ICCā€™s jurisdiction over Egypt

0
A communication seeking to accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ā€œICCā€ or the ā€œCourtā€)Ā  over Egypt has been dismissed as not presented on behalf of the concerned State. On 13 December 2013, lawyers acting on behalf of, amongst others, the Freedom and Justice Party (the ā€œPetitionersā€) lodged a communication with the ICC Registrar seeking to accept the exercise of the ICCā€™s jurisdiction pursuant to article 12(3) of the Rome Statute with respect to alleged crimes committed on the territory of the State of Egypt since 1 June 2013. Upon receiving the communication, as per the established internal procedures, the Registry verified with the Egyptian authorities whether or not such a communication was transmitted on behalf of the State of Egypt, as a result of which, the Registrar did not receive a positive confirmation. The Registrar further transmitted the communication in reference to the ICC Prosecutor and consulted with her on this matter. After a careful assessment, the Registrar informed the Petitioners that the communication received cannot be treated as a declaration accepting the exercise of the ICCā€™s jurisdiction pursuant to article 12(3) of the Rome Statute given that they lacked the requisite authority under international law to act on behalf of the State of Egypt for the purpose of the Rome Statute. This assessment should in no way be construed as a determination on the nature of any alleged crime committed in Egypt or on the merits of any evidence presented. In accordance with the Rome Statute, the Courtā€™s subject matter jurisdiction extends to war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed on the territory of a State Party, or by a national of a State Party.Ā  The State of Egypt is not a State Party to the Rome Statute.Ā  The Courtā€™s jurisdiction with respect to non-States Parties can be triggered if the relevant State voluntarily accepts the jurisdiction of the ICC by lodging a declaration pursuant to article 12(3) of the Rome Statute, or if the United Nations Security Council refers a situation to the ICC Prosecutor. To date, none of these preconditions have been met with respect to the State of Egypt, and therefore, the Court has no jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed in the territory of Egypt.

What Iran Really Wants

Ā By Mohammad Javad Zarif,Ā Minister of Foreign affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Special contribution for Diplomat Magazine in the Netherlands.

Iranian Foreign Policy in the Rouhani Era.

