To Start Page

TOP
Voice of Diaspora

 
INDEX ABOUT TOPICS - CONTENT REGION TOMORROWS

Important News, Belangrijke nieuws, Nouvelles importantes, Wichtige News, Fontos hírek, Importanti novitŕ, Pomembne novice, Importante Notícias, Viktiga nyheter



Ing. Salih CAVKIC
Editor in Chief
by ORBUS.BE
info@orbus.be
www.orbus.be


 
No more Paris nor Brussels!
Stop terrorism!
We want to live in peace with all our neighbors.
  regardless of their religion, color and origin.
Therefore, we condemn any kind of terrorism!

*****
Ne više Pariz ni Brisel!
Stop terorizam!
Mi želimo živjeti u miru sa svim našim komšijama,
bez obzira koje su vjere, boje kože i porijekla.
Zato mi osuđujemo svaku vrstu terorizma!


Belang van Limburg
De Morgen
De Standard
Het Laatste Nieuws
La Libre Belgique
Nieuwsblaad

VRT
VRTNieuws

N-TV.DE
Deutsche Welle
West-D. Zeitung




The man of the year 2009
Guy Verhofstadt
Mr. Guy Verhofstadt

The man of the year
L'homme de l'ane
De man van het jaar
2009


A proven Democrat, protector and fighter for justice and human rights in the World.

Een bewezen Democraat, beschermer en strijder voor rechtvaardigheid en mensenrechten in de Wereld.

Un prouvé démocrate, protecteur et combattant pour la justice et des droits de l'homme dans le Mond.

Eine bewährte Demokrat, Beschützer und Kämpfer für Gerechtigkeit und Menschenrechte in der Welt.

Dokazani demokrat,
 zaštitnik i borac za pravdu i ljudska prava u Svijetu.





Maasmechelen Village
Belgium



The man of the year 2012


Mr. Barak Hossein Obama

The man of the year
L'homme de l'an
De man van het jaar
2012


Guarantee
peace in the world

Garantie
vrede in de wereld

Garantie
la paix dans le monde

Garantie des Friedens in der Welt

Zabezpečenie
mieru vo svete

Garancija
mira u svijetu





Prof. dr. Murray Hunter
University Malaysia Perlis




Eva MAURINA
20 Years to Trade Economic Independence for Political Sovereignty - Eva MAURINA




Aleš Debeljak +
In Defense of Cross-Fertilization: Europe and Its Identity Contradictions - Aleš Debeljak

ALEŠ DEBELJAK - ABECEDA DJETINJSTVA

ALEŠ DEBEJAK - INTERVJU; PROSVJEDI, POEZIJA, DRŽAVA




Rattana Lao
Rattana Lao holds a doctorate in Comparative and International Education from Teachers College, Columbia University and is currently teaching in Bangkok.




Bakhtyar Aljaf
Director of Middle-East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES) in Ljubljana, Slovenia




Rakesh Krishnan Simha
Géométrie variable of a love triangle – India, Russia and the US





Amna Whiston
Amna Whiston is a London-based writer specialising in moral philosophy. As a PhD candidate at Reading University, UK, her main research interests are in ethics, rationality, and moral psychology.





Eirini Patsea 
Eirini Patsea is a Guest Editor in Modern Diplomacy, and specialist in Cultural Diplomacy and Faith-based Mediation
.




Belmir Selimovic
Can we trust the government to do the right thing, are they really care about essential things such as environmental conditions and education in our life?





Dubravko Lovrenović+
Univ. prof. Dubravko Lovrenović is one of the leading European Medievalist specialized in the Balkans, pre-modern and modern political history.




Manal Saadi
Postgraduate researcher in International Relations and Diplomacy at the Geneva-based UMEF University




doc.dr.Jasna Cosabic
professor of IT law and EU law at Banja Luka College,
Bosnia and Herzegovina




Aleksandra Krstic
Studied in Belgrade (Political Science) and in Moscow (Plekhanov’s IBS). Currently, a post-doctoral researcher at the Kent University in Brussels (Intl. Relations). Specialist for the MENA-Balkans frozen and controlled conflicts.

Contact: alex-alex@gmail.com






Dr.Swaleha Sindhi is Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Administration, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India. Decorated educational practitioner Dr. Sindhi is a frequent columnist on related topics, too. She is the Vice President of Indian Ocean Comparative Education Society (IOCES). Contact: swalehasindhi@gmail.com




Barçın Yinanç
 It is an Ankara-based journalist and notable author. She is engaged with the leading Turkish dailies and weeklies for nearly three decades as a columnist, intervieweer and editor. Her words are prolifically published and quoted in Turkish, French an English.




 By İLNUR ÇEVIK
Modified from the original: They killed 1 Saddam and created 1,000 others (Daily Sabah)




Aine O’Mahony
Aine O'Mahony has a bachelor in Law and Political Science at the Catholic Institute of Paris and is currently a master's student of Leiden University in the International Studies programme.Contact: aine-claire.nini@hotmail.fr




Elodie Pichon

  Elodie Pichon has a  bachelor in Law and Political Science at the Catholic Institute of Paris and is currently doing a MA in Geopolitics, territory and Security at King's College London. Contact : elodie.pichon@gmail.com




Qi Lin

Qi Lin, a MA candidate of the George Washington University, Elliott School of International Affairs. Her research focus is on cross-Pacific security and Asian studies, particularly on the Sino-U.S. relations and on the foreign policy and politics of these two.





ALESSANDRO CIPRI
Born in Chile and raised in Rome, Alessandro Cipri has just finished his postgraduate studies at the department of War Studies of King's College London, graduating with distinction from the Master's Degree in "Intelligence and International Security". Having served in the Italian Army's "Alpini" mountain troops, he has a keen interest in national security, military strategy, insurgency theory, and terrorism studies. His Master's dissertation was on the impact of drug trafficking on the evolution of the Colombian FARC.




Ms. Lingbo ZHAO
is a candidate of the Hong Kong Baptist University, Department of Government and International Studies. Her research interest includes Sino-world, Asia and cross-Pacific.

Contact: harryzhaolin@gmail.com

 


Hannes Grassegger
Hannes Grassegger and Mikael Krogerus are investigative journalists attached to the Swiss-based Das Magazin specialized journal.

 

Mikael Krogerus

Hannes Grassegger and Mikael Krogerus are investigative journalists attached to the Swiss-based Das Magazin specialized journal.

 


Michal Kosinski

Scientific analysis

 


Elodie Pichon,
Ms. Elodie Pichon, Research Fellow of the IFIMES Institute, DeSSA Department. This native Parisian is a Master in Geopolitics, Territory and Security from the King’s College, London, UK.





Djoeke Altena



Muhamed Sacirbey
Muhamed Sacirbey

Ambassador Muhamed Sacirbey currently lectures on Digital-Diplomacy. "Mo" has benefited from a diverse career in investment banking & diplomacy, but his passion has been the new avenues of communication. He was Bosnia & Herzegovina's first Ambassador to the United Nations, Agent to the International Court of Justice, Foreign Minister & Signatory of the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court. He also played American football opting for a scholarship to Tulane University in New Orleans after being admitted to Harvard, oh well!!








INDEX 2017

INDEX 2016


English
Important News


Dutch - Nederlands
Belangrijke nieuws


French - Français
Nouvelles importantes


German - Deutsch
Wichtige News


Bosnian-Bosanski
Važne vijesti






 

JULY 2017

Balkan Transitional Justice
Serbia Delivered Srebrenica Refugees to Mladic: Report

Filip Rudic - BIRN-Belgrade

The Humanitarian Law Centre NGO said it will file criminal complaints against Serbian officials involved in handing over Bosniak refugees from Srebrenica who fled to Serbia to Ratko Mladic’s forces.



A Bosniak woman at a funeral ceremony at the Srebrenica memorial on July 11. Photo: Beta/AP/Amel Emric.

The Belgrade-based Humanitarian Law Centre said in a report launched on Thursday that it has identified 30 Bosniak refugees who crossed the border seeking shelter in Yugoslavia after the July 1995 genocide in Srebrenica, but were handed over to Bosnian Serb forces, who killed at least 15 of them.

Nine of the Bosniaks are still listed as missing and six survived.

At the launch of the Humanitarian Law Centre report in Belgrade, one of the survivors, Muhamed Avdic, recalled how he lost his father, Azem, who remains listed as a missing person.

“My mother, sister and I parted with father on March 30, 1993, when [Bosnian Serb commander Ratko] Mladic’s forces were around Srebrenica,” said Avdic, who was a teenager at the time.

His father stayed behind while the rest of the family took a UN refugee agency humanitarian aid truck to the nearby town of Tuzla. Their only communication with Azem was through letters sent via the Red Cross.

“When Srebrenica was declared a safe zone, we were happy and waiting for father to return. In August 1995 we received information that he had been captured,” Avdic said.

The HLC had found official records showing that Azem was caught on July 31, 1995, 20 days after the fall of Srebrenica, by police in the Serbian town of Bajina Basta.

They handed him over to the border police, who in turn gave him to the Bratunac Brigade of the Bosnian Serb Army; he was never seen since.

