Centrul Diplomatic/Diplomatic Center

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

EIGHT PREDICTIONS FOR 2010 by Dr. Anton Caragea


It is in human nature deeply rooted the desire to see what is the future reserving for us. In the ancient times Sybille’s priestess in a cave near Rome interpreted the sacred Sibylline Book to see what the New Year will bring for Rome. Today the desire to know the future remain as strong as ever but the technique has certainly improved. Today geopolitics is here to help us guide our way in the next year. So what will bring to us 2010?  

The end of economic crisis?

Certainly something that everybody will like to see in 2010 is an end to the powerful economic crisis that is ripping havoc in international economy. Unfortunately 2010 is a decisive year in economy but with a double potential: to show the end of recession or to provoke another catastrophic fall. The economic dates are far away from a promising future. The US economy still has to face with the consequence of a real estate market that is suffocated by offers but also in lingering demand because of the strict policy applied by banks. Also financial sector proved his vulnerability to external pressure when the so called Dubai World bobble burst in November 2009 the New York Stock Exchange suffered a fall of 8 %. This vulnerability to foreign market will still be a major factor in influencing US economy recovery. Crushing stock markets in Asia or Middle East will sure happen in 2010 as the international banking system is slaw in offering collaterals and credit to pharaoh type projects that where starting before crisis and needs financing to be completed. These big projects are a sward with two directions, if they are not completed investor confidence will fall and as a result we will see depreciating values of stacks and bankruptcy if they are completed they will find a market already saturated and they will collapse.

A ghost is troubling the continent: Unemployment.

We all remember K. Marx beginning of Capital: a ghost is wondering the continent: the communism. Well now another ghost is showing here ugly face from New York to London: unemployment. The latest data from United States are crippling any hope of recovery, with 85.000 jobs lost only in December the economy of US is in severe shape and with more than 600.000 people relinquishing any hope for finding a new job the prospects seamed deem. In Europe the situation is even grey, German Federal Government admitted in November that the figures showing the German economy out of recession are exaggerated, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia face national bankruptcy and Spain, Italy, Ireland are fallowing closely and with national bankruptcy looming over Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria economy is still clear that Europe economy is continuing his downfall rapidly.

China and India: how long the miracle can last?

This year the only good news from world economy come from India and China that relied on a huge internal market (more than 1 billon each) to continue to grow in a down fall year. But this maneuver could not be sustained for 2010 economist predicts. Two are the main reasons: the grow of internal market demand could only be sustained by increase in wages that will affect both China and India competitiveness on external market. The second reason is that the internal market is not producing hard currency (dollars or Euros) that both India and China need for their developing economy but they only acquired more of their one currency with no value on international market. China and India continuous grow could only be sustained by cutting their economy from international market and this will be another catastrophe for international economy. In conclusion 2010 will be decisive in shaping the way for a recovery or for another crisis.

Democrats lose control.

In United States 2010 is an electoral year in which the democrats and republican will fight for control of Legislative. In this fight democrats enter on the lame duck position, in economy the financial support offered generously by B. Obama did not produced neither the necessary recovery neither the economic climate improvement, on international policy US troops are still embattled in Iraq, in Afghanistan a long war of guerrilla will claim his life toll in 2010 and Obama just make the monumental mistake in involving US military in a new conflict in Yemen. With none of his campaign pledges honored and a dire economic situation B. Obama is having little to show for, a situation that republican will get the best of it.

Israel – a new military adventure.

In Middle East the clouds of a new war are rapidly getting strength. In Israel an embattled Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu is seeing his cabinet position weaker and weaker by days go done. Israel Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman has found himself excluded for Mediterranean Union projects talks as a result of Turkey veto and Arab country refusal to talk with him for his extremist views (the most inflammatory remark being the possibility of an attack on Aswan Dam in Egypt to disrupt Egypt economy). Inside Israel the dispute surrounding construction in occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem is further weakening his cabinet. In this case as Ehud Olmert has done in 2008 attacking Gaza or Menahem Begin invading Lebanon in 1982 is clear that the cabinet will try to avoid collapse by launching a new attach in the region. The best target is Gaza already weakened by the 2008 war and by 3 years of total blockade. An operation in Gaza could dismantle Hamas and provide a strategic victory with little human life cost so probably this will be the next target. But also there are voice that suggest that an attack on Lebanon infrastructure will be more beneficial for Israel that economically bothered by Lebanon tourism and investment opportunity competition in the region. But is probably that Israel will restrain his goal at more achievable level and a strike on Gaza seems the most likely scenario for 2010.                 

