Centrul Diplomatic/Diplomatic Center

Centrul de Studii Politice si Diplomatie/ Center for Political Science and Diplomacy

FUTURE OF DIPLOMACY IN XXI CENTURY

On 13th November 2012 Romania had hosted the Conference on Peace and Security in Europe and Asia, an impressive gathering of Europe`s most important political brains, destined to express the support for Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia.

The Platform is a designed model of cooperation and peace created by the lofty President of Kazakhstan-Nursultan Nazarbayev.

The Platform for Peace and Security is an intellectual replay to the challenges of XXI century: war, criminality, terrorism, inter-ethnic conflicts, inter-state wars, collapse of international organizations such as United Nations and his affiliated agencies etc.

CARAGEA ANTON VORBIND DESPRE KAZAHSTAN 2050web

All this conceptual and reality`s defiance are becoming part of the security concerns of XXI century.

No state and no individual are immune to this general collapse of authority and legality, that is fringes the collapse of organized society.

The only solution for a reconstruction of world and for solving the humanity problems is to restart the National State concept.

A National State that will be, undoubtedly, different from his XIX century prototype. The fights for respect of human rights and for managing globalization trends must be implicated in the reconstruction of state authority.

Without the state authority reconstructed and put at the heart of international law and norms, no global issue can be resolved.

The re-construction of XXI century national state is the conceptual center of the Platform for Peace and Security.

The Platform for Peace and Security is solving the evils of the globalization such as: terrorism, drug trafficking, crime and globalized crime only by concentrating on the reconstruction of a modern, sophisticated and up to date national state.

This approach is truly revolutionary, as in the last two decades the international efforts, that could have being put to a much better use, where dedicated to dissolve and tragically destroy the national state authority.

All this effort of destroying and portraying as outdated and even criminal the national state, had as only result the dissolution of state authority, the dramatic rise of international criminality, a policy of international involvement in the internal affairs of the sovereign countries and the destruction of private property and the terrible crimes against human rights, that the last century had ever witness.

Reconstructing national statehood is an intricate part of re-establishing the global equilibrium.

Globalization is a dangerous trend that, without being proper managed, could distort and destroy people’s lives and the only possible coordinator for a better understanding and use of globalization is the national state.

Instead of perceiving the national state as an obstacle against globalization, the forces of globalization will do better to understand that only the national state is the proper provider of globalization and if the current trends of opposing globalization and national state are allowed to continue, the nation state will be trimmed and destroyed and globalization will become a totally negative trend.

None of the current global problems of the mankind can be properly addressed in the absence of a strong a pertinent national state.

The spread of mass destruction weapons and the terrorism is only the result of nation state weakness.

No mass destruction weapons could ever be transferred to private groups, as long as a state is functioning and running.

Only when the former Soviet Union collapsed, the matter of mass destruction weapons was tabled as an emergency. Only after Afghanistan state was destroyed by the internal convulsion, the terrorist movement obtained a save heaven and created the base for terrorism to attack.

At the beginning of 2000, the North Africa, composed of  shamble states, with long desert border, such as: Mauritania, Niger, Mali, Algeria etc. become the center for new terrorist activity.

The lessons of the last two decades are showing clearly that: only by offering support to national state to overcome the globalization related weakness, can insure that the flow of terrorism and destruction weapons can be stopped.

 

Nation`s rights are human rights.

With the end of Cold War a new concept had flourished, the concept that human rights are to be imposed against national rights. The theory it was that: the only legitimate way to assert human rights is to destroy national state rights.

This wrong policy had created the nightmare of Kosovo, where in order to promote individual and minority rights a global intervention had destroyed Serbia, had killed 100.000 peoples and had created more than 1 million refugees.

The final result was the creation of an illegitimate state, the creation of a vacuum and tension area in the center of the Balkans.

What have even aggravated the aggression against national rights, was the unlawful use of the humanitarian intervention concept to destroy nation state, to aggravate crisis, to persecute democratic movements and to install a general atmosphere of distrust and insecurity at world d level.

