Feed aggregator

Combien de militaires russes ont participé aux opérations en Syrie depuis le 30 septembre 2015? Il était difficile de répondre à cette question, tant le Kremlin est resté jusqu’à présent vague sur ce sujet. En mars dernier, l’on pouvait en avoir une petite idée avec la commande passée par le ministère russe de la Défense […]

Cet article Près de 25.000 militaires russes ont participé aux opérations en Syrie est apparu en premier sur Zone Militaire.

La Société générale de banques au Sénégal (SGBS) a réalisé un profit de 4 milliards de F CFA en 2015 (6 millions d'euros), après avoir essuyé une perte nette de 36,4 milliards de F CFA en 2014, a-t-elle indiqué mercredi.

Cet article La Société générale de banques au Sénégal sort du rouge est apparu en premier sur JeuneAfrique.com.

Az Európai Kulturális Alapítvány 2017 márciusában harmadik alkalommal rendezi meg az Idea Camp tábort.

Cet article Othman Benjelloun est apparu en premier sur JeuneAfrique.com.

KYIV, 23 June 2016 – The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM) will hold its regular news briefing tomorrow in Kyiv.

Alexander Hug, the SMM’s Principal Deputy Chief Monitor, will talk about the recent activities of the Mission and the general security situation throughout Ukraine.

Journalists are invited to attend the news briefing tomorrow, 24 June, at 16:00 (Kyiv time), at the Ukrainian Crisis Media Centre, at 2 Khreshchatyk street, Ukrainian house.

Live online streaming of the news briefing will be available at http://uacrisis.org/ru/stream/#eng

Related Stories

• OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine to hold news briefing in Kyiv tomorrow
• Spot Report by OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM):SMM caught in mortar shelling in Vodiane
• Latest from OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine, based on information received as of 19:30, 21 June 2016

Europeans are scared, angry, lost. Their world is in turmoil, their children’s future suddenly uncertain, their way of living under threat. Europe’s politicians need to listen, tell hard truths and rise to the challenge, offering a way forward if Europe is to avoid the undoing of its post-WWII achievements and legacy: peace and prosperity. Austria’s recent presidential election sent ripples of concern across the continent and beyond, and while there was an audible sigh of relief at the final outcome, the final 30,000-vote lead for Green party candidate Alexander Van der Bellen over his right-wing populist opponent wasn’t exactly a comfortable margin.

This populist surge was not just an Austrian issue, but yet another sign of rising economic, ethnic and social tensions across the continent. And Europe’s political class is largely responsible. Throughout much of the EU, resurgent right-wing populist movements rally throngs around anti-immigration and eurosceptic slogans, finding strong electoral support in Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden. France’s Front National is today an ‘established brand’ after over 30 years during which the Le Pens were an exception in Europe – it is no longer so. The spectacular results obtained by Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) last March shook up Germany’s political landscape, dramatically upping the stakes by entering three state parliaments for the first time. This breakthrough – from a party that did not even exist little more than three years ago – is arguably the most striking element of these elections.

“‘Overwhelming majorities disapprove of the way the EU has handled the current migration crisis”

If the refugee and migration crisis has clearly fuelled a backlash against traditional political parties, the current pan-European wave of discontent also taps into long-standing fears about globalisation, jihadi terrorism, as well as a dilution of national identity and traditional structures. Unresolved issues following the 2008 economic downturn, consistently-high unemployment, uncontrolled migration and failed integration, the euro and the perceived impotence of traditional parties have contributed to making the bread-and-butter issues of hard-right populist movements acceptable if not mainstream.

While I do not believe this swing to the far right means Europe is about to succumb to its old demons, I feel we should certainly take our cues and learn from the continent’s past. Europe’s politicians need to squarely confront the profound and understandable angst that is gripping the peoples of Europe. They need to give them a sense of being heard and of seeing their fears and concerns addressed. They also have to credibly and courageously chart a course that allows the EU to overcome its challenges and preserve its decades-long achievements while still remaining faithful to its values.

In 1952, Jean Monnet, one of the EU’s founding fathers, wrote that ‘Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening, […] by successive steps, […] which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.’ This ‘leadership by stealth’ is no longer accepted, nor acceptable.