Pakistan: between civilian rule and military intervention.

Pakistan situation is dire: economy fall by 20% percent, unemployment is huge (more then 18%) and banking system is showing sign of collapse. With the army engaged in frontier battles at border with Afghanistan and with a continuous line of interior attacks the last things Pakistan needs is a political crisis. But exactly this is what 2010 will bring.  The embattled president Ali Zardari was forced to relinquish nuclear arms control to his prime minister and also to face a corruption charges that could lead to his downfall. The only civilian personality that could take his place is former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. But we must not forget that Mr. Sharif was deposed in a bloodless coup d’état in 1996 by the military and replaced with General Perwez Musharaf. Bringing him back to power will just mean that the history will be re-write. In any case if there will not be a political solution to Pakistan economic and political crisis the military will step in and this time with the accord of Washington that is eager to see stability at the front door of Pakistan at any cost in order to defeat the insurgency in Afghanistan. A general that will promise Washington tranquility at the southern border of Afghanistan will be acclaimed just as Perwez Musharaf was in 2001 after September attacks.

Latin America.

2010 also witness another tension fleering up: in Honduras a coup d’état mounted by military in convergence with right wing politicians toppled the legitimate president: Manuel Zelaya, crush any civilian resistance and despite international condemnation consolidated there regime in illegal elections. This became now a study case in United States and the region where many want to see left wing politicians as Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez and Rafael Correa overthrown. The Honduras success receipt will be surely repeated in another Latin America country this year. The question is where?

In Bolivia where a so called independent state in the center of the country has elected a parliament and a government and tries to overthrown Evo Morales in a civilian and military coup ? Or in Venezuela where Hugo Chavez is now under Columbian army pressure, irregular militia that crossed the border from Columbia to attack Venezuelan objectives on daily bases and where United States just opened up military bases?

Finally Rafael Correa of Ecuador is also on the black list; Ecuadorian military trained and grown by United States is also shooing sign that could change lines. Where will be CIA next revolution in Latin America?   Newsweek citing informed sources from CIA announced that Venezuela is the prime candidate for a „freedom” operation in Caribbean.  

China`s decision.

2010 will also be a decisive year for China that will be presented in the Security Council with sanctions proposal for Iran and Sudan. Both countries are strong allies of China, suppliers with gas and oil for increasing Chinese demands and both countries have a tension relationship with United States. China will have to decide; to give a go ahead to future sanctions could spell clearing the road for war. Everybody remembers in Security Council the 2002 resolution against Iraq that threatened the Baghdad regime with serious consequences if they don’t comply. United States decided that serious consequences could mean war and launch the attack on Iraq. A similar resolution today imposed on Teheran will be just a final step to war. China seemed to be aware of this and will have to choose between open opposition to United States agenda or temporary acceptance of US demands. The present strategy of China of temporization could no longer work in 2010.

This are just of the few decision that international policy and market decision makers will be confronted in this decisive year between peace and war, crisis or recovery , coup d’état or liberty. The answer will be decided in the next 12 month. We will live with the consequence.

Professor Anton Caragea PhD, MA, FINS

January 12, 2010 Posted by | Diplomacy, Eastern Europe, Ecology, Economy, Environment, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Latin America, Leaders, Mass media, News, Open Letter, Politics, Religion, Russia, United States | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fidel Castro dezvaluie adevarul despre Copenhaga



Pe tineri îi interesează mai mult decât pe oricine viitorul. Până de foarte curând se discuta despre tipul de societate în care să trăim. Astăzi se discută dacă societatea umană va supravieţui. Nu este vorba de fraze dramatice.  Trebuie să ne obişnuim cu faptele reale.  Ultimul lucru pe care-l poate pierde omul este speranţa. Cu adevărul în mână, bărbaţi şi femei de toate vârstele, în special tinerii, au dus la Conferinţă o bătălie exemplară, oferind lumii o lecţie mare.    Principalul acum este să se cunoască cât mai mult posibil în Cuba şi în lume ceea ce s-a întâmplat la Copenhaga. Adevărul  posedă o forţă care depăşeşte inteligenţa mediatizată şi de multe ori dezinformată  despre cine ţine în mână destinele  lumii.