As the Platform for Peace and Security had stated:  By this, basic human rights and freedom are jeopardized, ignored or directly violated under the slogan of defending the very rights and freedoms.

Human rights are nation rights – this must be the key concept of insuring a peaceful world and preventing the masquerade of so called human rights protection by war to be used as pretence for foreign intervention and bluntly aggressions.

Anton caragea-Emirate-kazakhstan

Security by cooperation.

The last two decades after the Cold War where based on the concept of uni-polar world, destruction of nation state , the blunt disregard for human rights and the forced cooperation by so called coalition of the willing, such us in Iraq intervention in 2003.

The only reasonable and practical way of creating a cooperation system in Europe and Asia could be based only on cooperation models and the most successful one is that of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in 2010, under Kazakhstan Presidency.

Kazakhstan can play an instrumental role by the Platform for Peace and Security in uniting Europe and Asia by his tremendous capacity of building bridges.

Also, the concept of building not only a state to state cooperation movement but also a state to multilateral  organization is a truly remarkable idea, that could by itself created a momentum for unification and cooperation based not only on destruction of  nation state but on his reconstruction.

The quest for peace is in XXI century as actual and necessary as it was in the last hundred years.

After the Second World War an array of international organization spring up, especially in Europe, a traumatized   continent after the destructions suffered in two world wars.

In the Helsinki Agreement run off, countries lead by Romania had created a special Conference on Security and Cooperation, in order to offer a possibility to act and re-act to international provocation, borders, conflicts, disarmament and human rights issues.

The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe had soon proved to be a very concrete arena for international dialogue, fostering security in Europe, avoiding Cold War to become a hot war in Europe.

This long track of success created the potential to be developed at the end of Cold War in Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

In 1990 the Paris Conference that settled the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe as the main framework for dialogue in the larger Europe area had an instrumental role in creating peace in our continent.

After 1990 until 1999 the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe can be used as an example for his activity. Solving the security problems in Europe after the dissolving of Warsaw Treaty, insuring the peaceful devolution of Czechoslovakia in 1993 and offering solutions for the resolution of conflicts in former Yugoslavia where essential achievements.

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe had also successful passed the exam of the disintegration of former Soviet Union, paving the way for peaceful resolution of border conflicts, management of local wars ( as the Caucasus area ) and insuring the construction of democratic , open society in former USSR countries.

In 1999, the unlawful attack against Serbia, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe had being gradually transformed from an arena of dialogue and fostering cooperation in a place for distorting the framework of cooperation that dramatically reduced the organization standing in the world.

Only in 2010 the mechanisms of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe had being one again put in motion by the will and strength of Kazakhstan.

The Chairmanship of Kazakhstan in 2010 will be without a doubt hailed as the most glorious moment on Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe history: a moment for international gathering, for creating a path for reform and relevance of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in XXI century and the involvement of democratic civil societies in the organization development where all felicitous decision that insured the survival of Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

This moment of multilateral cooperation must be exploited and Kazakhstan experience must become the main pillar of an international cooperation model.

We need this international cooperation and the restart of international organization efficiency and global action if we want to muster the changes that lay ahead of our civilization.

 Anton caragea finalizeaza conferinta

The respect for international law: main pillar of diplomacy in XXI century.

The XXI century appears to be a period of numerous conflicts: ethnic cleansing, civil wars, irregular international interventions. If we have to summarize all this conflicts and international tensions have just one common trend: the total disregard towards international norms and laws.

Unfortunately, in the last two decades, after the end of the Cold War, the efforts of some interested parties to foster a uni-polar world, to undermine the international associations and to misused and miss appropriate the concept of human rights had created a general state of conflict and an unprecedented time of discord.

The first concept that we have to use: is to balance the human rights issue with the national rights and to rebuke firmly and decisively the ideas of conflict between individual rights and nation rights.

The nation and statehood concept are an intricate part of the concept of respecting human rights.