After Srebrenica was captured on July 11, 1995, Serb forces killed some 8,000 Bosniaks, which the international courts have qualified as an act of genocide.

After the mass murders, the Bosnian Serb Army pursued the Bosniaks who had escaped. The pursuit, capture, and murders continued for weeks after the fall of Srebrenica, according to the Humanitarian Law Centre.

“Every man who was caught on Serbian territory was handed over to the Bosnian Serb Army, including those who, according to police records, resorted to self-harm to prevent [themselves] from being returned,” said Milica Kostic from the Humanitarian Law Centre.

According to the report, no domestic or international court has ever prosecuted Serbian officials for the crimes.

One of the few survivors, Abdurahman Malkic, said he left Srebrenica as the town was being captured in July 1995.

“I took the road to salvation, towards [Bosniak-controlled territory in] Tuzla, there were 15,000 of us in a ten-kilometre column,” Malkic said.

After constant attacks on the refugee column, he and his brother swam over the river Drina and crossed into Serbia.

According to records obtained by the HLC, they were captured together with other men on July 23.

After being sent back to Bosnia, six of them, including Malkic, were transfered to the Batkovic prisoner camp near Bijeljina. They were the only ones who survived the deportations.

“It was a routine operation. Men were captured by the Serbian police, then turned over to the border police in Bajina Basta or Ljubovija. There they were interrogated, tortured, and turned over to the border police of [Bosnian Serb entity] Republika Srpska, which in turn handed them over to the Bosnian Serb Army,” Kostic said.

She added that Serbia knew that the men were refugees from Srebrenica, and that they were in danger from the Bosnian Serb police and military.

“Most importantly, everybody knew that the men from Srebrenica were systematically murdered by the thousands,” she said.

At the presentation of the report, Muhamed Avdic showed a picture of his father, a school teacher, surrounded by the Bosniak and Serb children that he taught.

“Since we are facing denial of genocide and claims that the numbers [of Srebrenica victims] are made up, here is the proof my father lived,” Avdic said.

“I hope that the state authorities who wish to defend Serbia’s honour will do something and punish the culprits,” he added.



July 19, 2017



The Truth and Reconciliation stuggle on the Balkans

Senadin Lavić

We live in a post-genocidal society, divided into ethnic-religious ghetto by means of war. In such broken society are continually inserted seductive and controversial concepts that serve the goals that are not realized by means of war. The terms such as federalism, unitarism and separatism come mainly as political games of political life actors in our country, but regarding the separatism of the entities RS, the Greater Serbian policy is absolutely focused on this goal. The shaping of political reality and the main ideas in it is a work of the ideology – par excellence, which then means that these terms are mostly ideologically determined and conceived in the minds of their constructors.

We should remember that M. Kasapović (Zagreb) in 2005 imposed and installed the term of consociation as territorial separation of the people in Bosnia and as the only possible model for the organization of the political system in Bosnia, followed by an orchestrated story of federalization and electoral units. The vague concept about the "impossible state" by N. Kecmanović (Banjaluka) is added to this in 2007 and till today, these two, assembled Serbian-Croatian projects of the dissolution of Bosnia stifled us and taken to a blind track of history. Kasapović has already come to Cyprisation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

These two names, Kasapović and Kecmanović, are witnesses to the great moral problem that has dampened our present social reality! We did not forget that on the ground of Bosnia, "pure ethnic territories" were created. On the objection that separatism must be halted, separatist forces respond that separatism is a reaction to unitarism and the non-recognition of entity "RS" or the necessity of federalization because of the vulnerability of Croats by Bosniaks. Thus, the syntagm of "unitarist politics" is a good excuse to continue the policy of division, ghettoization, hatred, great Serbian policy and similar enterprises.

The Dayton political system with imposed Constitution in Anex IV has brought peace to Bosnia, but, it should be emphasized, left the hope of anti-Bosnian forces to continue what they did not end in the war. This was immediately understood by the Greater Serbian policy and the entity RS was called the "Serbian state", "war booty" or "the rest of the remnants of the Serbian ethnic territory" west of the Drina River. The name of the entity itself allows this in perspective! Many people are already "trained" to speak "Serbian entity" regardless of the fact that it was made by genocide against Bosniaks.

Unitarianism is falsely identified with majorization in the explanations of separatist policies that, in fact, do not want the state of Bosnia or want only the formally present state institutions that are subordinate to the entity. The unitary system of government means that there is a state power that is accomplished throughout the territory of the state. Relating to this idea, Bosnia is a highly decentralized state divided into entities and cantons, which considerably slows down its functioning. The key matter is that separatism and federalism as parts of the political ideology of anti-Bosnianism do not want strong state of Bosnia. In such divided state, there we cannot talk about unitarism.

The expansionist nationalism of Serbs and Croats sees its goal in the assimilation of the Bosnian territory, then the "territorial authority" of ethnics means suppressing everything different from our "territory" and disregarding that in “our territory "state power or some national (state) institution has any influence. From here to dissolution, it is just a step. This is the way that tribal games go to the extreme. Serbian and Croatian national projects are seeking a "Bosniak policy" that would agree to implementation of Bosnian state's dissolution in this way and end with its political and historical existence. A brave Bosnian policy should offer the concept of regionalization of the state area and constantly insist on it regardless of all Serbian-Croatian agreements against Bosnia.

Bosnia has five historical regions that derive their meaningful existence from medieval times and that should not be ridden of the mind. In addition, the Bosnian ethatist political philosophy must be reaffirmed, therefore, a new development of awareness of the importance of the state. By this, it should be ended the Bosniak jeremiad in the last twenty years and defeated the anti-politics.

The ideologized vocabulary of anti-Bosnian politics

We must not agree to accept the ideologized vocabulary of anti-Bosnian politics at all. Unfortunately, we still do not have a sufficiently strong Bosnian policy that could deal with numerous subversives, simulacrums, deceptions and abuses of the system institutions, and we are all troubled by the failure of the rule of law. Parts of the law apply only to powerless or politically unbounded. It seems that the system of law in this country is the main source of corruption and manipulation of citizens, such a monstrous system that we have not even imagined. Organized groups have appropriated "right" of rights institutions and it appears as "party" and "ethnic" property, plus family clans, and the state is catastrophically damaged and turned into a "super-market" for robbery. The law system is subordinate to political groups that implement their constructions of social life. Weak state institutions open the space to all degenerative phenomena that undermine political stability. The state is vulnerable, institutionally deprived and does not breathe full of lungs. It would be good if the unitary system of government worked and organized the political life in the state through the devolution. It would be much more order, responsibility and better life. There would be no anarchy, hunting in the fog, ethnophulism in the education system, anachronistic ideologies, mythical consciousness, Chetniks and Ustasha, denying of genocide, denying the right to Bosnian language for children in schools ... In post genocidal society, a strong and responsible state is needed in order to overcome war trauma and reached legal satisfaction. What we have now is a knock-together form of war achievements and fulfilled wishes of the Milosević’s regime.

The bureaucrats from the so-called International community

We should not be naive and believe to bureaucrats from the so-called International community, to people like for example, B. B. Ghali, J. Akashi, J. Mayor, M. Lajčak or C. Bildt and many others, known and unknown. They consider Bosnia as a regular working task and they did not carry out anything to improve life in Bosnia. Let remember José Cutilliero, Lord Carrington, David Owen, Philippe Morillon and dozens of others who have done everything to carry out an anti-Bosnian idea in Bosnia and led us to the madness of the division of the country towards the ethnic-religious lines of war conquest. They were "just mediators" – that sounds innocently. They came here as maharaja with their colonial narrations. Today's generations must not forget these people and must save a real memory about them. It is important, for example, to leave a recorded memory of F. Mitterrand and similar figures of modern cynicism that convinced us that we could walk across the city under the siege of Serbian howitzers and snipers beside the burnt City Hall or Markale. They turned our disaster into a "humanitarian issue" and shamefully closed their eyes against the genocide against Bosniaks all over the Bosnia. In addition, Bosnia is settled at the heart of the former South Slavic area and it is "ideal" as a focal point in which Western, European, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, civilized mediators "experts" can be involved for the division of territories leaving the peoples in conflicts. When “bureaucrats” stop working this in the Balkans, it is absolutely certain that peace will be here – to avoid saying eternal peace, because we have never started wars. Let's look back to the 20th century - everything was transparent. Egoistic bureaucrats do not need civil Bosnia or peace among South Slavic "tribes", because what would they do then and how they deal with their problems.  European bureaucrats have been watching aggression on Bosnia for four years and wrote letters to Milošević. They did not provide protection and defence of an independent state with the UN forces. In today's constellation, they worry about the Bosnian and South Slavic "primitives" who do not know what "civil society" is and play the role of a civilizing factor.

The political matrix of ethnic-religious representation of people

It would be worth to express a sceptical attitude towards the "civil political option" syntagm, because it does not have clear semantic structure, as well as a "nationalist policy". Until we begin to name precisely the phenomena around us, we will not know what is happening to us! Since the 1990s in Bosnia the political matrix of ethnic-religious representation of people has been imposed, so that they have not appeared as individuals, citizens, free citizens, but only and exclusively as members of the team/collective, Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks and Others.

