Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

On December 16th, The Independent Commission on Multilateralism (ICM) will host a Public Consultation on its Discussion Paper: “Fragile States and Fragile Cities.” This Public Consultation will provide a platform for representatives from member states, civil society, the private sector, academia, and the United Nations to comment on the Discussion Paper’s recommendations and exchange perspectives on the larger trends and challenges at hand.

Click here for the live webcast beginning at 1:45pm EST>>

Nearly 1.2 billion people live in fragile states, including one‐third of the world’s poor. Challenges emerging from fragile states, such as transnational threats, regional spillovers, local insecurity, and underdevelopment require the attention of multilateral institutions. While there is no agreed upon definition of a “fragile state,” limited institutional capacity and weak governance—particularly in combination with structural political and economic exclusion—are evident as main factors of fragility.

More recently, cities as urban systems susceptible to damage incurred by shocks to infrastructure, and ecological, social, economic, and political systems have emerged as a concept of fragility in the peace and security landscape. With unprecedentedly fast urbanization rates, cities are becoming the focal point of global poverty, conflict, and vulnerability to disasters—particularly when situated within a “fragile state.”

As policy-makers move beyond “fragile states” to “states of fragility,” important shortcomings persist in the United Nations and the multilateral system in addressing fragility and building resilience in states and cities. These gaps are conceptual and analytical; institutional; financial; engagement-related; and gender and youth-related. Despite its limitations, the concept of fragility has enhanced the linkage not just among international, national, and human security, but also among security, development, and governance needs, including issues of food, water, health, and environment.

Discussants:
Ms. Andrea Ó Súilleabháin, Senior Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute
H.E. Mrs. Makurita Baaro, Permanent Representative, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Kiribati to the United Nations
Mr. Seth Kaplan, Lecturer, Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University

Moderator:
H.E. Mr. Hardeep Singh Puri, Secretary-General, Independent Commission on Multilateralism

On December 16th, the Independent Commission on Multilateralism (ICM) will host a Public Consultation on its Discussion Paper: “Forced Displacement, Refugees, and Migration.” This Public Consultation will provide a platform for representatives from member states, civil society, the private sector, academia, and the United Nations to comment on the Discussion Paper’s recommendations and exchange perspectives on the larger trends and challenges at hand.

Click here for the live webcast beginning at 11:45am EST>>

The exponential rise of forced displacement, including massive migration and refugee flows, has shocked the consciences of peoples and unsettled institutions worldwide. As the humanitarian space is shrinking, many on the move today are increasingly desperate and seeking protection.

The scale and complexity of the current challenge is testing the limits of the multilateral structures that have been created in the past seventy years. These were designed to deal with displacement at a smaller scale and at a slower pace than the challenges we face at present. Indeed, migration numbers are at an all-time high and we simultaneously face the largest refugee crisis in the history of the United Nations.

This paper addresses the current state of migration, displacement, and refugee flows. It outlines the shortcomings of the multilateral system, and particularly those of the UN, in adapting and responding to this unprecedented level of human mobility. From the immediate crisis stemming from Syria to the need for long term solutions, the paper provides a set of recommendations to improve the efficacy and efficiency of the multilateral system’s responses through a holistic approach.

Discussants:
Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch, Policy Analyst, International Peace Institute
Mr. Stéphane Bonamy, Delegate, International Committee of the Red Cross
Ms. Anne-Christine Eriksson, Deputy Director, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, New York

Moderator:
H.E. Mr. Hardeep Singh Puri, Secretary-General, Independent Commission on Multilateralism

Im April 2016 werden in Peru die nächsten Wahlen stattfinden. Ollanta Humala führte während seiner Amtszeit einige soziale Programme ein, doch tiefgreifende Reformen blieben aus.

On 25 September 2015 the 2030 agenda for sustainable development was passed at the summit of the United Nations in New York. This agenda sees the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which draw to a close in 2015. The new agenda follows a universal approach and will apply to developing, emerging and developed countries alike. It should also form the basis for a changed global partnership. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals link the principle of sustainability with economic, environmental and social development.
Financing plays a key role in the realisation of the objectives. In addition to trade, technology, the strengthening of local capacities and coherent international co-operation, financing is of paramount importance. Shortly before the passing of the 2030 agenda the financing of sustainable development was also discussed intensively within the scope of the 3rd UN Conference on Financing for Development. One of the goals of the Addis Ababa conference was to safeguard and improve the financing of sustainable development, particularly in developing countries. The necessary basis for this is a stable financial system, as a regional or global financial crisis could endanger the new development agenda. The final document places its priorities on the intensification of domestic resource mobilisation, the reliable disbursement of the funds for development co-operation and on tapping new resources of financing for developing countries. However, it does not address the role of financial stability in sufficient depth.
The choice of financing sources and instruments has a decisive influence on the stability of the financial system. During the global economic and financial crisis there was also a close interrelation between the financing structure and the effects of the crisis on the real sector. With the implementation of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development the question is raised as to whether the use of supplementary and new sources of financing fundamentally alters the financial structure in emerging and developing countries and what effects on financial stability are to be anticipated. This depends primarily on the financing conditions of a country. Secondly, the structure of the financial system plays a role because the size and breadth of the financial system and the role of cross-border financing determine the ability of the financial system to withstand systemic shocks. Thirdly, financing in order to achieve specific sustainable development goals can lead to new systemic risks. Its specific risk and financing profile makes the energy sector an example of this.
The risks to financial stability always need to be taken into account in the financing of investments in order to achieve the new sustainable development goals. On the one hand, the emerging and developing countries need to improve on managing financial complexity. On the other hand, more stringent international financial market regulation and more intensive co-ordination are required. This would enable the risks to financial stability to be contained and not used as an excuse for postponing investment in sustainable development.

