Archives 2020

EU VACCINATION 2020
Source: https://ec.europa.eu/

Writer: Hendra Manurung is currently a doctoral candidate in international relations at Padjadjaran University, Bandung, West Java

EU countries simultaneously initiate COVID-19 vaccination for their citizens from 27 to 29 December 2020. The push for mass vaccination has become even more urgent as the spread of cases of the global outbreak is due to the discovery of a new variant of the COVID-19 virus which originated in England a week before Christmas celebrations.

Therefore, through contextual phenomenon currently happens in the blue continent, most European countries are working to ensure that there will be access to safe vaccines across Europe, and encourages a coordinated approach of vaccination strategies for deployment of the vaccines.

The European Union has secured almost 2 billion doses of potential vaccine through six advance purchase agreements (APAs) for promising vaccine candidates, i.e.: 1) AstraZaneca: 300+100 million doses; 2) Sanofi-GSK: 300 million doses; 3) Janssen P.NV: 200+200 million doses; 4) BioNTech-Pfizer: 200+100 million doses; 5) CureVac: 225+180 million doses; 6) Moderna: 80+80 million doses (https://www.consilium.europa.eu).

Moreover, in line with the 17 June 2020 EU Vaccines Strategy, the European Commission and the Member States are securing the production of vaccines against COVID-19 through Advance Purchase Agreements with vaccine producers in Europe. Any vaccine will need to be authorized optimally by the European Medicine Agency according to regular safety and efficacy standards. Thus, all EU member states should start preparing a common vaccination strategy for vaccine deployment.

Previously, since the end of June 2020, some European Union countries have coordinated with global pharmaceutical companies to secure safe and effective vaccination for their citizens. These pharmaceutical companies have begun to apply for authorization to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), a condition they have to meet in order to deploy their vaccines on the EU’s market.  If EMA’s opinion is positive, vaccination could start just a few weeks ahead.

Thereafter, AstraZeneca as an international pharmaceutical company has a special condition with an ability to sell more in millions of doses optionally and guarantee the quantity of vaccine secured in million doses to the EU countries.

Further, a mass vaccination program began rolling out across the European Union (EU) affected COVID-19 countries on 27 December 2020 after several countries reported cases of a more contagious variant of the coronavirus. Thus, initial vaccination is given to health workers and those most at risk of contracting the disease. Most Western European and Southern European countries such as Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain have started injections in a campaign dubbed Vaccine Day or known as ‘V-Day:

Germany started its first vaccination campaign on 26 December 2020 and prioritized a small number of people in nursing homes inoculated at nursing homes in the city of Halberstadt. The German federal government plans to distribute more than 1.3 million doses of the vaccine to local health authorities starting at the end of December 2020.

Berlin plans to distribute more than 1.3 million doses by the end of 2020, and around 700 thousand doses per week starting January 2021. The COVID-19 vaccination program in Germany is free and can be implemented by every citizen starting mid-2021 once priority groups obtain it.

Hungary and Slovakia followed Germany and started vaccinating people on Saturday, 26/12/2020, a day before the vaccination launch announced by the EU.

Also, France started giving vaccines on Sunday, 27 December 2020. The country’s Ministry of Health declared that it had ordered nearly 68 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine from the EU. Related shipments will be made in the period of December 2020 and July 2021.

The first cases of a new variant of the coronavirus found in Britain were, according to British authorities, 70 percent more contagious. The Covid-19 mutation variant was detected in France, Ireland, and Sweden over the weekend. Fear of the new variant led Chinese aviation regulators to suspend flights to and from the UK on Sunday, 27/12/2020, until at least it lasts until January 10, 2021.

More than 40 countries, including France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, and Japan have also imposed travel restrictions from the UK. BioNTech believes that the coronavirus vaccine is expected to work against the new variant of the COVID-19 virus from the UK. But the German company says further studies are needed to fully confirm the efficacy of the vaccine it produces.

The UK government declares that it has allocated more than US$ 700 million (IDR 9.9 trillion) to ensure that lower-middle-income countries can vaccinate the continent’s most vulnerable populations.

Zimbabwe is one of the African countries that has received an offer from the British government to vaccinate 20 percent of Zimbabweans to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic (Herald, 24/12/2020). That 20 percent figure for COVID-19 vaccine assistance will cover the 3 million most vulnerable people in the country.

The Zimbabwean government plans to immediately prioritize vaccinations for frontline health workers and other vulnerable groups such as the elderly.

Zimbabwe is on the right track to becoming one of the African countries that will benefit from the international community regarding the distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine aid.

The EU’s regional vaccination campaign is coordinated on a scale unprecedented on the European continent. This step is considered important and a top priority for EU leaders and policy-makers, particularly in controlling the spread of the global pandemic, because it is given to around 450 million people in the EU. In Italy, the first dose of a vaccine developed by the United States drug-maker Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech.

Unfortunately, as of the last week of December 2020, Italy had recorded the highest death toll in Europe with 72,000, and it still has a long way to go to contain and limit the spread of the virus. A total of 9750 doses of the vaccine, which passed European regulations, have arrived in the country, which has an iconic Colosseum tourist destination. Italian Ministry of Health said that so far the dose was distributed in 20 regions.

Totally and still counting, these 27 EU countries have recorded nearly 16 million coronavirus infections and more than 353,000 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University data. More than 1.7 million people have died worldwide. Each decision-maker in EU countries is sure to make their own decisions about who should get the first injection. Most EU leaders pledged to prioritize vaccines for the elderly and residents in nursing homes.

It is targeted that all adult citizens in EU countries will be vaccinated during 2021.

