Ing. Salih CAVKIC
University Malaysia Perlis
Perpetual Self conflict: Self
awareness as a key to our ethical drive, personal mastery, and perception of
Go Home, Occupy Movement!!
(The McFB – Was Ist Das?) -
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
Diplomatie préventive - Aucun sičcle Asiatique sans l’institution pan-Asiatique - prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
The Continuum of Psychotic Organisational Typologies
There is no such person as an entrepreneur, just a person who acts
Groupthink may still be a hazard to your organization - Murray Hunter
Generational Attitudes and Behaviour - Murray Hunter
The environment as a multi-dimensional system: Taking off your rose
- Murray Hunter
Imagination may be more important than knowledge: The eight types of
imagination we use - Murray Hunter
Do we have a creative intelligence? - Murray Hunter
Not all opportunities are the same: A look at the four types of
entrepreneurial opportunity -
World Security Network reporting from Washington D.C. in
USA, April 23, 2012
Dear Cavkic Salih,
WSN Senior Vice President Dieter Farwick (left) with
Walter Laqueur, member of the WSN International Advisory
Board: "In Europe there has been in recent
decades a loss of dynamism, of energy, of
self-confidence. No one can say for certain why this has
happened, why Europe became so tired. Was it a process
of ageing? Perhaps, but more than once in history such a
process was reversed, nations (like individuals) found
fresh energy just like a runner in a competitive race
suddenly gets a second wind—for no obvious reason."
BrigGen(ret.) Dieter Farwick, Senior Vice President of the World
Security Network Foundation, took the opportunity to
interview the American historian
Walter Laqueur, member of the WSN International Advisory Board.
His book “Best of times, Worst of times” (2009) mirrors
his life as a critical observer of worldwide politics.
Six years ago (“The last days of Europe”, 2006) he
reached the conclusion that Europe had little chance to maintain
its position as a Global Player. WSN published the interview,
"Many Europeans were living in a Fool's Paradise", with
Walter Laqueur conducted by Dieter Farwick on January 3, 2007.
This assessment was criticized by several American and European
readers who predicted that, on the contrary the 21st
century would be dominated by Europe with its political and
Just recently Walter Laqueur published his new book ”After
the Fall. The End of the European Dream and the Decline of a
Continent”. This new book is much more than an update
of his former book on Europe. It offers new analyses and new
Dieter Farwick: I remember quite well the
debate about your prognosis at the end of 2006. Your conclusion
was based among other things upon the demographic developments
in Europe with its aging and greying population and an
“Islamisation” in major European cities.
Now, some five years later, are you still convinced that you
were right or do you have to correct your predictions?
Walter Laqueur: I was right—but not because I
am such a good prophet.. I was writing after all not about the
future but described things that had already taken place. But
many did not want to see them. Why? Because it is part of the
human condition not to accept unpleasant facts. Because it is
part of the human condition to engage in wishful thinking. It is
better to be mistaken because of excessive optimism rather than
be right because of pessimism. Think of Cassandra in Greek
mythology. She was always right in her predictions (Apollo had
given her this gift). But this did not at all add to her
popularity. She was a tragic figure.
Dieter Farwick: Have your critics conceded that
they were mistaken?
Walter Laqueur: Some have but not all. Some
critics, on the contrary have become very angry. They claim that
those pointing to Europe’s weaknesses (and the mistakes that
were committed) are dark reactionaries belonging to the extreme
right. It is part of the human condition to admit mistakes only
reluctantly. But it is true, excessive Euro optimism has become
much rarer. Some of my optimistic critics of 2006 are now more
pessimistic than I am. The Economist, this very respected weekly,
belongs to them. A typical headline these days would read
“Looking into the abyss”. I did not go that far then and I do
not now. I believe that even if the recent attempt to establish
a united Europe has failed, it does not preclude another such
attempt at some future date.
Dieter Farwick: The worldwide financial and
economic crisis starting 2008 in the USA was a political
tsunami. In your book you write about a new world order we face
today. What have been the main driving factors behind this new
world order – or perhaps world disorder?
Walter Laqueur: It is too early to talk about a
new world order. Of course, certain changes are obvious. Chinese
influence, for instance, has become strong in Africa and to a
certain extent also in Latin America. But so far this expresses
itself more in economics than in politics. And in the same
measure that Chinese power is growing, so are the fears and
suspicions of its neighbors in South East Asia. Pressure always
Dieter Farwick: If China, India and the United
States of America will form the political Champions League, do
we have to envisage more cooperation or more confrontation?