In that wretched matrix, people of Bosnia are not autonomous and free individuals. They have to think as the "team/collective says" or the priest on behalf of the team/collective (tribe, people, nation, religion) and in such way their individuality is reduced of them, and then they are only "cannon flesh" of some great "Načertanija" (1844) and pathological conditions of hegemonic politics. Such a collectivist spirit is controlled by religious institutions and ruling political oligarchs. Here, the religion is the basis of the nation - and it tells us where we are! It is an illusion to present the policy throughout the conceptual pair of "nationalist" and "civil" politics when we know that this is only the seductive surface of the project of tribal division of the people of the South Slavic area and the imposition of a matrix to Bosnia that opposes against its historical political philosophy.

Our heroic peoples, who have neglected their production of knowledge and general culture, managed by people with suspicious projects, they will be slaves and serfs in the upcoming establishment of the world order as a system of hegemony of several powers. The pair of terms "civil" and "nationalist" does not correspond to the essential meaning of the historical process in which we are overtaken by a sub-national political culture, a feudalized landscape in which neither citizens nor nationalists “can” appear.

We have not yet learned to participate freely in a democratic culture as citizens with their opinions and interests. We still need tribal chiefs and priests who do not know anything about the Bosnian political future! We need to ask questions that help us to focus primarily. For example, first of all - how did it happen that we are the only ones in today's Europe who has a "tribal political system" or a "state of tribes", such a constitutional arrangement imposed by Annex IV? Who set us this up as the Constitution of the State?

Why all European diplomats are silent on this issue and say that we should "agree" when they, as the International Community, have fulfilled the wishes of the aggressors and nationalist forces in the Balkans and against Bosnia? This cynical European bureaucracy, above all, regardless of European ideals, is a self-sufficient, static and enlarging political group that accumulates great power in its hands. It pretends as awkward in front of the Balkan fascists, the Nazis, the fundamentalists, because such characters serve it as an example of the "primitive Balkans" and "wild Slavic tribes" who are slaughtered each other without mercy. This colonial background and the orientalistic image about us disable a realistic approach to solving problems in this area.

There are also quite low and hypocritical moves of Croatian "European" policy that plays its petty-bourgeois super-ordination to this area and shows itself to others as an "heir of European values" while supporting the Hague convicts with Tompson's songs and ideology. This Croatian unilateralism has led to the incomparable exodus of Bosnian Croats from their homeland - Bosnia and has torn them away from their Bosnian state. The second guidance that helps us to orient ourselves is focused on understanding the distinction between national and ethnic, civil and ethnicity. First of all, it should be reminded that in the area of South East Europe, where the South Slavic nations were located, the state structure of these nations failed because they were mostly obsessed with their own mythical, religious and ethnic constructions or fabrications that served them to represent themselves as a nation superior to others. In Bosnia, this has been happening during the whole 20th century in big noises of the Serbian and Croatian national determinations.

Thus, the national question was shaped at a very primitive level as a question of creating an ethnic-religious state from which all who are not "ours" by religion and nationality will be excluded. This incompetence for the difference led the national question under the control of religious institutions of Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks. In one-track politics, the nuances of the fascist-shape relation to the different are noticed, as R. Konstantinović wrote about it, so knowledgeable and anticipatory, as well as Miodrag Popović. So, it could be said that the South Slavic peoples, as well as the peoples of Bosnia, have not yet developed and tested a political culture that surpasses the "tribal image of the world" and prefers free man as the greatest value of the social life of people.

We need to teach people that nationally are not a tribal, ethnic, folk, regional or ethnic-religious definition of a person, but it is meant that a free citizen belongs to a state-nation that assures him all human rights as to its citizen. Nationality is thus a civil definition, a legal-political concept of people's life who does not exclude their cultural perceptions of themselves. So, it is time to learn to distinguish the political-legal level of human life in the community from the cultural-historical dimension through which a certain national identity is recognized as specific among others. The Bosnian Serbs were captured in the mythologist of the 19th century about the "great Serbian state" in which all Serbs will live and - only Serbs. In front of them there is a great historical task to overcome their own misconceptions, self-denial and historical blind alley.

A similar process of liberation from the "Ottoman image of the world" has already begun by the Bosniaks and they are carrying it out. In the end, it should be emphasized that in our country the civil has not yet matured in citizenship awareness, but it entails historicist narratives of Tito-statehood, fraternity and unity, communism and a one-party world, the monolithic Left, existence without identity, misunderstanding of anti-Fascism, bipolar diversity of the world, unable to anticipate the new Bosnian idea of ​​life, and so on. In fact, the civil has never come to life in this region as a political culture of respecting a man, an individual, a free citizen of the Bosnian nation. We still do not know what it means to be a citizen, free and conscious again in our own Bosnianhood?

We have not considered this in the past thirty years under the siege of collective metaphysics of ethnic-religious groups. In today's monstrous political systems, this seems to be utopian, unreal and unachievable before the dictatorship of party oligarchies, leaders and their assistants. In that danger is growing the rescue-thing - Heidegger would remind to Hoelderlin.

 

Senadin Lavić is a professor at the Department of the Sociology of Political Sciences Faculty Sarajevo, at University of Sarajevo, in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Prolific author of numerous books and seminal works, prof. Lavić is the Chairman of the Bosnian Cultural Union 'Preporod'.



July 18, 2017



Serbian fascism never stops, it is becoming more and more dangerous every day


Bosnian Reporter Flees After Condemning Mladic Rally
BIRN | Banja Luka

Columnist Dragan Bursac has fled Banja Luka after receiving death threats from supporters of the former Bosnian Serb military commander Ratko Mladic.



Dragan Bursac. Photo: Curtesy of Bursac


Journalist Dragan Bursac - who received death threats after criticizing a planned rally in Banja Luka in support of Ratko Mladic - told BIRN that he had been forced to go into hiding for some time.

He had reported the death threats he has received to the police, he added.

Burcac received the highly aggressive threats after publishing a column expressing deep revulsion at a planned demonstration in support of the former Bosnian Serb commander under the slogan “Support for General Ratko Mladic - Stop the Lies about Srebrenica.”

It was scheduled to be held on July 11 - on the same day as the annual commemoration of the 1995 massacre of Bosniaks in Srebrenica by Bosnian Serb forces under Mladic’s control.

Courts have deemed the massacre of some 8,000 Bosniaks [Muslims] a genocidal act.

The Interior Ministry of Republika Srpska, the Serb-dominated entity in Bosnia, has since delayed the rally, citing security issues.

Outraged at the planned rally, Bursac asked whether people were willing to stand by and watch as “the Srebrenica genocide is celebrated in Banja Luka?”.

The organizers of the rally were a right-wing Serbian nationalist movement called the “Zavetnici”, or “Oath-takers.”

After that, Bursac received death threats that forced him to flee Banja Luka.

“I received explicit threats via social networks, detailing what they would do to me and my family,” Bursac told BIRN.

In calling off the rally, the interior ministry on Monday said that it would be unable to patrol the gathering of an expected 1,000 participants because most of its police would be away, safeguarding the commemorative events in Srebrenica itself.

Bursac said it was very problematic that the rally had not been banned completely but only rescheduled.

“Instead of banning the rally, they have delayed it. They are saying: ‘OK, fascism is not allowed on July 11, but it will be allowed at a later date,’” he said.

Burcas said that a silent majority in Banja Luka was just watching as extremists turned the city into a hotbed for “Chetniks” – a code word for Serbian ultra-nationalists.  

“What do you call a citizen of Banja Luka who will watch, shrugging and mute, as this lunacy takes place in the centre of the city? There is a word for that - an accomplice!” Bursac wrote in his article.

Bursac concluded that his own forced flight was yet another example of the worsening plight of journalists in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

“If you are reporting on culture, concerts, festivals ... you are wonderful, but if you peek into the pockets of politicians and tycoons, and refuse to uphold fascism, then you receive death threats,” he said.

Over 70 more victims of the July 1995 genocide were due to be buried at the annual ceremony at the Srebrenica memorial site on July 11.

Mladic is currently on trial in The Hague for genocide and other crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the first-instance verdict expected in November.



July 14, 2017



REGIONAL SECURITY ARCHITECTURES:
COMPARING ASIA AND EUROPE

Insights from Anis Bajrektarevic

Trans-Pacific View author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners, and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Dr. Anis Bajrektarevic  –  chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria and editor of the New York-based scientific journal Geopolitics, History, and International Relations – is the 98th in “The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.”


Q1:   Compare and contract regional security architectures in Asia and Europe.

While all other major theaters have had pan-continental settings in place already for many decades, such as the Organization of American States – OAS (American continent); African Union – AU (Africa); Council of Europe and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe – OSCE (Europe), Asia is rather different. What becomes apparent, at first glance, is the absence of any pan-Asian security/ multilateral structure. Prevailing security structures are bilateral and mostly asymmetric. They range from the clearly defined and enduring non-aggression security treaties, through less formal arrangements, up to the Ad hoc cooperation accords on specific issues.

The presence of the multilateral regional settings is limited to a very few spots in the largest continent, and even then, they are rarely mandated with security issues in their declared scope of work.