Foreign policy is a critical component in the lives, conduct, and governance of all nation-states. But it has become even more significant in recent years as interstate relations have grown ever more complex. The inexorable rise in the number of international playersā€”including multilateral organizations, non-state actors, and even individualsā€”has further complicated policymaking. Mean- while, the ongoing process of globalizationā€”however conceived and defined, whether lauded or despisedā€”has brought its inescapable weight to bear on the foreign policies of all states, whether large or small, developed or developing. Since its establishment by a popular revolution in 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran has grappled with these challenges. The post-revolutionary foreign policy of Iran has been based on a number of cherished ideals and objectives embedded in the countryā€™s constitution. These include the preservation of Iranā€™s independence, territorial integrity, and national security and the achievement of long-term, sustainable national development. Beyond its borders, Iran seeks to enhance its regional and global stature; to promote its ideals, including Islamic democracy; to expand its bilateral and multilateral relations, particularly with neighboring Muslim-majority countries and nonaligned states; to reduce tensions and manage disagreements with other states; to foster peace and security at both the regional and the international levels through positive engagement; and to promote international understanding through dialogue and cultural interaction. IRAN IN THE MULTILATERAL ERA Since the end of the Cold War and the demise of the bipolar world in the early 1990s, the global order has undergone a major structural transformation. But a firm new order has not yet emerged. As was the case during other transitions in the past, the fluid, complex, and un- certain state of international affairs today is extremely perilous and challenging. Previous transitions were usually complicated by military rivalries and even outright war among the dominant powers of the time. Todayā€™s rivalries are similarly quite intense. However, due to a number of factorsā€”the substantially changed global environment, changes in the nature of power, and the diversity and multiplicity of state and non-state actorsā€”competition these days mostly takes a non- military form. The concept of power itself, traditionally measured in terms of military might, has changed substantially. New forms of influenceā€” economic, technological, and culturalā€”have emerged. Concurrently, changes at the conceptual level have brought the cultural, normative, and ideational components of power to the fore, making power more accessible to a larger pool of actors. Moreover, the gradual rise of multilateralism in the wake of World War II has elevated the importance of international norms and consensus. Despite such substantial changes in the architecture of the world order, remnants and beneficiaries of the old order have tried to salvage the wreckage of the past. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, the emergence in the United States of apocalyptic theories declaring ā€œthe end of historyā€ or a ā€œclash of civilizationsā€ represented a hasty reaction to the enemy vacuum created by the end of Cold War and to the rising status of Muslims on the global stage. Through a series of subsequent Islam phobic campaignsā€”sometimes promoted as official state policy and perpetuated systematically in various forms and guisesā€”some in the West tried to depict the Islamic community as a new ideological enemy on a global scale. But rather than experiencing a divergence, the world is now moving toward a state of mutual interdependence. Contrary to the situation in the past, the pursuit of go-it-alone policies by former hegemony or current powers has led to a state of impasse and paralysis. Today, most nation-states, regardless of their size, power, influence, or other attributes, have come to realize that isolationism, whether voluntary or imposed, is neither a virtue nor an advantage. Collective action and Cooperation have become the hallmarks of the era. Multilateralism, the collective search for common solutions to common problems, has proved its desirability and practical efficacy at both the regional and the global levels. Even major world powers have learned the hard way that they can no longer pursue their interests or achieve their particular goals unilaterally. The gradual yet growing trend of coalition-making, at the regional and global levels, both for short- term purposes and for more enduring enterprises, bears witness to the inescapability of collective action. Willful cooperation has gradually developed as a new working pattern of interaction among states; it has come to replace the once predominant and now discredited pattern of confrontation, unconditional subservience, and perpetual rivalry. As an inevitable consequence of globalization and the ensuing rise of collective action and cooperative approaches, the idea of seeking or imposing zero-sum games has lost its luster. Still, some actors cling to their old habits and habitually pursue their own interests at the expense of others. The insistence of some major powers on playing zero- sum games with win-lose outcomes has usually led to lose-lose outcomes for all the players involved. The much-challenged position of the United States in the world today, notwithstanding its preponderance of military power, is a glaring case in point. The actual situation in various parts of the world where the United States is directly involved, most notably in the greater Middle East and in Iranā€™s immediate neighborhood, points to Washingtonā€™s reluctant but unmistakable turn to the path of coalition building with other global powers and even regional actors. China, India, and Russia are engaged in intense competition, primarily with the Western bloc, in a concerted effort to secure more prominent global roles. However, major powers and emerging powers alike are now loath to use military means to resolve rivalries, differences, or even disputes. This has led to the gradual rise of a revisionist approach to foreign policy. Nation-states, regardless of their current position and power, now seek to enhance their stature and achieve their goals through a carefully balanced combination of cooperation and competition. The deadly rivalries of the past, a function of brute force and hard power, have gradually given way to cultural, normative, and ideational forms of competition. The uncertainty produced by the current transition in global norms and behavior also has a downside. If states miscalculate their own power or misperceive the capabilities and intentions of others, it could prove extremely costly to all involved. The intrinsic riskiness of this state of affairs calls for governments to rely on more objective analysis and to make careful assessments of their own positions and capabilities as well as of the intentions and possible conduct of others. All states can take advantage of this transitional stage to advance their positions and further their interests. Governments must make realistic calculations about their own relative advantages and vulnerabilities and, most important, articulate clear sets of objectives and plans. Over the past few decades, especially since the end of the Cold War, states that have pursued clearly articulated foreign policies have been the most successful in advancing their regional and global positions; those that have lacked an understanding of the global environment and pursued policies based on miscalculations and misjudgments have either lost their previous positions or become marginalized. FULFILLING IRANā€™S POTENTIAL As a solid regional power in this era of intense transition in global politics, Iran stands in a unique position. Given its large landmass and unique geographic position along the eastā€“west transit route, Iran, since antiquity, has enjoyed a preeminent position in its region and