Author: Joris Dietz

  • LIBE I

    LIBE I

    by Katie Kiely (IE) Media Team Member of Heemstede 2020

  • LIBE II

    LIBE II

    by Thomas Celie (NL) Media Team Member of Heemstede 2020

  • LIBE I

    Motion for a Resolution by

    The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs I [LIBE I]

    Building bridges, not walls: with rising cultural tensions and increasing polarisation across the continent, how can the EU aid Member States in ensuring cultural integration of people with a migratory background?

    Submitted by: Stella Naudts (NL, Chairperson)

    The European Youth Parliament,

    1. Alarmed by the immense and steadily increasing number of migrants1 and refugees2 entering the European Union (EU), 
    2. Concerned by the frequent racism and discrimination migrants face in the housing and labour market as well as social activities,
    3. Noting with regret the unequal distribution of migrants between Member States,
    4. Aware of the differences in the Member States’ legislation regarding migration, 
    5. Emphasising the importance of integration into the labour market for the cultural assimilation of migrants,
    6. Realising the fact that migrants’ skills are often underestimated, causing migrants to have jobs that are not to their full potential,
    7. Bearing in mind that many migrants do not have sufficient education or language proficiency in Member States;

  • ENVI

    Motion for a Resolution by

    The Committee on Environment and Food Safety [ENVI]

    Turning tides: With more than 150 million tonnes of plastic still existing in the oceans today and an estimated 4.8 to 12.7 million tonnes entering the ocean annually, causing harm to marine life as well as human health, how can the EU and Member States simultaneously prevent further plastic waste polluting the ocean whilst ensuring the sustainable restoration of marine ecosystems?

    Submitted by: Gabriele Rimkute (IE, Chairperson)

    The European Youth Parliament,

    1. Noting with deep regret that a large quantity of marine litter comes from human behaviour,
    2. Further noting that 80% of this comes from land-based sources such as  littering of beaches,
    3. Taking into consideration that humans can ingest microplastics through eating seafood,
    4. Recognising that the Member States do not have an universal approach in managing plastic waste,
    5. Deeply concerned by the damage to marine animals as well as the environment caused by inefficient management of marine litter,
    6. Regretting the lack of environmentally friendly waste management technologies made available in the Member States,
    7. Taking note of directives such as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive1;
  • ECON

    Motion for a Resolution by

    The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs [ECON]

    #Sustainable future post-Corona: With 2 364 billion euros made available for Covid-19 economic relief, taking into account the different scenarios for economic recovery strategies, as well as the long term goals and priorities of the EU, should European Member States use the disruption caused to the economy by Covid-19 to restructure its economy in a more resilient, climate-friendly, and equitable way, and if so, how?

    Submitted by: Carla Sava (RO, Chairperson)

    The European Youth Parliament,

    1. Concerned by the increase in unemployment due to the COVID crisis, with 5.5 million jobs lost in the European Union (EU) during the second quarter of 2020,
    2. Alarmed by the economic impact of the pandemic on the Member States citizens, with 50% of EU households struggling to make ends meet by April 2020,
    3. Nothing with deep regret that the passing of the current package1 is contingent on unanimity, given that several Member States have previously objected,
    4. Aware of the vastly diverse needs of disproportionately affected regions,
    5. Deeply alarmed by the Member States’ lack of resilience for potential economic downturn,
    6. Strongly emphasising the need for restructuring in Member States’ stagnant economies2, given the example of Italy,
    7. Concerned by the economic vulnerability in the Member States who do not currently incorporate circular economic 3practices causing lasting economic recovery,
    8. Gravely concerned by the EU’s low targets in accordance to the Paris Climate Accords’4 standard;
  • DROI

    Motion for a Resolution by

    The Committee on Human Rights [DROI]

    #Fundamental rights and statelessness: With an estimated 600,000 stateless individuals living in Europe today, how should Member States ensure the protection of their fundamental rights and access to health care and other basic needs such as shelter and food during the COVID-19 pandemic?