Another striking feature is that most of the existing bilateral structures have an Asian state on one side, and an either peripheral or external protégé country on the other side which makes them nearly, per definition, asymmetric. The examples are numerous: the US–Japan,  US– S. Korea, US–Singapore, Russia–India, Australia–East Timor, Russia–North Korea, Japan –Malaysia, China–Pakistan, US–Pakistan, China–Cambodia, US–Saudi Arabia, Russia –Iran, China–Burma, India–Maldives, Iran–Syria, N. Korea–Pakistan, etc.


Q2:    With Brexit in the UK and the “America First” foreign policy of the US, please give us your take on the future of NATO.

The West is apparently in a serious decline. The UK has been sliding down for 100 years, absorbing it by a skilful set of planetary contrasts. The US has been melting ever since the end of WWII. In 1945, Americans had 54% of global manufacturing output, today it is hardly a 1/3 of it.

NATO is a relict of Cold War instrumentarium. Currently, confrontational nostalgia is what keeps it afloat. Atlantistic world is overcommitted and overstretched. London and Washington understand that NATO increasingly becomes part of a problem not a solution, for their own future. Europe goes along with it.
Simply, the Old Continent is not a wealthy club anymore. It is a theater with a memory of its wealthy past. The EU has to learn how to deescalate and compromise. This is in its best interest, for the sake of its only viable future.


Q3:    Is an Asian version of NATO plausible? 

Why does the world’s largest continent must consider creation of a comprehensive pan-Asian institution? Not a military pact a’la NATO (since NATO is only an instrument of American military presence in Europe) but a true multi-vector and multilateral instrument. Prevailing security structures in Asia are bilateral and mostly asymmetric, while Europe enjoys multilateral, balanced and symmetric setups (the American and African  continents too).

In my forthcoming book No Asian century, I go as far as to claim that irrespective of the impressive economic growth, no Asian century will emerge without creation of such an institution. Asia today is a huge running water without clear river banks - a rising economic success, social volcano and political hazard.


Q4:    Identify three ongoing geopolitical risks that Asia and Europe share.

For most of the 19th and a good part of 20th century, a central question of Europe and Euro-Atlantic was how many ‘Germanys’ Europe can digest – one big, über-performing and omnipresent, or several Germanophone states in a dynamic equilibrium with itself and the rest. This and the so-called the grand accommodation – Germany with Russia or France with Russia – remains a central security dilemma for many decades to come.

On the other flank of the world, the entire Asian architecture was based on an assumption of a weak center;  fragmented, backword and soft mainland China. What we are witnessing now is awaking of China – reminiscence of an imperial Germany in the heart of Europe.  


Q5:    What common linkages underpin U.S. transatlantic and transpacific relations, and how should the U.S. administration capitalize on them?     

Chinese grab for fossil fuels or its military competition for naval control is not a challenge but rather a boost for the US Asia-Pacific –even an overall posture. Calibrating the contraction of its overseas projection and commitments – managing the decline of an empire – the US does not fail to note that nowadays half of the world’s merchant tonnage passes though the South China Sea. Therefore, the US will exploit any regional territorial dispute and other frictions to its own security benefit, including the costs sharing of its military presence with the local partners, as to maintain its pivotal position on the maritime edge of Asia that arches from the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean, Malacca, the South and East China Sea up to the northwest–central Pacific. 

A real challenge is always to optimize the (moral, political and financial) costs in meeting national strategic objectives. In this case, it would be a resolute Beijing’s turn towards green technology, coupled with the firm buildup of Asian multilateralism. Without a grand rapprochement to the champions of multilateralism in Asia, which are Indonesia, India and Japan, there is no environment for China to seriously evolve and emerge as a formidable, lasting and trusted global leader.

Consequently, what China needs in Asia is not a naval race of 1908, but the Helsinki process of 1975. In return, what Asia needs from China and Japan is the ‘ASEAN-ization’, not the ‘Pakistanization’ of its continent.

28 JUN 17

Fist published by: http://thediplomat.com/2017/06/regional-security-architectures-comparing-asia-and-europe/

About the author:
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
Anis H. Bajrektarevic
Vienna, 01 MAY 2017
anis@corpsdiplomatique.cd

Author is chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria. He is Editor of the New York-based scientific journal GHIR (Geopolitics, History, Intl Relations). Professors authors four books: FB – Geopolitics of Technology (Addleton Academic Publishers, NY); Geopolitics – Europe 100 years later (DB, Europe), Geopolitics – Energy – Technology (Germany, LAP). Europe and Africa – Security structures (Nova, NY) is his latest, just released book.  His new book is No Asian century.



July 1, 2017


JUNE 2017
“We win, they lose” – Wonderful world of Binary categorisations

(Refeudalisation of Europe – III Part)

Anis H. Bajrektarevic
 

The new Cold War knocks on our doors, suddenly. Why so? How did it previously end?

The end of the Cold War came abruptly, overnight.                                        Many in the West dreamt about it, but nobody really saw it coming. The Warsaw Pact, Red Army in DDR, Berlin Wall, DDR itself, Soviet Union – one after the other, vanished rapidly, unexpectedly. There was no ceasefire, no peace conference, no formal treaty and guaranties, no expression of interests and settlement. Only the gazing face expression of that time Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze who circles around and unconvincingly repeats: “we now better understand each other”.

On contrary, Bush (the 41st US President) calmly diagnosed: “We win, they lose!” His administration immediately declared that the policies, including all military capabilities, will remain unchanged but with a different pretexts – to respond to the ‘technological sophistication of the III world powers’ and to a ‘radical nationalism’ (meaning; any indigenous emancipation). The so-called normative revolution from Atlantic followed shortly, in which the extensive (assertive) rights were self-prescribed to that theater. Thus, the might-makes-right interventions were justified through the new (de facto imperial) doctrines: humanitarian intervention, R2P (incl. Kouchner-Lévy bombing for a noble cause), doctrine of preemption, uninhabited access to or beyond grand area, as well as the so-called Afroasia forward deployment, as a sort of the enlarged Brezhnev and Monroe doctrines combined both together, etc.

Simultaneously, that time Washington darling Fukuyama published his famous article The End of History? and the book which came soon after. To underline how sure he was about this claim he even dropped the question mark into the title of the book.

Was this sudden meltdown of the Soviet colossus and the day after intrinsic or by design?


Brutality respected ?

Generous support, lavish and lasting funds that Atlantic-Central Europe extensively enjoyed in a form of Marshall Aid has never reached the principal victim of WWII – Eastern Europe. Despite being set on a weak ethical grounds, it was due to ideological constrains in the post-WWII period. Total WWII devastation of the East and their demographic loss of 36 million people (versus only 1,2 million of the West), was of no help.

Moreover, only 8 years after the end of WWII, West brokered the so-called London Agreement on German External Debts (also known as the London Debt Agreement or Londoner Schuldenabkommen). By the letter of this accord over 60% of German reparations for the colossal atrocities committed in both WW were forgiven (or generously reprogramed) by their former European victims, including – quite unwillingly – several Eastern European states. The contemporary world wonder and the economic wunderkind, Germany that dragged world into the two devastating world wars, is in fact a serial defaulter which received debt relief like no one else on the globe – four times in the 20th century (1924, 1929, 1932 and 1953).

Despite all the subsidies given to the West, East recovered remarkable fast. By 1950s and 1960s, many influential western economists seriously considered communism as better suited for economic advancements, along with a Soviet planned economy as the superior socio-economic model and winsome ideological matrix.

Indeed, impressive Soviet results were a living example to it; Backward, semi-feudal, rural country in 1920s, has won the WWII and in parallel it evolved into a highly industrialized and urbanized superpower – all that in just 30 year-time. Spain needed two centuries (and never completed), Holland 130 years, the UK 110, Germany 90, Japan 70 years to revolve from a backword agricultural cultivator into an industrial giant. Moscow achieved that in only 30-35 years, all alone. Hence, by mid 1950s – besides becoming a nuclear power – the Soviet Union grew up into a pioneer and pivot in deep space exploration, moving the final frontier of mankind deep into the outer space. Sending woman to space while many in the West still struggled with elementary gender equality was an ethical and technological blaster. Morality of communism narrative as well as its socio-economic advancements appealed globally.


Master-blaster

If all the above so, why did than the Soviet Union collapse? Was it really a bankruptcy caused by the Afghan intervention and costly Space program (orbital station Mir)? And finally, if the US collapsed earlier, with the so-called Nixon shock, why did America became stronger afterwards, while after the Gorbachev-era bankruptcy of the SU, Russian historical empire has melted away so rapidly?

There are many views on it. Still, there is nothing conclusive yet - neither popular no scientific consensus is here.

Some years ago, I’ve had an honour to teach at the famous Plekhanov University of Economics of Moscow. It was a block-week with the students of the Plekhanov’s elite program IBS. 12 days in Moscow proved to be an excellent opportunity to ask these questions some of the most relevant economy authorities among academia colleagues.