Outside the EU countries, a number of countries have also implemented mass vaccinations, including China, Russia, Canada, the US, Switzerland, Serbia, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Mexico, Chile, and Costa Rica.

Meanwhile, the world is still currently competing to develop a Covid-19 vaccine, in which China has promised its neighboring countries in Southeast Asia to be at the forefront of meeting the need for vaccine availability after the development of vaccines in their country is ready for distribution.

A number of countries from Malaysia, the Philippines, to several countries in Africa, have been given priority access to the Chinese coronavirus vaccine. Chinese companies have also signed agreements with some of these developing countries to test and produce coronavirus vaccines. However, China’s aid has drawn many questions from world health experts that it is a diplomatic approach that can pressure other countries, particularly to support Beijing’s commercial and political interests under President Xi Jinping leadership.

It is concluded, as worldwide countries learn to live with the pandemic, the development and swift global deployment of safe and effective vaccines against COVID-19 remains an essential element in the eventual solution to overcome the current national public health crisis sooner or later.

‘Hope for the best and prepare for the worst’ by Roger L’Estrange (Seneca’s Morals, 1702).

RUSSIA INTEREST IN NAGORNO-KARABAKH CONFLICT
https://www.bbc.com, 6/10/2020

Writer: Hendra Manurung is a doctoral candidate in international relations at Padjadjaran University, Bandung, West Java

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a territorial dispute and is also can be categorized as an ethnic conflict involving Armenia and Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. It is de facto ruled by the self-proclaimed Nagorno-Karabakh Republic but is internationally recognized as part of the territory of Azerbaijan.

The Caucasus is a mountainous region of strategic importance in Southeastern Europe. Over the centuries various forces in the region, both orthodox Christians and Muslims, have competed for control there. Modern Armenia and Azerbaijan were part of the Soviet Union when it was formed in the 1920s. Nagorno-Karabakh is an ethnic Armenian majority area, but the Soviets gave control of the territory to the Azerbaijani authorities.

https://www.bbc.com, 10/11/2020

Historically, on February 20, 1988, the Council of Deputies of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region (NKAO), predominantly populated by Armenians, appealed to the leadership of the USSR (in Moscow), Armenian SSR, and Azerbaijan SSR with a request to transfer Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia (Kommersant.ru, 27/9/2020). The Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee refused, which led to mass protests in Yerevan and Stepanakert, as well as to pogroms among both the Armenian and Azerbaijani population.

However, in December 1989, the authorities of the Armenian SSR and NKAO signed a joint decree on the inclusion of the region in Armenia, to which Azerbaijan responded with artillery shelling of the Karabakh border. In January 1990, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR declared a state of emergency in the conflict zone.

It was only after the Soviet Union began to collapse in the late 1980s that the regional parliament in Nagorno-Karabakh formally elected to join Armenia.

Azerbaijan government, meanwhile, at that time tried to suppress the movement that wanted Nagorno-Karabakh to become part of Armenia. On the other hand, Armenia supports the group. This split situation eventually led to widespread inter-ethnic clashes. After Armenia and Azerbaijan declared independence at the end of the 1980s from the Soviet Union, an open war just broke out between the two countries.

In the late 1980s, both Armenia and Azerbaijan spun loose from Moscow’s yoke. Amid the chaos of the Soviet collapse, the ethnically Armenian Karabakh region attempted to break from Azerbaijani control. The ensuing war cost more than 30,000 lives and millions of people flee from their home-town.

During a virtual National Webinar held by AlMuslim University, Bireun Aceh on December 22, 2020 (Tuesday), with the theme: ‘Azerbaijan and Armenia Conflict: Political Development, Policy Priorities, and Choice for Peace’, Mr. Fauzi, Head of International Relations Department, started the event by conveying the need for a sustainable peace process by Azerbaijan and Armenia government in Central Asia.

While, Hendra Manurung stated that, the major hotspot of the dispute located in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, which Azerbaijan claims as to their national sovereign territory, has so far been controlled and monitored by separatist ethnic Armenians. These two countries were involved in bloody wars in the late 1980s and early 1990s (1988-1994). Up to the first week of November 2020, open conflict still has continued to spark a continuous armed war.

This inter-state conflict should be localized by Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Russia without involving other regional major power interventions such as Turkey, France, and Iran. It is also confirmed by Adri Patria.

Further, in late April to early May 1991, Operation Ring was carried out in NKAO by the forces of Azerbaijan OMON and USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs troops. Within three weeks, the Armenian population of 24 Karabakh villages was deported. It is more than 100 people were killed. The forces of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Soviet army carried out actions to disarm the participants in the clashes until August 1991, when a putsch began in Moscow, which led to the collapse of the USSR.

On September 2, 1991, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic was proclaimed in Stepanakert. Baku’s Official government recognized this act as illegal. During the outbreak of the war between Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Armenia supporting it, the sides lost from 15 thousand to 25 thousand people killed, more than 25 thousand were injured, hundreds of thousands of civilians left their places of residence. From April to November 1993, the UN Security Council adopted four resolutions demanding a ceasefire in the region.

Tens of thousands of people died in open warfare. About one million people were forced to flee. The two sides are suspected of committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. Most of the refugees in the war were Azerbaijanis.

The Armenian army controlled Nagorno-Karabakh before a Russian-mediated ceasefire was agreed upon in 1994. After the deal, Nagorno-Karabakh remained part of Azerbaijan. However, the territory was controlled by Armenian separatists who declared a separate and autonomous republic. The Armenian government in Yerevan has publicly supported the Nagorno-Karabakh declaration of independence. The ceasefire agreement also contained the Nagorno-Karabakh Contact Line. Its aim was to separate the Armenian and Azerbaijani forces.

