Peace Blog
The views expressed in the blog are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the IIP.
This march ten years ago, demonstrations of young people startet to annoy and challenge the regime in Syria. On the 20th and 21st of Mach this year many people in the region celebrate NEWROZ, the New Year. Is there finally, after thousands of people killed and after the enormous destruction in Syria a chance for a political NEWROZ? Not without countries from the region and not if external actors start working together on a new Middle East.
I was recently approached by a journalist of Radio Free Europe, concerning loopholes within sanctions against Russia in connection with the annexation of Crimea. I always supported targeted sanctions against Russia, especially after Russia‘s military intervention in Ukraine because the EU had and has to react to this clearly illegal occupation and annexation of Ukrainian territory. I did also want to underline the necessity to think about a solution which would respect the willingness of many Crimean citizens to stay with Russia and the desire of many Ukrainians, who were forced to leave, to return to their land of origin - from time to time or permanently. With Russia intervening in Eastern Ukraine and annexing Crimea, Peace in Europe suffered a major setback. There is no doubt about that. One needs to ask, is it realistic to fight for a return of the Crimean territory to Ukraine? Let’s take a look at the greater picture.
“President Trump’s presidency not only was unsuccessful but left the world in disarray. He abandoned multilateralism and polarized the international system. Just as in the second half of the 19th century, the world today is witnessing a breakdown of a ruled based order. Under the Trump administration it became visible that the US has ceased to be the leading world power. This relative decline of the US implies that Europe will have to engage in world affairs. President Joseph Biden will certainly cooperate within some multilateral organizations. He will act more diplomatically. Tensions with China and Russia will remain, however. The emerging bipolarity will be structural. The Helsinki Final Act of 1975 can be model for global cooperation. The world has now the choice: 1914 or 1975.”
It appears, that Iran had completely pivoted towards its "Look to the East Policy" after the withdrawal of the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in May 2018 and imposition of new sanctions on Iran by Trump’s Administration. After these developments Tehran lost the hope to normalize relations with the West and marched eastward. Iranian “Look to the East policy” strategy aims to strengthen Iran’s strategic cooperation with Russia and China. Thus, it means that in the era of changing world order Iran has made its choice and it is joining the Sino-Russian political and economic pole. The following question arises: which are the arguments for the abovementioned assumption?
In the coming weeks we will commemorate the eviction and killings of Jews from Austria and especially from Vienna 600 years ago, in 1421 (The Sir Peter Ustinov Institute will hold a digital event on this topic on the 4th of March). Such cruel acts of predominantly Christian antisemitism did not occur only in 1421 and not only in Austria. Jews were discriminated against all over Europe for many centuries, way before the climax of antisemitism – the Holocaust – when they were murdered on an industrial scale. They were often seen and treated as second-class citizens or even worse: as nuisance.
This conflict is of course not the only one where force is used. The Sahel zone is suffering from many terrorist attacks and military reactions. The Congo has not come to rest (see my recent blog on the occasion of the killing of Lumumba 70 years ago) and is pulling its neighborhood into its fighting. However, in addition to these and other conflicts, Africa is also affected by the pandemic, we all suffer from. At the beginning of the pandemic, it seemed to be in a better situation.
Since the dawn of the nuclear age in 1945, perceptions and strategic positions amongst States regarding nuclear weapons have always differed. The 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) has thrust these existing divisions to centre stage. The treaty is the result of an increasing emphasis placed by non-nuclear weapon States on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons and the persisting risks posed to all humanity by these weapons.
In den letzten Tagen wurde die EU-Politik hinsichtlich der Impfstoffversorgung gegen das Covid-19-Virus eingehender Kritik unterzogen. Alternativen wurden dabei kaum aufgezeigt. Auch wenn wir uns in einer Ausnahmesituation befinden, bleibt die entscheidende Frage vor allem, ob nicht eine überzeugende globale Strategie fehlt, in die die EU eingebunden werden sollte. Trotz Verständnis für nationale Perspektiven darf man nicht übersehen, wie viele Menschen weltweit eine Impfung brauchen und wie viele kaum eine Chance haben, 2021 noch eine zu bekommen. Wir werden auch in Europa Verzögerungen zur Kenntnis nehmen müssen, aber noch gehören wir zu den Privilegierten.
