The Official Blog of the

Archive for July, 2020|Monthly archive page

South China Sea Delimitation Disputes: Good Faith Negotiations Needed

In Asia, Being a World Citizen, Conflict Resolution, Cultural Bridges, Current Events, Environmental protection, International Justice, NGOs, Solidarity, The Search for Peace, Track II, United Nations, World Law on July 28, 2020 at 11:42 AM

By René Wadlow

 

There are several maritime delimitation disputes that are currently dangerous and require good-faith negotiations to prevent increased tensions. World Citizens had played an important role in the Law of the Sea Conference (UNCLOS) negotiations and in the creation of the International Seabed Authority and its Tribunal on maritime deliberation issues. (1)

There are currently two major geographic areas in which there are maritime delimitation issues: the Arctic and the China Seas. The China Seas tensions are the most politically sensitive. Territorial sea disputes can be heated up by governments and cooled off at will when other political issues require attention elsewhere. Currently, we are in a “heating up” stage between China and Japan, China, and the USA, and to a lesser degree between China and Vietnam, China and Taiwan, and China and the Philippines. The broader China-U.S.A. tensions also color the South China Sea issues.

There are both economic and geo-strategic aspects to these tensions, and both need to be addressed if good faith negotiations are to lead to cooperation for the benefit of all. (2)

Littoral Combat Ship USS Fort Worth (LCS 3)

Progress in maritime geology and predictions of metal shortages in the decade ahead have made seabed mining a concern of governments such as China, Japan, and South Korea. Minerals such as copper, gold, and many other industrial minerals as well as oil-natural gas are thought to be available through sea mining in this Pacific area.

The strategic-geopolitical aspects are less clear but they focus on the Chinese Navy creating permanent islands around what had been only rock formations of land that was visible only part of the year. There is a drive for influence in the area among China, Japan, the USA, and to a lesser extent, India. The drive has no doubt to do with the vision each State has of its leadership role, its growing or declining position, its ability to limit the influence and access of other States, and its “core interests.” Such political speculations are “immaterial” but can easily lead to mistaken calculations and consequent actions.

Factions in both Japan and China are playing a “nationalist card” concerning the maritime delimitations disputes, no doubt for reasons which go beyond the specific aspects of the disputes. Although the Chinese “nationalist” focus is directed toward Japan, there is a vision among some Chinese that the USA is the cause of the continuing problems with Taiwan and Japan.

south-china-sea-stone-park-blue-sea

Therefore, it is important that “non-nationalist” voices be heard, stressing cooperation for mutual benefit. The Association of World Citizens is among such voices, stressing that the settlement of maritime delimitation disputes through adjudication by the World Court is the ideal approach. For World Citizens, the quality of the Law of the Sea is of special significance. The greater part of the oceans is considered res communis, a global common beyond national ownership. Furthermore, the physical nature of the oceans suggests world rather than national solutions to the increasing need for management of marine resources and the marine environment.

Although most maritime delimitations are, in fact, achieved without recourse to adjudication and settled by bilateral negotiations, submitting a dispute to the World Court can better ensure that the results of the delimitation process conform to the rules of international law. We need to start a strong mobilization of voices calling for good-faith negotiations and for a vision of cooperation among the States of the China Seas.

NOTES:

1) See the writings of the Louis B. Sohn, in particular his course at the Hague Court legal summer school “Settlement of Disputes Relating to the Interpretation and Application of Treaties”, Recueil des cours, Vol. 150. 1976 II, pp. 205-294. For a useful approach to the delimitations issues see A. O. Adede, The System for Settlement of Disputes Under the UNCLOS (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1987)

2) Delimitation disputes are not new but reappear when politically useful for some reason. For a good overview of the history with maps of the disputed areas see Douglas Johnston and Mark Valencia, Pacific Ocean Boundary Problems (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1991).

Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.

OMS : Nuages de tempête sur la Covid-19

In Current Events, NGOs, Solidarity, The Search for Peace, United Nations, United States, World Law on July 16, 2020 at 9:24 PM

Par René Wadlow

 

Les conséquences étendues de la pandémie de Covid-19 ont conduit à l’analyse des préparatifs et des actions au niveau local, national et international. Nous n’aborderons ici que le niveau international et en particulier les discussions concernant l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) des Nations Unies. Les efforts de l’Union européenne et des différents pays européens méritent également l’attention.

