Toespraak minister Blok TRT World Forum

Toespraak | 04-10-2018

‘Exploring a Just Peace in a Fragmented World’

Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

I would like to thank my friend minister Çavuşoğlu for inviting me to this important forum today. It’s a great honour to be here, in the margins of a bilateral visit. We’ve had a number of productive and in-depth conversations on many topics. Turkey is privileged to have such an experienced foreign minister, with a broad knowledge of both foreign policy and the EU.

Relations between Turkey and the Netherlands go back more than 400 years. Indeed, the Dutch were one of the first countries to have a diplomatic presence here. Like any long relationship, we’ve had our ups and downs, but it’s a relationship that has stood the test of time.

But I was not invited here to talk about bilateral issues. I was asked to speak about global affairs. To be more precise, about achieving ‘just peace in a fragmented world’. Quite a challenging and broad topic, as I’m sure you’ll agree.

Of course, I’m more than happy to oblige. And I’d like to begin with the second half of the phrase: ‘a fragmented world.’

It isn’t hard to show that the world is fragmented. Especially before this distinguished audience of experts on international affairs. So that part of my analysis can be brief. You’re well aware of the facts.

But let me briefly cite some of the key forms of fragmentation we see in today’s world. And I’ll limit myself to five main points:

First: after two decades of unipolarity, we now live in a multipolar world, with economic power shifting towards the east and the south, as old alliances try to adapt to the new reality. It’s a world where multilateralism and the systems of international cooperation set up after World War Two are under pressure; and where the principle of ‘might makes right’ is consequently in danger of gaining the upper hand.

It’s a world where states are no longer the single dominant factor at play. Non–state actors are growing more and more influential. (The rise of ISIS is a harrowing example of this, and Turkey has borne a disproportionately heavy burden in this regard, unfortunately.)

It’s a world where classic threats remain, but new, often undetectable hybrid threats have entered the mix: cyberthreats, meddling by foreign actors and fake news, to name but a few….

We live in a world where people have become increasingly mobile. This has benefited many, but it can lead to disruptive irregular migration patterns when not handled responsibly. Turkey knows this all too well, as host to an astonishing 3.5 million Syrian refugees, with all the challenges this entails. We truly appreciate this tremendous humanitarian effort. And by relocating refugees to the Netherlands and providing financial support to the EU Facility for Refugees in Turkey, we’re happy we can help in this effort.

And lastly: this is a world where all levels of society and government are interconnected, and sometimes collide. Where geopolitics can enter all of our homes at the swipe of a screen. Where the distinction between external and internal policies has totally disappeared.

I’m sure we could add some other, equally important elements to this list, like climate change and the global rise of populist movements, but as a politician rather than a scholar, I’m not trying to be exhaustive.

Now that we’ve established that the world is indeed fragmented, I’d like to move on to how we can best deal with these phenomena. And this brings me back to the proposition I was asked to discuss here: achieving just peace.

‘Just peace’.

It sounds simple, doesn’t it? Two little words; yet they represent the most precious thing we have, and the hardest to achieve, too.

How can we achieve it?

Let me run through five elements that I – and my country – believe are essential in our fragmented world.

Rules-based international cooperation and respect for international law

Ladies and gentlemen,

I come from a small, open and wealthy country that is heavily dependent on trade – trade with our partners, both close and faraway. A country that remembers the devastation of at least one world war, and the pain of decades of rebuilding. A country that has first-hand experience of what happens when the international order breaks down. A country that – like many, many others – has a tremendous interest in preserving international law and a rules-based international legal order.

And when I say ‘rules-based international order’, I mean that in the broadest sense of the term, encompassing all the various structures of international cooperation that benefit us so greatly. Structures of cooperation where countries come together, because they prefer to meet in conference halls rather than on the battlefield. And because they believe in working together towards common goals.

For Europe, this has resulted in peace through integration.

For NATO, this has meant peace through pooling resources and common defence.

For the UN, this has led to peace through cooperation and the development of a rules-based international order. Or, as the UN Charter rightly puts it: ‘[the] conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained’.

