Minister Koenders wants extra money to bring the capacity of Dutch embassies and consulates abroad up to standard. He endorses the conclusion of the Advisory Council on International Affairs (AIV) in the report 'The Representation of the Netherlands in the World'.
'Following the Scientific Council for Government Policy earlier this month, the AIV has outlined in a convincing manner that developments in the world call for the expansion of our embassies and consulates,' says Koenders. There is much more insecurity abroad, which we are experiencing in many forms in our own country, such as migration, terrorism, crime and cyber threats. 'That means a lot of extra work for our representations abroad.'
Economic competition also calls for more diplomatic efforts. 'The success of Dutch companies creates enormous growth and jobs in the Netherlands. But to remain successful, companies increasingly need the help of our diplomats, for example to open doors to governments that practice protectionism and have a big finger in the pie of the economy,' says Koenders.
The minister also points out that the Dutch are increasingly traveling further and more adventurously, while the world has become less safe in recent years. This also requires more from embassies in the field of travel advice to prevent problems and consular assistance if things go wrong.
The AIV even concludes that in many places things are so tight that trainees are often used in positions that were previously held by diplomats.
Koenders: 'I am extremely proud of how our diplomats go through fire for Dutch interests. After many years of contraction, it is high time that we invest in our diplomatic clout again.'
Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Well then from that PvdA boy!
He cut the lot himself (too bad) and now that his party no longer rules, money is suddenly needed. Or others may try to find those millions in the budget, because if they add it here (the embassy), then it must be taken away somewhere else. That choice (and the bill for it) is therefore nicely placed on someone else's plate. Koenders should have refrained from commenting now that he is outgoing.
I am of course in favor of the best possible service, after all I also benefit from that, but I just don't think it's chic the way Koenders is doing it now.
In politics and certainly in the democratic model as in the Netherlands, policy is built on compromise. In this context, the party for the poor has lost in this area in the past, but has also gained something back in another area, from the Many Days Off party. Surely this is the conclusion we can draw from a two-party cabinet, with opposites in many areas. In addition, one is never too old to learn and the progressive insight will also play a role in this. The PvdA also does not want to be part of a new cabinet under the inspiring leadership of the VVD. It is only logical that as a caretaker minister he now says what he really thinks and found. Whether a new cabinet will adjust its foreign policy and finances in the interests of the Dutch and companies abroad is still very much the question. Especially with the major financial setbacks that we were recently informed about. Anyway, I'm not counting on it.
As so often: “When the calf has drowned, the well is filled in”
The idea that cutbacks automatically lead to poorer service is a major misconception. This also applies to the Dutch embassies. Here's my plan for Thailand/Bangkok:
– from 2020 1 Embassy for the EU, i.e. for the 28 Member States: 1 office building with a wing or floor for each country for specific interests; working language English;
– a central department for Schengen visas;
– all existing embassy sites of the 28 member states can be sold (generating millions of euros; look at the locations of the embassies of France and the Netherlands, for example);
– a small number of mini EU embassies in remote corners of the country (such as Phuket, Chiang Mai) and in rural regions where many European expats live (such as the Isan and Hua-Hin/Cha-am);
– (on a voluntary basis) replacement of the national passport by an EU passport;
– maximizing the digitization of all (paper) traffic between the expat and the EU embassy while reducing the costs for the expat. Coming to the EU embassy should be an exception and financially discouraged.
You forget the most important thing, an embassy is primarily a trading post. Do business. That is what every country wants for itself, given its economic interests.
Actually this is nonsense. It doesn't really matter in which EU country one does business. If one country falls short, the EU, so the other countries, will have to step in later. We have to get rid of that narrow nationalistic thinking.
Perhaps one day, but then we must first become, like the USA, a United States of Europe, with EU citizens with an EU passport and not on a voluntary basis.
You can now put those countries together, but that will simply be 28 embassies in 1 office building. Well, you will only save on common costs.
The sale of land can then yield a one-off amount for that land, but I suspect that this office building will not be free either.
A place where everyone can go for a Schengen visa would be a big step forward.
Digitization of documents should not depend on whether or not there is a shared building. The options are available to enter this now.
Amounts for any stamp/letter or whatever are excessive, even if it concerns the paper version.
