Peace and Security Are Key to Aligning Security and Development Goals
It is possible to align security and development goals but it will depend on resolving conflicts, addressing poverty, rebuilding trust and engaging women. Leaders in development and finance debated the building blocks of creating peace and told participants at the World Economic Forum’s Sustainable Development Impact Summit that all issues must be addressed to create sustainable solutions.
Kristalina Georgieva, Chief Executive Officer, World Bank, said: “We can celebrate the decline of extreme poverty – 1.1 billion people have been lifted out of poverty. But to meet the goal of ending extreme poverty, we have to worry about peace and security.” She pointed out that when conflicts are raging, there are other severe factors, such as another crippling wave of Ebola disease in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
“This lack of security is hitting people once, twice and three times,” Georgieva said. In addition, people are suffering from vulnerability to climate change. “Countries that have done the least to contribute to climate change are the most to suffer,” she said. “We are not balancing in investment in mitigation and adaptation.”
Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) will cost an estimated $7 billion a year, but Georgieva pointed out that trillions of dollars are sitting idle around the world. Policies are needed to give investors certainty. “It is a challenge but also an opportunity to use public money to create the enabling environment for private investments to flow,” she said. This is in the hands of people, businesses and countries, and policies are needed to give investors certainty. “People also need confidence [and trust] that investors will not come and rip them off,” she added.
The World Bank has 72 projects addressing institutional weaknesses. “Are we there yet? Not quite. Are we going in the right direction? For sure,” Georgieva concluded.
Luis Alberto Moreno, President, Inter-American Development Bank, said it is necessary to multiply initiatives and to understand that for every dollar of an organization’s financing, we need to create situations to see that money is moving through the system. This, he added, will create an appetite for owners of savings to use them. “There is an appetite for doing things around climate change,” he said. To encourage investment, Moreno said it is important to manage the risks for the private sector. “We need to see what we can do to mitigate risks by using blended finance,” he added. “We are collectively wrestling with it. We are going in the right direction, but we are way behind.”
Bineta Diop, Founder and President, Femmes, Africa Solidarité, addressed the issue of women, peace and security in Africa. “I have spent most of my life in conflict,” she said. “When people discuss conflict, the first country you think about is Africa. When I see people suffering, I think something can be done in this nexus of peace and development. Human beings are caught in the middle.”
Diop recommended that more GDP needs to be invested in people. “We need to shift to see how we invest if we want to achieve the SDGs. We need to invest in development seriously – but real investment.” She gave the example of countries that have consistent sunshine and can profit from solar. “This is a real investment. Electricity brings people water and light, so it is necessary to invest in infrastructure and new technology,” she added.
Diop’s organization is working in 22 countries in Africa with a Plan of Action for women’s peace and security, which will lead to sustainable peace and development. “I want all African states to have a Plan of Action,” she said. In this way, women are contributing to prevention. She also pointed out that “Africa has to invest in Africa.” It is a poor continent, but when you look at resources, Diop said, “we are a rich country.” She called for European leaders to support women by helping to build the skills of Africans.
Thomas Greminger, Secretary-General, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), raised concern about a return to war in Europe, pointing to the conflict in Ukraine, now in its fifth year. “This is very much at the top of our agenda at OSCE. It undermines trust and confidence among the key stakeholders,” he said. “There is a heavy toll on the ground in terms of suffering and we are also paying a high price for it.”
The OSCE has developed a toolbox to tackle crises and minority-related conflict. “These are tools of prevention and diplomacy,” Greminger said. “We are trying to bring conflicts closer to resolution, but we also need political will.” He called for political leadership to invest in a “rules-based world order” built on strong international institutions. “If the international community pushes, progress is possible in a country,” he said.
Riyadh joins Shanghai Cooperation Organization
Saudi Arabia’s cabinet approved on Wednesday a decision to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), as Riyadh builds a long-term partnership with China despite U.S. security concerns.
Saudi Arabia has approved a memorandum on granting the Kingdom the status of a dialogue partner in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, state news agency SPA said.
The SCO is a political and security union of countries spanning much of Eurasia, including China, India and Russia.
Formed in 2001 by Russia, China and former Soviet states in Central Asia, the body has been expanded to include India and Pakistan, with a view to playing a bigger role as counterweight to Western influence in the region.
Iran also signed documents for full membership last year.
Dialogue partner status will be a first step within the Organisation before granting the Kingdom full membership in the mid-term.
The decision followed an announcement by Saudi Aramco, which raised its multi-billion dollar investment in China, by finalising a planned joint venture in northeast China and acquiring a stake in a privately controlled petrochemical group.
Explainer: Commission proposes to expand digital tools in EU company law
What are the objectives of the Commission’s proposal?
This proposal aims to cut red-tape and improve transparency and trust in the business environment in the single market. It will achieve more digitalised and connected cross-border public services for companies and reduce the administrative burden for companies carrying out cross-border activities, in particular for SMEs.
How will it help companies?
The proposal will significantly reduce administrative barriers when companies use company information from business registers in cross-border situations, including in administrative or court procedures:
- When companies set up subsidiaries or branches in another Member State, the proposal will ensure the application of the “once-only principle”. This means that companies will not need to re-submit the information already available in their business register, and business registers will exchange that information through BRIS.
- Companies will be able to use a multilingual EU Company Certificate to provide essential information about their company, e.g., when taking part in public tenders, in the context of tax or authorisation procedures or when applying for funding in another Member State.
- Companies may use a multilingual model for a digital EU power of attorney to authorise a person to represent the company in another Member State.
- Companies do not need to obtain an apostille on certified documents or information from business registers, and on certain notarial documents, when such documents are presented in another Member State.
- The proposal reduces the need for certified translations of company documents or information provided by business registers.
How much will the proposal reduce the administrative burden on companies?
By making more company data publicly available in business registers and at EU level through BRIS, and by improving the reliability of such information, the proposal will reduce the overall administrative burden on companies and in turn facilitate access to finance and the creation of businesses. It will apply to around 16 million limited liability companies and 2 million partnerships in the EU.
Companies planning to engage in cross-border business activities, or to create cross-border subsidiaries or branches, will benefit from recurrent annual savings (administrative burden reduction) of around €437 million per year thanks to administrative simplification, including the application of “once-only principle”, abolishing the apostille, and introducing an EU Company Certificate.
How will it help small and medium enterprises (SMEs)?
SMEs account for 98-99% of limited liability companies in the EU, and around 40% of SMEs are engaged in cross-border activities and operations or cross-border investments. SMEs in particular will benefit from the reduction in administrative burden and increased legal certainty, and also from easier access to company information, as they have less financial and administrative resources than large companies.
This proposal helps to make it easier for SMEs and start-ups to expand and scale-up cross-border in line with the 2020 SME Strategy for a sustainable and digital Europe and the EU Start-up Nations Standard.
How will it improve transparency in the business environment?
The proposal will make more information about companies publicly available in particular at EU level through the Business Registers Interconnection System (BRIS). It covers important information for investors, creditors, consumers and authorities about:
- groups of companies,
- single shareholders of single-member companies,
- the place of central administration and the principal place of business of companies,
- EU branches of non-EU companies.
It will also make searches for information about companies in the EU easier by allowing a search through BRIS and, at the same time, through two other EU systems interconnecting national beneficial ownership registers and insolvency registers, while respecting the existing rules for access to each system.
How will it improve trust in the business environment?
First, the proposal will improve reliability of company information in business registers across the EU and thus ensure that such information can be trusted in cross-border situations. In particular, the proposal requires Member States to ensure that:
- administrative or judicial control, as well as a legality check, of the instruments of constitution takes place when new companies are created and in case of any changes to those documents;
- uniform checks of company information (e.g., checking legality of the company’s name, object) are carried out before the information is entered in business registers.
Second, the proposal will ensure that company information in business registers is up-to-date by:
- asking companies to make timely updates of their information in business registers, and to confirm once a year that the information is up-to-date;
- asking business registers to make new information received from companies publicly available as soon as possible;
- ensuring that sanctions are applied where companies do not file information or file it late to business registers.
How does this proposal relate to the existing company law framework?
The proposal respects the different legal traditions and systems in Member States, including the possible involvement of notaries in company law procedures, and does not aim to modify them.
The 2019 Digitalisation Directive ensured that company law procedures can be carried out online, and in particular that companies can be set up online. This proposal is complementary and provides for the second step of digitalisation of EU company law. It focuses on increasing the availability of company information, in particular at EU level, and on removing administrative barriers when companies and public authorities use such information in cross-border situations, through the use of digital tools and processes.
It does not introduce new systems but builds on existing ones, for example on BRIS that is operational since 2017 and connects all Member State registers. It is also in line with EU rules on electronic identification and trust services (the eIDAS Regulation and its ongoing revision to establish a framework for a European Digital Identity).
Russia will deploy nuclear weapons in Belarus – EU and NATO went ballistic
Baroness Goldie, who is an experienced Scottish politician and life peer who served as Leader of the Scottish Conservative Party from 2005 to 2011 and as the UK’s Minister of State for Defence since 2019, said to the Parliament: “Alongside our granting of a squadron of Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine, we will be providing ammunition including armour piercing rounds which contain depleted uranium. Such rounds are highly effective in defeating modern tanks and armoured vehicles.”