L’OMS a été créée sur la base de l’Organisation de la santé de la Société des Nations, établie en 1923 et qui a fonctionné jusqu’en 1939. Il y a aussi l’expérience du Bureau panaméricain de la Santé qui avait débuté en 1902. Le siège de l’OMS se trouve à Genève, et il y a eu une coopération datant de l’époque de la Ligue avec le Comité international de la Croix-Rouge ainsi qu’avec des fondations privées s’occupant de santé comme la Fondation Rockefeller. Aujourd’hui, la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates joue un rôle important dans le financement des projets et de la recherche en matière de santé mondiale.

Self-isolation during the coronavirus COVID 19-20 pandemic

L’OMS est entrée en vigueur en avril 1948, lorsque les 26 États requis ont ratifié. Le Canadien Brock Chrisholm a été le premier directeur général et a donné à l’organisation sa réputation de forte direction de la part du Secrétariat. Ce leadership fort a été transmis aux bureaux régionaux semi-autonomes de l’OMS. Le Docteur Gro Harlem Brundtland, ancienne Première Ministre de Norvège devenue Directrice générale en 1998, est un exemple de cette forte tradition de leadership. Un dirigeant fort peut s’employer à éloigner la politique de l’organisation de son travail technique et peut attirer l’attention sur des questions spécifiques.

Les 194 membres de l’OMS sont censés donner un pourcentage spécifique du budget global, connu sous le nom de “contributions obligatoires”, selon une formule conçue en fonction de la capacité de paiement du pays. En outre, il existe des “contributions volontaires” qui servent généralement à financer des projets ou des campagnes sanitaires spécifiques, comme la lutte contre le VIH/SIDA, la distribution de vaccins et les soins de santé maternelle.

1200px-Evolution_de_la_mortalité_due_au_COVID-19,_région_OMS__Europe__(partie_Nord_et_Ouest).png

Au moment de la création de l’OMS, d’autres agences spécialisées des Nations Unies et de l’ONU dans son ensemble, les États-Unis d’Amérique (USA) avaient l’économie la plus forte et leur territoire n’avait pas été directement endommagé par la Seconde Guerre mondiale. La contribution des États-Unis est donc élevée, tout comme l’ont été les contributions volontaires du gouvernement américain et les fondations privées américaines.

Les finances donnent le pouvoir politique, à la fois pour influencer les programmes et pour “mettre un veto” à certains efforts tels que les efforts de contrôle des naissances. Les finances donnent également une influence sur la sélection du personnel. Telle est la réalité de la vie des organisations internationales. Si nous examinons l’histoire des agences spécialisées des Nations Unies, nous constatons que les États-Unis, l’URSS, le Japon et, de plus en plus, la Chine ont utilisé leur pouvoir politico-économique pour tenter d’influencer le travail des agences des Nations Unies, parfois en coulisses, parfois plus ouvertement.

Capture d'écran 2020-07-16 23.02.56.png

Le 15 mars dernier, l’émission humoristique “120 Minutes” de la Radio Télévision Suisse (RTS) parodiait avec talent Georges Brassens pour montrer plusieurs professionnels (chanteur, organisateur de fêtes et joueur de hockey sur glace, suivis d’un prêtre catholique dans son église déjà presque vide habituellement) attristés d’être devenus, à cause de la crise du coronavirus, “Sans public”.

L’actuel président des États-Unis, Donald Trump, n’est pas un acteur “en coulisses”. Sa décision de refuser le financement américain à l’OMS en attendant une révision de la gestion par l’OMS de la pandémie de coronavirus est inopportune et pourrait sérieusement compromettre l’effort de coopération mondiale nécessaire. Cette première menace a été suivie le 29 mai 2020 lorsque le président Trump a annoncé que “nous mettrons fin aujourd’hui à nos relations avec l’OMS”. Il a toutefois ajouté que le financement américain serait réorienté vers d’autres efforts de santé publique.

Les critiques américaines sapent l’autorité de l’actuel directeur général Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus qui avait été Ministre des Affaires Étrangères de l’Éthiopie. Son élection a été activement soutenue par la Chine, et pour ses détracteurs, il est trop favorable aux postes chinois. Toutefois, son expérience de Ministre des Affaires Étrangères a montré qu’on ne peut pas critiquer en public les États puissants.