The big question is, of course, who will become the Ambassador and will he or she, as Ambassador, have control over the various wings?
No, Europe is not ready for this at all and I don't think it will be in 2020 either.
The personal interests of each country are too different for that.
But it remains a hopeful thought
Dear Pilgrim,
People in EU countries are much more socially, economically and financially integrated than you think. Those people need happiness and freedom, not rules. And that is what the politicians should take care of.
In fact, I believe that the country of origin should help the expat obtain a visa in the country where they want to live. That country of origin can also check the background of the person much better and more precisely. This could and should be of great significance for the 'host country', eg when screening criminal figures.
Peter, those trade tasks can also be outsourced to experts in the country concerned, who already have good contacts and speak the language. In Asia, it doesn't really work to transfer trade employees every 2,3 or 4 years.
Strangely enough, the Netherlands is still one of the few countries that still fill trade positions at embassies with foreign affairs diplomats.
It remains strange that there is no Schengen visa office, but that each country still does this themselves.
Only an EU embassy doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I see embassies with only an ambassador (for bilateral relations), and a consular department, to provide the best possible service to their own nationals.
Good thought Chris, I help you hope so, but take a gloomy view.
Even now, the EU often cannot be on the same page, just look at the distribution of refugees at the moment.
The savings will indeed be huge, only one embassy instead of 28.
The service can indeed be expanded if everyone can submit their applications etc digitally, but the possibility for a visit will always have to remain for the low-literate and that should not be punished with a higher rate
Well, at least we have an answer why we suddenly have to pay 700 baht more for the same signed piece of paper as other years, thanks.
Sounds like a good plan Chris. But the diplomatic corps of all those embassies will not warm to your proposal of EU integration. How many diplomatic "posts" less? And who then goes back to the office in wet cold frogland? And with what titles and honors?
There is a large number of countries that do not have an ambassador at all, but only a consulate. These are usually staffed by part-timers from the host country of no EU country. We could welcome those countries with a real EU embassy.
Every 3 years (if I'm not mistaken) the Dutch ambassadors change countries. It can just happen that you are transferred from Thailand to Iceland. Risk of the profession.
And I once read that the diplomatic corps is suffering from low popularity, perhaps because of that switch. One of the last ambassadors here in Bangkok used to work at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He was never an ambassador before that.
It is not because there is no embassy in a country that those countries are not represented by an embassy.
For example, the Belgian embassy is competent for Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar.
(I thought that this was also the case for the Dutch embassy)
Consul is one step below Ambassador.
Where the Ambassador represents the interests of his country in his jurisdiction, the Consul represents the interests of the people of his country in that jurisdiction.
That's why the Consul is always a diplomat of the country he represents.
If there is an embassy, you will usually also be able to find the consulate there
People often say that they go to the embassy for certain administrative tasks, but actually they go to the consulate
Unlike the Consul, the Consul honorary or honorary consul is usually a resident of the country where the consulate is located and not of the country he represents.
Usually it is someone with a large (social) network and it often concerns CEOs or owners of companies because of their economic knowledge of the country.
The tasks that the Honorary Consul may perform are not fixed, but depend on the powers entrusted to him.
Consul honorary or honorary consul has his own place/consulate..
Usually in tourist places where many compatriots stay, or in many cases ports.
I still remember that a few days before we arrived at a port, we sent our supply lists to the Belgian consul in that country. He then ensured that everything was delivered upon arrival.
run
It is not because there is no embassy in a country that those countries are not represented by an embassy.
A (honorary) consulate always falls under an embassy. An embassy is located in the city where the country has the seat of government. Usually there is also a consular section within an embassy, as is the case in Bangkok.
The embassy in Bangkok has 2 honorary consulates, namely those in Phuket and Vientiane. In Hong Kong and Ho Chi Minh City there are fairly large consulates headed by a professional consul general. However, these consulates fall under the jurisdiction of the embassies in Beijing and Hanoi.
Of course it falls under the embassy. It also gives powers to the honorary consuls.
Lampang would be closed and apparently only the honorary consulates of Vientiane and Phnom Penh remain.
http://thailand.diplomatie.belgium.be/nl/ambassade-en-consulaten/ereconsulaten
General consulates cannot therefore be compared to honorary consuls.
I mean.
Consul General is therefore not comparable to an honorary consul.