Conflict Between Turkey and The Netherlands: The Winners and Losers.


The Netherlands is consider to be run as a democracy, while Turkey was previously proceeding to bring in democratic ideals, but under the current leadership would now appear to be proceeding with dictatorship ideals. While it is for each country to decide themselves how they wish to govern, neither should endeavour to implant their own ideals on each other.

Within the powers of each county they can individually decide who should or should not be allowed enter their respective countries in accordance with their own rule of law.

So, as in this case, if the Netherlands decide that certain persons will not be allowed access then these persons and their country, Turkey, should respect this. Irrespective whether the decisions were right or wrong the course of action is not for persons from one country to deliberately ignore and thwart these decisions and if they so wished to counter these then there are diplomatic channels in which to do so.

As stated in the article each country have important elections coming forth and therefore it is essential that each countries rule of law should be respected.

The Netherlands decided that to allow politicians from Turkey could provide a situation from which the alteright party could use to enhance more support. However due to the actions of the Turkish Government representatives in not respecting the Netherlands right to ban their enter, this has escalated the situation, so that Turkish President Erdogan supporters have, initially formed a large gathering in Rotterdam and not only did they not disperse when requested to do so they went on to riot and cause damage in a country in which they are effectively guests. So what the Netherlands government did not want to occur did occur and Geert Wilders, the right-wing candidate as used this to support his cause. It will also not do any harm to President Erdogan in the Turkish election.

The moral being respect the rule of law and the political process of each and every county by other countries.

Josep Goded

On Saturday, just four days before the Dutch elections and one month before Turkey holds a crucial constitutional referendum (on expanding Turkish presidential powers), a new diplomatic dispute began between the Netherlands and Turkey.

Everything began when the Turkish foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu announced he would visit Rotterdam to call on Turkish expatriates to vote favorably on the referendum. Right after this announcement, the Dutch authorities notified Cavusoglu that he was banned from entering the country, alleging that there was a risk to public order and security.

Despite the ban, Cavusoglu decided to take a plane to the Netherlands. In response, the Dutch government withdrew landing permission for him and his aides, forcing him to land in Germany. Once in Germany, the minister Cavusoglu said:

“This decision is a scandal and unacceptable in every way. It does not abide by diplomatic principles.”

“Listen Netherlands, you’ll jump once, you’ll jump twice…

View original post 691 more words

Saudi Arabia’s Violations of Human Rights Supported by Trump’s Administration


Saudi Arabia some many human rights abuses and ruled by Saudi Royal family under extreme Sharia law and some terrorists have been from Saudi, but Saudi was not part of Donald Trump’s executive order. Does this mean President Donald Trump agrees with the rulings of law in Saudi , for such an outspoken person he appears to be quiet about this.

Or is he indicating it is Fake News or is it Alternative facts.

Josep Goded

For years, Saudi Arabia has had the honour to be one of the principal violators of human rights in the world. Regardless of its efforts to hide it from the international community, numerous local human rights organisations have regularly exposed the abuses perpetrated by the regime. In response, the Saudi government has banned all international human rights organisations from entering Saudi Arabia. As numerous organisations have suggested, the primary problem remains in the system and the interpretation of the Sharia (Islamic law).

Saudi Arabia uses Sharia (Islamic law) as its domestic legislation. There is no a formal penal code; the criminal justice court derives its interpretation from an extreme version of Sharia. In most of cases, detainees do not have a fair trial and are not allowed to meet with a lawyer during their interrogations. Further, the authorities do not usually inform them about their charges until…

View original post 1,000 more words