   Dacă în capitala daneză s-a reuşit ceva improtant,  a fost faptul că prin mediile de comunicare în masă opinia mondială a putut vedea haosul politic creat şi tratamentul umilitor al şefilor de stat şi guvern, miniştri şi mii de reprezentanţi ai mişcărilor sociale şi din instituţii,  care, plini de iluzii şi speranţe s-au dus la sediul Conferinţei de la Copenhaga.  Brutala reprimare a manifestanţilor  paşnici de către  forţa publică,  aminteşte   atitudinea trupelor de asalt ale naziştilor care au ocupat vecina  Danemarcei în aprilie 1940. Ceea ce nimeni nu-şi putea imagina este că, la 18 decembrie 2009, în ultima zi a Conferinţei, aceasta va fi suspendată de guvernul danez – aliat al NATO şi asociat la măcelul din Afganistan – pentru a  preda sala principală a Conferinţei  Preşedintelui Obama,  unde el şi un grup select de invitaţi, 16 în total,  aveau dreptul exclusiv să vorbească. Obama a rostit un discurs înşelător şi demagogic, plin de ambiguităţi, care nu  angaja  în nici un fel şi ignora Acordul cadru de la Kyoto.  A plecat din sală imediat după ce a mai ascultat câţiva vorbitori. Printre invitaţii să vorbească erau cei din ţările cele mai industrializate, câteva economii emergente şi  câţiva dintre cei mai săraci de pe glob. Liderii şi reprezentanţii a peste 170 nu aveau decât dreptul de a asculta.

    Încheindu-se discursurile celor 16 aleşi, Evo Morales, cu toată autoritatea originii sale  de indian aymara, recent ales cu 65% din voturi şi sprijinul a două treimi din Camera şi Senatul Boliviei, a cerut cuvântul.  Preşedintelui de şedinţă danez nu i-a rămas alternativă decât să i-l acorde  la cererea celorlalte delegaţii. Când Evo şi-a încheiat frazele înţelepte şi profunde, danezul a trebuit să-i dea cuvântul lui Hugo Chavez. Ambele discursuri  vor rămâne în istorie ca exemple de discursuri scurte şi oportune.  Odată îndeplinită magistral sarcina, cei doi au plecat spre respectivele lor ţări. Dar când Obama a părăsit scena forului, nu-şi îndeplinise  încă sarcina în ţara sediu a Conferinţei.

   Din noaptea de 17 şi dimineaţa  zilei de 18, Primul ministru al Danemarcei şi înalţi reprezentanţi ai Statelor Unite  se întâlneau cu Preşedintele comisiei Europene şi liderii celor 27 de ţări pentru a le propune în numele lui Obama, un proiect de acord, la a cărui elaborare nu  a participat nici unul dintre ceilalţi lideri din restul lumii. Era o iniţiativă antidemocratică şi virtual clandestină, care ignora mii de reprezentanţi ai mişcărilor sociale, instituţii ştiinţifice, religioase şi ceilalţi invitaţi la Conferinţă.

    În toată noaptea de 18 până la 3 din 19,  când deja mulţi Şefi de State  plecaseră, reprezentanţii ţărilor au aşteptat reînceperea şedinţelor şi încheierea  reuniunii.  Toată ziua de 18, Obama a susţinut reuniuni şi conferinţe de presă. La fel au făcut liderii din Europa. Apoi au plecat.    Atunci s-a întâmplat ceva insolit: la trei noaptea pe 19, Primul ministru al Danemarcei a convocat o reuniune  pentru încheierea Conferinţei.  Rămăseseră să-şi reprezinte ţările miniştri, funcţionari, ambasadori şi personalul tehnic.    A fost totuşi uimitoare bătălia pe care a dus-o în zori un grup de reprezentanţi  ai ţărilor din Lumea a Treia, care respingeau încercarea lui Obama şi a celor bogaţi de pe planetă să prezinte ca acord prin consens al conferinţei documentul impus de de Statele Unite.