    Submitted by: Carla Sava (RO, Chairperson)

    The European Youth Parliament,

    1. Alarmed by the fact that 600,000 individuals in Europe are currently not recognized as nationals by any State,
    2. Recognising that the legal definition of statelessness is changeable, 
    3. Further recognising that the  categories of de facto1 and de jure2 statelessness do not cover all current cases of statelessness,
    4. Noting with deep regret that stateless people in Europe and elsewhere face human rights violations in the form of:
      1. barriers to education, healthcare, shelter and employment,
      2. racial and gender discrimination leading  to their application for nationality being rejected,
    5. Gravely concerned by the low social status of stateless people in Europe, caused by exploitation, marginalisation and discrimination,
    6. Further concerned that marginalisation, discrimination and stigmatisation of stateless persons have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic,
    7. Fully alarmed that 15 Member States lack mechanisms to achieve facilitated naturalisation of stateless individuals due to not having an established statelessness determination procedure,
    8. Deploring that 12 Member States have not acceded to the 1954 UNHCR Convention on the Status of Stateless People3
    9. Bearing in mind that signatory countries have expressed reservations regarding several obligations included in the UNHCR Conventions, 
    10. Conscious that data on statelessness is unreliable as a result of a lack of birth registration systems along with other identification methods for statelessness,
    11. Regretting that numerous stateless people and those at risk of statelessness have limited access to healthcare and social services during the COVID-19 pandemic;

  • CULT

    Motion for a Resolution by

    The Committee on Culture and Education [CULT]

    Not an issue to tackle alone: In 2019, more than 75 million European adults met with family or friends at most once a month and around 30 million European adults felt frequently lonely. Considering the impact of loneliness on health and life satisfaction, what should be done to turn the tide of increasing loneliness in the EU?

    Submitted by: Muna Shaiye (NL, Chairperson), Aya Bennis (NL, Chairperson)

    The European Youth Parliament,

    1. Fully alarmed by the increase of loneliness, especially among younger individuals,
    2. Stressing that Member State’s governments are not taking enough measures to prevent loneliness,
    3. Further stressing that there are not abundant active measures taking place regarding social inclusion, 
    4. Deeply concerned that there is not sufficient medical attention given to solving mental, psychiatric and physical issues that can arise when loneliness is not resolved on time,
    5. Acknowledging that the pandemic COVID-19 made the tackling of loneliness more complex,
    6. Cognisanting that people have indulged in a deeper sentiment of loneliness due to the fear of contracting the virus and the increase in the pressure on the health sector;
  • LIBE II

    Motion for a Resolution by

    The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs [LIBE II]

    Believe it or not: With a new era of heavily edited audiovisual content on their way, the intentional spread of fake news and misleading content has never been easier, affecting 4 out of 10 European citizens daily. What measures should the EU and its Member States do to minimise the circulation of disinformation via traditional and digital media?

    Submitted by: Esmee O’Connor (IE, Chairperson) 

    The European Youth Parliament,

    1. Noting with regret the lack of formal recognition in the form of legislation on the issue of fake news in certain Member States,
    2. Concerned by the growing polarisation along with wavering tolerance towards people with different political beliefs in society, 
    3. Conscious of the difficulty in differentiating between fake and factual news,
    4. Acknowledging the existence of algorithms on digital media outlets that result in an incomplete and biased presentation of current affairs,
    5. Recognising that the intention of the news industry is turning a profit resulting in smaller outlets depending on rapid production over quality control to stay competitive, 

    Alarmed by the prevalence of circular reporting and evidence by citation in the news industry resulting in the spread of incorrect information perceived as factual and checked;

  • SEDE

    SEDE

    Topic Overview for the Committee on Security and Defence (SEDE)

    Bella, horrida bella: “In the autumn of 2020, the conflict surrounding the region of Nagorno-Karabakh has once more flared up into military action, resulting in destruction and loss of life. What strategy should the EU adopt in its efforts to promote peaceful conflict resolution and the suppression of armed conflict?”

    Johann Davies (DE)

    Ein Bild, das Karte enthält.

Automatisch generierte Beschreibung
    A map of Armenia, Azerbaijan and the disputed area of Nagorno-Karabakh

    1. Relevance of the Topic

    The signing of a ceasefire agreement by the Armenian and Azerbaijani governments in November 2020 ended the most recent eruption of a conflict that has been going on for decades over control of the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

    Despite having a population that is 90 per cent ethnically Armenian, Nagorno-Karabakh is located within the sovereign territory of Azerbaijan, where – until the ceasefire agreement was ratified – it had a de-facto autonomous regional government with close ties to Armenia. This is going to change with the new deal: While Armenian forces must withdraw from the region, Azerbaijan is going to regain many of the areas it lost control over to Armenia in the first ceasefire of 1994. 