beyond. Although Iranā€™s civilization and cultural heritage have remained intact, its political and economic fortunes have fluctuated periodically, depending on, among other things, its governance at home and its relations with the outside world. The victory of the 1979 revolution, a popular, nationwide, antimonarchical uprising with a mixture of republican and Islamic traits, contributed to the establishment of a new revolutionary order in the country. The repercussions were drastic, and the revolution deeply affected the countryā€™s foreign relations, not only in its immediate neighborhood but also throughout the greater Middle East and in the rest of the world. Any objective analysis of Iranā€™s unique attributes within the larger context of its tumultuous region would reveal the countryā€™s significant potential for a prominent regional and global role. The Islamic Re-public can actively contribute to the restoration of regional peace, security, and stability and play a catalytic role during this current transitional stage in international relations. In light of the increasing importance of normative and ideational factors in global politics, the Islamic Republic is well suited to draw on the rich millennial heritage of Iranian society and culture and the significant heritage of the Islamic Revolution, particularly its indigenously derived and sustained participatory model of governance. Iran can use such strengths to help realize the deeply cherished national aspirations of the Iranian people, including the achievement of long-term development and regional ascendance commensurate with the countryā€™s inherent capacities and stature. Iran also benefits from a number of historical characteristics that could be considered unique sources of opportunity, many of which have not been properly or fully leveraged in the past. For example, Iran has remained independent from outside powers and practiced genuine nonalignment, lending it a particular freedom of action within the existing global order. Iran can also leverage its political traditions. It has successfully established an indigenous democratic model of governance, developing and maintaining a rare religious democracy in the modern world. It has an unmatched cultural identity emanating from its dynamic blend of Iranian and Islamic culture, which it can use to promote its mission and message throughout the entire Islamic world. As an ancient society with a plurality of ethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities, Iran also offers a model for political inclusion. And the country has achieved all of this at the center of a vital geostrategic region that has witnessed a long history of major- power rivalries, interventions of all sorts, and protracted military conflicts. Finally, Iran has also demonstrated its potent ideational capabilities and universal reach through such initiatives as President Muhammad Khatamiā€™s ā€œDialogue Among Civilizationsā€ and President Hassan Rouhaniā€™s recent proposal for a ā€œworld against violence and extremism,ā€ which was adopted as a resolution by the UN General Assembly last December. Governance in the modern world is challenging for every state, regardless of its size, demographics, form of government, geographic position, level of development, or relations with the world. Iran has been an organized state since antiquity, albeit with some periods of interruption. It has thus had extensive relations throughout history, in war and in peace, with its numerous neighbors and with other con- tending powers. It has accumulated a rich, layered collective memory and a deep reservoir of experiences. Iran borders seven countries and shares access to either the Caspian Sea or the Persian Gulf with 11 countries; both bodies of water are of interest to the littoral states as well as to a host of outside powers. Thus, Iran inevitably has a full plate to deal with when it comes to its national security and foreign relations. Iran also finds itself in a fundamentally crisis-ridden region. The decades- long occupation of Palestine and the ongoing conflict there has taken a destructive toll on the well-being and development of the entire Middle East. The chronic turmoil, instability, and violence in the region have grown worse in recent years due to a series of protracted external military interventions, most notably in Afghanistan and Iraq. Since early 2011, political upheavals in the Arab world and their generally bloody aftermathsā€”dubbed by some during their initial stages as ā€œthe Arab Springā€ and by others as ā€œthe Islamic Awakeningā€ā€”have introduced another destabilizing factor to the region. The trend appears likely to continue for quite some time, even though the direction of the process remains extremely uncertain. Given this overall regional picture and the dynamics at work be- tween local and external playersā€”most prominently the United Statesā€”Iran today has to grapple with a number of major challenges in its external relations. Needless to say, the long shadow of the decades-old and still ongoing tussle between Iran and the United States, which has been much exacerbated as a result of the nuclear imbroglio, has further complicated the state of relations between Iran and a host of its neighbors. Meanwhile, there has been a recent surge in the activities of extremist and violent non-state actors in countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria, with a clear and unmistakable anti-Iran, anti-Shiite platform. A well-orchestrated campaign has promoted Islam phobia,Ā  Iran phobia, and Shiite-phobia and depicted Iran as a threat to regional peace and security; extended support to anti-Iran claimants in the region; tarnished Iranā€™s global image and undermined its stature; armed Iranā€™s regional rivals; actively sup- ported anti-Iran forces, including the Taliban and other extremist groups; and fomented disagreements between Iran and its neighbors. MODERATION AND HOPE It was within this international context that Rouhani won a decisive victory in the heavily contested Iranian presidential election in June 2013. He won 51 percent of all the votes cast in the first round against five conservative rivals. His political platform of prudent moderation and hope represented a significant turning point in Iranian politics. The fact that voter turnout reached 73 percent suggests that the public had moved past the lingering divisions of the June 2009 election. Rouhaniā€™s pragmatic positions on foreign and domestic issues proved reassuring to the Iranian electorate. Rouhani distinguished his campaign from the murky platforms of his rivals in several key respects: his clear analysis of Iranā€™s current situation, his lucid and un- ambiguous articulation of the major challenges facing society and the state, and his honest and straightforward approach to problems and possible solutions. In this way, Rouhani managed to mobilize the dis- enchanted segments of the population to take an active interest in the final days of the campaign and to participate in the national vote. Rouhaniā€™s foreign policy platform was based on a principled, sober, and wise critique of the conduct of foreign relations during the pre- ceding eight years under the previous administration. RouhaniĀ  promised to remedy the unacceptable state of affairs through a major overhaul of the countryā€™s foreign policy. The changes he proposed demonstrated a realistic understanding of the contemporary international order, the current external challenges facing the Islamic Republic, and what it will take to restore Iranā€™s relations with the world to a state of normalcy. Rouhani also called for a discourse of ā€œprudent moderation.ā€ This vision aims to move Iran away from confrontation and toward dialogue, constructive interaction, and understanding, all with an eye to safeguarding national security, elevating the stature of Iran, and achieving long-term comprehensive development. Prudent moderation is an approach based on realism, self-confidence, realistic idealism, and constructive engagement. Realism re- quires an understanding of the nature, structure, mechanisms, and power dynamics of the international system and of the potential and limits of its institutions.