National protection of human rights is the only natural and acceptable possibility of offering the protection of human rights. The last two decades of international affairs express clear the fact that international intervention in the so called favor of human rights are no less than war crimes and a total disregard of human rights.

The long and unfinished tragedy of Iraqi people after the First Golf War and after Second Golf War, are creating a clear picture of the failed human rights based intervention:   more than 2 billon euro in destruction, famine, starvation, the destruction of infrastructure and sanitary and cultural services for 20 million people and more than 1 million killed and 3 million refugees, this was the tragic result of the United States intervention in Iraq.

The 1999 Kosovo crisis has also expressed the same results of the unlawful character of the human rights based interventions.   The NATO led intervention in Serbia had created 1 million refugees, around 100.000 killed and terrifying destruction   and left a terrible international law wound: Kosovo, an illegal so called state in the heart of Europe.

The list of destruction created by the human rights based intervention can be extended to civil war in Syria, anti-Libya intervention, Haiti terrifying experience etc.

The necessity to foster and strengthen the recognition and application of international laws and norms is the most important necessity for a peaceful XXI century.

 

Four golden rules of international law.

The main principles of Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia states the respect of fundaments of international law such as: equality among states, the rejection of interference in the internal affairs of independent countries, the rejection of threaten with force and use of force in international arena and the consensus as the main feature of common international activity etc.

These main principles are the only sound and common accepted principles that could build true representative coalitions, coalitions that could address efficiently the provocation of XXI century.

This principles have being forgotten  or even replaced in international activity of the last 20 years, a feature that undermined the efficiency of international bodies  and aloud the violence in international affairs to reach unacceptable levels.

Equality among states is the fundamental, basic principle, on which international diplomacy is based in the last four centuries.

Without equality of small to medium or big states, the international arena becomes a place for using the right of force instead of force of right. The fundamental condemnation off all wars and the main body of diplomatic activity is based on the self evidence of the equality amongst states.

The Second World War, to mention only the most known example, had started only on the base of disregard toward the principle of equality of all international actors. In the moment that appears the idea of a qualification and a selection among states, this is the first step toward aggression, war and the dismantling of United Nation principles.

Unfortunately, the last two decade transformed this principle in a so called forgotten or obsolete international norm, allowing that by indiscriminant actions, sanction regime, targeted political attitude and aggression`s some state to be deprived by their use of air space, or of maritime border or to be forbidden to acquire certain types of arm’s or defensive equipment or event to pursue scientific research or develop their economy.

This long line or arbitrary measures, contrary to international norms are based on a so called classification in good or bad states, in axes of evil or axes or good. Such a classification, contrary to international law, is a fragrant violation of the basic principle of equality amongst nation.

The non-interference in internal affairs is another principle that must be restored, if the climate of insecurity and war that prevailed in the last period is to find an end.

The basic principle of independence and sovereignty and of respect among nations was specially subjected to enormous pressure in international arena.

 New, unrecognized principles of   a so called humanitarian right to interference or humanitarian interference or the right to preserve minority, all contra factual invention had appeared in international arena with devastating consequences.

The wars in Balkans, the conflicts in former Yugoslavia, the conflicts in Caucasus, the Iraqi war, to mention just a few of the abomination resulted in this deviation  of international norms, are speaking plainly to the necessity to restore this principle of independence and sovereignty in the international diplomacy.

The non-interference is the only solution for creating a climate of respect amongst nation, of fostering the international laws to their former glory and to allow international organizations to find their true partners in the construction of a free and normal world: nation’s state.

Without the umbrella of non-interference, no nation’s state could be sure of his territorial integrity, of his place in the world arena or about his right to protect his citizens and his interest and to act responsible in the construction of the XXI century world.

The rejection of non-interference principles is creating an insecure world, in destroying the human rights and by destroying the national state is supporting the flourishing of terrorism and of non-state actors that could have an infelicitous behavior.

 The rejection of thereat of use of force in international arena is another fundamental principle that could not be negotiated, if the XXI century is to be a place of law and international norms.