   Reprezentantul Venezuelei, Claudia Salerno, cu o energie impresionantă  şi-a arătat mâna dreaptă, din care ţâşnea sânge, din cauza forţei cu care  a lovit în masă ca să-şi exercite dreptul de a lua cuvântul. Tonul vocii ei şi demnitatea argumentelor sale nu pot fi uitate.     Ministrul de externe al Cubei, a rostit un discurs  energic de  aproximativ 1000 de cuvinte, din care aleg câteva paragrafe pe care vreau să le includ în această Reflecţie:

   „Documentul pe care dv. aţi afirmat de  câteva ori că nu există, domnule Preşedinte, apare acum. (…) am văzut versiuni care circulă pe sub mână şi care se discută în mici conciliabule secrete…”

„…Deplâng profund maniera în care dv. aţi condus această conferinţă.”

   „…Cuba consideră extrem de insuficient şi inadmisibil textul acestui proiect apocrif. Ţinta de 2 grade Celsius este inacceptabilă şi ar avea consecinţe catastrofale incalculabile…”

„De asemenea cunosc versiunile anterioare ca  tot aşa, prin proceduri îndoielnice şi clandestine,  au fost negociate în cerculeţe închise…”

„Documentul pe care dv. îl prezentaţi acum, omite tocmai  acele deja slabe şi insuficiente fraze cheie pe care le conţinea acea versiune…”

   „…pentru Cuba este  incompatibil cu criteriul ştiinţific universal recunoscut, care consideră urgent şi de neamânat asigurarea unor niveluri de reducere de cel puţin 45%  din emisii pentru anul 2020, şi nu mai mici de 80% sau 90% reduceri pentru 2050.”

    „Orice  propunere de continuare a negocierilor  pentru a adopta, în viitor, acorduri de reducere a emisiilor, trebuie să cuprindă inevitabil conceptul de  vigoare a Protocolului de la Kyoto (…) Hârtia dv., domnule Preşedinte, este actul de deces al Protocolului de la Kyoto, lucru pe care delegaţia mea nu-l acceptă.”

    „Delegaţia cubaneză vrea să sublinieze preeminenţa principiului de „responsabilităţi comune, dar diferenţiate”, ca criteriu central al viitorului proces de negocieri. Hârtia dv. nu spune nici un cuvânt despre acest lucru.”

    „Acest proiect de declaraţie omite angajamentele concrete de finanţare şi transfer de tehnologii către ţările în curs de dezvoltare ca parte a îndeplinirii obligaţiilor asumate de ţările dezvoltate   prin Convenţia Cadru a Naţiunilor Unite  de Schimbare Climatică (…) Ţările dezvoltate,  care-şi impun interesele prin documentul dv., domnule Preşedinte,  eludează orice angajament concret.”

„Ceea ce dv. numiţi, domnule Preşedinte, „un grup de lideri reprezentativi”, este, pentru mine,  o grosolană violare a principiului de egalitate suverană consacrat de Carta Naţiunilor Unite…”

„Domnule Preşedinte, vă solicit formal ca această declaraţie să fie inclusă în raportul final al lucrărilor acestei lamentabile şi ruşinoase  a 15-a Conferinţă  a Părţilor.”

Li se acordase numai o oră reprezentanţilor statelor pentru a emite opinii, ceea ce a dus la situaţii complicate, ruşinoase şi neplăcute.    Atunci s-a produs o amplă dezbatere în care delegaţii ţărilor dezvoltate au exercitat puternice presiuni pentru a  face ca Conferinţa să adopte acel document ca rezultat final al deliberărilor.     Un număr redus de ţări a insistat cu tărie pe omisiunile  grave şi ambiguităţile documentului  impus de Statele Unite, în special pe absenţa  unui angajament din partea ţărilor dezvoltate în ceea ce priveşte reducerea emisiilor de carbon şi finanţarea adoptării de măsuri de  atenuare şi adaptare  a ţărilor din Sud.

    După o lungă şi extrem de tensionată discuţie, a prevalat poziţia ţărilor din ALBA şi a Sudanului, ca Preşedinte al Grupului celor 77, că documentul în chestiune era inacceptabil pentru a fi adoptat de Conferinţă.    În faţa evidentei lipse de consens, Conferinţa s-a mărginit  să „ia notă” de existenţa acelui document ca poziţie a unui grup de circa 25 de ţări.