Ā  Rouhaniā€™s moderation brings together a profound conviction in the cherished ideals of the Islamic Revolution with an objective evaluation of Iranā€™s actual capacities, capabilities, and constraints. It demands a deliberate aversion to actions that are insulting, condescending, or self-aggrandizing. It promotes self-confidenceĀ Ā  based on an understanding of Iranā€™s material and moral re- sources, including the collective wisdom of its citizenry. It values accountability, transparency, and honesty in dealing with the populaceĀ Ā  and implies a willingness to reform and improve existing policies. Rouhaniā€™s approach entails a delicate balancing act: between national, regional, and global needs, on the one hand, and the available means, instruments, and policies, on the other; between persistence and flexibility in foreign policy; between goals and means; and among various instruments of power in a dynamically changing world. Finally, Rouhaniā€™s commitment to constructive engagement requires dialogue and interaction with other nations on an equal footing, with mutual respect, and in the service of shared interests. It requires that all participants make serious efforts to reduce tensions, build confidence, and achieve dĆ©tente. A WAY FORWARD Guided by this conceptual framework, the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic under the current administration will be based on achieving understanding and consensus at the national level and constructive engagement and effective cooperation with the outside world. Iranā€™s policies will be guided by the principles of dignity, rationality, and prudence. This overall strategy aims to safeguard and strengthen Iranā€™s national security, diffuse or eliminate external threats, combat Islam phobia and Iran phobia, elevate the countryā€™s stature, and achieve comprehensive development. With the Ministry of Foreign Affairs serving as the central organ for planning and executing Iranā€™s foreign policy, in close coordination with other government bodies, the Islamic Republic will pursue several key goals moving forward. First, Iran will expand and deepen its bilateral and multilateral relations through meaningful engagement with a wide range of states and organizations, including international economic institutions. Multilateralism will play a central role in Iranā€™s external relations. That will involve active contributions to global norm-setting and assertive participation in coalitions of like-minded states to promote peace and stability. A second priority will be to de- fend the individual and collective rights of Iranian nationals every- where and to promote Iranian-Islamic culture, the Persian language, Islamic valuesĀ Ā  and Islamic democracy as a form of governance . Third, Iran will continue to support the cause of oppressed people across the world, especially in Palestine, and will continue its principled rejection of Zionist encroachments in the Muslim world. Given the pressing challenges that it faces today,Ā  Iran will also focus on a number of more urgent aims. The top priority is to diffuse and ultimately defeat the international anti-Iranian campaign, spearheaded by Israel and its American benefactors, who seek to ā€œsecuritizeā€ Iranā€”that is, to delegitimize the Islamic Republic by portraying it as a threat to the global order. The main vehicle for this campaign is the ā€œcrisisā€ over Iranā€™s peaceful nuclear programā€”a crisis that, in Iranā€™s view, is wholly manufactured and therefore reversible. That is why Rouhani wasted no time in breaking the impasse and engaging in negotiations with the so-called P5+1 (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, plus Germany) to find common ground and reach an agreement that will ensure nonproliferation, preserve Iranā€™s scientific ac- complishments , honor Iranā€™s inalienable national rights under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and end the unjust sanctions that have been imposed by outside powers. Iran has no interest in nuclear weapons and is convinced that such weapons would not enhance its security. Iran does not have the means to engage in nuclear deterrenceā€”directly or through proxiesā€”against its adversaries. Furthermore, the Iranian government believes that even a perception that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons is detrimental to the countryā€™s security and to its regional role, since attempts by Iran to gain strategic superiority in the Persian Gulf would inevitably provoke responses that would diminish Iranā€™s conventional military advantage. Therefore, the ongoing negotiations over the nuclear issue face no insurmountable barriers. The only requirements are political will and good faith for the negotiators to ā€œget to yesā€ and achieve the objective established by the Joint Plan of Action adopted in Geneva last November, which states, ā€œThe goal for these negotiations is to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iranā€™s nuclear programĀ  will be exclusively peaceful.ā€ The unexpectedly fast pace of progress in the negotiations so far augurs well for a speedy resolution of this unnecessary crisis and for the opening up of new diplomatic horizons. Iran will also endeavor to diffuse external threats by resolving out- standing issues with the rest of the world, in particular with its immediate neighbors. Confidence building and cooperation will be the cornerstones of Iranā€™s regional policy. That is why last year, Iran pro- posed the creation of a security and cooperation arrangement in the Persian Gulf area. As a responsible regional power, Iran will actively participate in combating and containing extremism and violence through bilateral, regional, and multilateral cooperation with countries in the region and beyond. Moreover, Iran will prudently manage its relations with the United States by containing existing disagreements and preventing further tensions from emerging unnecessarily, thereby gradually easing tensions. Iran will also engage with European countries and other Western states with the goal of reinvigorating and further expanding relations. This normalization process must be based on the principles of mutual respect and mutual interest, and it must address issues of legitimate concern to both sides. Iran will also expand and consolidate its amicable ties with other major powers, such as China, India, and Russia. As the chair of the Non-Aligned Movement until 2015, Iran will reach out to emerging powers of the ā€œglobal Southā€ and will try to responsibly mobilize their enormous potential for contributing to global peace and prosperity. The Iranian people, with their massive turnout in last yearā€™s presidential election and their decisive choice of assertive engagement, have provided a unique window of opportunity for the new Iranian government and for the world to chart a different and much more promising course in our bilateral and multilateral relations. The Islamic Republic of Iran is determined to vigorously honor its citizensā€™ choice, which will undoubtedly have a tremendous impact on world affairs. For this endeavor to succeed, it is imperative for other states to accept the reality of Iranā€™s prominent role in the Middle East and be- yond and to recognize and respect Iranā€™s legitimate national rights, interests, and security concerns. It is equally important for other states to scrupulously observe the sensitivities of the Iranian nation, particularly regarding its national dignity, independence, and achievements. Westerners, especially Americans, need to modify their understandings of Iran and the Middle East and develop a better grasp of the regionā€™s realities, avoiding the analytic and practical mis- takes of the past. Courage and leadership are required to seize this historic opportunity, which might not come again. The opportunity must not be lost.

