Diplomacy & Crisis News

Adoptée à Montego Bay en 1982, la convention des Nations unies sur le droit de la mer a, comme son nom l'indique, défini le droit international pour la mer. À ce jour, 166 États ont ratifié cette convention. Parmi les autres, on trouve les pays privés de littoral, mais aussi les États-Unis, Israël, le (...) / Chine, Philippines, Droit international, État, Géopolitique, Mer, Relations internationales, Géographie, Matières premières, Environnement, Justice internationale, Arctique, Mer de Chine, Pêche, Frontières, Organisation internationale, Accord international - 2016/06

The July 12 ruling clarified the law of the sea, but may further alienate China.

The hard work starts now.

(Own report) - In light of the escalating conflict in the South China Sea, the German Navy is, for the first time, participating in a large-scale maneuver in the Pacific Ocean. Mine clearance divers and other support personnel from the naval infantry ("marines") stationed in Eckernförde, near Kiel, will be involved in the "RIMPAC 2016" combat exercise, organized by the US Navy, over the next few days, training in various military operations in the Pacific. A total of 25,000 soldiers from 26 countries, coming from the main NATO powers and the most important US allies along the Pacific Coast of Latin America, in the South Pacific and in East and Southeast Asia will be participating. China is involved in some of the training measures, however, explicitly excluded from others. There is a question, if China will be invited to participate in subsequent RIMPAC maneuvers. At the same time, the US military is developing plans for operations, according to western military experts, against China's defensive lines, erected on islands and artificial reefs in the South China Sea. Tension has been rising since yesterday's decision by the UN's Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on a territorial dispute. The EU has begun discussing participation in naval patrols near the Chinese coast.

Beijing has fanned the flames of nationalism. Now it’s struggling to contain it.

The captive British photojournalist John Cantlie has appeared in a new Islamic State propaganda video purportedly filmed inside the extremist group’s stronghold in Mosul, and his thin, somewhat frail, appearance is already raising fears about his mental and physical health.

This is Germany’s first trial involving Islamic State war crimes.

President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has recently patched up ties with Russia and Israel. Are a couple of nationalist politicians laying the groundwork for a deal with Syria’s strongman?

West Africa's Ebola epidemic is over, but shocking new science suggests that tens of thousands of survivors could still be carriers.

Austria's supreme court ruled that a company boss's refusal to let a woman wear the full face veil at work was constitutional.

A group of senior House Democrats, including longtime Iran hawks, are refusing to support a last-minute Republican push to pass multiple Iran sanctions bills before the summer recess and dismissing the effort as naked partisan point-scoring.

‘The Triumph of democracy’ as Brexit supporters inside and outside of the UK have explained the historic results of whether the UK should remain or leave the EU. referendum. The Leave campaign has successfully mobilized anger of large parts of British society on immigration, the influence of bankers of the City, and the overreach of Brussels bureaucracy. On the other hand the case for Remain was weak in the run up to the referendum, the advantages of the EU were barely present in the debates, all the while fear mongering was dominating on both sides.

Although the pro-Brexit campaign not give any clear picture of how a UK outside the EU would look like, their point that there is life outside of the EU - bringing up Switzerland and Norway as examples – did have some truth in it. They enjoy the benefits of the single market while opting out of the political integration. Those who opposed the Brexit are quick to rebuff this line by saying that these non-member countries basically have to accommodate to EU rules – including on free movement – without having a say in the relevant decisions.

But the problem goes much deeper than that. Switzerland and Norway can have the luxury of opting out because of their size and geography. Although they are rich and well functioning democracies, their overall influence on Europe is limited. It sounds evident , but it’s worth giving it prominence: they can enjoy the benefits of the single European market because there is a single European market, with all its foundational pillars. European peace and welfare isn’t just based on trade, let alone economic cooperation, but shared institutions, procedures and norms created by painful work and compromise. And yes, on the military power and deep political engagement of the United States in Europe. If trade were only to it, then Europe would not have ran into the first World War. Without a certain level of sharing sovereignty with the leadership of Germany and France the peace and prosperity Europe enjoyed in the past sixty years would not have been possible.