The latest decade had also seen an unsavory use of rattle sobering and threats against independent and free states by groups of other states.

The violent mass media campaign, the use of rhetoric and of violent language in international diplomacy made this concept to look obsolete, when only his respect could be the base for a more security world.

In the global village of XXI century, where information and communications became not only essential tools, but essential security risks, the full and correct complying with this principle of refraining to the use of threat to the use of force must be restored.

The use of threats, of labeling in international arena, is the first step towards military intervention, diabolizing states , removing them from international arena, isolation policy, are all steps toward aggression and war that must be reprehended.

We must never forgot that the Second World War started by the use of a so called Czech peril to Europe stability , when a small country of 20 million people was accused of preparing an attack on 90 million strong Hitler`s Germany.

This is just an historical example and the latest two decades have seen many such outrages claims being presented in the international media as basic truth and later bases for international intervention.

The Second Golf War started in the search of illusory weapons of mass destruction, that have never being fund, is just the latest example of the tragic use of lies and disinformation and of threats with the use of force or bland aggression against independent countries.

Such actions had long time undermined the international security and had created a climate of universal suspicion and of pointing fingers that proved to be disruptive to international cooperation.

  The latest fundamental principle is the principle of consensus in international arena.

Without a doubt this fundamental principle was under attack as in the latest decade the international actions have being far from consensual.

Actions based on crossing the principle of international laws and diplomacy and on fabricated evidence like in the case of the attack on Serbia in 1999 or on Iraq in 2003, had proved to be incapable of mastering a consensus.

This is not a proof of the inefficiency of this principle, but just the contrary, this is the demonstration that only the consensus based activity is really positive and is creating the necessary framework for efficient activity of international organizations.

Only the consensus can prove that the cooperation and action on behalf of the international community are really based on the free will of the states and nations of United Nations and are not just the result of pressure or manipulation.

The principle of consensus had worked on the First Iraq War of 1990, when a broad consensus of all nations, drive Saddam Hussein forces out of Kuwait.

 A consensus based activity is efficient, speedy and supported by all international forces and is having the force of law and diplomacy.

Consensus is possible and is the only way that international cooperation could be achieved.

All international actions not based on consensus are illegitimate and inefficient; majority is not enough in international arena and in international law. The community of states is based on equality, respect of fundamental rights and on consensus. Only by this way international activity can resolve crisis, not create new ones.

The tragic history of the last 20 years has spoken enough about this.

The Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia, the latest drive for peace and a better world in XXI century, launched by Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev, is part of a long tradition of searching and promoting peace in the world.

This initiative is having all the necessary ingredients to be successful, mainly because is rational and based on the reconstruction of international norms.

We also must draw attention to a dangerous trend: the rapid decline of the national states, the increase power of criminal groups from economy, politics and even military areas and the increase insecurity in international affairs.

These dangerous trends are increasing in Asia: conflicts for influence and borders, internal civil wars, international interventions, military threat are flourishing. Other continents like Africa are also engulfed in crimes and corruption and in collapsing national states.

This general climate of conflict, tragic global insecurity and outer disregard for international norms is making more urgent and necessary a global solution based on the value and inspiration of Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia.

This must be not only a search of peace of diplomats and the powerful elite of this world.

Security and peace are essential for every individual, state, community and interest group.

Without security, and in the perpetuation of the present day climate, nobody is safe and the world development is in balance. The world spruce up goes by the fulfillment of the Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia commitments.

We need a global voice to resolve the global issue and to balance the forces of destruction and chaos in today`s world.

In Bucharest, Conference on Platform for Peace and Security in Europe and Asia, the voices of intellectual, diplomatic and academic elite of Europe had being heard for the first time.

Let`s not let this voices to go in vain.

Peace is everybody quest.