A prosperous Ukraine is in everybody Ā“s interest

0
By Barend ter Haar. Eighteen think tanks, varying from the Carnegie Endowment in Washington to the Mongolian Institute for Strategic Studies, made a study of current threat perceptions in their countries. As reported in Diplomat Magazine onĀ  February 2, 2014[1] the report on the Netherlands was prepared by Clingendael. The full Dutch report (in English) and a summary in Dutch can be found on the website of Clingendael[2]. Now all the country reports have been analysed and combined in a joint report. It will be presented to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) on April 29 2014. The most surprising outcome is that in most countries domestic and transnational problems are considered to be a far larger threat than any external threat. These problems differ from country to country, but economic problems and growing gaps between rich and poor citizens are widely considered to be worrisome and almost every country mentioned serious concerns about the ability of governments to address todayĀ“s main problems. Corruption is mentioned as a major problem in inter alia Albania, Mongolia, Russia and Ukraine. Doubts about the capability of national government to cope with challenges in a coherent manner were expressed inter alia in the US and the Netherlands. The only two governments that rank external threats higher than domestic and transnational problems are Greece and Georgia because of the perceived threat from Turkey respectively Russia. However, also in Greece almost all security professionals that were interviewed expressed their concern about growing unemployment and poverty. Most of the research for the national reports was done in December 2013 and January 2014, so before the Ukrainian crisis. It is very likely that the current crisis will have changed the threats perceptions in countries bordering Russia. However, the outcome of some additional research is that in most countries even now, domestic and transnational challenges are considered to be larger threats than external threats, such as a possible Russian invasion to support Russians living abroad. What conclusions can be drawn from these seemingly contradictory trends? First of all we should admit that Europe has changed less than we might have hoped. We are still confronted with the same two schools of thought that forty years ago were so cleverly combined in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE): the traditional security school that says: ā€œthe weaker my neighbour, the better IĀ“m offā€ and the transnational cooperation school that says: ā€œthe stronger my neighbour, the better IĀ“m offā€. The current Russian government seems to belong to the traditional security school and to feel most comfortable when it is surrounded by weak neighbours. However, our project makes clear that in all OSCE countries the cooperation school is becoming more influential. According to this school a democratic and prosperous Ukraine with a competent, non corrupt government is in the best interest of both its Eastern and its Western neighbours.

Spring is in the air!

By Bonnie Klap, Editor in Chief. Make Ā no mistake about it! The Netherlands may be a relatively small country, but there is an impressive array of possibilities to explore it. Now may be the perfectĀ  time as the cold temperatures have finally made way for Ā lovely spring weather, with trees and flowers Ā in full bloom. ā€œCarpe Diem,ā€™ as the Latin saying goes, which means ā€˜seize the day,ā€™Ā  so allow me Ā to suggest two entirely different ideas for the many Diplomats and their families to explore during this beautiful Spring season. First a ā€˜must-doā€™ is of course a visit to the famous ā€œKeukenhof,ā€which incidentally celebrated its 65th birthday last March! Situated onĀ  15th-century hunting grounds, the Keukenhof is a world famous international flower exhibition, which attracts 800,000 visitors annually. Queen Juliana and her daughters Ā ā€“ then Princess Beatrix and her sisters Princess Margriet and Princess Irene -, Ā were among the first visitors in 1950. Other dignitaries to visit the Keukenhof include US- Presidents Eisenhower and Carter and Hillary Clinton, when she was First Lady.Ā  In addition to the overwhelming amount of flowers, the Ā Keukenhof also boasts a sculpture garden, Europeā€™s most beautiful orchid show and, this yearā€™s Ā highlight: a flower bulb mosaic depicting an Amsterdam canal sceneĀ  with a tulip the size of a canal house My second and entirely different idea for the Spring is to pay a visit toĀ  ā€˜SLIGROā€™ at Forepark. The Sligro, well knownĀ  to most international Diplomats, celebrates Spring Ā by inviting the international community to their ā€˜Culinary Inspiration Day,ā€™ during whichĀ  the patrons ofĀ  a number of top-restaurants will give cooking demonstrationsĀ  and workshops, in order to inspire the guests to embark Ā on an exciting culinary adventure, using a wide variety of fresh and organic products. Naturally a vast array of delicious wines can be tasted to complement the dishes prepared by these excellent chefs. With hopefully someĀ  gorgeous Spring weather in mind, Sligro also offers a large selection of top-quality meats and barbecue-supplies.Ā  You are all welcome to experience this Culinary AdventureĀ  at Ā Sligro Forepark, Linge 2, The Hague,Ā  on May 15th Ā from 14.00 ā€“ 21.00 hrs. Donā€™t miss it!