    După această decizie adoptată la ora 10:30 dimineaţa, ora Danemarcei, Bruno – după  ce a discutat împreuă cu alţi reprezentanţi din ALBA cu Secretarul ONU, în mod amical, şi i-au  manifestat disponibilitatea de a continua lupta la Naţiunile Unite pentru a  stopa teribilele consecinţe ale schimbării climatice – a plecat împreună cu Vicepreşedintele cubanez Esteban Lazo către ţară pentru a lua parte la   şedinţa Adunării Naţionale , încheindu-şi  sarcina. La Copenhaga au mai rămas câţiva membri ai delegaţiei şi ambasadorul pentru a participa la  demersurile finale.

   În seara zilei de azi au informat următoarele:

  „…atât cei care au participat la elaborarea documentului, cât şi cei care  – ca Preşeditnele SUA –  au anticipat  să anunţe adoptarea lui de către Conferinţă…cum nu puteau să repingă decizia de a se limita la a „lua notă” de  aşa zisul „Acord de la Copenhaga”, au încercat să propună o procedură pentru ca alte ţări  Părţi care nu fuseseră în această discuţie, s-au alăturat, declarându-şi adeziunea, cu care încercau să dea un caracter legal  zisului acord care de fapt nu putea  să  judece dinainte rezultatul negocierilor care  trebuiau să continue.”

„Această încercare tardivă a primit din nou o fermă opoziţie a Cubei, Venezuelei şi Boliviei, care au avertizat că acest document pe care Convenţia  nu şi l-a însuşit nu avea nici un caracter legal, nu exista ca document al Părţilor şi nu putea să se stabilească vreo regulă pentru o presupusă adoptare a sa…”

„În acest stadiu s-au terminat şedinţele de la Copenhaga, fără să se fi adoptat  documentul care  fusese pregătit pe ascuns în ultimele zile, cu o evidentă dirijare ideologică din partea administraţiei americane…”

Mâine atenţia se va concentra pe Adunarea Naţională.    Lazo, Bruno şi restul delegaţiei va sosi azi la  miezul nopţii. Ministrul de Externe al Cubei va putea explica, luni, cu detalii şi precizia necesară, adevărul celor petrecute la Conferinţă.


19 decembrie 2009

December 26, 2009 Posted by | Diplomacy, Ecology, Economy, Environment, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Latin America, Leaders, Mass media, News, Open Letter, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Professor Anton Caragea on future of Taiwan and Romania relationship




appreciates Professor Anton Caragea, PhD, expert in international relations.

I see you full of optimism, Mr. Professor Caragea! What are your reasons?
Answer: The final part of 2008 has brought many unexpected reasons for optimism. This year preparations for parliamentary elections that will be held this month have shown that – after some tragic examples- the political class from Romania began to understand the importance of foreign policy factor in the life of Romania.
As a result of our efforts, the parties have already entered in a process to outline a National Pact for Romanian foreign policy. We hope that this pact, once agreed by all parties will not be an object of dispute, but – on the contrary – an object for unifying Romania’s efforts . We will no longer have a foreign policy based on interests or abilities of a minister or another, but a real foreign policy of Romania. Another reason for optimism I was given by the trip taken in the Far East, whose main point was the visit to Taiwan. I saw in the Far East an economic vitality, a political energy and a desire to make the XXI century, a century of Asia, that really impressed me. If Asian countries will continue to prepare their development with the same seriousness, we can be optimistic.
The future world economy, even shadowed by the current crisis will be a good one. Equally important is the signal that I received during my visit to Taiwan: Romania matters for Taiwan!
Could it be so?
A: Yes! Everybody is excited to cooperate with Bucharest. It seems that watched from the other side of the world, Romania looks more optimistic: a country with 22 million inhabitants, with a remarkable strategic position, with opening to the Danube and the Black Sea, with an important economic growth, supported by a class of managers energetic and eager to win! Thus, Romania appears from Taipei as a country of opportunities, treated with a lot of confidence…
From Taipei, for example, it is much easier to be proud that you are Romanian, than in Bucharest!
And what is – or should be – our Romanian authority’s response?
Of course this confidence, this willingness for investment and economic and political cooperation must be met with concrete actions from Bucharest government. Calendar of such concrete actions is very clear: to develop closer political relations with Taiwan, we should open as soon as possible a Diplomatic Office in Taipei and ask Taiwan to open a similar office in Bucharest.
Taiwan is ready to waive the visa system for Romania, if and Romania will be ready to facilitate visas for Taiwanese businessmen. For now, the situation is serious: Romanian business people should take visa from Athens or Budapest, which means additional difficulties and expenses absolutely meaningless. Similarly, Taiwanese businessmen, that have invested one billion U.S. dollars in the Romanian economy, need to go to Bangkok – In Thailand – or Tokyo, Japan, to obtain a Romanian visa! Disappointing and humiliating. This situation must cease immediately … Diplomatic relations, civilized relations on visa issues and consular relations should be established as soon as possible in order to facilitate economic ties!
Could this be a chance for Romania?