My country has invested heavily in promoting a rules-based international order, since as far back as the days of Hugo Grotius. As host to the Hague Peace Conferences, the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court and other key international legal institutions, the Netherlands has a proud tradition of championing international law. Indeed, it is enshrined in our Constitution.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is not merely an interesting historical fact. Nor is it an idealistic notion.

It is, on the contrary, a highly realistic aim. I consider myself a realist. And I strongly believe that, now more than ever, a dependable, rule-based legal order is a essential for security, stability and economic growth.

When respected, such an order is our best guarantee for prosperity – and the best available tool for conflict prevention. That is no less true in this day and age.

Robustness when needed: investing in credible security

As the Roman writer Vegetius observed in his Rei Militaris Instituta:

‘If you want peace, prepare for war.’ Unfortunately, that principle is also still true today.

A realist like me cannot help but concede that a just peace sometimes requires more than simply talk.

We need to be ready, when all other options are exhausted, to use other means than words. We need to be ready to exert real pressure, to hit an opponent where it hurts. After all, by imposing punitive sanctions the world forced North Korea back to the negotiating table.

In some cases, we even have to be ready to take the kind of steps we’re all working so hard to avoid. The threat of military action is sometimes enough; deterrence is a major component of defence.

But sometimes it’s necessary to go even further. When all options have exhausted, and our very existence is threatened, the use of military force cannot be ruled out. In extreme cases, we have to be ready to take up arms, even if we don’t want to.

The threat of ISIS was such a case. A 79-member coalition joined forces and managed to defeat an apocalyptic army of 30,000 fighters that was causing havoc in Iraq and Syria. As a result, ISIS now has almost no territory left in Iraq and Syria. We don’t want to play the military card, but we must be prepared to, as a last resort.

This implies a need to invest in our security, and in our military personnel and capabilities. In an uncertain geopolitical context, increased expenditure on defence is necessary to ensure stability, as agreed at the NATO summit in Wales. Turkey, as a key NATO ally, knows this better than anyone. The Netherlands is working towards this commitment. For its part, Turkey is one of only a handful of allies that has already fulfilled the Wales commitments. I commend you for it.

And Turkey, like the Netherlands, shoulders its security responsibility in the NATO alliance. Since 2001 our soldiers have stood shoulder to shoulder in Afghanistan. To prevent this troubled country from falling back in instability.

So, just peace and security go hand in hand.

But I also want to highlight the importance of rules.

Even in cases where we have no other option than to take up arms, there are rules we must follow. In order to have just peace, our use of force must also be just. We must abide by the laws of armed conflict, and even in situations of conflict the principles of international humanitarian law must be fully respected.

This brings me to my third point:

Predictability as one of the central components of peace

Predictability breeds confidence.

And confidence is the most vital component of international relations. This should never be taken for granted. Certainly not in this day and age, when some seem to think they can deny its importance without consequences.

Building confidence takes hard work, persistence and a long view. It often occurs behind the scenes, where so much useful work is done.

Building confidence is the work of all of you here, and I commend you for it.

Building confidence in international relations takes many different forms, in many different arenas. I mentioned the EU, NATO and the UN. But also forums like the GCTF, where 29 countries work together to tackle a shared challenge.

Consider, for example, of the success of the Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA. Europe has stuck to the agreement that was reached.

Consider, also, the importance of solid and predictable trade agreements, which level the playing field. In the WTO framework, countries refrain from taking unilateral steps because in the long run, it’s not in anyone’s interest to damage that hard-fought level playing field.

Building confidence by being predictable also means honouring the principle: Pacta sunt servanda – ‘rules are to be respected’. Internally, and externally, in relation to our partners.

For a country like the Netherlands, as a member of so many international forums:

This means you can count on your allies. A clear example of this was when we provided Patriot missiles for the Turkish border. To protect Turkey against attacks from Syria.

It means not shying away from reform. But reform must be constructive, moving with the organisation, not against it. With the ultimate goal of making the organisation better. That goes for the UN, of course, but also for the EU and NATO.

It means we must be prepared to address difficult questions. In regional bodies like the EU, we must be especially strict about issues like budgetary discipline. And to ensure that there are consequences when it is not observed.