The line of answers was quite different to anything I’ve usually heard or read in the West. Muscovites claimed that right after Nixon shock the Soviet Politbureau (top Communist party executive) and Gosplan (the Soviet Central Planning Economic Body – overseeing the entire economic performance of the SU and de facto its satellites) have sit jointly in an extensive closed session, as to debate two items only.

1. Could we prevent chaos and global instability by filling the gap after the collapse of the United States (and it eventual partition on 4 to 6 entities), by putting the allied countries – previously under the US sphere of influence – under our effective control;

2. Could we viably deter Chinese economic (and overall Asia’s socio-demographic and politico-military) advancement alone, without a help of the US and its western satellites.

After much debating, answer to both questions was unanimously NO.

Consequently, the logical conclusion was: The Soviets need to save the US as to preserve balance of power. Without equilibrium in the world affairs, there is no peace, stability and security on a long run – a clear geostrategic imperative.

Indeed, right upon the Nixon shock, an era of détente has started, which led to the Helsinki process and its Decalogue (that remains the largest and most comprehensive security treaty ever brokered on our planet). The US was left to re-approach China. Soon after, it recognised the Beijing China and closed the Vietnam chapter. Simultaneously, it (re-)gain a strategic balance elsewhere, like in Latina America and (horn of and western) Africa, with a brief superpowers’ face-off in the Middle East (Yom Kippur War) which – though bloody and intensive – did not damage the earlier set balances.


Why goodbye?

Why, then, instability in today’s world?

Apparently, Americans did not really consider these two questions when it was their turn. Gorbachev altruism was ridiculed and misused. As a consequence, the edges of the former Soviet zone – from Algeria to Korea and from Finland to the Balkans – are enveloped into instabilities. On top of it, Chinese powerhouse is unstoppable: Neither of the Western powers alone nor a combination of them is able to match Sino-giant economically. Asia, although largest continent, is extremely bilateral. It fragile security structures were anyway built on a soft centre precondition.
                                                                                                           * * * *
Bear of permafrost worried about planetary balance and was finally betrayed, while a fish of warm seas unleashed its (corporate) greed and turned the world into what it is today: a dangerous place full of widening asymmetries and unbalances. Climate, health, income, access to food and water, safety and security – each regionally and globally disturbed. Exaggerated statement?

For the sake of empirical test, let us apply the method of sustainability on this short story of geopolitics of the second part of XX century. As per tentative definition, Sustainable Development is any development which aims at the so-called 3Ms: the maximum good for maximum species, over maximum time-space span. (The beauty of the 3M principle is that it makes SD matrix very easily quantifiable.)

How did our superpowers behave? Was our 3M better off before or after 1991?

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi (in his just released Global Trends Report) notifies unprecedented asymmetries of today’s world: “Every 113th person on this planet is the displaced. Of the 65.6 million people forcibly displaced globally, 10.3 million became displaced in 2016… This equates to one person becoming displaced every 3 seconds – less than the time it takes to read this sentence.”

“You are either with us or against us” is a famous binary platform of Bush (the 43rd US President). Indeed, our planetary choice is binary but a bit broader.

End of history in re-feudalisation or a dialectic enhancement of civilisation. Cosmos (of order) or chaos (of predatory asymmetries) – simple choice.


Anis H. Bajrektarevic

Vienna, 22 JUN 2017

anis@corpsdiplomatique.cd

Author is chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria. He authors four books: FB – Geopolitics of Technology (Addleton Academic Publishers, NY); Geopolitics – Europe 100 years later (DB, Europe), Geopolitics – Energy – Technology (Germany, LAP). Europe and Africa – Security structures (Nova, NY) is his latest, just released book.



June 20, 2017




Föderation für Weltfrieden – UPF Austria - Infoservice,

 
www.weltfriede.at
NGO in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and
Social Council of the United Nations



Partner NGO to the UN Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform

 
The Universal Peace Federation Austria (UPF) in cooperation with the Association of
 Bosnian Academics in Austria (GBAA)  and the International Institute for Middle-East
and Balkan Studies (
IFIMES) is inviting you to a special lecture on the topic
 
  

 Sarajevo, Jerusalem of Europe


The Bosnian experience of Islam – Building bridges between the Orient and Europe

 
Friday June 16th 2017, 18:00 (6:00 pm)

Föderation für Weltfrieden,
Seidengasse 28, 1070 Vienna

Speaker:
Honourable Mirnes ef. Kovac


Lecturer at the eldest Islamic theological school in Europe, Faculty for Islamic
Studies of Sarajevo. Graduate of the same faculty, and MA in International
Relations from the Sussex University in the UK, he is editor of PREPOROD
(Official Journal of the Islamic Community of Bosnia).
Honourable ef. Kovac is theologian, journalist and political analyst
from Sarajevo – author of hundreds of texts, essays and commentaries.
Editor and author of numerous books.
His latest book is "The Siege of Islam". He is a regular columnist and commentator
on the Middle East and Balkan issues for prestigious media houses.
 
For further Information please contact: Peter Haider 0650 2588846

Or:
contact@bhakademiker.org

www.bhakademiker.org
____________________________________________________________

IFIMES Permanent Representation to Austria and Vienna-based IOs
Executive Assistant to HoM
Anis H. Bajrektarevic, Head of Mission
Cell: +43 (0) 676 739 71 75
Email: vienna(at)@ifmes.org
www(dot)ifimes.org
http:// www(dot)youtube.com/watch?v=645V9eryieI

 


June 20, 2017


Memorandum of Understanding

 between the
International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES), Ljubljana, Slovenia
and the
Gesellschaft Bosnischer Akademiker in Österreich (GBAA),
Vienna, Austria
 on Scientific and Socio-cultural Research and Cooperation

Reaffirming excellent relations between the two countries,

Recalling the need for a horizontal cooperation on all (non-governmental) levels, and Noting that such cooperation between institutions as well as the people-to-people exchanges are the best way to strengthen and further excel cordial relations, but

Regretting that the wider theater of Southeastern Europe, and its National minorities and Diaspora in Central Europe are very little known to each other, and therefore

Wishing to reverse this negative trend, thus

Determined to promote and enhance scientific and socio-cultural research and cooperation of the two and their wider regional interest, including that of the national minorities (already established and those in making), all that

Based on the exchange of letter of intent and statement of purpose, and

Embedded in the mutually expressed accord of wills, consequently

Gesellschaft Bosnischer Akademiker in Österreich (hereinafter referred to as "GBAA"), and the International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan Studies (hereinafter referred to as "IFIMES") are

Concluding the Memorandum of Understanding, substantiating it as follows.

The signatories undisputedly agree that their respective scientific and socio-cultural research and cooperation shall be carried out through:

● Joint research projects in areas mutually agreed upon as priorities;

● Exchange of experts, researchers, senior practitioners, young talents (and the so-called ‘hidden champions’ – less-known excellence);

● Exchange of views, standpoints and information (social, economic, political, cultural, educational) of relevance for the collaborative activities of the signatories (including the best-practice exchange and transfer of research and event management know-how);

● Joint conferences, round-table, symposia, workshops, and other (public or targeted-audience) events;

● Other forms of scientific cooperation, including joint publications, research studies, on-demand expertise and feasibility studies for the governmental and private sector within and beyond the two countries;

● By a prior notification either party can revoke, terminate or suspend, or invite for an alternation or amendment (in full or in parts) this Memorandum at any time without any further due;

● The above stated cooperation will be pursued in accordance with the positive legislation in force in the signatory countries, Republic of Slovenia and Republic of Austria, all in conformity with the standard EU rules and regulations.

Well-determined, the signatories will jointly support, promote and enhance scientific and socio-cultural research and cooperation between them as well as among the similar research organizations within their respective countries and regions.

To this end, this Memoranda shall provide a framework basis for any further arrangements between signatories, defining and annotating future aspects of collaboration and eventual joint undertakings.

Honorable but humble, authorized representatives of the IFIMES and of the GBAA agree that a favorable atmosphere to develop and excel cooperation in science and research has been established for the lasting benefit of the two nations, their respective institutions and wider regions, by today’s signature.

Ljubljana/Vienna, 16 February 2017
 

for IFIMES: 
 
  for GBAA:
 

Dr. Zijad Bećirović

Director

Siradj Duhan

President

            


June 18, 2017



Paris and Pittsburgh, pesticides in Indonesia: When none is best

Julia Suryakusuma

 

Jakarta | Wed, June 14 2017 | 01:22 am  - Donald Trump famously said, “I was elected to represent the people of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” when he announced the withdrawal by the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement (PCA). Pittsburgh is a city in the Rust Belt, which suffered from economic decline due to deindustrialization. It was purportedly the Rust Belt that paved Trump’s path to the presidency.

But what was the Pittsburgh mayor’s reaction? “We’re actually with Paris on this.” In fact, the majority of Rust Belt states are also. It just goes to show, climate change and global warming goes beyond politics (although pssst! For your information, Pittsburgh did vote for Clinton!).

Well, that’s the way it should be. If there’s one thing that people have in common, it is that we all live on this one fragile, precious planet.
Another thing we have in common is that we all eat. In the past 50 years, the number of people in the world has doubled, and so obviously, so has food production. Modern agriculture has relied even more on pesticides to get rid of pests and vermin which damage crops, but like anything, too much of a “good thing” can be bad.