Professor dr. Anton Caragea MA, FINS, EDA

Advertisements

February 14, 2013 Posted by | Diplomacy, Economy, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Leaders, Mass media, News, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

OBAMA IS PREPARING TO INVADE LIBYA

On 23 of February United States President had stopped short of recognizing his plan to invade Libya and to take over control of rich oil and gas fields of the country. In a moment when United States hegemony in the Middle East is crumbling a stabile base of supply with energy is a necessity for US. Sponsoring a so called revolution , sending foreign mercenaries is a way to obtain all this . Cuban leader Fidel Castro unveils this plan to destroy Libya and take control over the oil rich country.

The NATO Plan is to Occupy Libya by Fidel Castro


Oil has become the principal wealth in the hands of the great Yankee transnationals; through this energy source they had an instrument that considerably expanded their political power in the world.  It was their main weapon when they decided to easily liquidate the Cuban Revolution as soon as the first just and sovereign laws were passed in our Homeland: depriving it of oil.

Upon this energy source today’s civilization was developed.  Venezuela was the nation in this hemisphere that paid the highest price.  The United States became the lord and master of the huge oil fields that Mother Nature had bestowed upon that sister country.

At the end of the last World War, it started to extract greater amounts of oil from the oil fields ofIran, as well as those in Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the Arab countries located around them.  These became the main suppliers.  World consumption progressively increased to the fabulous figure of approximately 80 million barrels a day, including those being extracted on United States territory, to which later gas, hydro and nuclear energies were added.  Until the beginning of the twentieth century, coal had been the basic source of energy that made industrial development possible, before billions of automobiles and engines consuming the liquid fuel were produced.

The squandering of oil and gas is associated with one of the greatest tragedies, not in the least resolved, which is suffered by humankind: climate change.

When our Revolution arose, Algeria, Libya and Egypt were not yet oil producers and a great part of the abundant reserves of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran and the United Arab Emirates were still to be discovered.

In December of 1951, Libya becomes the first African country to attain its independence after WW II, during which its territory was the stage for important battles between the troops of Germany and theUnited Kingdom, conferring fame and glory on Generals Erwin Rommel and Bernard L. Montgomery.

Ninety-five percent of its territory is completely made up of desert.  Technology permitted the discovery of vital oilfields of excellent quality light oil that today reach one million 800 thousand barrels a day along with abundant deposits of natural gas.  Such riches allowed it to reach life expectancy that is almost at 75 years of age and the highest per capita income in Africa.  Its harsh desert is located over an enormous lake of fossil waters, equivalent to more than three times the land area of Cuba; this has made it possible to construct a broad network of pipelines of fresh water that stretch from one end of the country to the other.

Libya, which had a million inhabitants when it attained independence, today has somewhat more than 6 million.

The Libyan Revolution took place in the month of September of the year 1969. Its main leader was Muammar al-Gaddafi, a soldier of Bedouin origin who, in his early years, was inspired by the ideas of the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser.  Without any doubt, many of his decisions are associated with the changes that were produced when, as in Egypt, a weak and corrupt monarchy was overthrown in Libya.

The inhabitants of that country have age-old warrior traditions.  It is said that ancient Libyans were a part of Hannibal’s army when he was at the point of destroying Ancient Rome with the troops that crossed the Alps.

One can agree with Gaddafi or not.  The world has been invaded with all kinds of news, especially using the mass media.  One has to wait the necessary length of time in order to learn precisely what is the truth and what are lies, or a mixture of events of every kind that, in the midst of chaos, were produced in Libya.  For me, what is absolutely clear is that the government of the United States is not in the least worried about peace in Libya and it will not hesitate in giving NATO the order to invade that rich country, perhaps in a matter of hours or a few short days.

Those who with perfidious intentions invented the lie that Gaddafi was headed for Venezuela, just as they did yesterday afternoon on  Sunday the 20th of February, today received an fitting response from Foreign Affairs Minister  Nicolás Maduro when he literally stated that he was “wishing that the Libyan people would find, in the exercise of their sovereignty, a peaceful solution to their difficulties, that would preserve the integrity of the Libyan people and nation, without the interference of imperialism…”

As for me, I cannot imagine that the Libyan leader would abandon his country; escaping the responsibilities he is charged with, whether or not they are partially or totally false.