The results of a Pew survey released on 7th June – of more than 10,000 participants – showed strong disgruntlement with the Union is on the rise across the continent. Only 51% of those polled expressed a positive view of the Brussels-based institutions, while 42% expressed the desire to have certain powers restored to their national governments. The poll data indicates ‘overwhelming majorities’ in each of the 10 countries surveyed disapprove of the way the EU has handled the current migration crisis. Furthermore, the EU’s management of economic issues was seen as ‘another huge source of disaffection with the institution.’ Quite clearly, Brussels needs to be much more attentive and responsive to the messages sent back by Europe’s peoples. Actions such as circumnavigating the loud and clear ‘Nay’ votes in 2005 from the Dutch and the French on the European Constitution by rolling out the Lisbon Treaty, or forcing the Irish to vote twice on that very treaty because the results of the first referendum were unfavourable, do little to help Europeans feel heard.

“While European elites may see themselves as citizens of a globalised world, the great majority of Europeans have longstanding emotional ties with their nations”

The EU, or rather its ancestors the Coal and Steel Community and then the European Economic Community, was created to make war between its member states impossible. But to achieve this, Brussels constantly denigrated patriotism and national pride, offering in its stead a post-modern vision of the world in which such national identities were a parochial relic to be stamped out or relegated to the football pitches. While European elites may see themselves as citizens of a globalised world, the great majority of Europeans have longstanding emotional ties with their nations and to this day still primarily define themselves through their affiliation to their home country.

Mass migration – not just the Syrian refugee crisis, but the movement that started decades ago – is seen by many as changing the face of Europe in a radical way. Since 2014, nearly 2 million refugees have entered Europe – less than 0.5% of the EU’s population, but a formidable number nonetheless. Denying the impact and the challenges this movement of people presents is at the root of Europe’s populist test. Indeed, many in Europe feel that changes affecting their lives have been imposed on them without ever having been discussed. And if they were, it was either under the caveat that questioning or opposing immigration meant that you had to be racist and were, therefore, disqualified from any debate, or that Europe’s ageing societies needed immigration to self-sustain and preserve its welfare-state, and that was that.

The lack of debate as to what these changes mean, and the lack of any serious discussion as to an arrangement between newcomers and their host societies – such as the recent Integration Law in Germany – have steadily fuelled the rise of populism. The EU’s motto, ‘unity in diversity’, may be very appealing, but it has to translate into more than pretty rhetoric and good intentions for the EU to remain stitched together. While Europe certainly needs immigration for its labour markets and social systems to function or to protect its prosperity, it also has to be able to debate and to address issues raised by largely unassimilated and disaffected immigrant communities – many of whom are Muslims. European countries in general have done a poor job of ensuring that immigrants integrate and of proposing a clear set of rights and duties for both immigrants and host countries. Islamophobia has no place in Europe, no more than anti-Semitism or any other form of religious, ethnic or sexual-orientation prejudice. But ‘unity in diversity’ also means we need to agree on a set of core values that represent our shared understanding of the world and bind us together, and for those wanting to live in Europe to embrace them and abide by them.

Brussels also needs to focus more on what will help create a better life for the Union’s citizens. This means economic growth and jobs, especially for Europe’s youth. European growth rates are anaemic at best and socio-economic inequality is on the rise. The newer members of Central and Eastern Europe, even relatively successful Poland, have failed to bridge the income gap with the richer half of the continent. Youth unemployment remains catastrophically high, and the activity rates of senior workers are just as depressingly low across much of the EU. Europe’s ailments are deeply embedded in economies that lag behind on investment, innovation and competitiveness. There is a consensus, however, on how to fix these issues, even if it means difficult and painful reforms in the short term. Such growth-orientated reforms, including lowering taxes, opening up labour markets and offering a more supportive environment for risk taking, are well-known. But it will take courageous politicians, in Brussels and in member states, to lay open the hard truths and map a clear course forward.

