevent war â or to successfully fight one â but not so much that Vladimir Putin concludes that Russia is now locked into a long-term confrontation with the West; nor so much that the Alliance has no forces left for crisis management or the next generation of military interventions elsewhere.
Getting this balance right between a capacity for military escalation on the one hand and political de-escalation on the other will be the crucial task for NATO ambassadors and their military colleagues in the months ahead. T
his said, the spring in its step that the Alliance is getting from returning to its classical mission of collective defence should not make us think that NATO is now condemned to be successful, or that security is once again automatic. It is also, if not the worst of times for NATO, certainly one of the most demanding and challenging in its entire history, and this for a number of reasons.
First is that defence budgets do not necessary follow new threats. Governments will try to avoid cutting their military forces further but the costs of re-settling hundreds of thousands of refugees and bailing out the weak Eurozone economies, will make it difficult for many Allies to respect their NATO commitment to spend 2% of their GDP on defence. Currently only five out of 28 Allies do this.
The modern demands of security with the focus on terrorism, border controls and intelligence services, also means that the classical military no longer has the monopoly on security funds that it once enjoyed.
Many governments will take a gamble that they can re-establish effective deterrence relatively on the cheap through more military activity and joint multinational units rather than new capabilities and additional soldiers. This will make risk assessment a very important topic on the NATO agenda.
Secondly, what if Russia does not pose a direct military threat to NATO, given NATOâs overall superiority in budgets and capabilities, but tries instead to exploit the Achilles Heel of hybrid warfare? This involves intelligence operations, infiltrating special forces, economic pressures and propaganda campaigns to intimidate an adversary and undermine his will to resist.
We saw this with the âlittle green menâ in Crimea and the way in which Russia rapidly took over key facilities and the entire communications system of the local Ukrainian government and armed forces.
Although it is beyond question that NATO countries are less vulnerable than Ukraine to hybrid warfare, it will still be a challenge for the Allies to identify the early warning indicators of this type of covert campaign and to sort out who is the best responder: the nation, the EU with its economic instruments or NATO with its military forces? How does NATO help its member states to identify their vulnerabilities and improve their resilience against hybrid warfare? The third issue concerns the South where the threats stemming from the breakdown of governments and sometimes entire societies in North Africa and the Middle East are arguably as severe as those posed by Russia â and certainly not something that any diplomat can negotiate his way out of in the foreseeable future.
Success here will require patient conflict resolution and institution and defence capacity building to help legitimate local governments stand on their own feet. Ultimately, interventions on the ground may be needed to eliminate the most radical and extremist elements, like the Islamic State, which unfortunately are also the best equipped, financed and organized and unlikely to submit to pressure from air campaigns alone.
Here the Alliance is not 80% of the solution, as it is in dealing with the military threat posed by Russia in the East and its brain power in forging alliances with local actors and other organizations like the UN and the EU, will be as important, if not more so, than its military brawn. So ultimately, the pressures on NATO have never been more diverse.
Gone are the days when the Alliance could deal with one challenge at a time and have it more or less under control before a new challenges arises. Moreover after 20 years in which NATO member states have had partnerships and cooperation and stabilization missions as the principal DNA of NATOâs raison dâĂȘtre and daily activities, restoring NATOâs reputation as a major military power to be feared as well as respected will not be straightforward.
It will not be the task that many NATO ambassadors would have looked forward to at the beginning of their mandate or that Alliance-watchers had hoped would be necessary in the new Europe after the Cold War; but it has become, whether we like it or not, the new prerequisite for transatlantic security in the decades ahead. 