Walter Laqueur: I do not quite see India in the
same league. True, it is making great economic progress but we
should not ignore its internal problems which are enormous. This
refers to the great and growing economic inequality, the status
of the Muslims and the Dalit (the Untouchables), the challenge
by various Maoist groups. And Indian economic
progress is also slowing down. In general, we tend to underrate
the domestic difficulties facing the rising powers and this
includes also the BRIC countries, including Brazil and South
Africa. As for America-Chinese relations conflict is likely not
so much territorial but with regard to economic interests. But
there are, of course also fields of common interest and
Dieter Farwick: You are a renowned expert on
Russia. Vladimir Putin has been elected as president for six
years – with the option of another six years. Since his
declaration of his candidacy there have massive demonstrations
against him and his party. Some Russians see Russia on the way
back to the Brezhnev era, which was characterized by stagnation
and decline. So far, the many opposition groups are lacking
leadership. Nor do they have a minimum program. Some are left of
center, others rightwing and nationalists. They are united only
through their opposition to Putin and those backing him.
"The long term
prospects for Russia are not good."
Walter Laqueur: The long term prospects for Russia are
not good. This refers to demographic trends-- Russia is
shrinking, many thousands of villages and small towns are
disappearing. Will the Kremlin be able to hold on to Siberia and
the Russian Far East? It is by no means certain. The Kremlin
tried to reverse this trend—but had very little success. As far
as the ethnic composition of the country is concerned, Russia is
becoming more and more Asian—meaning Chinese and also Muslim.
This is something Putin and the present leadership tries to
ignore. They grew up in the belief that America (and the West in
general) is the traditional enemy. They see enemies where there
are none, and ignore the real challenges facing their country.
At the same time the modernization of the Russian economy has
made no progress. The country depends almost entirely on the
export of oil and gas. In the short term Putin has no reason to
worry—as long as the price of oil does not fall below USD 80-90.
Most of the promises made by Putin in the recent election
campaign will probably not be fulfilled. But he can always argue:
True, our country faces serious problems, but the West is much
worse off. This has been the official propaganda line in the
past and it will be the same in future. Will they wake up one
day to the realities of the world? Probably, but not very soon.
Dieter Farwick: Let’s come to Europe. You write
as a historian that about hundred years ago Europe was on top.
Even after the two world wars Europe maintained its role as
Global Player. But what about the future? Will the EU break up?
What went wrong?
Walter Laqueur: Historians know how difficult
it is to predict. If people had been asked in 1810 to what
nation in Europe the future would belong they would have replied,
France, of course. If the same question had been asked in
1880—the answer would have been France is finished. In fact many
books were published at the time with a title such as Finis
Galliae. In 1910 the consensus was that the 20th
century would be the century of Germany. But again, this is not
what happened. Why is it impossible today to be certain about
the future? We do see certain trends above all demographic and
economic and one can project these trends into the future. But
unfortunately there are also other trends which cannot be
quantified—and there are accidents which cannot be foreseen. We
do not know what scientific and technological breakthroughs are
likely to occur which might affect world affairs. Nor do we know
what disasters could occur which might decisively affect future
developments. As far as Europe is concerned there has been in
recent decades a loss of dynamism, of energy, of self-confidence.
No one can say for certain why this has happened, why Europe
became so tired. Was it a process of ageing? Perhaps, but more
than once in history such a process was reversed, nations (like
individuals) found fresh energy just like a runner in a
competitive race suddenly gets a second wind—for no obvious
reason. Sometimes in history a new religion (or a secular
religion) appears providing a fresh impetus. Sometimes a deep
crisis awakes a nation from its slumber. It suddenly realizes
that it is facing a crisis of survival. But of course, a crisis
could also have the opposite effect: Decline might have gone so
far that recovery is no longer possible. The pharmacological
industry has invented drugs against depression—perhaps drugs
against collective depression and lethargy will be discovered in
Senior Vice President
World Security Network Foundation
Former Force Commander and Chief Operations at NATO HQ
SARAJEVO, 06.04.1992 - 06. 04. 2012
Exactly 11,541 red
chairs were lined up in rows along the main street of Sarajevo -- one for every
man, woman, and child killed during the siege of the city that began two decades
by Bosnian Serb forces.