“Europe’s politicians need to squarely confront the profound angst gripping the peoples of Europe”

Brussels should lead Europe on the issues that are best or can only be tackled together, such as migration, commercial agreements, and common economic and financial policies. Countries that want to pool more sovereignty on these issues must be able to do so. But let’s also make sure the famous ‘subsidiarity principle’, as defined in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union, is put back at the core of the European project. Decisions need to be taken as closely as possible to the citizens, and the EU should not take action (except in the areas that fall within its exclusive competence), unless it is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level.

After decades of European integration, the role of the nation-state as the heart of political life remains unchanged. Brussels needs to both acknowledge this and celebrate much more forcefully the extraordinary achievements of the European Union: for the first time in history, close to 30 countries and 500 million people have come together without anyone coercing them to do so. As we remember the centenary of the battles of Verdun and the Somme, as we think of the 60 million lives lost in two world wars, it is important to realise that the citizens of the European Union live in the safest place on Earth. The EU can boast one of the world’s lowest violent crime rates, its governments abolished the death penalty, and it has renounced war within its borders. For now, it may look as if the limits of integration have been reached. But if the peoples of Europe feel they are being heard by Brussels, and its responses are of relevance to their daily lives, then, and then only, some of Europe’s nations may yet return to the path of ever-closer union.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – European Parliament

The post Responding to Europe’s populist challenge appeared first on Europe’s World.

Welcome to Thursday’s edition of our daily Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

It is finally here. After months of negotiations, threats, Nazi-comparisons, pasty-waving and even rapping by politicians, voters will head to the polls today to answer a simple question with profound implications: should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?

The bickering will come to a close and a surreal peace will break out on British airwaves during the day due to reporting restrictions for mainstream outlets. Even swings on the markets – some in the City have paid for private exit poll data – will not be analysed in depth.

Read more

On 21 June, EDA top management and experts met for the first time with the newly selected SME Senior Advisers, Mr Francisco González Mené and Mr Dušan Švarc. The advisers’ role is to counsel the Agency regarding future activities and identify new potential ideas and concrete initiatives in support of the defence-related SMEs.

Following a call for expression of interest for two SME Senior Advisers, 10 Member States proposed 15 candidates with impressive professional track record. Mr Francisco González Mené and Mr Dušan Švarc have been selected. Their mandate, based on EDA rules for external experts, will include the assessment of ongoing EDA initiatives and the provision of strategic advice and support on policies and actions regarding defence-related SMEs.

 

More information:

• CV of Mr Francisco González Mené
• CV of Mr Dušan Švarc

Turkey is not going to join the European Union any time soon; then what is this noise about Turkey acceding into the EU and Turkish people coming into the United Kingdom?  And so what if Turks come to the United Kingdom, there are already more than 100,000 people of Turkey live in the UK. Plus why would Turks want to come to the UK; the sun is not shining in the grey and wet UK and the Turkish economy growing better than the UK’s. Yes it is right to say that significant section of people in Turkey look up to the European culture and life style, but the rest of the Turkish population see EU as a threat to their Islamic traditions and conservatism.

Furthermore, Turkey is backsliding on democracy and drifting towards authoritarianism, so how can it meet the EU conditionality to join the EU. Having countries like Hungary and Poland in the EU as member states, which have been bluntly veering further and further towards illiberal democracies and the EU’s migration deal with Turkey– when there are critical questions about democracy, rule of law and the free press about this country– it becomes genuine worry for the Leave and Remain camps whether the EU may bend its principles as it has been doing so with Hungary, and admit Turkey into the EU regardless. Brussels must stand up to the EU’s principles if it wants maintain the EU’s credibility and unity.

The UK state policy seemed to have been to favor Turkey’s membership of the EU club since the late 1980s. There is a common agreement in the academia that the underlying reason for the UK state’s policy on Turkey’s EU membership is the UK’s fear of the EU’s deepening policies and move towards a federal club with supranational institutions. Admitting countries like Turkey, with a population of 74 million and with its endemic domestic problems and weaknesses, into the EU, the UK government believed they could to hinder and problematise Brussels’s aspirations for an ever-closer union. Since Prime Minister David Cameron have been promised by the heads of the 27 members states that the UK would able to opt out from the ever closer union clause of the EU, provided the country votes to Remain today, I believe the UK would change its attitudes towards not only on the admission of Turkey, but also on further enlargements of the EU. The British voters should not worry about further enlargements of the EU or should not vote on the basis of the EU’s possible further enlargements, because change is on the way.