An honest person shall always be against any injustice being committed against any people in the world, and the worst of all, at this moment, would be to remain silent in the face of the crime that NATO is getting ready to commit against the Libyan people.

The leadership of that war-mongering organization has to do it.  We must condemn it!

Fidel Castro Ruz

February 21, 2011

 

 

February 24, 2011 Posted by | African affairs, Al Quds, Blackseanews Agency, Communism, Diplomacy, Eastern Europe, Ecology, Economy, Environment, European Council on International Relations, Fidel Castro, Foreign policy, History, Informations, Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation, Institutul de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica, International Relation, Islam, Latin America, Leaders, Mass media, News, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Open Letter, Orient, Politics, Religion, Romanian economy, Romanian Foreign Policy, Socialism, Turism, United States, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ROMANIA IS FOSTERING A NEW COLD WAR AT BLACK SEA by Professor Anton Caragea

In the last months the use of Romanian foreign politics by Republicans in United States to hinder Barrack Obama policy , gets an unusual scrutiny as the Bucharest movements in the Black Sea region are reminding more and more of a Cold war time activity than a peaceful time diplomacy. The Bucharest support for Georgian army re-equipment and for Georgian government strong positions toward Russia or the support offered from Bucharest to the Moldavian anti-Russian and reformist government and finally the decision unilaterally announced by Romania to host the controversial antimissile shield left the region in limbo. But what is behind this biting the nose of Russia policy practice by Romania?

Tension at Black Sea.

From august 2008 when the Georgian – Russian war has broken out the peace at Black sea seemed long forgotten.   Almost on a monthly bases Tbilisi is trying, to put a brave face the latest part in this never ending saga: a broadcast in the night of 13 March at a Georgian television announcing that Russian troops have invaded Georgia and President Saackashvili, a staunch opponent to Russia was assassinated. This latest part in a show of tension between Georgia and Russia was destined to unify Georgian people against Russia and to boost the Georgian president authority. But this was just a media show; in January 2010 Tbilisi hosted an energy summit destined to promote an alternative energy route and source of supplies bypassing Russia. Only Romania was present at this show of force sending the Minister of Economy Adriean Videanu while the rest of the countries choose to ignore the invitation or to send no names to this anti-Russia show.

 

A Black Sea with NATO forces.

A new initiative from Romania is sending sock waives on Black Sea. A debate on Montreaux Convention (signed in 1936 and neutralizing the Dardanelle Straits and banning foreign military naval forces entering in the Black Sea) Now important voices are explaining that United States bases from Bulgaria and Romania could not be defended properly and neither the anti-missile shield could not operate at 100% capacity without a NATO permanent presence in the Black Sea. In NATO will established a stable naval based on the model of Mediterranean Sea the faith of Russian navy will be sealed and in 2018 when Sevastopol base will be evacuated practically the Black Sea will become a NATO lake and operation like 2008 war with  Georgia will be unthinkable .

Romania- Poland: a wall on the East.

In the next weeks the Romanian President is waited in Poland in a visit destined to forge a new Romania – Poland alliance. Nominally the alliance is directed towards nobody but as foreign commentator said is enough to look on the map to see where the alliance is directed. Also history is marking that in 1921 Poland and Romania also marked a partnership against Soviet Russia, a partnership that resisted until the broken of the Second World War in 1939. This successful partnership on controlling Eastern Europe is a memory that remained registered in the diplomatic memory of Bucharest and Warsaw.

Chisinau: a new line of confrontation.