    That original deal could only temporarily end the fighting in a conflict which goes back at least to the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, after which the regional parliament of Nagorno-Karabakh voted to join Armenia, resulting in the first Armenian-Azerbaijani war.

    The 2020 conflict will, however, have reopened even older wounds: on the Armenian side the memory of the 1915 genocide committed by the Ottoman Empire, the predecessor of Azerbaijan’s ally, Turkey, and in Azerbaijan the trauma of up to a million internally displaced persons (p. 2) as a result of the war in the early 1990s. 

    Despite this historical hatred between the two nations, a real danger of ethnic cleansing, and Turkish support of Azerbaijan allegedly stretching to the deployment of fighter jets, the European Union has yet to become actively engaged in de-escalating the conflict, let alone in finding a sustainable solution.

    2. Key Terms

    – The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is the general framework for the EU’s foreign policy. According to the CFSP, the EU’s foreign policy goals are to safeguard the Union’s common values, strengthen the EU’s security, preserve peace, and promote respect for democracy, the rule of law and human rights.

    – The Minsk Group is an international conference founded by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) with the goal of creating a forum for international dialogue regarding Nagorno-Karabakh and the negotiation of a peaceful conflict resolution (the “Minsk Process”), as opposed to military intervention by single states. The group is co-chaired by France, Russia and the United States and has a total of eleven members, including both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

    – The Madrid Principles are a peace plan proposed by the aforementioned Minsk Group on how to solve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The idea is that Armenia relinquishes control over several districts surrounding the actual region, but a corridor linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh remains open. Nagorno-Karabakh itself receives an “interim status”  with a peacekeeping operation ensuring its security. Internally displaced persons from the region would be able to return home.

    3. Stakeholders

    – The Republic of Azerbaijan is a predominantly Muslim country located between Armenia to the West and the Caspian Sea, an important trade route between Asia and Europe, to the East. The country has invested much of the profits of its most important sector, the oil industry, in defence systems and its military strength therefore outstrips that of Armenia. The country’s authoritarian president, who acquired this  position as a de-facto matter of inheritance from his father, has recently been facing fiercely nationalist anti-government protests.

    – The Republic of Turkey is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a dominant regional power and Azerbaijan’s main ally. The two countries routinely conduct joint military drills, and, during the 2020 conflict, Turkey supplied Azerbaijan with military equipment. There are also allegations Turkey stationed jets in Azerbaijan.

    – The Republic of Armenia is a predominantly Christian country situated between Azerbaijan and Turkey. Although the country has its own history of human rights violations, the 2018 pro-democracy protests, dubbed the “velvet revolution” and led by the current Armenian Prime Minister, have led to an improvement in democracy. This, however, has led to a strained relationship with Armenia’s historical ally, Russia. Nevertheless, any violation of Armenia’s national borders will trigger a military response from Russia, as both countries are members of the CSTO defence alliance (comparable to NATO). As Nagorno-Karabakh is not internationally recognised as a part of Armenia (let alone as its own country), it is not included in the CSTO.

    – Next to Turkey, the Russia Federation is the main power in the South Caucasus region. Traditionally an ally of Armenia, Russia seems to have been prioritising her relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan in recent years. Under the ceasefire deal of November 2020, Russian peacekeepers will be stationed in Nagorno-Karabakh for at least five years to ensure a peaceful transition of power.

    – The population of Nagorno-Karabakh has a size of about 150,000 inhabitants of which roughly 90 per cent are ethnic Armenians. As a result of the ceasefire agreement, many of Nagorno-Karabakh’s ethnically Armenian inhabitants have resorted to fleeing to Armenia. Dozens, if not hundreds, of civilians of both Armenian and Azerbaijani ethnicity were killed in the 2020 war.

    – The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy is the head of the European External Action Service (EEAS), the EU’s diplomatic corps, represents the EU in international organisations such as the UN and implements the EU’s foreign policy. He or she works closely with the Foreign Affairs Council (FAC), the conference of all foreign, defence and development ministers of the EU’s Member States. Together, the FAC and the High Representative determine the EU’s activity abroad and can launch military or civilian missions.