However, shared institutions, norms and interdependence by themselves do not bring legitimacy to the European project in the eyes of today’s European citizens. Delivering results in the welfare and security is what might achieve that. And nothing more would bring that closer than results against the negative effects of globalization: uncontrolled immigration, growing inequality within countries, growing masses felt left behind. It’s true that European integration would – in theory - be a useful tool to more effectively tackle these challenges. The challenges of globalization by their nature cannot be tackled successfully alone by nation states.

The problem is that a lot of the major decisions taken by the EU in recent years – that is the Commission and some major European nation states - have exaggerated the challenges, not decreased them. Take the handling of the economic crisis with the disastrous effects of endless austerity imposed on Southern Europe or the migration crisis in which Brussels has simply stepped behind Berlin’s open door – obligatory quota policy. And all these in such an environment where the European publics were already skeptical of the federalist tendencies even before these recent major crisis erupted, as the French and Dutch referendums on the EU Constitution a decade ago have demonstrated.
So with the EU going south on the substance, but – or at least some form of - integration structure still much needed, what next?

First of all, focus should be on the substance. Fostering growth, accelerating innovation, tackling inequality, stopping mass illegal immigration and fighting terrorism with additional resources and proper regulation – but without more integration. The nation states of the EU have to come to terms with each other on these issues foremost. Otherwise any attempt by Brussels or a powerful member to impose its will through the back door on others concerning these critical substantial questions will only hasten the demise of the whole European Union.

Secondly, discussions about the crucial challenges of Europe and the options available should be much more honest and more transparent – the issues on migration and the TTIP are good places to start with. This doesn’t mean that Brussels doesn’t have valid considerations as it is dealing with these issues, but it has to be much more responsive to the concerns of the majority of EU citizens. Any double talk, circumlocution, arrogance and disregard of the fears of many Europeans will only hasten the demise of the whole European Union.

Thirdly, acknowledge that European integration is not a bicycle, which would either go further or fall down. It is rather a huge but slow moving truck on many wheels which at times can even stop to rest to take stock and alter its direction if necessary. It’s a unique and valuable instrument which helps bring us Europeans closer together, and it has become an essential feature of our greater European family, but it cannot replace our homes, the nation states of Europe.

Language Undefined Tag: NATOBREXITEUVarga Gergely

The Vermont senator used a drawn-out primary to attack Clinton’s judgement on national security and international trade, so party unity may prove elusive.

Central Africa Project Director Richard Moncrieff gave his testimony on the humanitarian situation in Burundi to the UK Parliament’s International Development Committee on 12 July 2016.

Refusant le « coup d'Etat parlementaire » du gouvernement de M. Abe Shinzo, des Japonais manifestent devant la Diète tous les jours depuis plus d'un an. / Japon, Armée, Droit, Mouvement de contestation, Pacifisme - 2015/09 / Japon, Armée, Droit, Mouvement de contestation, Pacifisme - 2015/09

/ États-Unis, Japon, Armée, Relations bilatérales - Asie / États-Unis, Japon, Armée, Relations bilatérales - Asie

Les institutions européennes accordent une place exorbitante à la bureaucratie au détriment du pouvoir politique. Intervenant à tous les stades du processus de décision, ces fonctionnaires concentrent l'attention des lobbys. / Belgique, Europe, Banque, Élections, Entreprise, Finance, Fonction (...) / Belgique, Europe, Banque, Élections, Entreprise, Finance, Fonction publique, Industrie, Médias, Politique, Travail, Groupe de pression, Commerce - 2015/09

Cette recension est issue de Politique étrangère (2/2016). Rémy Hémez propose une analyse de l’ouvrage dirigé par Tatiana Carayannis et Louisa Lombard, Making Sense of the Central African Republic (Londres, Zed Books, 2015, 384 pages).

Peu d’ouvrages traitent de la République Centrafricaine (RCA), particulièrement en anglais. Making Sense of the Central African Republic est important car il rassemble quelques-uns des meilleurs spécialistes de la crise centrafricaine et propose une approche véritablement pluridisciplinaire. Il permet en cela de mieux comprendre ce pays d’environ quatre millions d’habitants vivant aux marges de la communauté internationale.