A success of the last year of this powerful policy toward East headed by Bucharest was the orange revolution held in Chisinau that chased out of power the communist party and offered a slim majority to the pro-Europe opposition. This success was quickly fortified by Romania with economic help and with a strong advocacy voice in Europe pressing for a support to the young democracy flourishing in Moldova. But clouds are gathering quickly. The communist opposition is strong enough to block the elections of any pro-Europe candidate and this could lead to anticipate elections. In a climate of economic disorder and high inflation and with a monthly medium wage ranged around 40 USD a communist victory is almost inevitable. Bucharest is supporting a reform movement that is trying to modify the way that the President is elected giving a chance to avoid new elections. Russia is not regarding this Romanian involvement in what is consider here back door with positive eyes. Contrary Russia ,after here victory in Ukraine where a candidate of centrist parties Viktor Yanukovich, favorable to a friendship policy towards Moscow  has reported a resounding victory, is concentrating his efforts on new battle ground: Moldavia.

Romania and Ukraine: or how the love has faded away.

Five years ago when an orange revolution sweep to power in Bucharest President Traian Basescu and in Ukraine , President Victor Yushcenko a honeymoon was established between Romania and Ukraine . Both presidents initiated a reform movement in the Russia influence area, supported Georgia`s Mikhail Saakashvili independence politics and foster a plan for democracy building even in Russia. But this time quickly became history, now in Ukraine an independent personality, with a strong backing from Russian speaking eastern part of the country come to power. Usually the Romanian President was an all time presence in Kiev, this time he didn’t find time to participate in the inaugural ceremony of Viktor Yanukovich . Also recent declaration reminding that Romania is having issues with Ukraine regarding Romanian minority rights in Ukraine, a controversial channel build by Ukraine on Danube Delta and many other issues all are depicting a more tension image. If we put in the balance that Ukraine is having herself interests in Republic of Moldavia that are not exactly the same as Romania`s presidential vision  we could say that the honey moon is over.

 

The shield of our discontent.

Finally the already world known decision take but Romanian President to host the long debated anti-missile shield on Romanians soil. The decision taken without Parliament consent or political approval send Moscow in a rage speaking even by Cold War resurrection .The decision made tones of ink to be spread on newspapers and comments and will surely make many other tones in the next months . The most important is the United States attitude; already the Republican personalities announced that they will not forget the Romanian strong pro-US stance and promised a strong support if they will take the control of the Parliament in November elections. A long line of republicans key figure already find their way to Romania expressing their views that Bucharest will be even strongly backed in this baiting the nose of Russia policy if they will take the reins after Barrack Obama. In this Black Sea policy the next move will come in the next months from Russia. What this move will be?

                                          

March 20, 2010 Posted by | Blackseanews Agency, Diplomacy, Eastern Europe, Ecology, Economy, Environment, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Leaders, Mass media, News, Politics, Russia, Russian Affairs, Tourism, United States | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NON ALIGNED MOVEMENT RENAISSANCE: A CHANCE FOR A MULTIPOLAR WORLD? by Professor Anton Caragea

NON ALIGNED MOVEMENT RENAISSANCE: A CHANCE FOR A MULTIPOLAR WORLD ?

800px-NAM_Members_svg

NAM Member States

In 1955, when the founding fathers of Non Aligned Movement (NAM) held their first meeting in the now famous Bandung Gathering, the role of Non Aligned Movement seemed to be clear: prevention of a new war. In a world already savagely ravaged by the Second World War, URSS and United States already embarked in a new kind of military and political confrontation: Cold War. So the role and the place of a non-aligned movement where clear and easy to carve: keeping the two opposite blocs in equilibrium not allowing for the cold war to become a nuclear war. After the fall of the communism and dissolution of Warsaw pact in 1991 the Non Aligned Movement seemed to be out of place in a world that had promised to be without military or ideological confrontation. Many had claimed even the end of the organization in a post-Cold War world. After the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq that presented clear the risk of a unipolar world ,now a new need is offering to Non Aligned Movement a new chance to play a historic role: the search for a multipolar world.

A new Non Aligned Movement?