That said Prime Minister David Cameron was right to say that Turkey is unlikely to join the EU until year 3000.  He was right in the sense that Turkey’s relations with the EU have been slow progressing. Neither the development of Turkey–EU relations (1959-2005) nor Turkey’s accession negotiations with the EU (2005-2016) have been uninterruptedly smooth. Turkey’s first application for the Associative Membership of the EU was made in 1959, however the Turkish army’s coups of 1960, 1971 and 19 80 meant that the EU had to put on hold on all the political dialogue with Turkish authorities during these periods. Thus the EU did not sign the Customs Union with Turkey until 1995. The economic crisis of mid-1970s, inconsistent coalition governments, and the government’s handling of the Kurdish issue meant that democracy never became the only game in the town and civil liberties were barely protected in Turkey. Thus Turkey’s application for full membership was partly refused in 1989.

Furthermore to date, eleven years on Turkey began accession negotiations with the European Union on 3 October 2005, and there has not been noticeable progress in the accession process. Only fourteen negotiation Chapters had been opened to negotiations; one of these (Science and Research) was provisionally closed; and Chapter 22 (Regional Policy and Coordination of Structural Instruments) was only officially opened in November 2013. At the same time eight Chapters have been blocked by the EU Council decision over Turkey’s non-implementation of the Additional Ankara protocol since December 2006; five Chapters blocked by France since June 2007; and six Chapters were blocked by Cyprus since December 2009.

This proves the point that Turkey-EU relations have been a fluctuating one, resulting in a slow progressing relationship. Plus at the moment the future of Turkey-EU relations looks bleak than ever as Turkey slides to authoritarianism and illiberal democracy. Thus the British voters should not worry about Turkey now. The British voters should pay attention to what the benefits of the EU have been for the Europe: ‘Peace to the Western Europe’ and ‘Democracy to the Eastern Europe’.  And the EU should hold tight on to its principles, if the EU looses its credibility, it is very likely that there would be further alike referendums that could risk not only the peace and stability in Europe, but also could speed up the disintegration of the EU. This is pertinent in the light of the electoral success of the far-right political parties and rise of Euroscepticism and illiberal democracy across Europe.  I suggest the British voters should listen to arguments coming from sane voices from the remain camp clearly outlining the benefits of the preserving status of the UK within the EU rather than listening to Nigel Farage’s xenophobic comments on Turkey and immigration.

 

The post Why the Brits should calm down about Turkey’s possible EU membership appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Les autorités nigérianes luttent sans répit contre les raffineries de pétrole illégales qui se multiplient dans la région du delta du Niger. France 24 a suivi une patrouille de police qui traque les contrebandiers. Reportage.

L’armée de Terre attend beaucoup de ses forces spéciales, véritable système d’hommes nécessaire et efficient. Considérant leur importance, elles avaient besoin d’être restructurées ; ce mois-ci, elles deviennent un commandement à part entière.

On July 2014, the European Council decided to adopt a package of economic sanctions against Russia. This was in response to a perceived Russian inference with the democratic process in Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea by Russian forces, and further perceived threats posed by Russia against Ukraine’s territorial integrity. The sanctions targeted specific sectors in Russia, including energy, banking, defense, and included a ban on the purchase and sale of new bonds, stocks, and long-term debts from some Russian banks. This initial sanctions package was extended in June 2015 until 21 January 2016, and further extended to 31 July 2016 in December 2015.

Recently, there had been discussion on further extending the sanctions package past 31 July 2016. In a statement made on 26 May 2016, Germany Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier announced that, “we are aware that resistance has increased in the EU with regards to extending the sanctions on Russia,” but that, nevertheless, an agreement should be reached. This recent debate on the renewal of sanctions against Russia came as a result of a lack of progress made in implementing the Minsk Agreement; there is doubt in the European community that the Minsk Agreements will be totally implemented by the end of June, and as such, some began to call for an extension of sanctions against Russia. Still, there was a lack of consensus as to the correct course of action to take given the present situation.