On May 5, 1994, the three parties signed an armistice agreement, as a result of which Azerbaijan actually lost control over Nagorno-Karabakh. While Baku official government still considers the region to be occupied territory.

Nagorno-Karabakh region is part of Azerbaijan, but the majority of the region’s population has an Armenian ethnic background. But when some members of the Soviet Union challenged their independence in the 1980s, Nagorno-Karabakh citizens also chose to join Armenia. This decision sparked a conflict that only ended with a ceasefire in 1994. At the end of the conflict, Nagorno-Karabakh remained part of Azerbaijan but was controlled by ethnic Armenian separatists supported by the Armenian government.

Since the ceasefire peace talks have been continuously explored by the Minsk Group’s Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). It is a body formed in 1992, chaired by France, Russia, and the United States.

As consequence, peace negotiations initiated and mediated by influential countries in the world in the Minsk group such as France, Russia, and the US also failed to be agreed upon amongst conflicting countries.

The conflict was further complicated by the regional geopolitical situation. NATO member state Turkey was the first country to recognize Azerbaijan’s independence in 1991.

Armenia is a predominantly Orthodox Christian country. Meanwhile, the biggest religion in Azerbaijan is Islam. Turkey has close relations with Azerbaijan, while Russia is allied with Armenia, although Russia also has good relations with Azerbaijan.

Obviously, bloody clashes continued. Serious upheaval in 2016 killed dozens of soldiers, both Armenian and Azerbaijani.

Azeri Heydar Aliyev, former President of Turkey once described his country and Azerbaijan as “one nation-two countries”. Both countries have a culture and are inhabited by citizens of Turkish nationality. Turkey does not have official relations with Armenia. In 1993, Turkey closed its border with Armenia.

Therefore, Ankara’s policy is to show their full support for the Azerbaijan government during the war in the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

So far, Armenia has been on good terms with Russia, where Russia has a military base in Armenia. The two countries are members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) military alliance.

Russian President, Vladimir Putin, also has close ties with Azerbaijan. In 2018, there was a peaceful revolution in Armenia when the regime led by Serzh Sargsyan collapsed. The leader of the pro-revolution group, Nikol Pashinyan, was elected Prime Minister of Armenia after the 2018 elections. Pashinyan then agreed with the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, to reduce the escalation of tensions in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. They created the first military contact center which was planned to bridge the differences in the interests of the two countries.

In 2019, Armenia and Azerbaijan jointly stated the need to take concrete steps to prepare the population for peace. However this year, for several months tensions between the two countries have increased. There was also intense armed fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh. It is not clear who started the conflict last July. The events of that month took casualties on both sides. The battles for Armenia and Azerbaijan ended this November when they agreed to sign a peace deal that was mediated by Russia.

Based on that document, Azerbaijan will defend some of the areas it controlled during the conflict. As for Armenia, it will withdraw troops from several areas adjacent to the region.

The most serious clashes since July 2020 took place in the zone of the Armenian-Azerbaijani confrontation on September 27. Azerbaijani Defense Ministry stated that the Armenian armed forces fired at the positions of the Azerbaijani army “along the entire front line”. In response, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan stated that the Azerbaijani military had launched the attack.

Furthermore, on 10 November 2020, a peace agreement was concluded by Armenia and Azerbaijan, mediated by Russian President, Vladimir Putin. These two countries are splits of the Soviet Union which during the last few months were involved in military disputes, from July to early November 2020. The war has killed thousands of people, forced thousands of others to flee, and lost personal property such as houses and apartments.

On that date, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, and President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin stated that A complete ceasefire and termination of all hostilities in the area of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is declared.

Post peace deal agreement signing on November 10, 2020, Kremlin decides that the Russian government will deploy its peacemaking forces, consist of 1,960 troops armed with firearms, 90 armored vehicles, and 380 motor vehicles and units of special equipment, shall be deployed along the contact line in Nagorno-Karabakh and along the Lachin Corridor.

As agreed by Azerbaijan and Armenia, thus, within the next three years, a constructive plan will be outlined for the construction of a new route via the Lachin Corridor, to provide a connection between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia, and the Russian peacemaking forces shall be subsequently relocated to protect the route.

Sooner or later, Russian peacemaking forces will be deployed concurrently with the withdrawal of the Armenian troops. The peacemaking forces of the Russian Federation will be deployed for five years, a term to be automatically extended for subsequent five-year terms unless either Party notifies about its intention to terminate this clause six months before the expiration of the current term.

It will be followed with more efficient monitoring of the Parties’ fulfillment of the Agreements such a Peacemaking Center will be established to oversee the ceasefire process.

It is concluded, the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is a throwback to the death-throes of the Soviet Union.

In South Caucasus, for 32 years, Russia secured a truce but unfortunately failed to secure the regional peace and stability, which is well-known as Russian ‘backyard’ geopolitics interest in Central Asia and Southeast Europe.

RESETTING EU – US RELATIONS?

Writer: Muhadi Sugiono, UGM

The post-presidential election drama continues in the US. Despite the confirmation by the Electoral College of Joe Biden’s victory, Donald Trump remains reluctant to admit his defeat. Instead of congratulating the winner, Trump keeps on contesting the election result. Undeterred by the failure of his previous legal battle with the rejection of his lawsuit by the Supreme Court, he continues to contest the election result by filing a new lawsuit.