Daniel Hurstel présente sa note : Projet d'entreprise : renouveler le capitalisme.

Cet article Daniel Hurstel présente sa note : Projet d’entreprise : renouveler le capitalisme est apparu en premier sur Fondapol.

Les entreprises sont confrontées à un besoin inédit de se renouveler. Ce besoin a des sources négatives et positives.

Cet article Daniel Hurstel : Projet d’entreprise : renouveler le capitalisme est apparu en premier sur Fondapol.

On Tuesday 8 December 2015 the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP) and the Embassy of Israel in Athens organised a discussion on the theme of ‘Developments in Iran: Israeli and European Perspectives‘. The main speaker was Dr Raz Zimmt, Expert on Iran and Research Fellow at the Alliance Center for Iranian Studies at Tel-Aviv University. His talk was followed by comments made by Dr Charalampos Tsardanidis, Director of the Institute of International Economic Relations; Associate Professor, University of the Aegean. Dr Thanos Dokos, Director General of ELIAMEP moderated the discussion.

The event took place at the Representation of European Commission in Greece.

Im April 2016 werden in Peru die nächsten Präsidentschafts- und Parlamentswahlen stattfinden. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird die politische Situation analysiert und werden Perspektiven für die weitere Entwicklung im Land aufgezeigt.

Research Fellow of ELIAMEP Dr Angeliki Dimitriadi gave an interview in the Sunday edition of To Vima newspaper analysing whether Turkey could efficiently co-operate with the EU on the refugee crisis . The article was published on 6 December 2015 and is available here.

The 3rd Annual Conference of the Crisis Observatory will take place on Wednesday, 16 December 2015 (12:00-18:45), at the French Institute of Greece (31 Sina, Athens), on:

“Economic Governance and Democratic Legitimacy in the European Union”

In the first part of the conference (12:00-16:00), eight papers that were distinguished in the Young Scientists Academic Paper Competition of the Crisis Observatory will be presented.

In the second part of the conference, a roundtable discussion on “Economic Governance in the EU: Challenges and Perspectives” (16:30-18:30) will take place. The participants will be:

• Iain Begg (Professorial Research Fellow, European Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science)
• Zsolt Darvas (Senior Fellow, Bruegel)
• Stefano Micossi (Director General, ASSONIME, Professor, College of Europe)
• Nikos Christodoulakis (Former Minister, Professor, Athens University of Economics and Business)

At the closing of the conference, the authors of the four best papers that took part in the Young Scientists Academic Paper Competition of the Crisis Observatory will be awarded monetary prizes (18:30-18:45).

The conference will be held in Greek with simultaneous interpretation in English.

Certificates of attendance will be provided.

The programme of the conference is available here.

You can confirm your participation here by 13/12/2015. Tickets are available on a first-come, first-served basis.

For more information: tel.210-7257110, e-mail: crisisobservatory@eliamep.gr.

The Annual Lecture of ELIAMEP will follow the conference. It will be delivered by Martin Wolf, the principal economic columnist of the Financial Times and internationally acclaimed author. Register for ELIAMEP’s Annual Lecture here.

Retrouver 知识经济 la note Économie de la connaissance de Idriss J. Aberkane en version chinoise.

Cet article Retrouver 知识经济 la version chinoise de la note « Économie de la connaissance » de Idriss J. Aberkane est apparu en premier sur Fondapol.

Opinión - 9/12/2015
Carlos Malamud
El reconocimiento de la derrota por el presidente Maduro no es garantía de que el respeto a la legalidad vaya a ser la norma en Venezuela en los próximos meses. No será fácil que el país pueda llegar a pasar la página del chavismo y se consolide en la democracia.

Gerade jetzt sollte das Ziel eines breiten, auch kritischen Dialogs mit China weiterverfolgt werden – ohne Illusionen, aber nicht gänzlich ohne Visionen.

Das Referendum zum möglichen Austritt Großbritanniens aus der Europäischen Union geht in erster Linie auf innenpolitische und wahltaktische Gründe der Regierung Cameron zurück. Die EU-Institutionen sowie die EU-Mitgliedstaaten müssen die Reformwünsche der britischen Regierung ernst nehmen. Ein ehrlicher und konstruktiver Dialog ist von Nöten, denn die Gefahr eines Ausscheidens Großbritanniens aus der EU ist real.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-zykbts").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-zykbts").fadeIn(1000);});});

Participants in a multi-stakeholder dialogue in Tunis, Tunisia, analyzed the problems of terrorism and violent extremism in the Sahel, the Sahara, and beyond, December 7th and 8th. The conclusions of the seminar will feed into the development of the “Global Action Plan for Francophone Countries to Fight Terrorism,” and inform IPI’s ongoing work in the area.