Pesticides are for crops like chemotherapy is for cancer: in the same way that chemo kills the good cells in addition to the bad ones, pesticides tend to kill organisms that weren’t intended to be killed. Pesticides also affect the whole ecological system, leeching into the soil and water, and poisoning birds, fish and other small animals.

And the effect of pesticides on humans? An entry in Toxipedia says it has “neurological health effects such as memory loss, loss of coordination, reduced speed of response to stimuli, reduced visual ability, altered or uncontrollable mood and general behavior, and reduced motor skills.” Thanks, but no thanks!

Recently I came across a book called Krisis Pangan dan ‘Sesat Pikir’: Mengapa Masih Berlanjut? (Food Crisis and ‘Misguided Thinking”: Why does it still continue?”) published last year, which addresses a very important issue: food production in Indonesia.

Edited by Yunita T. Winarto, professor of anthropology at the University of Indonesia (U.I.), the anthology has eight chapters by six experts on topics ranging from climate, insects, marginalized farmers and, yes, pesticides.

There were two chapters on pesticides, one of them written by James J. Fox, professor emeritus from the Australian National University (ANU) and Professor Yunita from UI.

Jim, as he is usually called, is an old friend of mine from the 1980s. When I knew him then he was working among others to get rid of pesticides. He was lucky. He got help from none other than President Soeharto himself. Pak Harto issued a presidential decree (Inpres No. 3/1986) on Nov. 5, 1985 banning the use of 57 varieties of pesticides in response to a serious outbreak of brown planthopper infestation. At the time Indonesia had just achieved rice self-sufficiency – a source of great national pride.

According to Jim in his chapter, the Inpres had the immediate effect of reducing the brown critters and more. The reduction of pesticides for rice cultivation resulted in annual rice increases for 17 years from 1987 to 2002. Impressive!

As the lowest user of pesticides in any developing country, Indonesia was a shining example of effective biological control of pests for other countries. In any typical sawah (paddy field) there are 100 natural predators of threatening pests, especially of brown planthoppers who breed like rabbits.

Unfortunately, all good things come to an end. In 2002, there was a dramatic change in the pesticide industry. Hundreds of local companies were established relying heavily on supplies from China. Pesticides were promoted as obat (medicine) for growing crops, distributed by local agents to village kiosks throughout Java.

Stunningly, in one decade, from being one of the world’s lowest users of pesticides, Indonesia became one of the highest. Brown grasshopper infestation became endemic on Java. According to Jim and Yunita, “Twice in five years (2011 and 2014) national rice production declined because of significant crop losses on Java.”

What? Aren’t pesticides supposed to get rid of the brown planthoppers? Here’s the irony: The overuse of pesticides actually induces the population increase of planthoppers by killing their natural predators. Oh no! Then there’s also resistance: With each generation of pesticide, the planthoppers become more resistant to the pesticides.

There were also rice varieties that were resistant to brown planthoppers, but by 2011, Indonesia had none. Shifting infestations became endemic.

Jim and Yunita did a UI-ANU pesticide survey in the village of Indramayu in West Java to obtain comprehensive data on farmers’ utilization of a range of pesticides. The study is replete with scientific names of various types of pesticides, fungicides and herbicides, which the farmers can’t distinguish. Given the lack of control in the form of government licensing systems, for example, the farmers are like kids in a candy shop, choosing between striking labels and the existence of “new products,” which could actually be old products with new labels. Does this sound like a familiar marketing ploy?

Other problems that the UI-ANU study identifies are spraying intensity and pesticide cocktails. The farmers believe that the more, the better, and just to be on the “safe side,” why not mix all the different products into a cocktail? Sounds yummy right? In a disastrous way.

What’s the politics behind it all? Political reformation in 1998, which led to regional autonomy. Inpres No. 3/1986 still exists and could be invoked, but it isn’t. The existence of a variety of incentive schemes from the pesticide companies certainly helped, in the same way that the 22 senators who urged Trump to withdraw from the PCA over the past five years collectively received US$10 million in campaign contributions from oil, gas and coal industries.

Rice is a “political commodity” and governments’ ability to guarantee rice production and supply earns them the people’s trust. In fact, raising the target of rice production is a main program of the Jokowi administration in 2014-2019. But the reality is that the sawah ecosystem on Java has now become very vulnerable. This trend cannot be reversed until the “misguided thinking” of the farmers and various interested parties is also reversed.

Given the recognized global dangers of pesticides, two United Nations experts have called for a comprehensive global treaty to regulate and phase out toxic pesticides. The movement for organic sustainable farming is in fact growing.

Could this be an opportunity for Indonesia to reclaim the Queen Bee status it once had for 17 years to lead this movement?



Julia Suryakusuma is the outspoken Indonesian thinker, social-cause fighter and trendsetter. She is the author of Julia’s Jihad.
(first published by Jakarta Post)



June 16, 2017



 COMMON SENSE – A RELIC OF THE PAST?
 

By: Tomislav Jakic

         Once upon a time, this is how fairy tales usually begin. This is not a fairy tale, but once upon a time people used to talk about common sense and to think based on common sense. It was never an ideal time, but always when it seemed that the lack of common sense and the evil in us would draw the world in the abyss of self-destruction, common sense woke up and rebelled; most usually in combination with pragmatism. Mankind paid dearly in the ensuing battle, it went through unbelievable horrors, but eventually common sense would prevail. And so it went until the year 1990, when the cold war ended. It was an extremely dangerous confrontation between two, not only ideologically different blocks. The world peace was saved only due to the fragile, but at the same time efficient balance of fear, namely on the knowledge that an open armed confrontation would end without anybody being victorious. But, as from the beginning of the last decade of the 20th century, when East – West confrontation ended, due to the fact that the Soviet block disintegrated, when the “dawn of democracy” begun shining on countries, previously ruled with iron hand from one centre and by one and only party and its repressive system, we are witnessing a constant and steady downgrading in all sectors of life. Because of this and despite democracy as a system, despite democratic forms and despite the multiparty system, it is unavoidable that we put to ourselves the question: does common sense belongs to the past, is t a relic of the past?

         All indications point towards a positive answer.

         In international relations we are experiencing the revival of the cold war, a new and with every day passing more dangerous confrontation between the United States and the Russian Federation. In fact it is nothing more than the almost desperate striving of neoliberal capitalism to “rule the world”. In order to be able to achieve this goal, to gain the support (of previously manipulated citizens, but – alas – in the best democratic form) for the policy of expansionism, regardless of anything, neoliberal capitalism needs an enemy. Because having an enemy is the best way to homogenize one’s own flock. And the enemy was found, better to say it was projected in the picture of Russia, although – and this is ironic indeed – it is the democratic West that is today practicing the policy of hegemony, once a trade mark of the Soviet Union. All basic principles upon which the architecture of international relations was build, are abandoned. Nobody even thinks of speaking about the principle of equality, or the principle of not meddling in internal affairs of other states, not to mention the right of every country and nation to develop as they think it suits them best. In a globalised world, and we were made to believe that only such a world could exist, everything must be “cooked following the same recipe”. If this is not the case, with or without the blessing of the UN and under the disguise of the war for democracy and for human rights, bombers start their deadly missions, mercilessly killing those whose human rights they are supposed to protect. Whole states are pushed into chaos and internal fighting, whole regions are destabilized and heads of states are killed (just remember Hillary Clinton and her words, when she received the news that colonel Ghadafi was killed: “We came, we saw and he is dead!”). At the same time for billions of dollars modern arms are being sold to states whose record in the field of democracy and human rights is – to put it mildly – very poor. But they are “ours”. With growing speed the world is being divided between the ever smaller part of privileged and rich, those who are governing not because they were democratically elected to do so, but because they have the power to do so and the ever bigger part of oppressed – in every sense – and poor, those who are being governed. While thousands and thousands of people are dying from hunger in the undeveloped countries, Europeans waste in one year so much food that every hungry human being on this planet Earth could be fed. And the American President says that climate changes and their evident results are just a hoax. Is there any common sense in all this? No, there is none!

         So, what can we expect, what is to be expected? Let us put forward just two scenarios. The first is the armed confrontation between East and West, be it direct, be it as a consequence of some action of the unpredictable US President – amateur (for example a missile attack on North Korea). In both cases the consequences would be disastrous, not to say suicidal. The second scenario is slightly “milder”. It is based on the presumption that the oppressed, the hungry and the poor would conclude that they have nothing to lose, but their lives, and a tornado of revolution would hit the whole world with a highly uncertain result. Indications that are pointing towards this scenario we can detect in attacks whose perpetrators are more and more often terrorizing the countries of the West. While it is true that these attacks are – at least – disguised as being religiously motivated, it is not less true that there is no religion that could motivate suicide attackers, were it not for the basic and deeply rooted feeling of being pushed to the margines of the society, of being deprived of some basic rights, such as the right to be educated, the right to be medically cared for, in short the right to live, as a human being, a decent life.