The world is watching the development in the US very carefully. The EU is no exception. Who will be the US president is particularly important for the EU. EU – US relations are at the lowest ebb under Trump’s administration. No doubt, the relations between the EU and the US were not always very smooth. But, the previous US presidents kept on treating the EU with respect or saw the EU as an important and valuable partner. Donald Trump, on the other hand, tended to disregard the EU. He looked at the EU with disdain and did not see it as relevant for the US. For the EU, therefore, the next US president will determine whether the relationship between the EU and the US will improve or otherwise worsen.

“I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade.” (CBC News)

The election of Joe Biden as the US President undoubtedly gives new hope for the EU to improve its relations with the US. The new President constitutes an opportunity for the EU to reset its transatlantic relations. But, a daunting task lies ahead given the damages that Trump’s administration has done to transatlantic relations.

One of the most important characters in Trump’s administration has been the distrust of multilateralism. The distrust of multilateralism had significant impacts on international cooperation such as setbacks in the free trade agreements, in the climate change negotiation as well as in the combating of global pandemic Covid-19. Trump’s tendency towards unilateralism was also manifested in his direct confrontational stands against China and the questioning of the transatlantic alliance (NATO). At the same time, the populism of President Trump has led to the adoption of various polarising policies. Trump disrespected women and minorities, was tolerant of the authoritarian governments and had no interest in combating global poverty and in development. In addition, Trump’s response to Brexit was a big disappointment for the EU. While the EU and the UK were in the negotiating process to settle the consequences of Brexit, Trump without considering that the UK was during this process still an EU member and was tied to obligations as a member, expressed his willingness to conclude trade bilateral agreement with the UK. Trump expressed this willingness even before he was inaugurated as the US President.

All those characteristics which the US under Trump has brought about are in contradiction to the EU vision as reflected in the EU Global Strategy. The EU Global Strategy envisions a multilateral world order based on rule of law, common values, and interests. As such, the EU Global Strategy does not only reflect the EU’s core interest and principles but also guides the EU in relations to the wider world.

Resetting the transatlantic relations for the EU does not only mean to repair the damaged transatlantic relations but also to bring back the commitment of the US as an important EU partner in building a world based on multilateralism and global interest and norms. In addition, it becomes an urgent need for the EU as Europe is facing a more challenging security environment with the more confident Russia under Putin, uncertainty on Turkey as well as continuing threat of terrorism as a result of the conflicts in the region close to Europe.

But while it has been almost certain that Joe Biden will be the next US president, the reset button cannot work properly until the election drama ends.

INDONESIA-VIETNAM RELATIONS: CHALLENGE TO SE ASIA STABILITY
Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Retno L.P Marsudi met Vietnam Minister of Foreign Affairs, Pham Binh Minh (Dec.23, 2019) Source: kemlu.go.id

Writer: Hendra Manurung is currently doctor candidate in international relations at Padjadjaran University, Bandung, West Java

During the Cold War era which involves the Soviet Union and the United States, Indonesia and Vietnam officially established diplomatic relations on 30 December 1955 with the opening of the Indonesian Consulate in Hanoi which was later upgraded to the Embassy on 10 August 1964.

President Ho Chi Minh and President Soekarno are two leaders who have laid the foundations for friendly relations between Vietnam and Indonesia. In its 65-year history, this relationship has been maintained and developed by generations of leaders and the people of the two countries to this day. In the midst of the rivalry between the US and China in the South China Sea region, the two countries in Southeast Asia need to continuously optimize efforts to maintain and develop strategic relations in the region.

Indonesia’s relations with Vietnam began in 1955. At that time, Mr. Soedibjo Wirjowerdojo is the first Consul General of the Republic of Indonesia who was appointed and assigned a diplomatic tour of duty to occupy a pioneering representative post at the Consulate General of the Republic of Indonesia for Vietnam which is still domiciled in Hanoi.

Vietnam and Indonesia are members of ASEAN. Indonesian President Megawati Sukarnoputri visited Vietnam in June 2003. At this time the two countries signed a “Declaration on a Framework for Friendly and Comprehensive Cooperation Entering the 21st Century”.

In May 2005, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono visited Hanoi, Vietnam. And in December of the same year celebrations were held in the respective capitals to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries.

In April 2015, the Prime Minister of Vietnam, Truong Tang San expressed his appreciation to the Indonesian government for organizing the 60th Asia Africa Summit Leaders Meeting. It is due to the political and economic benefits that were not only felt by the Asia Africa region but also experienced by the international community.

Vietnam hopes to increase and strengthen defense cooperation with Indonesia, especially in the provision of joint military training, transfer of military technology, and joint marine patrols.

Regarding maritime issues, Vietnam is optimistic about the prospect of negotiations with Indonesia. It is ensured that through continuous negotiations regarding maritime borders between the two countries so far has been going well, and will reach an agreement that affirms each other’s territorial sovereignty.

Meanwhile, President Joko Widodo conveyed Indonesia’s commitment in overcoming the problem of illegal fishing, that this problem is a joint problem between Indonesia and Vietnam that must be resolved immediately.

Further, in October 2018, Indonesia and Vietnam also agreed to strengthen cooperation on economy, trade, and investment. Indonesia and Vietnam have intensified their bilateral cooperation in recent times. This reflects the high intensity of bilateral relations based on the Strategic Partnership of Indonesia and Vietnam in the Southeast Asia region, increasing bilateral trade, strengthening cooperation in a number of other fields such as negotiations on the exclusive economic zones of each country, eradicating illegal fishing, and cooperation to advance ASEAN, and enhance cooperation in both countries maritime sectors.

