As the crisis in the Tigray region of Ethiopia simmers, South Africa has the distinction of holding the presidency of the UN Security Council (for December) and serving as chair of the African Union. Stéphanie Fillion at PassBlue reports on the convergence:
In the last hurrah of its two-year term, South Africa happens to be president of the Security Council in December, so it is making the most of its final month by holding a debate on the all-important United Nations-African Union relationship. South Africa is also chairing the African Union this year, until February 2021, and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa will virtually attend the Security Council debate, on Dec. 4.
“It converges very nicely, presiding over the Council but also still being the chairperson of the African Union,” Marthinus van Schalkwyk, the political coordinator for the South African mission to the UN, told PassBlue.
“So we will try to focus that debate, for instance, on how the UN-AU cooperation has contributed to conflict prevention, also to the resolution of conflict…How has the UN-AU cooperation contributed towards silencing the guns on the continent, one of the flagship projects that we have?”
It’s worth asking how effectively South Africa has used the unusual multilateral synergy to address the Tigray crisis.
The World Health Organization is considering a system of vaccination certificates for international travel. Reuters reports:
“We are looking very closely into the use of technology in this COVID-19 response, one of them how we can work with member states toward an e-vaccination certificate,” said Siddhartha Datta, Europe’s WHO programme manager for vaccine-preventable diseases, told reporters on a call from Copenhagen.
He cautioned that any technology initiative must not overwhelm countries in the midst of pandemic responses, must conform to varying laws and ensure seamless border-crossing service.
Tensions remain high near the Senkaku islands in the East China Sea, where Chinese government vessels make regular incursions into nearby waters (China claims the islands, which it refers to as the Diaoyu). A veteran Japanese legal expert and member of the UN’s International Law Commission, Shinya Murase, is calling for China and Japan to refer the dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ):
How could China make it a legal dispute? It is actually quite simple. All it has to do is refer the case to the ICJ. If China decides to take this course, Japan will not run away from settling the issue at the ICJ. If China genuinely wishes the ICJ to solve the issue, it should accept the ICJ’s compulsory jurisdiction under Article 36(2) of the ICJ Statute, which Japan did as early as 1958…For China as a responsible superpower, seeking a legal solution is preferable to exacerbating tension by sending government vessels to the area and repeatedly intruding into Japan’s territorial waters.
The Organization of American States (OAS) wants the International Criminal Court to investigate alleged abuses in Venezuela. An OAS special adviser, Jared Genser, described the situation:
Our report brings to life the extraordinary suffering of the people of Venezuela, being inflicted on them by Nicolás Maduro and his regime. The only reasonable conclusion to reach from examining the scale and breadth of human rights abuses, such as extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, and the imposition of conditions of life designed to cause great suffering or death, is that these actions constitute crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court…
The ICC already has two preliminary examinations of the situation in the country, one requested by several Latin American countries and another sought by the Venezuelan government itself (the latter focuses on alleged misdeeds by the United States). Still, the OAS move is notable, given the prominent role that the United States plays in the organization. The Trump administration has imposed sanctions on Maduro regime officials and on ICC prosecutors (for their investigation of U.S. conduct in Afghanistan).
British troops are arriving in Mali to bolster the UN’s peacekeeping force there. The mission in Mali, which began in 2013 and comprises more than 15,000 personnel, has been among the organization’s most dangerous in recent years. It operates alongside a mostly French force, which targets jihadist fighters in the region.
Like most permanent Security Council members, Britain pays a large bill for UN peacekeeping but contributes relatively few personnel to the organization’s missions, which are mostly staffed by developing world countries. (In the latest UN tabulation, the UK ranked 41st in terms of personnel contributions.) The Mali deployment represents a near doubling of British contributions.
Briefly noted:
A trade deal between Britain and the European Union “hangs in the balance.” Meanwhile, Hungary and Poland continued their standoff with the EU over the link between democratic standards and EU funding.
Despite domestic criticism, the Costa Rican government plans to continue loan talks with the International Monetary Fund.
The World Bank approved a $400 million loan to bolster Morocco’s social safety net.
The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is training Argentine first responders.