 The Cuban presidency of Non Aligned Movement (2006-2009) has witnessed a new world that could offer new meanings to a movement that seemed to be in collapse in the last decade of XX century. The reason for this comeback where many . First we are seeing an increase in relevance of the so called Bandung spirit. In 1955 at the inaugural session the five key figures of the movement: Josif Broz Tito of Yugoslavia, Jawaharlal Nehru of India, Gamel Nasser of Egypt , Sukarno of Indonesia and Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana wanted this new organization to stand for: non-aggression, non-interference, respect for independence, equality and peaceful co-existence.

NonAlignedMovement 

At the end of the Cold War this principle seemed to stay at the heart of the new international security structure. The dissolution of URSS granted freedom to the people in the communist area and the Kuwait War (1991) signaled a new role of United Nation as a protector of independence of small countries . Soon this dream was dashed, the US lead invasion in Afghanistan (2001) the unilateral Iraq invasion (2003) and the threats to North Korea and Iran existence , the orange revolution in Eastern Europe, all this marked a new era of unipolar world . In this new confrontational vision the spirit of Bandung was the key for re-establishing order in the world. In an unexpected way the so called war on terror marked the necessity for a balanced world in which no power to act without impunity and those marked the renaissance of Non Aligned Movement.

Is Non Aligned Movement a power?

At a first glance the answer seemed to be a clear Yes: with118 member states and another 15 observer waiting for admittance and with almost 55% percent of the world population and 20% percent of world economy, demographical and economical date tend to suggest an important power to be used by this movement. In any case the sad days of the nineties when the Movement look as it will lose his meaning are long gone. But on a realistic note the Non Aligned Movement has still the same weakness that crippled his influence on the Cold war period. The Bandung five fathers imagined a powerful military, political and economical alliance that could balance United States and Soviet Union. This strong alliance is not build yet. On political level the connections between these countries are still week, economic also there is no plan for common development, there isn’t any trade agreement or economic project to hold together the NAM members. Also the NAM it does not offer a political mechanism for dismantling inner tension between member states and no military common capacity to give relevance to the movement. State by state agreement does not substitute a common unified mechanism .Also the NAM organization it is lacking the material resources to put forward a common international agenda. Finally a weak point of the organization is the dependency on the country that is chairing the NAM Alliance. The last years prove this quite eloquently , the three years of Cuban mandate marked a bust in visibility and international audience to the organization ,while the Egyptian mandate until now is a very disappointing one, succeed only in puttying the organization into shadow . So NAM is having a lot of work to do until will be able to measure up with NATO or United States influence.

Is Non Aligned Movement rising up?

 Despite these internal issues the Cuban presidency and NAM have marked a few initiatives that could foster the image and influence of the organization. The most important was the decision of NAM to get involved in a necessary, but long postponed, reform of United Nation system. Taking part in common peace keeping operation is also offering the breeding ground for an experimental military task force of NAM. Finally the Committee on Palestine of NAM has offered credible solution on the Middle East problem, requesting Israel to to halt its settlement activities, open up border crossings, and cease the use of force and violence against civilians and relinquish Gaza and West Bank territories to a future Palestinian state. Extremely important was the decision on NAM to emphasize on justice and respect for fundamental human rights and for the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and relinquish his older name as the club of autocrats and foster democracy on the member states. Off course it is still a long way until NAM will be a club of democracy but it is a step on the right direction. All this new stance , the decision to create a Joint Economic Cooperation committee and to offer a new leadership to the organization in the form of a Joint Coordinating Committee that doubles the state leadership of NAM, all this are opportunity to make the organization more efficient and by this more visible. As always history teach us that an organization like a person is having his role in the world. Non Aligned Movement played a part on the Cold War adventure and is having now a new calling: fostering a new power for a multipolar world. The last decade, under a one polar world, was not a beneficial one: increase in military spending, economic crisis, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and destabilizing of the Middle East region, African underdevelopment, and democracy crisis, all this need to be address and Non Aligned Movement by his simple existence could be a beckon of hope.

Professor Anton Caragea PhD, MA, FINS

September 11, 2009 Posted by | African affairs, Diplomacy, Eastern Europe, Economy, Environment, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Latin America, Leaders, Mass media, News, Politics, United States | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment