Suchergebnisse

Since the end of the Cold War, three sensitive shifts have taken place within the NATO: territorial defense turned into "security", including securing the quality of life of NATO citizens; regional arena turned into a global one; suppressing Communism became the suppression of terrorism. Five discussed elements: threat evaluation aka "fight against terrorism", which sometimes loses touch with the unstable geo-strategic context; lacking flexibility and anticipation as regards to a hard to identify, asymmetric, and ever-changing enemy; a pro-active or protective contract attitude; the political context of current military operations; NATO regarding the UN and the EU. References. O. van Zijl

Apart from Belgian's OSCE Presidency (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), two other important topics in 2006 Belgian foreign affairs were economic diplomacy and the European policy. Concerning economic diplomacy the text addresses the problems surrounding two German branches on Belgian territory: the Volkswagen assembly line and DHL. Furthermore, increased importance of economic diplomacy is a well decided approach of the current Minister for Foreign Affairs De Gucht, emphasizing that in bilateral discussions the economic aspect has to be taken into account at all times. Regarding the European policy of ongoing development of European security and defense policy (EVDB) and civic-military cooperation are addressed. Transatlantic relations have improved since 2003 (Iraq war), changing into a "agree where we can, agree to disagree where we can't" attitude, Belgium diplomatic language has lost its rougher edges, and "the glorious three", three years of Belgium presidency (OSCE 2006, UN Security Council 2007-2008) in which the country gained in expressiveness, but lost character opposite large power such as Russia, the US and China. Regarding the UN Security Council a main objective was abolishing the veto right for permanent member states. Tables, Figures, References. O. van Zijl

Third-country nationals can use regulation 1231/10 to invoke regulation 883/04, However, the territorial limitation imposed by regulation 1231/10 still limits third-country nationals. The main issue is that regulation 1231/10 is restricted to EU territory. Outside of the EU, any requirement regarding equal treatment in accordance with regulation 1231/10 is not applicable. Decision 3/80, the European Convention on Social Security, the Dutch-Turkish social security treaty and ILO Treaty 118 also consider facts outside of the EU, as demonstrated by figures of the Employee Insurance Agency and Social Insurance Bank. Relevant facts outside of the EU include for example the periods of time third-country nationals lived and worked in third countries and the export of benefits to these countries. My proposal to conclude new treaties with third countries on the EU level was discussed in the context of the four analysed coordination schemes. In the discussion, I have researched what possibilities exist to include the techniques of the involved schemes in treaties with third countries, to address those exact issues faced by third country nationals as a result of the limited territorial scope of regulation 1231/10. In addition to facing possible issues because the territorial scope is limited to the EU, third-country nationals also face issues from regulation 1231/10 resulting from the requirement that a third-country national must be in a situation which is not confined in all respects within a single EU Member State. We have seen that the analysed coordination schemes do not require the cross-border movement between at least two EU Member States before involved persons can call upon the concerned coordination schemes. With respect to these coordination schemes, it suffices that the involved persons move from one treaty country to another. This is therefore not limited to just EU Member States. There are no relevant objections for cancelling the requirement that third-country nationals as a result of regulation 1231/10 ...

Between 1949 and 1962 the Netherlands renounced its sovereignty over most of its overseas territories. Nevertheless, during the entire period of the Cold War, the Royal Netherlands Navy (RNLN) stood by its point of view that it had a global task to fulfil. This military-naval deployment, outside the NATO treaty area during and shortly after the Cold War in relation to the structural global ambitions of the Royal Netherlands Navy's leadership, is the central theme of this study. This theme is analysed on the basis of theories and an understanding of multinational fleet operations after 1945 and Dutch policy regarding naval operations outside the NATO treaty area, but above all through regional case studies (Korean War 1950-1955, operations around the Arabian peninsula 1984-2000, and in the Adriatic Sea and Montenegrin waters 1992-2001). These case studies were examined by addressing the following central questions: to what extent did these missions involve a traditional approach to Dutch foreign policy? To what extent did the Navy's leadership influence the political-strategic decision-making on these out-of-area operations? To what extent were Dutch tasks and operations different from those of coalition partners, specifically those of the British Royal Navy, which the Royal Netherlands Navy considered to be its 'sister navy'? To what extent did the existing national and international perceptions of the RNLN influence Dutch decision-making on these missions, and how much did the participation in multinational fleet operations subsequently contribute to the objectives the Dutch government had in mind? In all the three case studies, the national and international perception of the Netherlands as a maritime nation and the ability to deploy high-quality navy units were taken into account in the Dutch government's decision-making regarding the RNLN participation in multinational fleet operations. The missions always received international, and especially British and American, appreciation and respect. The fact that ...

The present article was part of the conference Belgium and its foreign policy of November 2006, organized by the University of Gent and Catholic University Leuven. It presents an evaluation of the Belgian 2006 Presidency of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). A main objective has been to play an active role regarding the institutional reforms. Achieved were: increased efficacy of the organization, and a renewed confidence in communication between eastern- and western-member states (dividing line, Vienna); strengthening of the economic and ecological dimension, with as focus transport (achieved: increased cooperation between member states, special attention for land-locked countries, and transport-related security issues such ash illegal migration, human traffic, drug traffic, and terrorism); fight against international crime and promotion of the rule of law as central topic of the chairmanship (achieved: increased cooperation between member states); a constructive contribution to solving frozen conflicts (achieved: theoretical improvements). Concerning the human dimension of the OSCE: activities concerning access to legal advice, democratization, mediums freedom, trafficking of human beings, tolerance (the Danish cartoon crisis), and increased access of NGOs to OCSE meetings. References. O. van Zijl

Stöckmann, D.: Armed forces in a changing security and technological environment. - S. 1-5. Colson, B.: Le rôle de l'état dans les relations internationales. - S. 7-18. Chaliand, G.: Les nouvelles formes de conflits. - S. 19-22. Metz, S.: Changes in technology and warfare. - S. 23-27. Wijk, R. de: Welke veiligheids - en defensiepolitiek in deze veranderende context? - S. 29-36. Dannatt, F. R.: The consequences of this changing environment on security and defence policy. - S. 37-43. Lacoste, P.: L'évolution de l'environnement sécuritaire et technologique. - S. 45-51

This paper focuses on the European Security and Defense Policy and tries to answer the question why the member states have deviating deepening preferences in this field. After discovering the supranational-intergovernmental divide, we will determine its possible causes. The Qualitative Comparative Analysis helps us to distillate the most valuable independent variables and reveals 'institutional culture' and 'balancing' as most important. Finally, we match our findings with the initial theories, used to derive the causal variables, and verify their explanatory power. Adapted from the source document.