By Sunday Oyinloye, West Africa Editor. Nigeria no doubt is one of the leading nations in Africa. It is blessed with enormous natural resources, some of which are still buried in the belly of the earth unutilized. For instance, much has not been heard about bitumen, which is lying fallow under the earth in Ondo State South West, Nigeria. Interestingly, some experts have argued that the bitumen deposit in Ondo State which remains untapped is enough to tar all the roads in Africa .The country also boasts of vast human resources. Ironically, millions of professionals have been lost to brain drain due to poor working condition and lack of motivation in their home country. Professionals who are poorly paid in Nigeria are highly priced in many advanced countries, thus they seek greener pasture abroad. Nigeria’s frustration about brain drain was publicly expressed by former President Goodluck Jonathan in early 2014 during a Town Hall meeting with Nigerian citizens when he attended Nuclear and Security Summit in the Netherlands. His frustration and that of other Nigerians is understandable, a lot of people familiar with the wealth of Nigeria have argued that the country has no business being poor. It is not by accident that Nigeria has remained a good bride of the Netherlands. The small but vibrant European country practically has dominion over Nigeria’s oil with Shell Petroleum, a Dutch company as a major player in the nation’s oil and gas industry. However, relations between the Netherlands and Nigeria has being of mutual benefit with the Netherlands having the” upper hand’’.   Nigeria practices mono-economy which makes the country depends heavily on oil for survival hence the strategic importance of Shell to Nigeria. An appraisal of the two countries nevertheless shows that their relations go beyond oil, though oil is the backbone. The list of Dutch companies in Nigeria is long. From Heineken in the manufacturing sector to APM Terminal, one of the largest port and terminal operators in the world, it is therefore not surprising that Netherlands remains the most important trading partner of Nigeria in the Euro zone. It is on record that from 2003, trade volume between the two counties has witnessed steady growth. The steady growth is understandable; Nigeria-Netherlands Chambers of Commerce is one of the oldest in Nigeria. The Chamber encourages and facilitates bilateral trade between the two countries. It has also been working closely with the Embassy of Nigeria in The Hague to woo Dutch investors to Nigeria. Trade between the Netherlands and Nigeria was N80.9 billion in the second quarter of 2015. The Dutch government is however looking beyond oil in its relations with Nigeria as it is working hard not only to grow Nigeria’s businesses but also to encourage its agricultural sector. Netherlands is reputed as one of the largest exporter of agricultural products in the world. The Dutch Growth Fund is one of the strategies Netherlands is using to stimulate Nigerian economy. It is open for Nigerian businessmen and women to access. Michel Deelen, a top official of the Netherlands Embassy in Nigeria in one of his interviews with Nigerian Media said Netherlands is focusing on Agriculture, infrastructure and water-related cooperation with Nigeria . As the price of crude oil continues to slide in the International market and Nigerian government looks for alternative to oil, experts have suggested that the most populous country in Africa should seek the Dutch intervention in warehousing, logistics and transportation of agricultural produce that often rot away in farms across the country due to lack of storage facilities and food processing companies. They also advised Nigeria to work closely with the Dutch reputed for their efficiency in water technology so that the water resources of the country could be fully utilized for agricultural purposes. However, Netherlands has to do more in its economic relations with Nigeria because China has literally taken over Nigeria’s economy and turned the country into a dumping ground for its products because of ineffective government regulations on things that could be imported into the country. Economists have warned Nigeria to be wary of all manners of goods coming into the country from China, Netherlands, United Kingdom and other advanced nations because unguided importation could kill industrialization. It is left to be seen whether the new government in Nigeria will take the bold initiative of turning Nigeria to a producing country from a consuming nation. If this is done, countries that have turned Nigeria to a dumping ground will probably have to look for another route. But for now, Nigeria remains a good bride of the Netherlands. Time will however tell how long the marriage will last.        

Practitioners need more than a laptop and mobile phone.   By Jan Melissen.   The debate about digital diplomacy is in full swing. There is an explosion of commentary on the implications of the digital age for diplomacy, with the views of ‘cyber-utopians’ competing with those of ‘cyber-realists’. Old-school wisdom among diplomats is that digitalization does not change the fundamental objectives of diplomacy, but offers new ways through which these can be achieved. Governments need to take a more nuanced look, taking into account the different facets of diplomatic practice. Realistically, it may take foreign ministries years to adapt to the digital age, and one of the challenges therefore lies in keeping up with the speed of digital change. Digitalization is increasingly important in determining relationships within the integral network of the ministry of foreign affairs (MFA) and its diplomatic missions. The implications will be significant for the relationship between the MFA and diplomatic posts that are taking on more prominent roles. This will increase dramatically as the implications of new technologies are better understood and exploited.   No Nescafé-school answers Technology is not as much a driver of change in international politics as has sometimes been suggested. In this connection one can for example think about debates surrounding the so-called ‘CNN-effect’ in the 1990s or, more recently, debates about the ‘Arab Spring’. A mere focus on the social media would not do justice to the complexity of the subject, even though a social media perspective on change in diplomacy has a lot to offer. Social media are visibly present in the context of diplomacy’s multiple manifestations. The Malaysian Airline MH 370 tragedy caused a stir in the social media that extended to state-to-state relations between China and Malaysia; the Ebola crisis led to a series of exchanges on social networking sites between and international organization and an NGO – the World Health Organization and Médecins sans Frontières (MSF) International; immediately after the Nepal earthquake governments used Twitter to get in touch with their citizens; but also high-level negotiations have a digital dimension. As US Secretary of State John Kerry stated, “Digital diplomacy is diplomacy: period”. The digital dimension is simply becoming part of most diplomatic activity.   Defining objectives ‘Digital diplomacy’ can best be understood as a shorthand term embracing broader changes in diplomacy that are pre-dating digitalization. The term requires a greater degree of precision than is commonly given in government circles, which reminds of vague references to ‘soft power’ by political leaders and diplomats. Foreign ministries are advised to work out what they mean by ‘digital diplomacy’. Interpreting the digital age and digital diplomacy matters, because digitalization is here to stay. There are two ways in which MFAs should not respond to the challenges of the digital age: ‘following the herd’ in proclaiming the adoption of digital diplomacy without clearly defining their objectives, or treating digital resources as another form of top-down communication. Most foreign ministries are just entering the digital age and find themselves in the first phase characterized by both skepticism and hype about ‘digital diplomacy’. Individual diplomats will find the modalities of digitalization in constant flux and they therefore need to ‘retool’ on a continuous basis.   New practices and norms Diplomats of all types will need to function in online and offline environments. Differing blends of ‘hybrid’ diplomacy are needed. Experience demonstrates the limits of digital technology in negotiating environments, evidenced by negative responses to the use of smartphones to text and tweet during negotiations. In contrast, as can be seen in the history of the UK Prevention of Sexual Violence Initiative, human rights diplomacy is bound up with extensive use of digital resources. Individual diplomats will have to reconcile conflicting demands for online communication and physical presence. In some areas citizens will expect both, like in the field of consular assistance: they want digital tools, a human face – and immediate help. Recent practices in public diplomacy can help show patterns of change. The resources provided by big data and social media networks greatly enhance the strategies available here. Foreign ministries also need to be aware of the fact that digitalization will put fundamental norms and rules of diplomacy to the test. Age-old diplomatic norms have been challenged by the actions of diplomats on the ground, who experience that their ‘duty to interfere’ is competing with the principle of non-interference.   Changing DNA External MFA partners are increasingly important for policy success in a more and more hybrid international environment with emerging non-governmental actors and new types of transnational policy milieus. Traditional diplomatic culture and hierarchical organizational structures clash with the imperatives of speed and ‘horizontalization’. Those who do not understand the importance of networking as the basis of diplomatic practice will not get very far in understanding diplomacy in the digital age. No area of diplomacy will become redundant as a result of digitalization. Diplomatic functions will be re-defined to meet changing needs. The obvious example here is that of diplomatic reporting. Gathering information may be easier for foreign ministries: processing and analyzing it will be much more complex. Ironically, the enhanced information through social media platforms and big data gives added importance to the diplomatic functions of information analysis and policy prediction.   Networked diplomacy Governments have no choice but to develop digital strategies if they are to survive. Digitalization further erodes the claim that the MFA is a gatekeeper with privileged access to crucial bodies of information. It will enhance the need for MFAs to redefine their roles and to develop narratives to explain to their stakeholders and to themselves what they are for. Networking is the basis of contemporary diplomacy, calling for the development and effective use of ‘nodality’ tools. This is one of the critical areas of digitalization in the diplomatic field. For MFAs it is of central importance to perform as a significant node in information networks. They need to position themselves in the broader context of the national diplomatic system (NDS) – that is the totality of departments and agencies involved in the shaping and implementation of international policy. This concept of the NDS can be applied across political systems, in Washington and Berlin as much as in Beijing.   Jan Melissen: Jan Melissen is a Senior Research Fellow at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’, The Hague, and Professor of Diplomacy at the University of Antwerp, Belgium. He is founding Co-Editor of The Hague Journal of Diplomacy. His latest book is Understanding Public Diplomacy in East Asia: Middle Powers in a Troubled Region (Palgrave Macmillan, 2015). This short article summarizes some of the main findings a Clingendael Report by Brian Hocking and Jan Melissen, Diplomacy in the Digital Age (2015): http://www.clingendael.nl/publication/diplomacy-digital-age-0 @JanMDiplo  

By Marc Petermann, BA: International Relations. Images of refugees seeking shelter in European nations has in recent weeks seared into our minds and has produced vastly different policies/perceptions within the population as well as different responses of governments from several European nations. In some countries refugees from all parts of the world (Syria, Afghanistan as most prominent example) were warmly welcomed, as at Munich main railway station teddy bears were given to Syrian children, whereas, Hungary locks its borders and uses tear gas against refugees. The different responses within Europe to the crisis couldn’t have been starker. What does this symbolise and what can we learn from these unprecedented contrasts? Arguably many aspects can be learned from the current crisis, however, one aspect is increasingly that the European Union is currently not as united and proactive as itself envisages and is expected to be. The European Union was able to withstand many challenges and crisis throughout its era, be it the European Debt crisis for instance, in which despite the different attitudes among the member states, a consensus could arguably be quickly achieved. This time, however, consensus among the member states is far-off. A quota of distributing refugees into the respective European member states is rejected by many countries as well as the mere idea of some nations refusing to accommodate any refugees at all. A divided Europe, resembling the old times of the Iron Curtain, appears to be closer to Europe. Eurosceptic Parties such as the ‘Alternative for Germany’ or the Hungarian nationalist party ‘Jobbik’ party are increasingly gaining popularity amongst others because of the refugee crisis, and parties such as the ‘Danish People’s Party’ have even emerged as second most popular in this year’s election in June. Therefore, it becomes clear that nations, such as Germany or Denmark that are in general terms willing to accommodate asylum seekers, experience a growing degree of xenophobia and euro scepticism that cannot be denied. Therefore, this problem of xenophobia and euroscpeticism is not merely confined to Eastern European nations, as it has been often portrayed in recent weeks within the media. Therefore, in the light of an issue that affects all European nations, how could be best responded to the current crisis? Many refugees (Syrian refugees as one example) were escaping the atrocities of rape or death that the ‘Islamic State’ currently commits in Syria, however, the burning of hostels for asylum seekers in parts of Germany, as well as demonstrations against the accommodation of asylum seekers in Warsaw emphasises that in some regions/ countries the fear of death and lacking sense of support (police-wise, society-wise) is as present as it is in the countries many refugees were originally fleeing from. The UN Charter Article 73, clearly states that members of the UN need to protect people suffering against abuses, but does it really make sense to accommodate refugees in countries which cannot guarantee this clause in the UN charter? Therefore, as outlined in this short article xenophobia and the refusal of welcoming refugees is not confined to some European nations. In fact, it is a characteristic that encompasses all European nations, thus, bluntly speaking with regards to this aspect, the continent is united. Therefore, the main question needs to be centred upon how this growing xenophobia and refusal of welcoming refugees needs to be encountered? There are countless lessons that can be learned from the current refugee crisis, however, in order to maintain focus on this article, I will not list all reasons. Yet, one lesson that needs to be learned is that in the light of this growing number of refugees seeking asylum in Europe, xenophobia and increasing racism is a widespread European problem and, therefore, needs to be resolved European wide.    

In an increasingly global world, family’s frequently travel and live in multiple locations, learning the language and culture of each of the countries as they move. At American School of The Hague (ASH), approximately a third of the student and parent population rotate out every school year due to new job postings. Parents, staff and students work closely together to lessen the effects of cross-cultural relocation for everyone in the community, creating a safe and secure environment for these important transitions.   Transitioning to new culture, jobs, countries and schools can impact the entire family and often leads children to questioning their true nationality; is it where they live, where they came from or where they are headed to? “Home” for what is now termed a Third Culture Kid, is a hard place to find. A Third Culture Kid (TCK) is defined as “someone who, as a child, has spent a significant period of time in one or more cultures other than his or her own, thus integrating elements of those cultures and their own birth culture, into a third culture”. At ASH, a family can stay for as little as three to five years – making for a very quick transition into both the ASH Community and local Dutch culture. To help eliminate uncertainty and disorientation that can be felt when transitioning, as well as dealing with the emotions experienced through the loss of loved ones left behind, the long-standing approach to supporting families and staff through their transitions, is the essence and backbone of A Safe Harbour, the well-renowned transitions program at ASH. A Safe Harbour is a concept or a philosophy more than an organization – a collaborative effort of staff, student and parent welcomers who work hand in hand to help each member of the schools’ community with all aspects of arriving, orientating, integrating and departing to meet its mission “to help students, parents, and staff cope with the challenges, and maximize the opportunities, inherent in the experience of international relocation and cross-cultural mobility”. In addition to A Safe Harbour, special events held throughout the year continue to help embrace the cultures, like International Day, which encompasses the entire student body, celebrating their cultural backgrounds. With more than 77 nationalities learning and working together at the School, helping ASH community members be a part of the global community and finding a balance with growing up multi-culturally, is just part of daily life at ASH. This past school year, interactive workshops were held which focused on Families in Transition – Raising Global Nomads Whilst Balancing a Sense of Sanity & Self-Development on the Move, and X-Cultural Lunch Bunch – Foraging for New Foods & Networking for New Ideas, which are just a few of the opportunities for new parents to expand their social network within the school and feel more at home in The Netherlands. It is the joint efforts of our parents; staff and students that make the ASH community flourish, creating the ongoing support for our families transitioning with their continued stay.   ———————————————————————————————–