On ne peut revenir ici sur les douze contributions qui composent le livre. Elles apportent toutes un éclairage essentiel sur la situation actuelle du pays. Cela commence d’ailleurs par une excellente introduction à l’histoire de la RCA, rédigée par Stephen W. Smith, qui nous fait prendre conscience du tourbillon négatif dans lequel est engagé le pays depuis la colonisation. Les contributions suivantes alternent entre des problématiques assez générales comme la question de la richesse et de la pauvreté par Roland Marchal, ou les « pathologies » du maintien de la paix en RCA par Enrico Picco, et d’autres plus spécifiques, tels l’analyse des dynamiques locales du PK5 par Faouzi Kilembe ou un chapitre sur l’Armée de résistance du seigneur en Centrafrique par Ledio Cakaj.

Malgré cet apparent foisonnement, il est possible, à la lecture de cet ouvrage, de dégager quatre lignes de forces pouvant servir de guide pour appréhender la complexité de la RCA. Premièrement, il convient de prendre en compte l’histoire violente du pays depuis sa colonisation, car elle laisse des marques profondes, notamment en ce qui concerne sa structure sociale. Deuxièmement, il faut bien se rendre compte des faiblesses récurrentes de la structure étatique centrafricaine. L’État n’a jamais fourni les services de base et n’a pas étendu son autorité à l’ensemble du pays. L’utilisation de biens publics à des fins privées y est devenue chose commune. Ainsi l’État centrafricain est, pour la plupart de ses citoyens « une douloureuse absence et une présence blessante ». Troisièmement, l’insérer dans son environnement régional est crucial pour une analyse sérieuse. Le nord de la Centrafrique est par exemple beaucoup plus intégré avec les pays frontaliers qu’avec le reste de la RCA, et les crises régionales ont de fortes répercussions sur le pays. Enfin, les très nombreuses interventions extérieures visant à rétablir la paix ont toutes échoué car elles ont cherché à remplir à « faible coût » des objectifs de court terme. Les dynamiques profondes de la crise n’ont donc pas été traitées.

Cet ouvrage, indispensable à tous ceux qui s’intéressent à la RCA mais aussi à la question générale du peace building, démontre bien que l’explosion de violence dans ce pays depuis 2012 est le fruit de la convergence de dynamiques de long terme complexes. Le livre remplit l’objectif affiché par les auteurs : analyser pour la première fois en un seul volume l’économie politique, le rôle des conflits et l’influence des acteurs régionaux en RCA. Enfin, on ne peut qu’être d’accord avec le constat fait par les auteurs de la nécessité de traiter les racines profondes de la crise en redéfinissant les rôles de la société et de l’État centrafricains. Reste à espérer que l’engagement actuel de l’ONU en RCA – le plus important que le pays ait jamais connu – puisse répondre à ces exigences.

Rémy Hémez

S’abonner à Politique étrangère.

(Own report) - NATO wound up its summit in Warsaw, Saturday, with a decision to bolster its arms buildup. The measures decided by the Western war alliance are particularly aimed at Russia. Four battalion-sized NATO-"Battle Groups" will be deployed in Poland and the Baltic countries - one under German command. NATO will also support Ukraine's armed forces and reinforce its presence on the Black Sea. The war alliance pursues its propaganda of Cold-War style alleged threat scenarios. With allusion to the "Fulda Gap," NATO identifies today a "Suwalki Gap" between northeastern Poland and southern Lithuania as an alleged gateway for Russian troops to Kaliningrad through Belarus, against which, NATO would be "helpless." Statistics show that the "helpless" NATO invests thirteen times more than Russia in its military. While the EU is enhancing its cooperation with the western war alliance, the US is heating up the next major conflict - with China - through its deployment of a missile defense system in Asia.

El gobierno insiste en que no habrá negociación mientras prosigan los secuestros y la guerrilla insiste en que esa condición desconoce la agenda. ¿Cuál es entonces el futuro del proceso de paz con “la otra guerrilla”?