Participants included women, youth, religious and traditional authorities, representatives of governments, as well as members of the private sector. These 45 participants came from Francophone countries such as Algeria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, France, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Switzerland, and Tunisia.

The Francophone participants aimed to offer some recommendations that can fill a gap in current literature and debates on violent extremism. An Anglophone community of researchers currently dominates the field, and the focus is primarily on security and military issues.

By contrast, this seminar aimed at building a common understanding of the strategic value of prevention and developing proper mechanisms and tools of preventing violent extremism (PVE).

IPI co-hosted the seminar with the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie (OIF) and the Centre for Security in the Sahel Sahara.

Les pays de l’OTAN viennent d’accepter d’intégrer le Monténégro, malgré les protestations de la Russie. Moscou voit dans les élargissements successifs une remise en cause d’un gentleman agreement, énoncé au moment de la réunification allemande : pas d’élargissement de l’OTAN. Les Russes perçoivent une volonté d’encerclement et le maintien d’un climat de guerre froide. Les pays de l’OTAN répliquent en disant que l’alliance atlantique est une organisation de pays démocratiques qui n’a pas de visées agressives et que les inquiétudes de Moscou sont infondées. Certes, la Russie exagère certainement le danger que représente l’adhésion du Monténégro à l’OTAN pour sa propre sécurité. Certes, il n’y a pas eu d’engagement formel des pays de l’OTAN à ne pas en élargir le périmètre après la réunification allemande. Néanmoins, il y a élargissements successifs qui donne matière à ceux qui, à Moscou, voient dans le monde occidental un ensemble qui cherche à limiter la puissance de la Russie et la maintenir dans un statut de vaincu de la guerre froide et non de partenaire d’un nouvel ordre mondial.

Ce calendrier est de surcroît particulièrement mal choisi au moment où on cherche avec certes des difficultés, du fait du soutien de Moscou à Bachar al-Assad, à impliquer plus la Russie dans la lutte commune contre Daech. On peut penser qu’envoyer un signal qui, à tort ou à raison, sera de toute façon perçu comme étant négatif par Moscou n’est pas très habile.

Certains verront dans cette décision de l’OTAN une volonté d’expansion et de puissance sans limite. On peut aussi y voir un mouvement naturel lié à la structure de l’organisation mais qui n’est pas cadré dans une réflexion stratégique globale. En tant que structure, l’OTAN doit justifier son existence après la disparition de la menace qui avait suscité sa création. Quelle légitimité dans un monde post guerre froide ? Historiquement les alliances militaires ne survivent pas à la disparition de la menace qui était leur acte de naissance. L’OTAN doit, par une logique interne, multiplier les activités, chercher de nouvelles missions, élargir son champ pour continuer à exister. C’est presque une démarche structurelle d’organisation quasi-inconsciente, un peu comme l’avait été celle des dirigeants soviétiques lorsqu’ils ont modernisé les SS-3 et SS-4 pour les renforcer par les plus modernes SS-20, dans les années 70, sans saisir qu’ils avaient suscité une contre réaction ferme des Occidentaux débouchant sur la crise des euromissiles.

Après 1990, l’OTAN était dans la situation d’un industriel dont le produit se trouve en difficulté sur le marché. Il peut choisir de fermer l’usine, de diversifier sa production, ou de gagner des parts de marché sur le concurrent. Le produit « défense territoriale des pays membres » étant moins nécessaire, l’OTAN a opté pour la diversification de sa production (élargissement géographique, missions « hors zone ») et de gagner des parts de marché sur celui de la sécurité (L’UEO a disparu, l’ONU n’a pas confirmé les espoirs de 1990, l’OSCE n’a pas pris son envol).

L’OTAN est poussée par une logique de croissance bureaucratique. Ses responsables, ceux qui y travaillent, doivent sans cesse se trouver de nouvelles missions pour se légitimer. Croissance de ses activités, croissance de son champ géographique. Mais cette politique est sans fin car elle conduit à réaliser ce qu’elle dit vouloir combattre. Face à ces différents élargissements, l’attitude de la Russie ne peut être que de se crisper contre les Occidentaux. On pourrait évoquer également l’initial et dangereux système de défense antimissile. Ceux-ci vont alors en conclure qu’il est nécessaire de mettre en place de sérieuses protections contre les résurgences d’une menace russe. À l’extérieur de l’Europe, l’OTAN est trop souvent perçue comme l’armée occidentale du choc des civilisations. C’est le cercle vicieux parfait. L’OTAN mène pour partie une politique de gribouille sans discernement stratégique et pour partie une politique consciente, inspirée par le souvenir de la guerre froide. Les responsables de l’OTAN doivent en permanence se réinventer un rôle pour survivre.