Après chaque grand défi dans le passé, l’OMS a eu une analyse de ses réponses. Ainsi, les États membres de l’OMS participant à l’Assemblée annuelle de cette année, qui se tient virtuellement, ont adopté par consensus une résolution demandant instamment une étude indépendante des réponses de l’OMS au coranavirus. La résolution proposée par l’Union européenne appelle à une “évaluation impartiale, indépendante et complète” des réponses de l’OMS. De telles évaluations ont lieu après chaque effort majeur de l’OMS. Cette fois, plus de personnes seront attentives aux résultats. L’OMS, comme toutes les grandes institutions multi-étatiques, a ses faiblesses à la fois administratives et dues à l’influence politique des États.

D’où la nécessité d’observations et de propositions non gouvernementales fortes. Ce renforcement des efforts non gouvernementaux pourrait être l’une des conséquences positives de la pandémie.

Le Professeur René Wadlow est Président de l’Association of World Citizens.

Can Track II Efforts Reduce China-India Frontier Tensions?

In Asia, Being a World Citizen, Conflict Resolution, Cultural Bridges, Current Events, NGOs, Solidarity, The Search for Peace, Track II, United Nations on July 3, 2020 at 7:52 AM

By René Wadlow

 

In a June 24, 2020 message to the Secretary General of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Mr. Vladimir Novov, the Association of World Citizens (AWC) expressed its active concern with the June 15 death of Indian and Chinese military in the Galwan River Valley in Ladakh on the India-China frontier and the possibility that the tensions will increase. While there have been brief discussions among Indian and Chinese authorities to prevent escalation, there have been no real negotiations. Negotiation is a basic political decision-making process, to facilitate compromise without loss of essential objectives.

33465091301_7d4f34b432_o

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs said on June 25 that since early May, the Chinese have been amassing a large contingent of troops and arms along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Also, within India, there has been a good deal of media attention, highly critical of China, given to the events. In addition, there have been calls for a boycott of Chinese goods, and some Chinese products have been removed from Indian shops. Both Indian and Chinese spokespersons have made references to the 1962 war during which some 2,000 persons were killed.

The AWC believes that there is a need for prompt measures as the India-China tensions add to existing tensions between the USA and China as well as boundary issues with Asian States in the South China Sea.

There may be a role for “Track II” nongovernmental efforts and exchanges. Track I is official government to government diplomacy among instructed representative of States, usually diplomats from the Foreign Ministry. However, governments have a range of officials on whom to call: intelligence agencies, the military, and “friends of the President” – trusted individuals within the executive entourage.

Nathu_La_-_Indo_China_Border

Track II efforts are organized through nongovernmental organizations and sometimes by academic institutions. Such efforts can entail informal, behind the scene communications that take place in the absence of formal communication channels. The term “Track II” was coined by the U. S. diplomat Joseph Montville in The Arrow and the Olive Branch: A Case for Track II Diplomacy.

Track II efforts have grown as there is increasing recognition that there is a tragic disjunction between the United Nations tension-reduction mandate and its ability to intervene in conflicts when called upon. As Adam Curle, experienced in Quaker mediation efforts has written “In general governments achieve their results because they have power to influence events, including the ability to reward or to punish. Paradoxically, the strength of civilian peacemakers resides specifically in their lack of power. They are neither feared nor courted for what they can do. Instead, they are trusted and so may sometimes be enabled to play a part in peacemaking denied to most official diplomats.”

Those involved in Track II efforts must, nevertheless, have ready access to governmental decision-makers and Track I diplomats. As the World Citizen and Quaker economist Kenneth Boulding in a little verse writes,

“When Track One will not do,
We have to travel on Track Two
But for results to be abiding,
The Tracks must meet upon some siding”.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

In the China-India frontier tensions, both sides must be convinced that there is a considerable sentiment for peace among their own supporters. In this conflict, which could slip into greater violence, there is an understandable tendency to look for short term answers. Yet there is also a need for some involved in Track II efforts to have an over-all integrated perspective for both short as well as long-term transformation. Thus, there needs to be a “pool” of people with experience, skills and the ability to move fast when the need or the opportunity is there?

We are sure that there are groups in India and China which can rise to meet this challenge.

Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.