    4. Conflicts

    At the heart of the Nagorno-Karabakh question lies the conflict between Azerbaijan’s right to territorial integrity, as stated in Article 2 of the UN Charter, and the right of Nagorno-Karabakh’s inhabitants to self-determination, following Article 1 in the same document (see previous link), Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 1 of  the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). As UN Member States, Armenia and Azerbaijan must follow the UN Charter and the UDHR and they are also both signatories of the ICCPR. The result is a clash between two important international legal principles.

    So far, the EU has attempted to abide by both of these principles by emphasising self-determination in agreements with Armenia and territorial integrity in agreements with Azerbaijan. This double strategy has resulted in the EU being regarded as an unreliable actor, especially by Azerbaijan.

    However, despite its lack of activity, the EU does have a stake in the conflict. It is being suggested that Turkey is using the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis as a means of establishing itself as a regional power. Given Turkey’s shift towards an authoritarian state with little regard for democracy, it should be in the EU’s interest to limit Turkey’s influence in the resolution of the conflict. This consideration becomes even more urgent when observing Russia’s reduced activity, which appears to be a reaction to Armenia’s pro-democratic revolution.

    The fact that this conflict spans several decades has infused the question of Nagorno-Karabakh’s rightful ownership with deeply-felt emotional importance for both Armenians and Azerbaijanis. Allegedly placed under Azerbaijan’s rule by the Soviet Union as a calculated way of preventing a joint South Caucasian independence movement, Nagorno-Karabakh has become a symbol for the fight not only between two countries but between two ethnic groups.

    5. Measures in place & status quo

    In the past, the EU has specified its core interests regarding foreign policy, most importantly with the adoption of the EU Global Strategy in 2016, which aims to increase the EU’s presence on the world stage and make it a stronger geopolitical actor. EU priorities with importance for this conflict named in the Global Strategy include an improved and more integrated response to conflicts, with a goal of “being fully engaged in all stages of a conflict, from early action and prevention, wherever possible to staying on the ground long enough for peace to take root” (see previous link).

    In 2003 and, more recently, in 2017 the EU appointed Special Representatives for the entire region of the South Caucasus, emissaries specifically tasked with representing the EU in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and promoting international dialogue. However, there have never been civil (or military) peacekeeping missions in Nagorno-Karabakh, such as the EUMM Mission in Georgia.

    As part of the CFSP, the EU launched the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) in 2005, a framework for all bilateral cooperation with Southern and Eastern neighbours, including both Azerbaijan and Armenia. Among the goals of the ENP, which was revised in 2015, are fostering stability, strengthening security and promoting democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights.

    This approach has been complemented since 2009 by the EU Eastern Partnership (EaP), which is a joint initiative between the EU and six of its Eastern neighbours, again including both Azerbaijan and Armenia, with the objectives of stronger economies, governance, connectivity and societies in the Partner Countries.

    However, none of these programmes directly addresses the peaceful resolution of conflicts among Partner Countries, let alone Nagorno-Karabakh. The most recent joint statement of all the EaP members from March 2020, setting the EaP’s agenda for after 2020, subtly alludes to unresolved conflicts (page 11) but does not propose a strategy for the region.

    The negotiations for a peace agreement in the autumn of 2020, brokered mainly by the Russian Federation, were held without any EU involvement.

    6. Food for Thought & Brain Munchies

    • What are the EU’s interests in the South Caucasus?
    • Are there any non-traditional, more “out of the box”-ways of foreign policy with which one could solve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict? How could civil society, especially the younger generations, be more involved in the peace process?
    • What role could the United Nations play?

    7. Links for Research

    – This is a short but comprehensive article describing the events of 2020 and unravelling the decades of power politics that led to them.

    – This is a three-minute video showcasing the widespread shock in Armenia after the ceasefire agreement with Azerbaijan and raising questions over that agreement’s sustainability.

    – The counterpart to the previous link, this video depicts the celebrations in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, after the announcement of the ceasefire agreement.

    – A photo series showing the effects of war on people and settlements in Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia.

    – Finally, a declaration published by The High Representative after the ceasefire agreement, restating the EU’s commitment to building long-term peace in Nagorno-Karabakh.

  • Board 2020-2021

    Board 2020-2021
    PresidentTom Cobbenhagen[email protected]
    SecretaryMariëtte Peutz[email protected]
    TreasurerSuzanne van Spijker[email protected]
    National CoordinatorHannah Wessels[email protected]
    International CoordinatorErik Koeken[email protected]
    Alumni CoordinatorElmar Post[email protected]