Some member states, such as Greece, voiced their resistance to an extension of sanctions against Russia. During an April 7 visit to Russia, Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras stated that, “to get out of this profound crisis, we need to leave behind this vicious cycle of sanctions.” Indeed, this is the worst relations between Russia and the EU have been since the Cold War. Tsipras further confirmed his beliefs during Putin’s visit to Athens on 27 May 2016 when he, again, spoke out against the “vicious cycle of sanctions, militarisation, and Cold War rhetoric”. Still, Tsipras pledged to stick to the agreements Greece has as a member of the European Union; this did not speak, however, to any potential resistance Greece could show in talks over renewing sanctions.

Greece was not the only voice casting doubt over an extension of sanctions. In April 2016, France’s lower house of Parliament voted in favour of lifting EU sanctions against Russia, in a non-binding vote. On 23 May 2016, France permitted Russia’s Agricultural Minister, Alexander Tkachev, a travel visa, despite the fact that he is one of many Russian diplomats on an EU-wide travel ban. In January 2016, Germany refused Tkachev a travel visa.

However, even Germany seemed to be in support of eventually easing economic sanctions imposed on Russia. On 27 May 2016, a spokesperson for the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Germany would support a gradual easing of sanctions against Russia, given that progress would definitely be made in implementing the Minsk agreements. Hungary, the Czech Republic, Austria, and Italy could also be counted among the skeptics, and had been experiencing varying levels of internal backlash against extending the strict sanctions regime without any changes. They are among the countries that have been most affected by the sanctions package.

A year after the sanctions went into effect, the Parliament published a briefing in October 2015 that outlined the economic consequences of the sanctions on EU member states, and the economic consequences of the counter-sanctions imposed on the EU by Russia. The briefing explained that, as Russia is only the EU’s third largest trading partner, the counter-sanctions imposed by Russia on the EU would only have a contained effect in certain sectors. Indeed, Russia banned (with some exceptions) fruit and vegetable, dairy, and meat imports from Europe. As a result, the agri-food sectors in many member states were affected, to varying degrees. Germany, as the biggest exporter to Russia in the EU, was hit the hardest. Indeed, in late 2015, the German Farmers’ Association (DBV) had already begun calling for an end to sanction. The agriculture industry had suffered heavily in 2015, part of which was attributed to the Russian embargo imposed on agriculture products. From 2014-2015, the average income of a farmer in Germany fell by 35%. As a result of this, the European Commission had agreed to unlock a €500 million package in emergency aid for farmers who had been hit by the embargo; part of this aid package was designated to helping unlock routes to markets in 3rd countries, specifically in Asia. Still, this did not quell anger over such a significant loss of revenue, and job security.

However, despite these setbacks, the EU did vote to extend the economic sanctions package against Russia in June 2016, for at least another six months; the decision was made in a unanimous vote by ambassadors from all 28 members states. In a visit to St. Petersburg, head of EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, stated, “on Minsk, the European Union is united. And so is the G7. Russia is party to the Minsk agreements. Therefore, the next step is clear: full implementation of the agreement. No more, no less. This is the only way to begin our conversation, and the only way to lift the economic sanctions that have been imposed.” Therefore, it seems that the EU will not compromise its values, and will continue the sanctions no matter their adverse effects.

Ultimately, a few conclusions can be drawn from this:

• There is vocal support for easing or ceasing the economic sanctions package against Russia
• Representatives of the agri-food sector in several countries have required aid due to damaging counter-sanctions imposed on food imports by Russia
• Sanctions against Russia will be extended indefinitely until such time that Russia has fully implemented the Minsk agreements

Maria Gladkikh

More information is available at these links:

• Juncker says visit to Russia is to “continue dialogue”, despite tensions:https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/16/juncker-russia-visit-sanctions-eu
• EU seen on track to renew sanctions against Russia:http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-eu-russia-idUSKCN0YA134
• Will the EU prolong economic sanctions against Russia:http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_will_the_eu_prolong_economic_sanctions_against_russia_this_7026
• German foreign minister: ease Russia sanctions “step-by-step”:http://www.politico.eu/article/german-foreign-minister-ease-russia-sanctions-step-by-step/
• Time to reconsider EU sanctions against Moscow, say German farmers:http://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/time-to-reconsider-eu-sanctions-against-moscow-say-german-farmers/
• Economic impact on the EU of sanctions over Ukraine crisis:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2015/569020/EPRS_BRI(2015)569020_EN.pdf
• Ukraine territorial integrity: EU extends sanctions by Russia for 6 months:http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/10-ukraine-territorial-integrity/