         There too we confront the results of a policy without any common sense, a policy that recruited the oppressed, the poor, but pathological killers too, trying to use them as an instrument for achieving its goals, only to meet now the murderers it produced as its own enemies. There can be no doubt about it – they, the terrorists, were produced by the policy of the West, they were armed and supported thanks to this policy – either directly, or through smaller countries, satellites of the “big Brother” form the other side of the Atlantic. And now this same policy is being confronted by them – globally. Still it will not, or cannot accept the fact that the terrorists are the greatest danger for the world as we knew it and that the fight against them should be the prime – and common – target of our civilization. It will not, or cannot accept Russia as an ally in this war; on the contrary it is continuing to present Russia as an enemy (adversary), adding – if it seems to be suitable – Iran, North Korea and sometimes China. Is there any common sense in all this? None whatsoever!

         And is there some common sense in the policy of the so called transition countries? Absolutely not! Former Soviet satellites only changed their master, they became champions in the battle against the (non existing) communism, because it suits the neoliberal capitalism for which the very idea of communism is the worst imaginable enemy. At the same time these countries are deeply engulfed in historic revisionism, “writing” the new history of WW 2 and the Antifascists struggle, while “forgetting” their collaboration with Nazi-fascism. Republic of Croatia, to name one example, invented the formula about “all totalitarian regimes being equal evil”, thus putting on the same level antifascism (labeled for this purpose as communism) and fascism, while Republic of Serbia – just another example – rehabilitates in court procedures the leaders of the Chetnik movement which collaborated with the occupying forces during WW2 and fought against Marshal Tito’s partisans.

         The prevailing atmosphere in the world is one of fear for the future, of growing intolerance, of hate not only towards those who are in any way different, but towards those who dare to think differently and to voice their opinion. In the creation of such an atmosphere the once respected journalistic profession played a shameful role. Not only the mainstream media, but social networks too are transformed into a snake’s pit of intrigues, lies and disinformation servicing the policy that forgot what common sense is.

         The rest is silence.



June 8, 2017



The post-Christian West and post-Western World


(Refeudalisation of Europe – II Part)
 

Anis H. Bajrektarevic

 


 

While the Western world is increasingly post-Christian and cosmopolitan, its Eastern sibling is trapped in a post-ideological bubble: strikingly entrenched and enveloped in its neo-religionism. No wonder: Eastern European communities on all their levels are using failed models of leadership. Too many institutions are still mired in a narrative of past victimization, and too many have no any mechanism for producing new leaders to serve true national interests.

Currently, percentage of Eastern Europeans obtaining the foreign diplomas – most notably those from the universities in Atlantic-Central Europe – that are afterwards admitted to the higher echelons of their national socio-economic, cultural and politico-military policy-making is higher than even in sub-Saharan Africa (e.g. in the LDC, situated around Chad or Victoria lakes or Horn of Africa). Their quantities and configurations reveal us that the ‘elites’ in Eastern and Russophone Europe are among the most unauthentic, least indigenous or less patriotically connected with its electorate – probably a cleavage larger than anywhere else in the world.

That explains in detail why over the last two decades, the policies and their protagonists in that region are so little responsive to a public opinion.

Any research, which is not a pre-paid or guided by remote control, is usually quickly denounced. E.g. debate about alarming de-industrialisation and brain-drain is simply a no-go. Any independent thinking must be condemned as a ‘radical nationalism’. As if the emancipative democracy should be a lame talk-shop, not a pursuit of happiness’ road-map.

Finally, East is sharply aged and depopulated –the worst of its kind ever– which in return will make any future prospect of a full and decisive generational interval simply impossible.

Is the Honduras-ization of Eastern Europe, in additional to refeudalization, now taking place? This term refers to an operationalization of XIX century Monroe Doctrine in Latin America, by which Washington ever since allowed its strategic neighborhood to choose their own domestic political and economic systems to an acceptable degree, while the US maintained its final (hemispheric) say over their external orientation. The so-called Brezhnev doctrine (of irreversibility of communist gains) postulated the Soviet (Suslov-Stalin) equivalent to Honduras-ization – Finlandization. Hence, it is safe to say that the Honduras-ization of Eastern Europe nowadays is full and complete.

Thus, if the post-WWII Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe was overt and brutal, this one is subtle but subversive and deeply corrosive?

The key (nonintentional) consequence of the post WWII Soviet occupation was that the Eastern European states –as a sort of their tacit, firm but low-tempered rebellion – preserved their sense of nationhood. However, they had essential means at disposal to do so: the right to work was highly illuminated in and protected by the national constitutions, so were other socio-economic rights such as the right to culture, language, arts and similar segments of collective nation’s memory. Today’s East, deprived and deceived, silently witnesses the progressive metastasis of its national tissue.


Terra nullius

Eastern Europe, the (under-)world of dramatic aging which, is additionally demographically knocked down by the massive generational and brain drain. Passed the dismantling of the communist order, these emerging economies, countries in transition of the new Europe contain reactionary forces (often glorifying the wrong side of history), predatory ‘elites’ and masses of disillusioned (in a life without respect and dignity, humiliated and ridiculed in the triviality of their lasting decline).

Even if the new jobs are created or old kept, they are in fact smoke screens: Mostly a (foreign-loans financed) state-sponsored poverty programs where armies of the underemployed and misemployed cry out miserable wages in dead-end jobs. Clero-nationalism and ethno-chauvinism is therapeutically offered as a replacement for a reasonable life-prospect.

Former Slovakian cabinet minister laments in private: “Our ‘liberated East’ lives on foreign loans, or in the best case as the industrial suburbia of Western Europe, having these few ‘generously’ franchised factories like Renault, VW or Hugo Boss. Actually, those are just automotive assembly lines and tailor shops – something formally done only in the III World countries. Apart from the Russian Energia-Soyuz (space-program related) delivery system, what else do we have domestically created anywhere from Bratislava to Pacific? Is there any indigenous high-end technical product of past decades known? ... Our EU accession deals are worse than all Capitulation agreements combined that the Ottomans and Imperial China have ever signed in their history.”

His former Polish counterpart is even more forthcoming: “Unexperienced and naďve as it was in 1990s, Eastern Europe – in shock of sudden geopolitical change – foolishly embraced shock therapy in lieu of a badly needed economic program… We failed to understand that this destabilizing doctrine was simply a continuation of the Milton Friedman’s experiment, which brought about one of the most notorious dictatorships, of Pinochet in Chile, and then discharged its plague elsewhere in Latin America, Middle East and Yeltsin’s obedient Russia. We missed to make a comparative analysis and spot that this doctrine always follows the same pattern in three stages: (i) the first impact of primary destruction; (ii) ‘economic’ shock measures; (iii) their brutal enforcement, along with an absence of any democratic debate… Implications are practically irreversible reengineering that stretches far beyond our macroeconomic fabrics. Consequences are socio-political, cultural, moral and demographic, therefore existential…”

Ergo, euphemisms such as countries in transition or new Europe cannot hide a disconsolate fact that Eastern Europe has been treated for 25 years as defeated belligerent, as spoils of war which the West won in its war against communist Russia.

It concludes that (self-)fragmented, deindustrialized and re-feudalized, rapidly aged rarified and depopulated, (and de-Slavicized) Eastern Europe is probably the least influential region of the world – one of the very few underachievers. Obediently submissive and therefore, rigid in dynamic environment of the promising 21st century, Eastern Europeans are among last remaining passive downloaders and slow-receivers on the otherwise blossoming stage of the world’s creativity, politics and economy.

Persistent pauperization of the East is nothing else but a lasting victimization of core sectors of the continent. That, in return, inevitable leads to an accelerated (wealth, demographic and generational) redistribution and hence a re-feudalization of the whole of Europe. Once the black hole is formed, no star in proximity will ever prevail.

About the author:
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
Anis H. Bajrektarevic
Vienna, 01 MAY 2017
anis@corpsdiplomatique.cd

Author is chairperson and professor in international law and global political studies, Vienna, Austria. He authored three books: FB – Geopolitics of Technology (published by the New York’s Addleton Academic Publishers); Geopolitics – Europe 100 years later (DB, Europe), and the just released Geopolitics – Energy – Technology by the German publisher LAP. No Asian century is his forthcoming book, scheduled for later this year.