It also means being consistent about accession criteria – ‘strict and fair’.

This principle is true for migration as well. We will respect the UN Refugee Convention. But we will also honour our agreements on the return of irregular migrants.

Finally, predictability also entails respect for human rights and their universality. I would like to stress: there can be no ‘pause button’ for this principle. 

The importance of accountability

Ladies and gentlemen,

There is another element of ‘just peace’ that my own nation’s history of post-war reconstruction has demonstrated.

It’s a simple paradigm which may sound familiar coming from a Dutch foreign minister, because we’ve been saying it consistently for so long: there can be no lasting peace without justice.

We can cite the Nuremberg Trials as an example of how justice can enable post-war societies to rebuild, confront trauma and heal wounds.

Decades later, after the devastating Balkan wars, the same can be said of the ICTY, the special tribunal we proudly hosted in The Hague. Just as we’ve proudly hosted many other international legal institutions, special courts, and of course the ICC.

This is an area we have long invested heavily in. Because without justice, there can be no peace. It’s not an empty maxim; it’s a hard-fought lesson.

For this reason accountability has been one of our priorities during our UN Security Council membership.

Whether in Syria, Myanmar, Yemen, or elsewhere: fact-finding, investigation and attribution are essential elements in the chain of accountability. They send a clear message to the victims: justice may not be swift, but it will eventually be done. It also sends a clear message to the perpetrators: impunity will not prevail, and you risk suffering the consequences of your actions.

This is why I won’t stop calling on the Security Council to refer the most serious crimes to the International Criminal Court. In that connection I welcome the recent announcement that the ICC’s Prosecutor has opened an investigation into the forced displacement of the Rohingya people from Myanmar. Together with Kuwait, the Netherlands has put a lot of effort into holding accountable those responsible for the atrocities there. In this regard, I commend Turkey for its leadership in giving the Rohingya such a prominent place on the world agenda.

I believe that the ICC is one of the most important instruments we have for ending impunity and achieving accountability. And for that reason, as many countries as possible should become party to the Rome Statute. With a hundred and twenty-three states, a majority of the international community has signed up, but there are still too many states outside the fold. The important role Turkey has played in highlighting the plight of the Rohingya shows that Turkey should be also part of the ICC family.

For that reason I would again like to urge our Turkish friends to join the ICC. This way, we can work together even more effectively to combat atrocities like those taking place in Myanmar.

The importance of reconciliation

My fifth and last point is also about accountability.

Because of course, accountability is not an end in itself. It’s one of the elements that makes reconciliation possible, and it’s reconciliation that enables a wounded society to tap into its reserves of resilience, and look to the future again. To move forward. And rebuild.

This takes hard work and a lot of courage. It takes people who are willing and able to do the impossible in the toughest of times. Look at Syria. The suffering and the devastation. Today, it seems hard to imagine that someday, Syrians will be able to look to the future again.

Fortunately, history has shown us that this is, indeed, possible. Just look at the examples of Europe after the World War Two, South Africa after apartheid, Rwanda after the genocide and Sierra Leone after the civil war.

It is from these examples that we take inspiration when we underscore the importance of reconciliation in a range of post-war settings: in the Balkans, in Colombia, and between Ethiopia and Eritrea last month, to name but a few examples. And, some day, in Syria.

Reconciliation gives us the hope of ultimately living as brothers and sisters once again. This may take generations, but we have to believe it’s possible, and the world must stand ready to help.

In that spirit, I’d like to remind everyone that this year we remember the end of the First World War a hundred years ago. So, in closing, allow me to recall Atatürk’s words in his moving tribute to the Anzacs (the Australians and New Zealanders) killed at Gallipoli during that conflict:

‘Those heroes that shed their blood and lost their lives

You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country

Therefore rest in peace.

There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us, when they lie side by side here in this country of ours

You, the mothers who set their sons away from far away countries, wipe away your tears

Your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace.

After having lost their lives on this land, they have become our sons as well.’

And with that moving tribute, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to close this statement, and allow us to move on to the more interactive part of this session, where I hope we’ll be able to cover some of the subjects that I wasn’t able to address because of our limited time.

Thank you.