Classé dans:BREVES, Droit international, RELATIONS EXTERIEURES

VIENNA, 23 June 2016 – The 2016 Annual Security Review Conference (ASRC), organized by the German OSCE Chairmanship, will take place on 28-30 June 2016 in Vienna focusing on persistent security challenges throughout the OSCE area and ways to give new impetus for conflict resolution, confidence building and countering transnational threats.

The annual high-level OSCE conference provides a platform for both a broad exchange on the current state of European security and in-depth discussions on specific issues such as regional conflict situations, arms control and confidence- and security-building measures, terrorism or challenges arising from migration.

The opening session in the morning of 28 June 2016 will be addressed by Special Representative of Germany for the 2016 OSCE Chairmanship Gernot Erler and OSCE Secretary General Lamberto Zannier. Michael Møller, Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva, will convey a message of the Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, to the Annual Security Review Conference.

Then José Ramos-Horta, 1996 Nobel Peace Prize laureate and former President of Timor-Leste (East Timor), will deliver a keynote speech. Based on his lifelong experience as a statesman und diplomat, Ramos-Horta will speak on the value of patient diplomacy, the need for enduring post-conflict rehabilitation and elaborate on security challenges. Ambassador Adam Bugajski, who heads Poland’s current Chairmanship of the OSCE Forum for Security Co-operation, will also contribute to the opening session.

The ASRC is expected to bring together a total of 400 participants from all 57 participating States, Partners for Co-operation and international organizations including the United Nations.

Journalists are invited to follow the addresses of the opening session from 10:00 on Tuesday, 28 June, at the Hofburg Conference Centre's Neuer Saal.

 Media interested in attending the opening session should register by e-mail to press@osce.org, by 17:00, Monday, 27 June. 

Journalists interested in arranging interviews with Mr. Erler and Mr. Horta after the opening address are asked to send their request to press@osce.org by 17:00, Friday, 24 June.

The opening address will be streamed live at www.osce.org/live.

Further information and the agenda are available at http://www.osce.org/cio/246311

Related Stories

• Experts from OSCE participating States stress importance of continuous fight against anti-Semitism
• OSCE marks 20th Anniversary of Sub-Regional Arms Control Agreement, essential for building peace and stability in Western Balkans
• Press Communiqué of Co-Chairs of Geneva International Discussions

Pendant douze ans, un dispositif de détournements de fonds a provoqué un lourd préjudice - plus de 75 millions d'euros - à cette filiale du français BPCE. En cause : les surprenantes défaillances du contrôle interne.

Cet article Banque : au Cameroun, la Bicec tire les leçons de la fraude est apparu en premier sur JeuneAfrique.com.

(B2) Le général français Éric Hautecloque-Raysz, numéro deux de l'Eurocorps, boucle ses derniers bagages, ses derniers dossiers avant de partir prendre la tête de la nouvelle mission de l'UE en Centrafrique, EUTM RCA, chargée de former et de conseiller l'armée centrafricaine (FACA). Quel est l'objectif de cette mission, ses axes de travail, les difficultés à […]

Harnessing the Potential of Former Scholars for International Cooperation

Le Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU a adopté jeudi à l'unanimité une résolution reconduisant pour une période d'un an les sanctions concernant la République démocratique du Congo (RDC) et prorogeant le mandat du Groupe d'experts chargé de surveiller l'application de ces sanctions.

Was Pestalozzi für die Schule der Schweiz, ist Henry Dunant für deren Gute Dienste: ihr Inbegriff.

Die Kinderärztin Isabelle Güss führt regelmässig Auslandeinsätze für das Rote Kreuz durch. Ein Gespräch über medizinische Welten, unterkühlte Flüchtlinge und die europäische Schande.