Jakarta appreciates the assistance of the Vietnamese government for barriers to Indonesia’s automotive exports to Vietnam.

Indonesian entrepreneurs should optimize new Vietnamese markets, particularly among others in relation to trade-economic cooperation of pharmaceutical products and medical devices.

In the next 10 to 20 years, the increasing bilateral economic trade and investment relations between the two countries will benefit both parties in the future.

Jakarta and Hanoi also emphasized their position on the importance of maintaining a conducive situation in the South China Sea region, amidst Beijing’s nine-dash line claims that did not respect the 1982 UNCLOS.

Thus, regarding the South China Sea issue, Indonesia is willing to act as an honest broker by adhering to the Declaration of Conduct (DoC) and Code of Conduct (CoC) initiated by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

In 2020, Viet Nam and Indonesia will both become non-permanent members of the UN Security Council.

The two neighboring countries in Southeast Asia need to boost political economy cooperation as well as strengthen both contributions to stability and peace in the region and globally, especially in response to the escalation of tensions related to the possibility of open conflict in the South China Sea region involving the US and China in the near future.

Furthermore, these two countries are strategic partners and agree to continue to push for the implementation of the Plan of Action for the period from 2019 to 2023, especially economic cooperation, increase bilateral trade, investment, progress in the field of air-connectivity, and finalize Exclusive Economic Zone negotiations.

Meanwhile, Indonesia supports ASEAN as a regional organization present in Southeast Asia to continue to advance the issue of women’s rights, peace, security, and the latest developments Rakhine State as one of the priorities for Vietnam’s chairmanship in 2020.

ASEAN needs to increase its role in helping solve the Rakhine State problem, including accelerating the repatriation process of refugees from Bangladesh in a voluntary, safe, and dignified manner. Both welcomed the involvement of ASEAN representatives in the Second High-Level Visit, from 17 to 20 December 2020 at Cox’s Bazaar.

It is also necessary to prioritize the review of the terms of reference of the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights to achieve a balanced mandate between the promotion and protection of human rights in the region.

Apart from the importance of continuing ASEAN and Chinese negotiations regarding the progress of the Code of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (COC), which in 2020 will continue a second reading. The two countries agreed to emphasize that the COC must be substantive, effective, and implementable to create an area that is conducive to territorial dispute resolution.

To conclude, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, this strategic partnership relationship between Vietnam and Indonesia must be maintained and it is ensured that it will develop faster and stronger for the sake of the national interests of the two countries, as well as maintaining regional peace, stability, and prosperity in the Southeast Asia and the South China Sea regions.

INDONESIA SOFT POWER: TOBA CALDERA AS UNESCO GLOBAL GEOPARK 2020

Writer: 1. Hendra Manurung, 2. Elvinro Sinabariba

1. International Relations, Padjadjaran University

2. State Senior High School Number 1 Pangururan, Samosir

1. hendra19001@mail.unpad.ac.id,

2. elvinrosnb@yahoo.co.id

Abstract: This research aims to describe analytically Toba Caldera’s ability to become one of the UNESCO Global Geopark in 2020. The research used a qualitative research method and is done through literature studies, government documents, and internet sources. Researchers founded, there are inter-linkages amongst Indonesia’s central and local government together with stakeholders’ continuous contribution who concern with Toba Caldera’s sustainable tourism development. Those concerning parties fought for Toba Caldera’s recognition status as the UNESCO Global Geopark. From 2011 to 2020, for nine years, the Toba Caldera was finally named a UNESCO Global Geopark during the UN Cultural Body’s 209th Plenary Session held in Paris on July 7, 2020. Toba Caldera Geopark was a worldwide tourist magnet as it was home to 13 sites with breathtaking views, namely: Tongging Sipiso-Piso, Silalahi Sabungan, Haranggaol, Sibaganding Parapat, Eden Park, Balige Liong Spige Meat, Situmurun Blok Uluan, Hutaginjang, Muara Sibandang, Sipinsur Bakti Raja, Bakara Tipang, Tele Pangururan, and Pusuk Buhit. A ceremony where the UNESCO Global Geopark placard will be formally given to the Toba caldera is slated to be held in Jeju, South Korea, by September 2020. According to a statement from the Indonesian Embassy in Paris, Toba Caldera is among the 16 new UNESCO Global Geoparks announced by the organization’s executive board. North Sumatra provincial administration is hopeful that the recognition will help boost foreign tourist arrivals to the destination.

Keywords: Toba caldera, UNESCO, Indonesia soft power, sustainable tourism development, tourist destination

Download the full version of the articles at this link: 2140-Article Text-8475-1-10-20201208

Indonesia-North Korea Diplomatic Relations: Effort to Pursue National Interest and Create Regional Peace

Indonesia-North Korea Diplomatic Relations: Effort to Pursue National Interest and Create Regional Peace

Writer: Hendra Manurung Mahasiswa Doktoral Hubungan Internasional, Universitas Padjajaran email: hendra19001@mail.unpad.ac.id

Direvisi: 14 Agustus 2020 Disetujui: 15 September 2020 doi: 10.22212/jp.v11i2.1466

Abstract: This article aims to analyze the implementation of Indonesia’s foreign policy towards North Korea over its approximately fifty-nine years of bilateral relations, since 17 June 1961. The arguments posited in this regard is that the implementation of Indonesia’s foreign policy towards North Korea has been counterproductive. Under the leadership of President Joko Widodo, Indonesia actually has great potential to influence North Korea’s conducts through the close diplomatic relations that the two countries have developed. The friendship between Indonesia and North Korea began since the two states conducted reciprocal official visits 1964 and 1965. Indonesia’s foreign policy towards South Korea has often been carried out to influence the offensive decisions of North Korean leaders, especially in relation to the issue of nuclear weapon development. The key question is what should and can Indonesia do next to help create peace and stability in the Korean Peninsula by adhering to the principles of a free and active foreign policy? Why is it necessary for Indonesia to do this and how can Indonesia carry out this foreign policy towards North Korea? After becoming President since 2011, Kim Jong-un had to weaken his father’s winning coalition to consolidate domestic political stability. However, North Korea’s domestic market reforms have had the effect of eroding the Kim family’s ideological appeal. This is relevant to the expansion of political influence from Pyongyang, which prioritizes the continuation of a fragile centralized authoritarian power while maintaining sustainable domestic economic growth. Keywords: Indonesia; North Korea; Foreign Policy; Denuclearization; Regional Stability.

Hubungan Diplomatik Indonesia – Korea Utara: Upaya Mewujudkan Kepentingan Nasional dan Menciptakan Perdamaian Regional

Abstrak: Artikel ini bertujuan menjelaskan secara analitis bagaimana implementasi kebijakan luar negeri Indonesia terhadap Korea Utara selama 59 tahun sejak 17 Juni 1961. Argumen yang ingin disampaikan terkait implementasi kebijakan luar negeri Indonesia terhadap Korea Utara adalah kontraproduktif. Indonesia di bawah kepemimpinan Presiden Joko Widodo berpotensi besar untuk mampu memengaruhi perilaku Korea Utara melalui hubungan diplomatik. Persahabatan Indonesia dan Korea Utara dimulai sejak saling kunjung di 1964 dan 1965. Orientasi politik luar negeri Indonesia di masa lalu hingga saat ini, telah sering dilakukan untuk memengaruhi keputusan ofensif para pemimpin Korea Utara, khususnya terkait dengan isu pengembangan senjata nuklir. Pertanyaannya adalah apa yang harus dan sebaiknya dilakukan Indonesia selanjutnya untuk membantu menciptakan perdamaian dan stabilitas di Semenanjung Korea dengan tetap berpegang pada prinsip politik luar negeri bebas dan aktif? Mengapa hal tersebut perlu dilakukan oleh Indonesia dan bagaimana cara menjalankan kebijakan luar negeri terhadap Korea Utara tersebut? Kim Jong-un, setelah menjadi Presiden sejak 2011, harus melemahkan posisi koalisi pemenang ayahnya untuk konsolidasi stabilitas politik dalam negeri. Bagaimanapun, reformasi pasar domestik Korea Utara telah berdampak pada pengikisan daya tarik ideologis keluarga Kim. Hal ini relevan dengan perluasan pengaruh politik dari Pyongyang memprioritaskan pada keberlangsungan kekuatan otoriter terpusat yang rentan seiring bagaimana dapat mempertahankan pertumbuhan ekonomi dalam negeri berkelanjutan. Kata kunci: Indonesia; Korea Utara; Kebijakan Luar Negeri; Denuklirisasi; Stabilitas Kawasan

Download the full version of this article in this link: 2020 Indonesia-North Korea Diplomatic Relations

THE FUTURE OF EU – UK TRADE RELATIONS
Source: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Writer: Hendra Manurung, is doctoral candidate in international relations at Padjadjaran University, Bandung

The European Union and the United Kingdom continue to break the deadlock in trade negotiations due to the particular subject matter locked. If there is no agreement, their relationship deteriorated.

The future of trade relations between the UK and the European Union is not getting better. This is because several rounds of negotiations to direct telecommunications between British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have not been able to bridge the differences in perspective between the two sides. It is mainly related to the standard issue of export and import goods, fishing rights, and the issue of dispute resolution or legal disputes between both sides.

Further, another thing that also complicates the field situation is the plan of Paris against every clause of the EU treaty and the UK which is considered to sacrifice French fishermen and its national fisheries sectors.

In early September 2020, the British Government asked the European Union to take a stand on trade deals after Brexit. According to Boris Johnson, if there is no agreement or agreement then there is no free trade and it must be accepted by all parties.

Britain has officially left the European Union on January 31, 2020. According to Johnson, it doesn’t matter if the relationship between Britain and the European Union can be like Australia, where the two countries combine WTO rules with specific agreements for certain products.

Apart from the positive influences that Britain and member countries of the Commonwealth of Nations have had due to Britain’s membership in the European Union, in fact, there are still those who think that Britain’s membership in the European Union only limits Britain’s space for movement, especially in terms of trade interactions with other countries including with fellow members of the Commonwealth of Nations. These parties consider the European Union too restrictive to Britain, with many regulations that must be met.

This is the reason for the emergence of the term Brexit. The term Brexit is a combination of Britain and exit policy. The meaning of this term is a call for Great Britain to leave the European Union. Debates within the United Kingdom as well as within the Commonwealth of Nations over Brexit are inevitable. Those who have felt the benefits of Britain’s membership in the European Union are certainly against the Brexit call. Meanwhile, those who feel that Britain is limited in its space and too limited by the European Union with a series of regulations made by the European Union are pro parties to the Brexit call.

In 2016, this debate led to the holding of the UK Membership Referendum in the European Union which resulted in 51.9% of voters saying they supported Britain leaving the European Union and 48.1% of voters said they expected Britain to remain a member of the European Union.

Britain, which is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations as well as a member of the European Union, acts as an ambassador for the Commonwealth of Nations in the European Union. Therefore, Britain’s membership in the European Union indirectly provides its own benefits for member states of the Commonwealth of Nations.

The relationship between the Commonwealth of Nations and the European Union is a reciprocal relationship between the two supranational institutions in the European region. These two supranational institutions have a high commitment to their member countries.

Both the European Union and the Commonwealth of Nations have always played an active role in initiating relations and forging cooperation with other countries and international organizations. Currently, both the European Union and the Commonwealth of Nations are proactively pursuing the realization of free trade agreements with their partner countries and organizations.

So far, Britain’s membership in the European Union has opened a gateway of access for countries that are members of the Commonwealth of Nations to establish good relations and cooperation with the European Union. UK membership in the European Union means that countries that are members of the Commonwealth of Nations can be represented in the European Union even though these countries are not members of the European Union.

In the trade sector, the influence of Britain’s membership in the European Union for member countries of the Commonwealth of Nations is very clear. In fact, in 2016, nearly 80% of the member states of the Commonwealth of Nations were in the process of negotiating with the European Union on trade contracts. The advantages of this trade contract are significant both for the member states of the Commonwealth of Nations and for Britain itself. Britain’s membership in the European Union makes Britain at the forefront of strengthening relations between countries that are members of the Commonwealth of Nations and the European Union. Britain is involved in efforts to initiate negotiations on a free trade agreement between the European Union and Australia and New Zealand. Britain’s membership in the European Union also allows Britain to push the EU to realize a free trade agreement with India. Clearly, Britain’s membership in the European Union makes it possible for The UK can show its consistency in fighting for access to the European Union market for developing countries, whether they are members of the Commonwealth of Nations or that are not members of the Commonwealth of Nations.

However, London targets this agreement should to be completed on 15 October 2020. In addition to and is currently preparing rules for borders, seaports, and making strict regulations issues related to the marine and fisheries sector.

Thus, it will continue with the rules regarding aviation, transportation to scientific cooperation. British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson emphasized that there are still problems to be resolved in this trade agreement, although he did not give details on the matter.

The British government implements this agreement in accordance with international law and no political games are played by London. Thus, if there is no agreement, the potential US$ 900 billion in trade transactions between Britain and Europe could enter into the abyss of uncertainty sooner or later.

At present, if there is no agreement, it is certain that the economic relations of the two sides will deteriorate and become a heavy pressure on economic business entities and citizens of the European Union in general.

If the condition of the European Union described without Britain in 2020 (Eurostat, 2020), the area of the European Union is 4.22 million km2, reduced by the UK’s territory reaching 0.25 million km2; the population of the European Union (2019) is 447 million, also reduced by 67 million people in the UK; The GDP of the European Union (2019) reached Euro 13.95 trillion, and the UK GDP reached Euro 2.52 trillion.

For twenty years (2000-2020), the UK is well-known as one of the best countries for ease of doing business and is the 6th largest economy in the world. The UK is the number one destination for foreign investment in Europe. Current rates of investment into the UK technology sector are better than those of technology superpowers such as the US and China. London has more digital tech start-ups than any other city in western, central and eastern Europe.

The future of the UK and EU relations is based on mutual trust and belief. Thus, this trust is at stake in the final settlement of the trade agreement negotiations between the two.

The most difficult problem is how to guarantee fair and sustainable trade in the future; In addition to imposing sanctions if one of the contents of the agreement experiences a setback or a deadlock, for example, related to environmental or health standards issues, it must also be a serious concern and how the settlement mechanism can be mutually agreed upon.

The European Union is much concerned that London will cut regulations that could allow British companies to weaken the business expansion of European multinational companies.

Meanwhile, after Brexit at the end of January 2020, the UK is obviously focused on expanding global trade, especially looking for new markets in other parts of the world. Indonesia must be able to utilize and strengthen the potential for economic, trade, and investment relations with the UK.

It is expected that the UK and Indonesian trade relations will remain the same. In fact, the British government believes there will be momentum opportunities to boost bilateral trade cooperation with Indonesia after the Brexit, which is certain to develop great economic, trade, and investment opportunities for Indonesia.

The situation of solving the problem between the UK and the European Union is complex, but it requires a breakthrough, willingness, and goodwill from the British Prime Minister and the leaders of influential countries in the European Union to make efforts to find the best solution for all to avoid deadlock situations and not mutually profitable for all.

Coronavirus: Italy bans Christmas travel between regions

Italy is banning travel between its regions from 21 December to 6 January as part of strict coronavirus curbs over the Christmas holidays.

A curfew from 22:00 to 05:00 will also be in place.

Restaurants can open in some regions until 18:00 but only takeaways are allowed in other parts of the country. Ski slopes must close until 7 January.

It comes as Italy announced its highest daily Covid death toll since the pandemic started, with 993 fatalities.

“We cannot let down our guard,” Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte told a news conference.

“We must eliminate the risk of a third wave which could arrive in January – and not less serious than the first and the second,” he added.

There will be travel exceptions for work, medical reasons or emergencies.

On top of the regional travel bans, people will not be allowed to leave their home towns on Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year’s Day.

The new curbs have been criticised in a joint statement by regional authorities, who say they were not consulted by the central government.

“The lack of discussion has made it impossible to balance the curbs with the needs of families,” the statement said.

Attilio Fontana, governor of the northern Lombardy region, which has reported the most cases and deaths, called the new rules “crazy”.

More than 58,000 people have lost their lives to Covid-19 in Italy.

Before Thursday, the country’s previous record daily death toll was 969 on 27 March.