The Anglo-Saxon clique’s core objective is a calculated escalation of the proxy war that is certain to draw forth a robust reaction from Moscow, as predictable as night follows day, writes M.K. Bhadrakumar, Indian Ambassador and prominent international observer.
Indeed, that is precisely what happened when Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia will deploy its tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus. Putin linked this to a request from Belarus in reaction to Baroness Goldie’s statement in London a week ago.
More importantly, Putin also drew the analogy of the US placing its nuclear weapons on the territories of the allied NATO countries for decades.
The EU and NATO went ballistic after Putin’s disclosure. EU’s chief diplomat Josep Borrell said Moscow’s decision was “an irresponsible escalation and threat to European security.” He promised to impose “further sanctions” against Belarus!
A NATO spokeswoman called Moscow’s decision “dangerous and irresponsible.” Interestingly, though, the Biden administration neatly side-stepped the issue, focusing instead that the US has not seen any signs that Russia has moved nuclear weapons to Belarus or anywhere else!
What is the game plan? First, the Anglo-Saxon clique would hope that the issue will create further disquiet and insecurity in Europe vis-a-vis Russia and would rally European countries behind the Biden administration at a time when fault lines were appearing within the transatlantic alliance over a protracted war in Ukraine that might be catastrophic for European economies.
However, Washington is hard-pressed to respond to Putin’s remark that Russia is only doing something that the US has been doing for decades.
The crux of the matter is, as with the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, the Russian decision on tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus is retaliatory, drawing attention to the US missiles stationed close to its borders. (An estimated 100 nuclear weapons are stored in vaults in five European countries — Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and Turkey.)
Worse still, the US practices a controversial arrangement known as “nuclear sharing”, under which it installs nuclear equipment on fighter jets of select non-nuclear NATO countries and train their pilots to carry out nuclear strike with US nuclear bombs. This is happening when the US, being a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), has promised not to hand over nuclear weapons to other countries, and the non-nuclear countries in the NATO’s sharing arrangement have themselves promised not to receive nuclear weapons from the nuclear weapon states!
The NATO declared last year that seven NATO countries contributed dual-capable aircraft to the nuclear sharing mission. These countries are believed to be the US, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey and Greece. And all are signatories to the NPT!
There is no question that depleted uranium munitions are radioactive and toxic and their heavy use in the Yugoslavia and Iraq wars has been linked to birth defects and cancers. It has been tied to “the highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied” in Fallujah, the city subjected to two brutal US sieges during the invasion of Iraq.
Britain appears to be creating conditions in Europe to justify the basing of nuclear-armed US bombers at Lakenheath in Suffolk, which were removed in 1991 in line with the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty, stresses M.K. Bhadrakumar.
Riyadh joins Shanghai Cooperation Organization
Saudi Arabia’s cabinet approved on Wednesday a decision to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), as Riyadh builds a long-term...
What does the Arctic Ocean hold for the world in changing global politics?
“The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate”, a book by...
Northern Ireland: Peace in the province – still a pipe dream?
All eyes are currently – and understandably – on the bitter and still unfolding war in Ukraine. The first anniversary...
Impact of Multinational companies on Pakistan
Multinational companies (MNCs) have had a significant impact on Pakistan’s economy since the country’s liberalization and opening up to foreign...
Considerations on asteroids and dangers near and far
The solar system is the first stage in the human exploration of space. Observation and the desire to learn more...
Intelligence Deficiencies Hamper Togolese Security Forces Fight Against VEOs
The Togolese security forces’ lack of actionable and credible intelligence is fettering its response to the VEO attacks. On Friday,...
Bulletproof Panama: An Isthmus of Stability Becomes a Magnet for Migration
On the sidewalk along Vía Argentina, one of Panama City’s busiest streets, a Colombian bodybuilder passes digital nomads from the...
Economy2 days ago
U.S. Is Threatening to Default China Debt Repayment, What Will Beijing Do?
New Social Compact4 days ago
Aurat March 2023 & Agenda Setting
Economy4 days ago
Unpacking the “China Debt Trap” Narrative: Nuances and Context
Intelligence4 days ago
Time for an International Cyber Court?
World News3 days ago
FT: Is France on the road to a Sixth Republic?
Economy3 days ago
Marriage of Sanctions Convenience: Russia Rethinking the EAEU Role
Middle East4 days ago
How Beijing take advantage of US’s attempts to get rid of Netanyahu and expel him from power?
East Asia3 days ago
Will Xi Jinping Continue the Wealth Crackdown in his Third Term?