June 6, 2017


2017


   
   
PUBLICATIONS JULY, 2017:

  Serbia Delivered Srebrenica Refugees to Mladic: Report - Filip Rudic -BIRN-Belgrade

  The Truth and Recon
important_news.htmciliation stuggle on the Balkans - Senadin Lavić

  Bosnian Reporter Flees After Condemning Mladic Rally - BIRN - Banja Luka

  REGIONAL SECURITY ARCHITECTURES: COMPARING ASIA AND EUROPE - Insights from Anis Bajrektarevic


PUBLICATIONS JUNE, 2017:

  “We win, they lose” – Wonderful world of Binary categorisations - (Refeudalisation of Europe – III Part) - Anis H. Bajrektarevic

  Sarajevo, Jerusalem of Europe

  Memorandum of Understanding between IFIMES and GBAA

  Paris and Pittsburgh, pesticides in Indonesia: When none is best - Julia Suryakusuma

  COMMON SENSE – A RELIC OF THE PAST? - By: Tomislav Jakic

  The post-Christian West and post-Western World - (Refeudalisation of Europe – II Part) - Anis H. Bajrektarevic


PUBLICATIONS MAY, 2017:

  Zbigniew Brzezinski & the Battle on Post Communism Fascism - By, Ambassador Muhamed Sacirbey

  Post-secular Europe and post-Soviet Russia - Anis H. Bajrektarevic

  The story of a Bosnian woman who lost her entire family to the terror of the 1990s:“I feel like a cut tree. I am neither alive nor dead … There is no justice and there will never be,” - Robert Leonard Rope

  'Schindler List' for Southeast Europe - Pakistanisation as the Final Solution for the Balkans? - Prof. Zlatko Hadžidedić

  Brazil in the short Strikes – the ultimate price of welfare - By Luísa Monteiro



PUBLICATIONS APRIL, 2017:

  Pimp my s/ride - Ms. Elodie Pichon

  SPIRITUALITY AND THE ECONOMY OF CLIMATE CHANGE - Anis H. Bajrektarevic

  Who Needs Dysfunction in the Balkans? - Zlatko Hadžidedić

FATAL SPIRALE OF SENSLESNESS - By: Tomislav Jakic

Neo-religionism of the post ideological Russia (Refeudalisation of Europe – I Part) - Anis Bajrektarevic


PUBLICATIONS MARCH, 2017:

 Saudi king’s “Clash of Civilizations, convergence with Indonesia's hypocrisy and opportunism - by Julia Suryakusuma

The World’s Last Colony: Morocco continues occupation of Western Sahara, in defiance of UN - Nizar Visram

Culture as a binding factor in our society, interview with Camilla Habsburg-Lothringen - By Djoeke Altena


  ALL BREAKING BEDS OF OUR MOST FAVOURED AGGRESSOR - By Elodie Pichon

 National Congress of The Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina (NCR B&H) - March 2, 2017

 Bosnian precariat, militaristic world images and media cynicism - Senadin Lavić



PUBLICATIONS FEBRUARY, 2017:

 SR15 Caspian Basin.pdf

 THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK - By: Tomislav Jakić

 Decriminalize Victims, please - Sooyoung Hu

 Big data and the Future of Democracy - by Hannes Grassegger and Mikael Krogerus

 The Malta Plan – a humane EU border and asylum policy is possible - Gerald Knaus


PUBLICATIONS JANUARY, 2017:

 
The Diplomatic Insight JAN 2017.pdf


 La-La-Land of Central Asia Kazakhstan and its “Astana Code of Conduct” - By Samantha Brletich

 Donald Trump, Nuclear Issue and Nuclear War -By:  Markus Wauran

 TRUMP’S TURN - By Tomislav Jakić

 Facing the Trump Presidency – Will the Monroe doctrine finally die? - Nicola Bilotta

 Human Misery monetized - By Aleksandra Krstic

 Jakarta Gubernatorial Election 2017: Who Will Be Eliminated? - By: Igor Dirgantara


 
Battling the Tiger: Combating corruption in the Sino-world - By Lingbo ZHAO

 
A European swamp – corruption and human rights - Gerald Knaus



info@orbus.be
www.orbus.be






Koninkrijk Belgie - Monarchie Belgique










Maasmechelen Village


Maasmechelen Village




Adria




BALKAN AREA
BALKAN AREA




prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic

Editor - Geopolitics, History, International Relations (GHIR) Addleton Academic Publishers - New YorK

Senior Advisory board member, geopolitics of energy Canadian energy research institute - ceri, Ottawa/Calgary

Advisory Board Chairman Modern Diplomacy & the md Tomorrow's people platform originator

Head of mission and department head - strategic studies on Asia
Professor and Chairperson Intl. law & global pol. studies



Critical Similarities and Differences in SS of Asia and Europe - Prof. Anis H. Bajrektarevic



MENA Saga and Lady Gaga - (Same dilemma from the MENA) - Anis H. Bajrektarevic



Dr. Nguyen Anh Tuan, Assos. Prof.[1] Nguyen Linh[2]
HE ONGOING PUBLIC DEBT CRISIS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: IMPACTS ON AND LESSONS FOR VIETNAM - Dr. Nguyen Anh Tuan, Assos. Prof.[1] Nguyen Linh[2]



Carla BAUMER
Climate Change and Re Insurance: The Human Security Issue SC-SEA Prof. Anis Bajrektarevic & Carla Baumer



 
Igor Dirgantara
(Researcher and Lecturer at the Faculty of Social and Politics, University of Jayabaya)




Peny Sotiropoulou

Is the ‘crisis of secularism’ in Western Europe the result of multiculturalism?




Dr. Emanuel L. Paparella
A Modest “Australian” Proposal to Resolve our Geo-Political Problems

Were the Crusades Justified? A Revisiting - Dr. Emanuel L. Paparella




Alisa Fazleeva
Earned an MA in International Relations from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, United Kingdom in 2013. Her research interests include foreign policy decision-making, realism and constructivism, and social psychology and constructivism.



 
Corinna Metz
She is an independent researcher specialized in International Politics and Peace & Conflict Studies with a regional focus on the Balkans and the Middle East.




Patricia Galves Derolle
Founder of Internacionalista
Săo Paulo, Brazil
Brazil – New Age





Dimitra Karantzeni
The political character of Social Media: How do Greek Internet users perceive and use social networks?

 


Michael Akerib
Vice-Rector
SWISS UMEF UNIVERSITY




  
Petra Posega
is a master`s degree student on the University for Criminal justice and Security in Ljubljana. She obtained her bachelor`s degree in Political Science- Defense studies.


Contact: posegap@live.com





Samantha Brletich,
 George Mason University School of Policy, Government, and Intl. Relations She focuses on Russia and Central Asia. Ms. Brletich is an employee of the US Department of Defense.


Interview on HRT-Radio

Prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarević




Dr Filippo ROMEO,



Julia Suryakusuma is the outspoken Indonesian thinker, social-cause fighter and trendsetter. She is the author of Julia’s Jihad.

Contact: jsuryakusuma@gmail.com 




Gerald Knaus




Mads Jacobsen
Mads is an intern at PCRC. Mads Jacobsen is from Denmark and is currently pursuing his Master's degree in 'Development and International Relations' at Aalborg University...




Dzalila Osmanovic-Muharemagic
University of Bihac, Faculty of Education, Department of English Language and Literature - undergraduate
University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Philology, Department of English Language and Literature - graduate study




Rakesh Krishnan Simha

New Zealand-based journalist and foreign affairs analyst. According to him, he writes on stuff the media distorts, misses or ignores.

Rakesh started his career in 1995 with New Delhi-based Business World magazine, and later worked in a string of positions at other leading media houses such as India Today, Hindustan Times, Business Standard and the Financial Express, where he was the news editor.

He is the Senior Advisory Board member of one of the fastest growing Europe’s foreign policy platforms: Modern Diplomacy.





Damiel Scalea
Daniele Scalea, geopolitical analyst, is Director-general of IsAG (Rome Institute of Geopolitics) and Ph.D. Candidate in Political studies at the Sapienza University, Rome. Author of three books, is frequent contributor and columnist to various Tv-channels and newspapers. E-mail: daniele.scalea@gmail.com




Alessio Stilo,
 
Research Associate at Institute of High Studies in Geopolitics and Auxiliary Sciences (IsAG), Rome, Italy, and Ph.D. researcher at University of Padova, is IMN Country Representative in Italy.




Tomislav Jakić
Foreign Policy Advisor to former Croatian President Stjepan Mesić





Zlatko Hadžidedić

Graduate of the London School of Economics, prof. Zlatko Hadžidedić is a prominent thinker, prolific author of numerous books, and indispensable political figure of the former Yugoslav socio-political space in 1990s, 2000s and 2010s.




Mr. Nicola Bilotta
Nicola Bilotta has a BA and a MA in History from Universitŕ degli Studi di Milano and a MSc in Economic History from the London School of Economics. He works as a Global Finance Research Assistant at The Banker (Financial Times) and collaborates as an external researcher at ISAG (Istituto di Alti Studi di Geopolitica e Scienze Ausiliari) N_bilotta@lse.ac.uk




Markus Wauran

Date and Place of Birth: April 22, 1943 – Amurang, North Sulawesi, IndonesiaEducation: Bachelor in Public Administration.
Writer was a member of the House of Representatives of Indonesia (DPR/MPR-RI) period of 1987-1999, and Chairman of Committee X, cover Science and Technology, Environment and National Development Planning (1988-1997).
Currently as Obsever of Nuclear for peace
.




Sooyoung Hu

Attached to the US-based Berkeley University, Sooyoung Hu is a scholar at its Political Science and Peace and Conflict Studies Department. Miss Hu focuses on international relations, international organizations and its instruments.




Senahid LAVIĆ





Nizar Visram
 Nizar Visram is a Ottawa-based free-lance writer from Zanzibar, Tanzania. Recently retired Senior lecturer on Development studies, he extensively publishes in over 50 countries on 4 continents. He can be reached at
nizar1941(at)gmail.com .




Robert Leonard Rope
He studied at the University of Michigan,
He lives in: San Francisco, California: San Francisco, California, USA




Dragan Bursac,
Journalist