Close friends for 400 years

0
                          By HĆ„kan EmsgĆ„rd, Ambassador of Sweden to the Netherlands. 2014 is a very special year for me as Swedish Ambassador in the Netherlands. This year we are celebrating 400 years of diplomatic relations between Sweden and the Netherlands. A milestone in the relations between our countries, but also an excellent opportunity to look forward together. On April 5, 1614 a treaty on defense, trade and shipping was signed between Sweden and the Netherlands. As part of this treaty, it was decided to exchange resident ambassadors, which makes the Netherlands the first country with which Sweden exchanged ambassadors in this way. Relations between the countries have since then remained close. The extensive trade has linked our counties throughout the centuries. During the Dutch golden age in the 17th century trade with the Baltic region was a main source of wealth and prosperity for the Netherlands. Today, a large part of the Swedish foreign trade passes through the port of Rotterdam. Bilateral trade stands for close to seven billion euro per year. Sweden and the Netherlands rank among each otherā€™s 10 largest export markets. The celebrations in 2014 will focus on the excellent relationships that exist between our two countries. Rather than looking back, we are focusing on areas of mutual interest and where both countries face similar challenges –Ā  in order to shape our common future. Business between our two countries is central in this respect. For me, there are three sectors that are particularly interesting when it comes to the bilateral relations. One of these sectors is innovation and research, with particular focus on sustainability ā€“ both Sweden and the Netherlands ranking high on the Global Competitive Index. What can we do in order to maintain these positions? Secondly, a very interesting sector is the creative industries sector; film, music, fashion, design. And thirdly we focus on public sector challenges, such as healthcare, ageing populations, education, local government, labor market participation. These are all challenges our two societies share and where joint solutions are needed. To learn from each other is a key. One highlight of the celebration year took place in the beginning of April when the Swedish King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia paid an official visit to the Netherlands, accompanied by the Swedish Minister for Trade, Dr. Ewa Bjƶrling. This two-day visit was a huge success, and showed also the close relationship between the Royal Families. In addition to this, I am looking forward to a number of activities, ranging from a Swedish Month in The Hague, focus on Swedish film for a young audience at the international Cinekid festival in Amsterdam, business events in cooperation with the Brabant region and the Royal School of Technology, a digital bridge between The Netherlands and Sweden and much, much more. If you want to know more about the celebration year, please visit www.swe400nl.com    

International Criminal Law and International Legal Approaches to Terrorism

Annual Summer Law Programme on International Criminal Law and International Legal Approaches to Terrorism

By Tanya Mehra LL.M., Education Development Manager, T.M.C. Asser Instituut From 2 ā€“ 25 June 2014, the T.M.C. Asser Instituut will organise the Eighth Annual Summer Law Programme on International Criminal Law and International Legal Approaches to Terrorism. This Summer Law Program in The Hague is the product of a unique collaboration between the War Crimes Research Office of American Universityā€™sā€™ Washington College of Law and the T.M.C. Asser Instituut. During this program, participants will have the opportunity to explore some of the most critical, legal issues today in The Hague, the legal capital of the world. The course on International Criminal Law will provide a thorough understanding of ICL, from substantive crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes) to the functionings of the international tribunals (ICTY, ICTR, ICC and hybrid tribunals) to the general role of the defence and victims. The course on International Legal Approaches to Terrorism in the 21st Century will cover the salient aspects in the fight against terrorism. From different forms of terrorism (terrorism in the air, terrorism on the sea and terrorism in cyberspace) to applicable law (international humanitarian law, international human rights law) to trying terrorists both domestically and internationally. This yearā€™s speakers include, amongst others:Ā  H.E. Judge Fausto Pocar, Judge, ICTY; Mr. Guido Acquaviva, Chef de Cabinet, Office of the President, STL; Ms. Helen Duffy, International Human Rights Lawyer; Ms. Alinda Verhaeg, Head of Case Analysis Unit at Eurojust; H. E. Judge Christine van den Wyngaert, ICC; Mr. Karim Khan, QC, Barrister, Temple Garden Chambers; Prof. dr. Larissa van den Herik, Professor of Public International Law, Leiden University.Ā Ā  To complement the lectures, six afternoons will be devoted to study visits to various international courts and institutions in The Hague. Some of the confirmed study visits include: The ICC, the OPCW and the ICTY. These study visits will provide the participants with the chance to discover the structure and functioning of the various institutions and to ask their questions to working professionals on site. 40 students from US law schools will attend this summer law program. An additional 10 seats are available for interested students and young professionals from across the globe. ā€œThis has been a great month [ā€¦] I never would have had access to the sites and lectures that we have had hereā€ Participant in the 2013 Summer Programme on ā€˜International CriminalĀ  Law and International Legal Approaches to Terrorismā€™ For further information please contact: CharlotteĀ  Oā€™Reilly, Project Manager Education & Events T.M.C. Asser Instituut educationtraining@asser.nl