We are going now through a period of crisis and we need foreign investment and economic support. Taiwan has a national reserve of over 290 billion dollars and believes that investment can be about 10 billion dollars in the next years in our economy, so we must look carefully at what is happening there. Now there is a real struggle for foreign investors and Romania can win on the direction of Taiwan and the Far East, this ‘fight’ by political and diplomatic cooperation. While black clouds gather over Eastern Europe, Romania has a chance to escape the crisis and have a solid partner in Taiwan in the Far East area.
We must understand that Taiwan is a political and economic opportunity for Romania, which should not be lost!
In theory, this is great! But what is the situation, in practical terms?
Basically, in the discussions held in Taipei with Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrew L.Y .Hsia we came quickly to a common understanding that Romania and Taiwan may be the point of entry, for each other, in the European and Asian markets! This opportunity does not come too often and Taiwan gives us a generously offer.
The rest of the Far East is a new destination, but also extremely important for our diplomacy: from now on, Bucharest is opened to a new direction! On his visits in South Korea and Japan, the President of Romania, gave a clear signal: the Far East has ceased to be too distant for Romania. For now, economic and political relations will be developed within this space.
For example, Singapore has to be next to Taiwan, another outpost of our foreign policy. Key point economically developed and with powerful interests in Romania, we have in Singapore as well in Taiwan a destination for political and economic ties. Taiwan and Singapore must be the priority of Romania in the next decade in the Far East region.
I also enjoyed that, after two years of discussions regarding the need for Romania’s involvement in the Middle East, we have already done the first concrete step. In just two months after we asked that Syria be included in the tour of Romanian diplomacy, we are registering a new success: President Traian Băsescu understand our reasons to visit Damascus and made the visit. It’s a beautiful victory of Romania!
For now, we must continue to deepen relations in this area and to go to the Far East. ‘Ex Oriente lux – light comes from the East – said the chronicles of the middle Ages and now we rediscover the wisdom of this old word!
The major goals of our economic and political interests on the direction of the West have already been achieved, and now we must move on in achieving national interest in other quarters of the world.
Next decade we must focus on the Far East. We are living in a world of rapid transportation and, communication, mobility of capital and Romania should be a ‘hub’ for the investment of the Asian tiger and a privileged zone in Eastern Europe.
So, let’s be optimistic?
We have enormous advantages: 22 million inhabitants, the second country as area and population of the region, with political stability, openness to strategic avenues as Danube and the Black Sea, with developed economy, an increase in the average class numbers, participation in NATO and the European Union and do not forget that we are – in total

– 31 million Romanian, relating to Bucharest and waiting out economic and political leadership from here.
This is the second major challenge to us in the next decade: to become a cultural and economic unit of 31 million Romanians. Optimistic conclusion: privileged links with the Far East, with Taiwan – in particular – and a strategy for 31 million Romanian, not just for 22 million. Future sounds good! (interviu de Daniel Negut, preluat din revista Business Adviser, varianta print, nr. 33)


March 5, 2009 Posted by | Foreign policy | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Peace Agreement in Darfur

Peace agreement on Darfur- Sudan from Doha – Qatar/ Acordul de pace asupra conflictului din Darfur- Sudan, acord realizat la Doha in Qatar



March 1, 2009 Posted by | Economy, Foreign policy, History, Mass media, News, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment