By Peter Knoope, Associate Fellow ICCT -The Hague.
Religion is an important identifier. It gives shelter and secures values. It offers belonging and personal cornerstones for moral guidance. It’s a home and a family and can constitute a major part of a person’s identity. Religion can be a powerhouse.
Off late a renewed debate is raging as to what exactly is the role of religion is in the wave of terrorism that is increasingly gaining momentum and expanding its space. In Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Tunisia, Kenya and Cameroon. I can go on to France and Denmark or to Mali and Nigeria. It does not seem to stop; and it is constantly taking us by surprise. Popping up in new and unexpected places.
Many of the attackers claim that religious texts, or interpretations of these texts, inspire them to fight and kill infidels or other opponents to their cause. So it seems simple and logic to go along with the narrative of the attackers and find the answer to the question, as to the “why”, in the religion. And a relevant number of my fellow counter terrorism experts do. The religion offers the inspiration and the collective, it offers the words of the “all mighty” and the terrorists find justification for their violent actions in their interpretation of those words.
But then again the fast majority of those who identify with the same religion claim that it is all wrong. The correct interpretation of the religion is non-violent and peaceful. And based on the facts, that claim seems correct. Most religious people are pleasant non-violent individuals. So it’s not the religion that is the issue, but the weird thinking of some.
And then there are those that have studied and analysed the texts, referenced by DAESH (formerly known as ISIS) and AQ, and come to the obvious conclusion that; yes, it’s all there! There is no escape the religion offers the ingredients necessary to justify the struggle and the killing. From there those analysts subsequently conclude that it is obvious: terrorism is the potential outcome of religion.
But is this conclusion correct?
When one takes the trouble to study the motivations of young people that feel attracted to political violence, one discovers that there is a diversity of reasons that drive people to make that choice. Lack of other, more attractive, propositions is just one off them. Grievances about injustice and societal or collective political exclusion yet another. Anger and frustration about a failing governance system is not unusual. One comes across feelings of humiliation and alienation. And not unusual also is the idea to be occupied or dominated by foreign powers. All these reasons are found. Along with pure excitement and potential of fame and a reason to live and die for. It changes with time and place.
You will notice the absence of religion in this list of motivations. So again: “what does religion have got to do with it?” The answer is rather simple. Religion offers identity and a home. It is the cover that is put on top of the driving motivations by those that recruit amongst the angry restless youngsters that seek to find a way to express anger and frustration. Those that feel excluded, humiliated or oppressed, are brought under the comforting umbrella of the religion. And interpretations do the rest to justify actions, identify and dehumanize the “other”.
The debate that is raging, whether religion is the issue or not, is the wrong discussion. Religion, and what it offers to people, is abused by the brokers of violence. That abuse is not inherent to (a specific) religion. Since religion is an identifier it can offer consolation and shelter to the homeless and the seeker. to the angry and the humiliated. And that is exactly what happens. Abuse and falsification. It works.
So for those who seek the answer to the real question, which is; how to fix the problem?, the only path to take is to look at the motivations of the restless youth and try to address the real issues and leave religion as such out of the equation.
A smile and a thought….By Eelco H. Dykstra, MD.
Introduction
Eelco Dykstra writes a column called “A smile and a thought…” The columns put a playful spotlight on the interface between the Dutch and the International Community it hosts. Yes, his musings may appear at times to be mildly provocative at first sight but they are first and foremost playful – with a little irony thrown in here and there… You be the judge!
His columns are intended to give you ‘a smile and a thought’. A smile because perhaps you hadn’t quite looked at something that way and a thought because the column may leave you wondering…
—————————————————————————————————————–
A Look Behind the Scenes… Diplomacy at work: Disaster Risk Reduction at the United Nations
Nearly 200 countries were represented in Sendai (Japan) to finalize the post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction – previously known as the Hyogo Framework. The choice to hold this meeting from March 14-19 in Sendai was not co-incidental – the consequences of the triple disaster known as “Fukushima” from March 11, 2011, are still there to see.
Despite this sense of urgency implied by location, a lot of frustration surfaced during the meeting due to political gamesmanship and manoeuvring.
Let’s take a look behind the scenes.
Worldwide, the trend is clear: disasters cause an ever-increasing number of victims and ever-growing socio-economic damages. So much so, that even the private sector nowadays considers investing in disaster risk reduction to be part of their core business. In other words, they see this no longer as a luxury but as a necessity.
Major – and not so major – corporations have aligned themselves with the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) and are putting resources such as money, knowledge, or both, in a global trust fund called “R!SE”. One example is the Rockefeller Foundation who is spending around $100 million to set up a global network of Chief Resilience Officers in cities around the world.
And here we hit the first snag.
Climate Change.
Much of the international discussions on disaster risk reduction focuses on rising sea levels, global warming and more extreme weather patterns. While some parts of the world accept the overwhelming evidence that it is high time to prepare for hitherto unseen emergencies and disasters, other parts of the world stick to a more-of-the-same, business-as-usual approach. Negotiations such as the ones in Sendai are complicated by distrust and opposing fractions and regional power blocks. Not even diplomatic principles such as the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ (CBDR) tool, is then of much help. Trying to reach an agreement when there is only an agreement to disagree is notoriously difficult…
As recent as six months ago, nobody had foreseen these difficulties as it was widely believed that everybody considered the Sendai meeting as a technical and neutral meeting on disaster risk reduction, a topic that everybody recognized as important.
A second problem with these kind of meetings consists of a combination of confusion, time pressure and loss-of-face.
Confusion…
Instead of a stand-alone meeting on a neutral and technical topic (how to arrange for public-private cooperation, funding and technology transfer for disaster risk reduction) the Sendai summit all of a sudden became a station on the route of controversial and heated international summits on climate change, i.e. Addis, New York and Paris.
Time pressure…
Because amid all the disagreement an agreement had to be reached on a framework for disaster risk reduction, a marathon of negotiations started over a period of 36 hours during which smaller groups of 20 countries ironed out the most controversial issues during sessions from 10 pm to 4 am (!).
Loss-of-Face…
The hosts, i.e. Japan, looked at the confusion on the last day of negotiations and felt that time was slipping away. To avoid loss of face, the Japanese took over the meeting but not after first besieging and berating the delegation of the USA which was seen as a major roadblock to reaching agreement.
Eventually, an agreement was reached. An agreement which was not bad at all. An agreement with which all kinds of tools for disaster risk reduction can be developed and implemented.
But the conclusion after Sendai was also this: “This process is a disaster…”
In line with the name of my column “A smile and a thought…”, I’d like to make the following suggestions to diplomats and the diplomatic community involved in preparing next summits:
Do not merely share the final product of these summits with the world but tell them how the agreement was reached, where the pitfalls were and how the problems were overcome.
Tell the world about the many hours, the many stressful moments and the advanced skill levels that are needed to reach an agreements amid disagreement.
Consider hiring completely independent chairs for these meetings, international people who are very experienced as crisis managers.
Do involve the host-nation as soon as possible in co-determining what the desired impact of the meeting will be. With these suggestions, the world will never wonder what the fuss was all about and will never consider these summits as mini-holidays for well-paid diplomats. Never.Trust.Reality rules. Respect. And the benefits for the diplomatic community?
By Jhr. Mr. Alexander W. Beelaerts van Blokland, Justice (Judge) in the (Dutch) Court of Appeal and honorary Special Advisor International Affairs of the City of The Hague.
The City of The Hague hosts hundreds of international organizations. Big ones as well as smaller or even very small ones. Most of them are active in the fields of peace and justice, but not all of them. Several are at least in some way related to peace and justice. In this year 2015 a new one will come: the International Commission for Missing Persons (ICMP) with about 180 employees will move in the next three years from Sarajevo in Bosnia Herzegovina in the former Yugoslavia to The Hague.
ICMP has been an initiative of former President Bill Clinton of the USA, launched by him at the G7 Summit in Lyon, France, in 1996. In the Yugoslavia War (1991-1995) about 40.000 people were missing. But the problems are much bigger. No one knows exactly of course, but people think that all together many, perhaps even hundreds of millions of people are missing all over the world. Not only in war zones but also as a result of violations of human rights, disasters, kidnapping and organised crimes. Only in the Iraq of Saddam Hussein 250.000 to one million persons were missing.
ICMP is active in about forty countries with a huge number of missing people. The headquarters of the organization will move to The Hague because of the many related international organizations that are established there and more in particular because of NFI, the Dutch Forensic Institute, an organization world wide well known because of its outstanding record in the field of forensic work. That of course is most important when dead bodies are found and have to be identified, as well as to find things that can be related to the murderers, who will have to be brought to justice.
The Hague is proud that ICMP has chosen us. We will welcome ICMP Director General Kathryne Bomberger and her staff and employees with open arms and wish ICMP a very good future and the people who work there a very nice period in The Hague.
a.beelaerts@planet.nl
By Jan Dop.
There have been major changes to employment law in the Netherlands in 2015, and even more changes are yet to come. These changes include strengthening of the legal position of flex workers, and reforming dismissal law. Some of the changes will have serious consequences for the locally hired personnel of Embassies, Consulates and Diplomats. We will discuss these amendments in a series of articles in Diplomat Magazine. Previous articles dealt with fixed-term employment contracts, the tightening of the regulation regarding successive fixed-term contracts, the outlines of the new dismissal law and the new mandatory dismissal procedures. This article – the last in this series – will deal with the compensation after dismissal.
Transition compensation
In the event the employment contract has lasted at least for two years, the employer, in contrast to the current situation, must pay a so called transition compensation to the employee in the event of a dismissal on the employer’s initiative (by giving notice, setting aside of the contract by the subdistrict court and even if the contract ends by operation of law), unless one of the exceptions mentioned under ‘No or lower compensation’ will apply. This new rule applies to both fixed-term and indefinite employment contracts and also to employment contracts for an indefinite period. If the employee terminates the employment contract as a consequence of imputable acts or omissions of the employer, the employer must also pay a transition compensation.
Calculation of transition compensation
The amount of the transition compensation depends on the length of employment (1/3 of the monthly salary per year of service over the first ten years of service and ½ of a month’s salary over the subsequent years). The transition compensation is subject to a maximum of EUR 75,000 or one year’s salary if that is higher. By or pursuant to order in council it can be determined that the costs incurred for finding another job (for instance, training costs or outplacement) can be deducted from the transition compensation.
No or lower transition compensation
The employer does not have to pay a transition compensation if the employment contract expires when the pensionable age has been reached (or ends before the age of 18 years). No transition compensation or a lower transition compensation is due in the event the employment contract comes to an end as a consequence of imputable acts or omissions of the employee.
Exception for older employees
Up until 1 January 2020, there will be transitional arrangements for older employees entitling them to higher transition compensation. Employees 50 years or older with an employment contract of 10 years or longer with the same (or successive) employer, are entitled to one month’s salary per year of service over the period following their 50th birthday (the maximum of EUR 75,000 will remain effective though). These transitional arrangements do not apply to employers with less than 25 employees.
Fair compensation
If the dismissal is due to imputable acts or omissions of the employer, the court can award the employee a fair compensation in addition to the transition compensation. The subdistrict court is free to determine the amount of fair compensation that has to be paid.
Jan Dop, LL.M. is partner and Head of the Embassy Desk at Russell Advocaten (embassydesk@russell.nl). More information about the expertise at Russell Advocaten for Embassies, Consulates and Diplomats can be found at: www.russell.nl.
By Augie K Fabela II, Co-Founder & Chairman Emeritus, VimpelCom, Ltd.The mobile future is truly a global future. In many ways, it is eliminating barriers, transcending borders, and enabling a quantity and diversity of connections unimaginable until very recently.
The change in the nature of these connections is worth mentioning specifically—as it is the catalyst of the transformation towards this “mobile future” from the “mobile present.” With voice giving way to data, we continue to connect people with each other.
Increasingly, we are connecting people with information, ideas, and larger communities.
Importantly, as the heart of the emerging digital world, mobile is becoming the means by which people conduct every facet of their lives—their work, their social lives, and their economic activities. Mobile is also becoming the hub of an interconnected web—consisting of customers, devices, data, behaviors, social networks and processes, which depend on the systems and infrastructures that form the backbone of our operations.
One thing we see as giving us an advantage in shaping this digital future for our 220 million customers, in 14 countries across Africa, Asia, and Europe is the fact that we are headquartered here in the Netherlands, in Amsterdam.
Aside from giving us an environment which helps us attract top talent from all over the world, our base in the Netherlands also connects us to an innovative community of entrepreneurs, professionals and thinkers who are looking at the mobile future and developing ideas and solutions that are focused on the kinds of markets where we work.
The Netherlands is an important player in building mobile approaches to social challenges as well as commercial opportunities. With our home in the Netherlands, we are proud to be part of this effort to shape the mobile future, for our customers, and to all they connect with.
By Joe Ray.From 13th to 19th July 2015, some 200 university students from around the world will gather in The Hague for the annual conference of The European International Model United Nations. Now in its 28th year, TEIMUN is the oldest model United Nations in mainland Europe and serves as an inclusive forum within which the diplomats and leaders of the future can exchange ideas and discuss solutions to pressing global issues.Student delegates from more than 50 countries will be welcomed to Hotel Bel Air for the opening ceremony. This grand event will feature speeches from Mr. Jozias van Aartesen, Mayor of The Hague; Mr. Herman Schaper, former Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the UN; Mr. Jamie Shea, Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Emerging Security Challenges at NATO; and Mr. Erik Akerboom, Secretary-General at the Netherlands Ministry of Defence. TEIMUN 2015 will also draw upon the distinguished support of Mr. Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General; Mr. Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation; and Mr. Bert Koenders, Foreign Minister of the Netherlands, each of whom will provide their own written preface for the conference programme booklet. Adding to the diplomatic grandeur of the occasion, a substantial number of ambassadors and diplomats representing many of the embassies stationed in the International City of Peace and Justice will be present at the opening ceremony to answer questions from participants and advise them on the finer aspects of diplomacy. This comprehensive introduction from some of the leading lights of contemporary international affairs will prepare delegates for a challenging but rewarding week of diplomacy and multilateral negotiations in which each individual will be tasked with representing the position of a country other than his or her own. Simulations of key international decision-making bodies, including the UN Security Council and NATO’s North Atlantic Council, will provide the framework for the week’s discussions, allowing delegates to become acquainted with the negotiating processes which characterise diplomacy in such organisations. This year’s council sessions will focus on salient issues within the field of international security, and in particular, the challenges faced by states and decision-makers in responding to shifting global security landscapes. Without significant deviation from their nation’s negotiating brief, delegates must attempt to find common ground by way of argument and compromise in order to propose solutions to the issues put before them by the chairs of each council. These debating points are designed to closely reflect the political and diplomatic hurdles encountered by decision-makers on a daily basis within the realm of international affairs. At the end of the week, participants in each council will endeavour to codify their discussions and ideas into mutually acceptable communiqués.In addition to the council sessions, visits to a variety of international organisations and institutions will take place throughout the course of the conference. Participants will have an opportunity to visit the International Court of Justice, Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons, and Red Cross, amongst others, and will further explore The Hague’s thriving international scene by way of social excursions and a networking event. Activities such as the Global Village – an evening of cultural diplomacy in which delegates can learn more about one another’s religious, social, and cultural backgrounds – are designed to foster the exchange of knowledge and ideas between attendees in order to celebrate and enhance cross-cultural understanding.On the final day, the conclusions and agreements reached in the various councils will be presented in the closing ceremony, and the outstanding delegate from each council will be honoured with an award.
Everyone benefits from coaching, suitable styles may vary.
While it’s easy to argue that everyone benefits from some form of coaching, it is a broad concept that’s hard to grasp and causes many misunderstandings. To clarify the possibilities and value of coaching in different settings, we’ll walk you through the most essential coaching styles.
By Luuk Tubbing & Joop van Schijndel.Mr. Joop van Schijndel
Of course, a coach coaches people. But what is coaching really and what is its value really? Coaching is helping people to help themselves develop personally and/or in their career. Very common objectives are improving performance, more efficient behavior, achieving goals and generally to experience more success and fun. Coaching therefore presupposes growth and variation in terms of vision, attitude and behavior. In a good coaching conversation there is learning involved! Depending on which book you read or who you talk to, different coaching styles are acknowledged. We provide you with some common examples.
Result-oriented
The coach helps the coachee to be explicitly aware of his goals, opportunities, and activities. The coach helps with practical applications and action. He acts as a motivator and helps the coachee to incrementally identify, analyze and realize his goals.
Solution focused
There is spoken about problems without immediate search for causes. Therefore, a diagnosis cannot be established. Instead, the coach helps the coachee to contrast by asking him to clarify the desired situation in concrete behavioral terms. By then seeking for what has already worked in the past, the coachee acquires practical ideas to put steps forward.
Mentor style
The coach has the role of a wise man or woman; a big brother or sister; a dyed-in-the-wool person with a lot of life experience. The coach shares his or her experiences and translates them into the situation of the coachee.
Teacher style
The coach has expert knowledge of the topic at hand (e.g. leadership, writing), on both the theory and application. Sharing knowledge and insights as well as teaching particular skills are the key to this style.
Transformational
The coach is mainly some kind of ´talking mirror´, someone who makes the coachee look at himself and comments on his behavior. The latter is done by asking opinionated and often critical questions. The aim is to cultivate awareness of the behavior of the coachee by wondering where his behavior comes from and what causes it.
Provocative
Provocative coaching is a revolutionary cocktail of humor, warmth, challenge and surprise. Suddenly the coachee shouts that he is worthwhile, that he can do it and that he will do the damn thing! This is the result of a provocative principle in action: “If you want the donkey to go forward, pull him by the tail.”
Luuk Tubbing MSc is consultant at O&i Management Consultants, and founder and coach at de afstudeerconsultant. Joop Van Schijndel MA is personal effectiveness coach at de afstudeerconsultant, management consultant, and head of the advisory board at Rhiza International.
More information about the expertise at de afstudeerconsultant can be found at: deafstudeerconsultant.nl/personal-effectiveness
By Silvia A. Fernández de Gurmendi, ICC President.
As the new President of the International Criminal Court I have been entrusted with the great responsibility of overseeing the proper administration of the Court and thereby helping to ensure fair and impartial justice in situations where atrocious crimes have occurred and there is no other recourse to justice.
The ICC hears cases regarding war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Its goal is to bring to justice those responsible for these crimes, and to help prevent such crimes from occurring again. Its mandate is clear, and the Court is determined to meet these goals. Yet it will not be easy, will not happen overnight, and most importantly, will not be possible without global cooperation and support.
As a judicial institution, the International Criminal Court is a distinct kind of international organisation, since independence from external influence is essential to its identity and achievement of its goals. Without independence, its raison d´être is compromised. The Court and the international community share the responsibility of upholding at all times the independence of the Court, which is vital for its credibility and legitimacy
At the same time, as the ICC’s first President Judge Kirsch once said, the Court is both independent and interdependent. States and organisations have a crucial role in allowing the Court to fulfil its core mandate. Non-cooperation or lack of timely cooperation significantly affects the Court’s ability to collect evidence, protect witnesses or arrest its suspects in the situations and cases that are brought before it. Likewise, without cooperation, the Court cannot provide adequate reparations to victims and ensure awareness and understanding of its work by affected communities and society at large.
In other words, without cooperation, the Court can neither be efficient nor effective. However, cooperation may not be forthcoming or may diminish if potential supporters lose confidence in the ability of the Court to deliver high quality justice. Both aspects – cooperation and performance – are interrelated.
With respect to its performance, the proceedings of the Court are perceived as too lengthy, and not as efficient or effective as they should be. This perception must be addressed, as it poses a potential risk to our ability to gain and maintain support and cooperation. This in turn would jeopardize the ability of the Court to enhance the quality of its operations. While many delays and difficulties may derive from factors beyond the Court’s control, the Court needs to identify and address the problems that are indeed within its powers to resolve.
There is, for this reason, a compelling need for the Court to undertake wide-ranging reforms to improve its operations. Important initiatives are already underway within each of the Court’s organs. The Prosecutor is implementing a new Strategic Plan adopted two years ago. The Registrar has launched a project to restructure and streamline the Registry. The Judges have embarked on a “lessons learnt” process to take stock of the Court’s judicial practice and to propose amendments to its legal texts, if needed.
The legal system of the Court is based on a combination of elements derived from different legal systems and traditions; thus, any amendments to its provisions should take into account the need to preserve its hybrid character. One fundamental aspect is the unprecedented role granted to victims of the crimes who may participate in the proceedings to express their views and concerns and seek reparations for the damage suffered.
The interpretation of this unique and innovative system has raised considerable legal and management challenges, and the various ICC chambers have given different responses to problems that were raised during the first years of the Court’s existence. Twelve years down the road, it is now urgent to assess results and seek to identify best practices and harmonize solutions. In light of our past experience, I believe that, rather than piecemeal revision of individual provisions of the legal texts, it is necessary to address the proceedings in a holistic manner, with a view to diagnosing practical problems and proposing comprehensive remedies.
As part of a court-wide effort to improve its operations, inter-organ discussions have also started to develop performance indicators that may serve to assess and improve the operations of the Court. It is important to develop a coherent, court-wide vision of how best to ensure high quality of justice at the ICC. This is not a simple task as there are inherent difficulties in evaluating the performance of a court, in particular an international criminal court.
While acknowledging these and other difficulties, we must all recognize that the challenges the Court and the international community currently face have multiplied and their nature has changed. Not too long ago, the international community wondered whether the creation of Court was at all possible and, after its inception, whether it would ever become relevant.
The Court has indeed become relevant as the concept of accountability for international crimes and the importance of a justice component in the settling of conflicts are now recognised. The role of the Court in ensuring this accountability is also increasingly recognised. The central question today is whether the Court is sustainable and whether its relevance will be maintained and continue to grow in the years ahead. As said, the sustainability of the Court will require the combined efforts both of the institution itself and of the global community since both aspects – performance and cooperation are intertwined.
As the new ICC President, my priority is to contribute to the Court’s sustainability by seeking to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of its performance. I trust that broad support and cooperation with its activities will be forthcoming. I also hope that States and organisations will deploy all necessary efforts to enhance the universality of the Court. While a significant number of States have now joined the ICC, the Court has not yet achieved universal participation, which is essential for the effective exercise of its global mandate.
Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi took office as the President of the International Criminal Court on 11 March 2015.
By Josh Giesbrecht.
With the House of Commons rising for the summer there is no doubt that the 2015 federal election is now in full swing. Many policy issues regarding the economy and national security will come to dominate this election.
However, will Aboriginal policy issues take root at all this election? This question must be asked, not because they ever really have, but because of all the major events that have taken place since the last federal election in 2011. There was Idle No More – the grassroots Aboriginal protests that took place over a seemingly mundane policy issue of the government’s omnibus bill. The First Nations Education Act that proposed significant reforms and funding was agreed too, and then rapidly stalled with opposition that resulted in the Assembly of First Nations National Chief at the time, Shawn Atleo, suddenly resigning. The Truth and Reconciliation Commissions findings were released marking the end of the historic formal process of the federal government addressing its dark past of Residential Schools. Yet, the long process of reconciliation in Canada taking place has just started and that new relationship is complicated.
This is just to mention a few significant events that have taken place since the last election. It begs the question if this election will be any different – will Aboriginal policy take a significant part of this election or will it be just background noise at best like in the past? Interestingly enough, the first time Aboriginal issues ever came onto the political scene was in the 1957 election when John Diefenbaker made a point of putting it into his election platform. As one can imagine in the late 1950s in Canada, Aboriginal policy matters were not a point of major political points in an election. Yet he made it apart of his platform and set a new political convention in Canada. This became part of the expected practice by all political parties.
Despite all of these major events, conventional wisdom of past federal elections points to there being no major role for Aboriginal policy to play in the campaign to come. Aboriginal policy in all likelihood will take the backseat for the three major parties as they vye for power. However, just as Idle No More came out of nowhere and a seemingly done deal on real Education reform quickly unravelled, conventional wisdom in both cases was proven to be wrong.
One thing is crystal clear: these are not ordinary times for Aboriginal policy in the country. It can be argued that ever since Elijah Harpers stand against the Meech Lake Accord 25 years ago, things have changed, and they have given a real voice for Aboriginals politically. In other words, the overarching conventions that have governed this country since its confederation has been overturned.
With that being said, maybe this election we will be different. Conventions in this country have been completely changed at the most unexpected times. 2015 may be the unconventional year where big changes happen in the election cycle – changes from normal topics to one that includes a fulsome discussion of Aboriginal policy in this country in real terms. One thing is for certain, if it does take place this fall, it is about time.
By Mr. Jozias van Aartsen, Mayor of The Hague.
This year it will be seventy years ago that the Second World War came to an end and The Hague was liberated by the Canadians. That war with the battle for the royal seat in May 1940 and the five years that followed, were undoubtedly the most dramatic period in the history of The Hague. A period in which more than 15,000 people living in The Hague lost their lives. Most, about 12,000 of them, Jewish residents. The war caused huge material damage too, the traces of which can still be seen today.
This article is an edited version of the speech given by Mayor Jozias van Aartsen on 1 March this year at the commemoration of the tragic bombing of the Bezuidenhout district of The Hague. The ceremony took place in the Christus Triomfatorkerk (Risen Christ Church) in the presence of British and other diplomats. Among those leading the oecumenical service was the Reverend Canon Dr David Stone of Coventry Cathedral, the church destroyed by the Luftwaffe in 1940 and which, in 1995, donated a Cross of Nails to the churches of the Bezuidenhout.
“The day before yesterday there was war
and yesterday too
and there is still war in my time
time that is not just mine”
Lines from a poem by Remco Campert, who was born and raised in The Hague. His father Jan Campert perished in the Neuengamme concentration camp. The actor, Bram van der Vlugt, who also grew up in this city, quoted this poem in a radio interview he gave a few years ago. During the programme he talked about the dramatic events experienced by his family during the Second World War. It was a distressing story which in many ways reflected the war years of The Hague. Bram van der Vlugt’s mother was Jewish and was murdered, along with her own mother and other family members. When the occupying forces cleared Scheveningen the Van der Vlugt family ended up in the Bezuidenhout. Along with many other families from Scheveningen and other areas of the city which had been cleared or even torn down. There in the Bezuidenhout, the young Bram then witnessed the terrifying bombing.
It was on 3rd March exactly seventy years ago that a large part of the beautiful Hague district of the Bezuidenhout, with its typical architecture and street patterns, was accidentally bombed by the Royal Air Force in an attempt to disable the destructive V2 rockets which the German occupying forces were firing from this area at Britain, causing death and destruction there. Owing to a compounding of errors the bombs landed instead on a densely populated residential area. More than 500 people lost their lives that day and in the days that followed. With another 400 missing, many of whom were never found. The bombing of the Bezuidenhout, together with the German air raid on Rotterdam and the allied bombing of Nijmegen – also a tragic mistake – were among the worst and most deadly air raids that the Netherlands suffered during the Second World War.
On that day 3300 homes were destroyed or severely damaged, along with 290 businesses, 64 offices, 5 churches, 15 schools and 8 hospitals. The bombing made 12,000 people homeless, many of them losing everything they had. The survivors took flight. As they did so they saw the most horrific sights, witnessing scenes of inferno. Someone recently said: “Every time I see a group of refugees on television today, I am again reminded of how I too had to flee on 3 March 1945.”
“The day before yesterday there was war
and yesterday too
and there is still war in my time
time that is not just mine”
For countless survivors the war never completely ended, however many years have passed since. The wounds inflicted on that terrible Saturday were simply too deep. The sorrow too great. On top of this, in the decades after the war little thought was given to the bombing. This was most certainly because it was an attack by our allies. Besides which, these were the years of reconstruction. Years of looking forward, not back.
More recently, however, the bombing has gained more notice rather than less, which is a good thing. Now as the group of people who experienced it first-hand is becoming smaller, the stories need to be handed down to the present generation and to future generations. And that is certainly happening. Books have been published and documentaries made in which the survivors tell their stories. There is a package for primary schools and recently an historic walk through the Bezuidenhout was organised. Photos with explanatory captions placed around the neighbourhood show just how much the appearance of the area was changed by the bombing. History can be found literally on the streets there.
You soon feel a sense of unease looking at pictures of the bombed Bezuidenhout: that was the day before yesterday, in 1945. But it is still going on today. In the cities of Syria that have been reduced to rubble, in the East Ukraine, and elsewhere in the world. It makes us realize all the more how fortunate we are to be able to live here in peace. And that we must continue to do everything in our power to banish such suffering from the world.
Or, to put it in the words of that great philosopher Baruch Spinoza, who spent his final years in The Hague, and whose fundamental ideas about peace and freedom have lost none of their power and relevance more than three centuries later. “Peace is not the absence of war, but a virtue based on strength of character.” A virtue which we in The Hague, the international city of peace and justice, will continue to strive for and promulgate.