Many of the chairs are small, representing the hundreds
of children killed.
Biba Mehimovic stands with her
granddaughter Sara in front of the small red chairs
symbolizing the 643 children who died in the siege.
Lamia Alibegovic, 13, and Elma Oduz, 14,
visit the "Sarajevo Red Line" installment.
Exhibitions, concerts, and performances are being
held to commemorate the start of the siege of Sarajevo by Bosnian Serb forces,
which launched the 1992-95 conflict in Bosnia in which more than 100,000 people
were killed and more than 2.2 million fled their homes.
According to RFE/RL's correspondent in Sarajevo, Daisy Sindelar, events
organized to commemorate the anniversary are seen by many as the first
opportunity for the people of Sarajevo to collectively remember the victims.
"This is a city where the war dead were buried wherever space was available, at
a time when people could not move far from their houses," she said. "So parks
and soccer stadiums in ordinary neighborhoods all served as impromptu
graveyards. So many people feel there has never been a chance for the city to
come together en masse to pay tribute to the adults and children lost during the
Many Sarajevans wiped away tears as they remembered their loved ones who died
during the 44-month siege, the longest in modern history.
Biba Mehimovic, 65, looking at the sweeping rows of small red chairs with her
granddaughter Sara, 5, said she felt a range of emotions. "I'm very sad," she
said. "But at the same time, I'm very proud, because Sarajevo is still a city
for everyone, still a multiethnic place -- for Serbs, Croats, Jews, Roma --
Elma Ocuz, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, also came to Titova Street to attend the
commemoration events. She's too young to remember the war herself, but she has
heard many stories from her parents and her older brother, who was just six
months old when the war began.
"My brother was very little, and the food was gone, and it was very hard for
them [her parents] to see the baby with nothing to eat," she said. "When they
talk to me about it now, it's hard for me to listen because it's a very hard
story. But I'm proud of my parents, because they made it. They made it."
Bosnian Serb forces laid siege to Sarajevo after the European Community
recognized the independence Bosnian Muslims and Croats had voted for in a
referendum opposed by the Serbs.
Hundreds Of Children Among Victims
Bosnian Serb forces aided by Serbia went on to occupy 70 percent of the country,
killing and persecuting non-Serbs.
In the siege of Sarajevo, which began on April 6, 1992, some 380,000 people
were left without electricity, water, or heating as they tried to take cover
from more than 300 shells that smashed into the city each day.
Many of those who died during the siege -- including
hundreds of children --
were killed by snipers.
The Bosnian conflict ended in 1995 with the Dayton peace agreement. That deal
ended the fighting but left the nation strongly divided along ethnic lines, with
Bosnia-Herzegovina comprising the Bosniak (Muslim) - Croat Federation and
Bosnia-Herzegovina 20 years ago
By Nihad Krupic
Today, 20 years ago, the most brutal aggression and genocide happen to my
beloved homeland Bosnia and Herzegovina and to my people Bosniaks. Serb
military forces have committed aggression, genocide, ethnic cleansing, rapes
for almost 4 years on innocent Bosnian Muslims in front of all civilized
World. You still remember, It was directly televised. From April 5 1992 to
February 28 1996, capital City of Bosnia Sarajevo, was 1425 days under the
siege, the longest one in the history. Dayle average 329 shell impacts from
the Serb military posts around Sarajevo, on July 22 1993 record was sett up,
3777 shell impact. More than 10 thousand dead, 1601 children. Pazite,
Snajper! ("Be careful, Sniper!") became commonplace and certain particularly
dangerous streets were known as sniper alleys.
I remember 17 years ago I had a first interview with Canadian journalist in
Vancouver. At the end of my story he told me I am too subjective, like I am
making up the stories. Last 2 weeks Carol Off and Ana Maria Tramonti, 2 more
distinguished Canadian reporters, are telling again their stories from
Sarajevo. They are not Bosnians, their houses have not been shelled, they
have not been raped or pushed from their homes, but they witnessed
everything 20 years ago in Sarajevo and today they are again at the same
spots and they are not afraid to tell that Serbs committed the most brutal
aggression and genocide in Bosnia and the master mind of all of this is Serb
Political leader Radovan Karadzic.
Please watch and listen their stories
World Security Network reporting from Berlin in Germany, April 01, 2012
Dear Cavkic Salih,
In his 326 page book “Wege
ins Abseits. Wie Deutschland seine Zukunft verspielt” ("How Germany
gambles away its Future"), Osning Verlag,
BrigGen ret. Dieter Farwick, Senior Vice President of the World Security
Network Foundation covers the full range of current and future
worldwide political developments, crises and conflicts from a German
perspective. His topics range from the competition between superpowers
China, India and the U.S., to the uncertain future of NATO; the unsolved
“Euro crisis”; the nuclear time bomb Iran; the volatile nuclear power
Pakistan; the enduring war in Afghanistan; the fragile North Korea; the
“Arabellion” and its consequences; the decline of Russia; the conflict
between Israel and Palestine; the problems with energy security;
demographic developments; international Islamic terrorism; cyber
warfare; the scarcity of “rare earths”; food and potable water; negative
climate change, and silent Islamisation in Germany. His conclusion, that
the Political Union of Europe was buried at the EU summit in Brussels in
December 2011, is very powerful.
All these issues must be seen in the context of our globalized world,
in which no single issue can be treated in isolation and separated from
the rest. The economic and financial crises that started in 2008 have
revealed a worldwide net of mutual dependencies and mutual influences.
In this exclusive interview with WSN, Dieter Farwick focuses on those
topics which have a major impact on Germany.
WSN: From an outside perspective Germany appears
very b and competitive. Germany seems to be the only savior of both
the Eurozone and Europe. In your book, you paint a bleak picture of the
future of Germany and Europe. You see the risk that, at the end of the
day, Germany might become the victim. Is this pessimism or realism?
Dieter Farwick: I hear this question quite often.
The German government and the majority of our media do what they can to
give the German public the impression that Germany travels in safe
waters without major challenges. One hundred years ago, the Titanic’s
passengers felt the same. The Titanic was regarded as unsinkable; they
were wrong. Nowadays, the majority of Germans believe that Germany is
unsinkable, too. At a minimum, the government and most media outlets
strengthen this misperception. Realism tells a different story. The
current positive facts and figures are hiding Germany’s dangerous
mixture of severe medium term problems.
WSN: What is going wrong in Germany? What do you
blame your government for?
Dieter Farwick: The government is proud of reacting
pragmatically and efficiently to immediate problems. But there is no
vision of Germany’s future place in a globalized and tightly interwoven
world whose center of gravity is shifting from the Atlantic to the
Pacific. As a consequence, there is no national grand strategy; no
concept of ‘smart power’ as developed by Joseph S. Nye in his brilliant
book The Future of Power. Germany’s present government does not
want to exercise ‘hard power’ as an integral part of smart power. This
government wants to celebrate a “culture of restraint” – or soft power.
In addition, the government lacks leadership. Chancellor Angela Merkel
is not leading her cabinet. Her ministers, from three coalition
partners, follow their own agenda.
WSN: That’s a very general assessment. Give us some
Dieter Farwick: The most damaging example in foreign
affairs was Germany’s abstention in the question of UN Resolution 1973
concerning Libya. It was not the Chancellor, but the Minister of Foreign
Affairs who took the decision – siding with Russia and China. He
neglected the “responsibility to protect” demanded by the UN. He then
worsened his mishandling by saying no to a German military commitment
with NATO in Libya. Both decisions were grudgingly accepted by the
Chancellor. He should have been sacked on the spot.
WSN: That’s certainly an exception. Do you have
Dieter Farwick: Pressed by the Finance Minister for
savings in the defense budget, the then Minister of Defense, Baron zu
Guttenberg, abolished the conscript system without careful research. The
conscript system was a certificate of quality for the German Armed
Forces. Thirty to fifty percent of conscripts stayed voluntarily longer
in the German Armed Forces than their initial contracts. They were the
reservoir of both non-commissioned officers and the officer corps. Many
high ranking generals and officers started their career as conscripts.
Without this flow of qualified, young and skilled conscripts, the German
Armed Forces will lose specialists and qualified young leaders.
WSN: Are you really arguing that
Germany should use conscripts in Afghanistan?
Dieter Farwick: Certainly not. But you can educate
and train young former conscripts over a shorter time to become well
trained, combat ready fighters, in an experienced combat team with a
high level of cultural awareness. The German Armed Forces lost this
opportunity because of a single politician who persuaded, without
substance, the government, the parliament and the coalition parties. He
combined this decision with a reduction of the German Armed Forces from
250,000 to 185,000. The Armed Forces must now do more with less – less
money and less people.
WSN: Why can’t Germany spend more money on defense,
stability and security? The USA has to reduce its forces in Europe in
order to improve their military clout in the Asia-Pacific region – their
new, main political effort. Can NATO and EU fulfill their military
missions with less? Do they have the necessary assets?
Dieter Farwick: The politico-military operation
Unified Protector, against the Gaddafi regime in Libya, offers some
important lessons. The first important lesson is political: only 10 out
of 28 NATO nations took part. The majority was either not willing or not
able to join. It was a ‘coalition of the willing’ who fought, supported
by some non-NATO members like Qatar and Sweden. Without strategic
support from the US, the European countries would not have been able to
bring this operation to a positive end. After several weeks the UK and
France even had to ask the US for supplies of precision munitions.
At its present strength, and certainly after the predicted further
reductions of European armed forces, NATO and the EU will not be able to
conduct even a limited military operation like Libya.
This problem of insufficient resources has been exacerbated by the
Euro crisis, in reality a crisis both of most European countries –
especially in the South – that have suffered under high indebtedness,
and a crisis of most European banks, who had accumulated toxic loans
from weak European countries.
Does this mean that these Euro crises have had a direct
impact on Europe’s willingness and capability to make up for the
reduction of American forces in Europe? Is there a way out?
Dieter Farwick: For the next few decades, rich
European countries like Germany and France will have to spend trillions
of Euros to help the poor countries back on track. At present, austerity
measures dominate, but they do not cure sick countries. They must regain
their economic competitiveness through lower wages and – hopefully –
with their own currency.
There will be no resources left for defense, security and stability.
The main aims and objectives are to safeguard the Euro currency.
However, the risks are greater than the opportunity to save it. I firmly
believe that the Euro and the Eurozone will not survive the next three
years in their present form. The vision of a European Political Union
was destroyed at the EU summit on December 9, 2011 in Brussels. There is
a need for statesmen who can develop a new vision for Europe to regain
its political power and influence in world politics.
WSN: With NATO forces downgraded: what do you think
about a threat from Russia?
Dieter Farwick: I do not see a threat to Central
Europe by Russia’s conventional forces. In his fascinating book The
Reform of Russia’s conventional forces the British expert Roger
McDermott paints a realistic but dark picture of the Russian
conventional forces. Their armament and equipment lags years behind the
Western forces. Their personnel are poorly trained and seriously
demotivated. The military-industrial complex is corrupt and inefficient.
The only threat might come from Russia’s nuclear weapons, which are
obviously still operational and target Western assets. This threat might
become real if Russia faces a regime collapse.
The dominant problem for Russia is the political future of the Putin
regime. Russia faces a severe demographic problem: she loses one million
people per year. The population is aging and graying, many of them with
chronic diseases. The social and the health systems are not able to cope
with the growing tensions.
Russia is an energy power. Her economic power rests upon gas and oil.
But oil production has already passed its peak. The production of oil is
getting more difficult and more expensive. Russia has missed the
opportunity to prepare her economy for post-oil times. With declining
oil revenues, Russia will have huge problems.
The parliamentary elections on December 5, 2011, as well as the
presidential elections on March 4, 2012, clearly showed that Putin has
lost a lot of his previous popularity. Many people – especially from the
middle classes and the young - are afraid that another six or twelve
years under Putin might be a trip back into the Breshnev era, in which
stagnation and decline prevailed. Russia’s opposition forces lack a
charismatic leader like the imprisoned Michail Chodorkowski who is
willing and able to combine the various opposing groups and orchestrate
their activities. There is little hope that the Putin System will open
the door to more transparency and cooperation with the middle classes
and the young, not to mention democracy.
WSN: Let’s come back to your country – Germany,
which is seen by many observers as the only b European country able
to save Europe. In your book you give a pessimistic view of Germany’s
future. What is wrong?
|"I firmly believe that the Euro and the
Eurozone will not survive the next three years in the present
Dieter Farwick: Like other European governments, the German
government underestimated the quality and depth of the Euro crisis. They
believed they could solve the problem by simply providing cash for
They did not realize that the crises in the PIGS countries -
Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain – ran much deeper than previously.
Exorbitant indebtedness, high unemployment and fading competitiveness on
world and European markets created a negative downward spiral. From May
2010 onwards we were in a process of permanent financial aids to Greece
– without visible progress.
Another mistake: Our government linked the fate of the Euro with the
fate of the Eurozone and Europe. How can a currency, implemented twelve
years ago, decide the fate of a 2000 year old Europe? In the 20th
century, Europe and the world coped with two terrifying world wars.
Germany had its Wirtschaftswunder. All these successes were
achieved without the Euro. The political signs point to a European
fiscal pact, which obviously goes against the German constitution. The
majority of German people are against Europe being split into four
groups. They still want a unified Europe as it was originally planned: a
Europe based upon solidarity, solidity and subsidiarity, not a Europe
governed by bureaucrats in Brussels lacking democratic legitimacy. The
European nation states should retain as much national sovereignty as
possible and give Europe what is needed for positive synergetic effects.
In saving the Euro by almost any means necessary, Germany runs the
risk of being overburdened, eventually becoming the victim.
In addition to the Euro crises, Germany has to cope with its own high
indebtedness, a negative demographic development; with the integration
and education of millions of immigrants; with a silent Islamic
revolution caused by the different birth rates; as well as the threat of
international Islamic terrorism combined with home-grown terrorism. The
German Armed Forces are committed with about 7,000 – 8,000 soldiers in
Afghanistan and in the Kosovo.
WSN: Could you elaborate on the issue of energy
Dieter Farwick: As a highly developed country with a
high-end economy, Germany is highly dependent on a steady influx of
affordable raw materials and open routes of transport to export its
sophisticated products like Mercedes and Porsche cars to distant market
places in Asia and Latin America. As far as energy supply is concerned,
Germany needs a prudent and affordable energy mix.
The decision – caused by the Fukushima incident – to give up nuclear
power by 2022 – was taken overhastily. Neither the big companies nor the
power grid, from the sea in the North to the production sites in the
South, are prepared for this rapid change. Germany’s previous attempt to
decrease its dependence on foreign suppliers has been reversed. Our
dependence has been increased, especially on Russia, as well as energy
costs, which will hit the economy and private households. The prices for
gasoline hit a record high – bad news for commuters. Even in the mild
winter of 2011/2012 there were numerous power cuts.
WSN: What is your final prognosis for Germany over
the next five years?
Dieter Farwick: Germany and Europe stand at
strategic crossroads. If they move towards fiscal union, they will fall
into a deep trap and the subsequent recovery will take decades;
meanwhile the outside world will not take any time out in their way
ahead. Germany and Europe will fall behind and lose sight of the major
powers China, India and the US, even perhaps emerging powers like
Indonesia and Brazil too. To the benefit of the Western world, the US
will remain an indispensable world power.
With its high indebtedness, Germany lives – like many European
countries – off the back of future generations. Because of the
efficiencies of German entrepreneurs and its skilled workforce, Germany
currently still has comparative advantages.
But if Germany must provide more financial aid, in hard currency, not
loans and credits, it risks gambling its future away. Who will save the
savior? Nobody. Not even China can help. Finally, there will be no more
resources to cope with growing internal problems, for example the
consequences of the demographic decline combined with its heavy
repercussions for the social and health systems triggering social
Germany and Europe can still choose a different way ahead. It will
take courage to confess and correct several former errors. But it is not
too late to form a better and ber Europe – one that includes the
UK. There are hard decisions ahead. They have to be taken without delay.
The price might be to let weak countries leave the Eurozone temporarily,
to allow them to go back to their national currency so they regain their
competiveness on European and world markets. That would not be a catwalk
moment for Europe. But at the end of the day, it will be better than the
current indefinite horror without end.
The book "Wege ins Abseits. Wie
Deutschland seine Zukunft verspielt” ("How Germany gambles away its
Future") can be ordered online at
Osning Verlag, Germany.
Fógra tábhachtach Nuacht
and the New World Order
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
Go Home, Occupy Movement!!
(The McFB – Was Ist Das?) -
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
Diplomatie préventive - Aucun sičcle Asiatique sans l’institution pan-Asiatique - prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
Gunboat Diplomacy in the South China Sea – Chinese
- prof. Anis H. Bajrektarevic
Geopolitics of Quantum Buddhism: Our Pre-Hydrocarbon Tao Future
prof. dr. Anis Bajrektarevic
The Mexico-held G–20 voices its concerns over the situation in the EURO zone
- Anis H. Bajrektarevic