The entire contents of this article are taken from bbc.com

Inggris, Uni Eropa Lanjutkan Perundingan Perdagangan

Tim-tim Inggris dan Uni Eropa melanjutkan perundingan tatap muka mengenai perjanjian perdagangan pasca Brexit, tapi kedua pihak sepertinya masih belum akan menyepakati suatu perjanjian segera.

Kepala juru runding Uni Eropa Michel Barnier kembali ke London untuk bertemu juru runding dari Inggris, David Frost, setelah menyelesaikan isolasi mandiri karena sebuah kasus virus corona dalam timnya.

Perundingan masih tersendat seputar isu-isu penting termasuk hak-hak penangkapan ikan dan peraturan kompetisi yang adil, dan Barnier mengatakan bahwa “perbedaan signifikan yang sama, masih berlanjut.”

Inggris meninggalkan Uni Eropa awal tahun ini, tapi masih menjadi bagian dari ekonomi blok itu dalam periode transisi 11 bulan, sementara kedua pihak berusaha merundingkan perjanjian perdagangan baru untuk diberlakukan mulai 1 Januari.

Perundingan telah melampaui pertengahan November, tanggal yang dianggap sebagai tenggat untuk menyepakati perjanjian tepat waktu untuk disetujui dan diratifikasi oleh parlemen di Inggris dan Uni Eropa.

Inggris rencananya akan meninggalkan struktur ekonomi Uni Eropa pada 31 Desember. Apabila perjanjian tak segera dicapai, maka tahun baru akan sangat menyulitkan, dengan adanya penerapan tarif dan hambatan perdagangan lain. Itu akan merugikan kedua pihak, terutama Inggris yang melakukan separuh perdagangan dengan Uni Eropa. [vm/ft]

 

Seluruh isi berita dalam artikel ini diambil secara utuh dari VOA Indonesia

Brexit: Is there enough time left to ratify a UK-EU trade deal even if one is agreed?

Writer: Alasdair Sandford

Even if the EU and the UK succeed at this late, late stage in striking a post-Brexit trade deal, a new race against time will begin.

An agreement needs to be ratified on both sides to ensure it comes into force by January 1 after the transition period expires.

“Crunch” weeks have come and gone, as has Boris Johnson’s mid-October deadline. In June EU negotiator Michel Barnier said a full legal text would be needed “by 31 October at the latest”. Experts in procedure later said agreement would have to be reached by mid-November, and that has passed too.

In football terms, we are now deep into stoppage time and several minutes beyond the number flashing on the touchline electronic board.

Overcoming the familiar obstacles relating to fishing rights, future competition and an enforcement mechanism is likely to require some imagination and a brave political leap.

If a Brexit rabbit is suddenly pulled out of the hat, the UK and especially the EU will then need to pull out all the procedural stops.

EU ratification — not a simple process

On the EU side, an agreement struck by the Commission would need the backing of national leaders in the European Council, and the European Parliament. Michel Barnier has kept national envoys regularly updated on progress during the negotiations, with little sign of disunity.

Firstly, a deal needs to be turned into legal text. This involves a process known as “legal scrubbing”, to ensure it is legally robust. The range of topics expected to be covered is huge: among them trade in goods and services, fishing and farming, aviation, security cooperation, data policy, education and science.

Reports quoting officials suggest a future treaty could run to 1,800 pages — three times the length of the Withdrawal Agreement in the divorce deal that took the UK out of the EU last January.

Translation from English into the EU’s 23 other languages is likely to be a formidable task. However, despite the deadlock on key issues a draft is said to be 95% complete, and it’s thought some translation may be done in advance.

The deal would need ratification from the European Parliament, by a simple majority of all votes cast. MEPs cannot make amendments, yet some have made it clear that they are not going to rubber-stamp an agreement but give it thorough scrutiny.

The parliament can speed up its procedures, by for instance waiving its committee stage which normally produces a report for MEPs with recommendations. However, passing such an important and far-reaching deal in under a month would be a tall order.

The last plenary session of the European Parliament is in mid-December, so MEPs may have to organise a special meeting in the week after Christmas to vote on a deal.

Some policy areas may come under what is known as “mixed” or “shared” competence, meaning subject also to the approval of national and even regional assemblies. Member states can collectively decide to limit ratification to EU level, but several are certain to want to analyse the text in detail including in their parliaments.

After the European Parliament’s consent, the deal would return to the Council to be formally adopted.

UK approval should be easier than last time

Ratification on the British side should be simpler, not least because of the 80-strong majority enjoyed by Boris Johnson’s government. A repeat of the acrimonious parliamentary deadlock that repeatedly delayed Brexit itself is highly unlikely.

By law, the government can ratify a treaty 21 sitting days after it is laid before parliament. The process can be speeded up if necessary. If MPs vote against it, a further 21-day period kicks in. However, under Brexit legislation already passed the government is not obliged to hold a vote.

Further legislation may be needed though to implement an EU-UK treaty. UK parliamentary managers have reportedly been drawing up legislation in anticipation of a deal, in order to get it passed in time for January 1.

What happens if the process runs out of time?

Throughout the autumn, commentators have said time is running out to strike a deal. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told MEPs on Wednesday (November 25) that these were now “decisive days”.

EU officials have often said that Brussels will not pull the plug on talks, but it may have to announce that ratification is no longer possible by December 31.

Boris Johnson’s government refused an extension to the post-Brexit transition period, which since the summer has been legally impossible anyway under the terms of the divorce deal. One possibility might be for the EU and the UK to agree to apply a deal provisionally, pending ratification.

Much may depend on whether there is any political will to reach an agreement. Otherwise, contingency plans are likely to come into play for a “no-deal scenario”.

All the text copied from euronews