The End of Aid

0
By Ton Schouten, senior programme officer at IRC, an international think-and-do tank supporting water sanitation and hygiene services for life. Providing first time access to water and sanitation in developing countries is a matter of aid: fighting extreme poverty. But developing permanent services is a different ball game and it needs to be led by government. More than 30 percent of water systems in Sub-Sahara Africa are not functional. Only around 20 percent of the functioning water systems provide a basic level of service: water of WHO accepted quality, flowing 90 percent of the time and at a reasonable distance from the house. Meaning that 80 percent of the water systems in Africa provide a bad service! Over the last decades huge progress has been made in constructing water systems. But many of the shiny pumps and pipes break within two to three years. It is like on a conveyer belt: infrastructure gains are undone by losses at the end of the belt.the_wash_conveyer_belt image (1) Non-functionality and break downs of water systems show that something is very fundamentally wrong in the system that delivers water. For decades that system was driven by providing first time access. Now that system needs to provide permanent water services and it can’t. Providing first time access is a matter of aid and fighting extreme poverty; get the pumps and pipes in fast. But developing permanent services is a different ball game and it needs to be led by government. It needs to develop the systems for maintenance of water systems, for support after construction, for spare parts, for repairs and it must plan for replacement. No aid agency can do that. Government should not do that all by itself; communities and private sector are better equipped for doing the job. But government regulates it all, through policy, legislation, guidelines, subsidies to reach the ultra-poor and more. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. That government role is played in the US and in Europe. And that is how it should be. Africa should not be aid dependent for the rest of our times. No country should. And it won’t. Africa has some fast growing economies and stable democracies and some countries are not marked poor anymore but middle income. The public systems (water, health, education) need a lot of improvement, but the trend is irreversibly going in that direction. Experts say that by 2050 Africa will be the China of the world. The aid industry better be ready for that and start shifting the focus of its work from providing first time access to supporting the delivery of permanent services. Both government and aid must get their act together. Governments should stop leaning and depending on good willing aid organisations. They should show leadership and vision towards the aid industry, stimulate the private sector and be accountable towards their citizens. Aid organisations should also get their act together and stop running around in parallel projects each with their own manuals, technologies, guidelines and philosophies and cooperate with (local) government, challenge it and at the same time align with it. We in IRC help countries to gradually make that future come true. With respect for all stakeholders, but in the first place boosting government to develop the systems and take the leadership to deliver permanent services to citizens. Aid will stop one day and it should stop one day. Aid organisations should be confident that they have supported the building of water systems when it was desperately needed and can leave the country with the systems in place to provide long term access to water for all. About IRC IRC is an international think-and-do tank that works with governments, NGOs, entrepreneurs and people around the world to find long-term solutions to the global crisis in water, sanitation and hygiene services. At the heart of its mission is the aim to move from short-term interventions to sustainable water, sanitation and hygiene services. With over 45 years of experience, IRC runs projects in more than 25 countries and large-scale programmes in seven focus countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. It is supported by a team of over 100 staff across the world. For more information please visit www.ircwash.org    

Slovakia ratifies amendments

0

Slovakia ratifies amendments to the Rome Statute on the crime of aggression and on article 8 related to war crimesĀ 

The President of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, Ambassador Tiina Intelmann, observed and warmly welcomed the deposit at the United Nations on 28 April 2014 of the instruments of acceptance of the 2010 amendments to the Rome Statute, by H.E. Mr. Peter Burian, State Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs of the Slovak Republic.

The 2010 Amendments to the Rome Statute are two sets of amendments that were adopted by consensus at the first Review Conference of the Rome Statute, held in Kampala, Uganda. The first of these amendments pertains to article 8 of the Rome Statute, which characterizes the use of certain weapons during non-international armed conflict as war crimes. The second concerns the provisions for the exercise of jurisdiction of the Court over the crime of aggression. The crime of aggression was initially included in the Rome Statute in 1998 as one of the crimes under the jurisdiction of the Court, while the definition of the crime and the mechanism for the Courtā€™s exercise of jurisdiction were deferred to a Review Conference. The amendments adopted in Kampala, Uganda in 2010 define the crime of aggression and provide for the conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction over this crime. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once thirty States Parties have ratified the amendments, and subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the States Parties. “The deposit of instruments of acceptance by Slovakia brings the number of States that have ratified both amendments to fourteen. The Kampala Amendments, especially on the crime of aggression, strengthen the international legal framework that prohibits the use of force and increases the guarantees of peace and of respect for the territorial integrity of the States Parties to the Rome Statute. I hope that other States Parties from all regions will follow suit,” stated President Intelmann. Slovakia ratified the Rome Statute on 11 April 2002, making it one of the first sixty States to contribute to the entry into force of the Statute, thereby establishing the ICC. Slovakia also ratified the Agreement on Privileges and Immunities of the Court on 26 May 2004. Slovakia has also completed the process of domestic implementation of the Rome Statute through the incorporation of the crimes and general principles contained in the Rome Statute, and of the necessary provisions to ensure effective cooperation with the International Criminal Court.

Reintegration of Returning Migrants

ā€˜Opportunities and Challengesā€™: International Conference on the Reintegration of Returning Migrants Exploring the opportunities and challenges migrants face in their reintegration process when returning from the Netherlands. That was the main aim of the international conference organized by IOM in The Hague on 3 April 2014, which was part of a three day programme funded by the European Return Fund, with co-funding from the Dutch Repatriation and Departure Service. The conference was attended by more than 100 representatives from the diplomatic community, the Dutch government, the European Union, civil society, Academia, as well as by IOM missions, government representatives and NGOs from China, Egypt, Ghana, Guinea Conakry, Libya, Mongolia, Morocco, Suriname, Belgium and Switzerland. As IOM the Netherlands in 2013 assisted 50% of its returnees with in-kind reintegration support, the conference dealt specifically with the necessity for in-kind reintegration modalities, including the importance of professional pre-departure and post-arrival counselling, and the advantages related to delivering it. On 2 April IOM organized field visits for the participants from the counties of origin. During these visits potential returnees in various parts of the Netherlands received first-hand information about return and reintegration options. On the day after the Conference, 4 April, delegations of the countries of origin met with their diplomatic representations in the Netherlands and Dutch government officials for further bilateral discussions. The programme supported the need to evaluate the impact of reintegration assistance provided under Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration (AVRR) projects, as well as to strengthen the coordination among different stakeholders in the return and reintegration process. With the outcomes of the conference, IOM aims to contribute to future policies and practices that will enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of voluntary return and reintegration. The final results will be composed in an e-booklet, which will be available on the IOM website soon (www.iom-nederland.nl).  

Women as agents of change in peacebuilding processes

Matthijs van der Beek, UPEACE Centre The Hague .

Summary of the lecture by Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support, on 7 March 2014.

The kick-off of the lecture series ā€œPeace Building in Progressā€ by UPEACE Centre The Hague took place on Friday 7 March in the Academy Building of the Peace Palace. In these lectures various speakers will have the opportunity to share their views on peace and peacebuilding policies. We were honoured to welcome an important and passionate speaker, Ms. Judy Cheng-Hopkins, who works as the Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support for the United Nations. Moreover, she is a Member of the Council for the University for Peace in Costa Rica, which indicates her interest in the relevance of peace education.

Ā Her lecture dealt with the developments in peacebuilding and the many challenges that lie ahead for the United Nations (UN) and all parties involved. As stated in the short introduction by our Chairman Marius Enthoven, it is often uncertain what ā€œpeacebuildingā€ is about. It was upon Judy Cheng-Hopkins to explain to a very mixed audience, made up of policymakers, representatives from NGOs, universities and students, what the UN are aiming at in their peacebuilding missions and what problems need to be tackled before conflicting parties can realize sustainable peace. Currently, the UN undertake fifteen peacekeeping operations worldwide and one special political mission in Afghanistan. Such operations on the ground do not complete what is considered to be ā€œthe peacebuilding processā€. According to Cheng-Hopkins, peacebuilding in a UN context can best be understood as a long and difficult process from war to sustainable peace, consisting of very different stages. During conflict and wars this process already starts early with humanitarian assistance and mediation between, preferably, the conflicting parties and UN representatives. Once a ceasefire has been achieved and the UN are mandated by the Security Council to launch a peacekeeping operation, blue helmets need to avoid relapses into violence and must provide protection to civilians. At the same time they assist, along with mediators and NGOs, in many forms of peacebuilding measures, such as the implementation of peace agreements, power-sharing arrangements, strengthening the rule of law and social and economic development. Thus peacekeeping operations encompass not only the observance of ex-combatants, but also the building of institutions that are ideally capable in providing justice and socio-economic recovery. In many cases, however, reality shows different outcomes compared to the high expectations among the UN and the international community. Over a period of more than sixty years of UN peacebuilding missions, Cheng-Hopkins argued, post-conflict societies faced many problems that prevent a future of peace and harmony. Among these general problems she distinguished relapses into violence, military domination by some groups (at the expense of civil society), high levels of corruption, and no access to education for youth. States often remain fragile in this manner, since violence disrupts any further development. Why then are the peacebuilding operations so important? According to Cheng-Hopkins, the involvement of a supra-national body as the UN can play a vital role in peacebuilding by helping the conflicting parties through the above mentioned stages. Knowledge about peacebuilding has grown over the last decades, thanks to a large amount of research, peace education and practical experience. Since the international community has the capacity to assist in (post-) conflict societies, there is no good reason to stay aside. Conflicts ask our attention because instability can have major consequences across the borders if one thinks for example about terrorism, drugs trafficking and refugee streams. Although the UN peacekeeping operations can assist in state-building processes in many ways, the current strategies are also lacking. Cheng-Hopkins identifies the exclusion of women from the peacebuilding process as the greatest gap in UNā€™s policy. She argued that women are the ultimate victims of conflicts, suffering from miserable family circumstances and sexual violence by soldiers. But seeing them as victims only does neglect that women can also be ā€œagents of changeā€. In many (conflict) societies women are responsible for agriculture, raising their children and in providing most other family needs. From a grassroots level, she believes, women can fulfil all kinds of peacebuilding roles, but in order to achieve that, the peacebuilding paradigm must change. UN operations are mainly targeted on men when it comes to peacebuilding measures and are therefore inherently biased. Only over the past ten to fifteen years women issues received more and more attention among UN bodies. Promoting the role of women in peacebuilding is not easy, however, since there are several obstacles. Many societies ignore or downgrade the role of women in public life and should undergo a cultural change before these ambitious ideas by Cheng-Hopkins can be put in practice. The current peacebuilding mission in Liberia proved that such cultural change is difficult, when only safe projects are financed by the UN and the international community. Thus to educate men within conflict societies about the benefits of women participation in peace processes and to change traditional role patterns, requires a strong belief and cooperation among the UN, international organizations and business leaders who work together. Peace education that acknowledges the role of women as ā€œeveryday peacebuildersā€ can be an important tool in changing the paradigm and in opening the way to perhaps a more effective strategy of peacebuilding. www.upeace.nl