© REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi

Some norms are so important for human civilization that they are established erga omnes—owed to humanity as a whole. The underlying concept of universal rights is intuitive as it gets to the heart of what makes human existence dignified. Therefore, any erosion of universal principles threatens the peaceful and rules-based coexistence of nations. The violation of international humanitarian law is one such threat.

While the principle of universality is easy to grasp, its implementation seems close to impossible. The reasons for this are manifold, but I believe that two of the main aspects are quite obvious:

First, for perpetrators to be held accountable, there need to be independent mechanisms in place. These mechanisms, however, can only be as strong and incorruptible as the international community makes them. Second, even in areas where overarching mechanisms do exist on an international level, their scope of action ends where national interests appear to be at stake.

In an ideal world, the International Criminal Court (ICC) would deal with atrocities committed in any war zone. Unfortunately, with regard to Syria, one of the most devastating conflicts of our time, a referral is unlikely to happen, given the gridlocked positions in the UN Security Council.

I have been a Member of Parliament for many years and am now fortunate to experience government work first-hand as minister of state in the German Foreign Office. This job brings with it an enormous responsibility. It feels like much-valued pillars of the multilateral system are crumbling on our watch. Whenever I ask myself whether we have to accept impunity, I believe that this is out of the question. We cannot and we must not do this.

The Syrian Regime’s Dark Record

Throughout almost a decade of conflict, the Syrian regime has literally violated every major principle of international law. Its wide-scale war crimes and crimes against humanity are undeniable. This is why the establishment of the International, Impartial, and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) for Syria and its collection and analysis of information and evidence was an important step toward accountability. The IIIM keeps alive the memory of tens of thousands of civilians tortured and millions tyrannized—by Assad’s forces and non-state actors—for the sake of upholding a brutal system, silencing opposing voices, and gaining territorial control.

In Syria, not even the most sacrosanct principles of humanitarian law have been upheld. Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons and cluster munitions to slaughter the inhabitants of whole cities. He targeted hospitals, schools, and humanitarian convoys. And he withheld humanitarian aid for regions not under the regime’s control. But make no mistake: the perpetrators’ crimes will not be forgotten. Their sense of security and impunity are of a temporary nature only.

Setting an Example

Granted, with the lack of national steps toward accountability in Syria and a blocked ICC, serving justice will not be an easy task. However, the principle of universal jurisdiction gives all states the opportunity—or rather the obligation—to pursue accountability, regardless of the nationality of perpetrators or victims, and irrespective of where the atrocities were committed. This is why the world’s first criminal trial of two former Syrian government intelligence officials charged with perpetrating crimes against humanity currently taking place in Germany is so important.

Most of the time, trials under universal jurisdiction are protracted and difficult and will not lead to universal justice. However, they are still worthwhile because they represent much more than individuals being held to account for their crimes. These trials are an empowering symbol of hope for all those who suffered at the hands of unjust regimes and, in the case of Syria, will begin to expose the structural elements of systematic torture and other atrocities.

With COVID-19 overshadowing international crises and conflicts, the public focus has again shifted away from hotspots such as Syria, Libya, and Yemen. While drastic steps are necessary to get this unprecedented global situation under control, we must keep our eyes firmly fixed on international conflict zones as well.

I am sure the virus will lead to cascade effects. We can already see these emerging, including new security challenges, fresh waves of violence and terrorism, and greatly increased humanitarian needs. Saving lives and easing suffering, especially through enabling the UN coordinated international humanitarian system to continue its tasks, is at the forefront of our efforts. For this system to function properly, we not only need to have sufficient resources, but also an environment that is conducive to humanitarian organizations and their workers doing their job. Humanitarian assistance requires humanitarian space.

Difficult and Dangerous

One of the most memorable moments of my professional life was talking to representatives of the Syrian White Helmets. Seeing so many of them save countless lives while putting their own at risk was a humbling experience. Their humanitarian work has been a small glimmer of hope in otherwise dark and hopeless situations. Aleppo comes to mind, and also Idlib.

In Syria, humanitarian workers have risked their lives time and time again while the humanitarian space shrinks rapidly around them. In 2018, when a number of members of the international community, in a common effort with Israel and Jordan, were able to evacuate hundreds of White Helmets from Syria, it felt like we made a difference. Offering them asylum in several Western countries was the right thing to do, because after years of insecurity and unrest, we had to provide them with a safe haven.

Humanitarian work is difficult and dangerous as it is. However, without respect for the humanitarian principles as the common denominator for humankind, humanitarian assistance becomes nigh on impossible. The denial of humanitarian assistance must not be used as a weapon of war. Humanitarian workers must not be criminalized or targeted. It is the perpetrators of the Syrian regime who are the criminals. And there will be no safe haven for them. Justice will be served in time.

The post Op-Ed: Justice Matters, Impunity Is Unacceptable appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.

© REUTERS/Kacper Pempel

As expected, PiS won the Polish parliamentary elections on October 13, but not as well as it hoped to. “We received a lot, but we deserve more,” said party leader Jarosław Kaczyński after the exit poll was announced that evening. The party won 43.6 percent of the vote, which will give it 235 out of 460 seats in the Sejm, the lower chamber of parliament. This is enough for it to maintain its absolute majority and continue governing alone, but not by much.

After a disappointing result in the elections to the European Parliament in May, the opposition parties decided to run for the Sejm separately, as three blocs. The centrist Civic Coalition led by the Civic Platform (PO)—formerly headed by Donald Tusk until he left to become president of the European Council in 2014—won 27.4 percent of the vote, or 134 seats. The agrarians led by the Polish People’s Party (PSL) received 8.6 percent (30 seats), and the left 12.6 percent (49 seats). The fifth party to cross the electoral threshold of 5 percent was the far-right Konfederacja (“Confederation”), with 6.8 percent. It will have 11 seats.

These results will change the political landscape in the Sejm, adding new voices from the social-democratic left and the far-right. The left, which failed to cross the electoral threshold in 2015 (as a coalition, it needed 8 percent), is back—rejuvenated. The old Democratic Left Alliance ran together with two newer parties, Razem (“Together”) and Wiosna (“Spring”), the party founded earlier this year by gay-rights activist and former mayor of Słupsk Robert Biedroń. Contrasting with PiS’s social conservatism, the left supports gay marriage and the right to abortion.

The other newcomer to the Sejm is Konfederacja, an alliance of nationalist parties formed ahead of the European Parliament elections, in which it finished slightly below the threshold. Openly euroskeptic, the party is even further to the right than PiS. This is bad news for the ruling party: it will face pressure from the right in the Sejm and stronger competition for nationalist voters, especially young people. According to the exit poll, Konfederacja got almost 20 percent of the vote in the 18-29 age group. It was also more popular among men than women.

The opposition’s main victory—practical and symbolic—is the Senate. Unlike in the vote for the Sejm, the three opposition blocs made a pact for the upper chamber of parliament, agreeing not to run candidates against each other. Together, they will have a slight majority of 51 out of 100 senators. In practical terms, this will allow it to slow down (but not completely stop) the legislative process by amending or rejecting bills proposed by PiS in the Sejm. The symbolic dimension is perhaps even more important: it shows what the opposition parties can achieve by working together.

Dominated by Domestic Issues

Since PiS came to power in 2015, politics has been dominated by the split between the party’s supporters and its opponents. Similarly, the election campaign was all about domestic issues. PiS successfully kept the focus on two main topics: its new welfare policies and so-called “LGBT ideology”, which it presented as a threat. Kaczynski positioned his party as the “protector of the Polish family” by creating what he calls the “Polish version of the welfare state” and shielding it against an “attack” by gay people.

European issues and the Polish government’s protracted dispute with the European Commission over the rule of law hardly featured in the campaign. The PiS leadership’s main reference to the EU, in the context of its economic policies, was to bringing “European standards of living” to Poland. In the run-up to the European elections earlier in May, the party had soften its rhetoric in response to the opposition’s accusations that it wants to lead Poland out of the EU. Its slogan in that election was “Poland heart of Europe.”

While its relations with Brussels and Berlin remained strained, the PiS leadership were keen to highlight Poland’s good relations with United States and, specifically, the Trump administration. On October 5, just before the elections, the US President Donald Trump announced that Poland had been formally nominated for the visa-waiver program that allows visa-free travel to US for up to 90 days, which Warsaw had wanted for a long time.

When the new government is appointed next month, this approach to foreign policy is likely to continue, while domestic politics will again dominate the agenda, as PiS focuses on implementing its welfare promises and fighting off the opposition. Politicians are already thinking about the next standoff between PiS and its opponents: the presidential election in 2020.

Despite the inward-looking tendencies in PiS, domestic and European politics will remain intertwined. Relations with Brussels will not improve overnight: the PiS government’s dispute with the European institutions over the rule of law remains unresolved. Moreover, with Brexit on the horizon, Poland will have to think once more about its place in Europe.

The post No Earthquake in Poland, But Some Shifts appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.