Robert S. Rodvik
Analysis of the book: Izetbegovic, Alija, Islam Between East and West, American Trust Publications, Plainfield, Indiana, 1984; third edition, 1993, 302 pages. (From: Dialogue, Paris, 26: 17-28, 1998)
Analysis of the books: Izetbegovic, Alija, Islamic Declaration, 1970.
Izetbegovic, Alija, Islam Between East and West, American Trust Publications, Plainfield, Indiana, 1984; third edition, 1993, 302 pages. (From: Dialogue, Paris, 26: 33-47, 1998)
(From: Dialogue, Paris, 1996)
Par Dragan Pavlovic et Jacques Hertz
The Balkans between destruction and construction
(Dialogue, International Journal for Arts and Sciences, June 2012)
The proposal by Mr. George Soros (Financial Times, September 30, 2011, page 11) is concrete, hard to implement, but still possible. A common treasury and European Central Bank monitoring is certainly a must and the protection of some states an obligation.
Indeed Mr. Soros, a first line soldier of the Western globalization, maintains that “These measures would allow Greece to default without causing a global meltdown. (…) That does not mean that Greece would be forced to default. If Greece met its targets (…).” Or “How Greece fared under those circumstances would be up to the Greeks”. I think that such a position may give us many more chances to avoid a “second Great Depression” but it nevertheless neglects certain aspects of the Greek financial and more general political and social disaster. The EU will, in the worst scenario, just postpone its agony. Therefore some measures that would directly involve Greece in actively contributing to its own recovery and establishing an economic basis for the future at a more distant point in time are needed. This would include healthy investments: Probably some financial packages should be in the form of concrete investments that would be of European importance, offer a serious return in the future, and also open thousands of jobs for the Greeks. Such an investment opportunity would be a European project for the regularization of the fluvial route from the Danube to the Aegean. This is an almost 200 years old project that never reached its final stages because of the political turmoil that the region passed through over the last two centuries.
However, the project has been examined repeatedly since the mid -19th century, and its most recent evaluation was carried out at the end of the 20th century. The Danube-Aegean channel would shorten the fluvial route from Central Europe to the warm water Mediterranean sea significantly and contribute to the development of the region that represents the weak point of the EU. In the immediate future, the invested money would turn into salaries for the Greeks and quite certain financial security for the coming decade.
If the EU were to be the main investor, then it could assure that the jobs on the channel building were obtained by Greek companies and that the future channel would in great part continue to assure returns to Greece, at least for some time. The benefits for the adjacent critical regions, Serbia, and Macedonia, would be in the increase of simple fluvial transport. A number of other benefits, in the hydro-energetic, agricultural and tourism areas, just to mention a few of them, would flourish.
This channel Danube-Aegean in combination with some aspects of the plan presented by Mr. Soros, could prove to be an effective measure to solve the crisis and support the region in the long run. Such project would involve much lower costs than would be the case if this were to be attempted without any substantial investments in infrastructures. The channel would in all likelihood provide substantial returns relatively rapidly. Combining vigorous measures that have been suggested with real investments may be more secure way-out of the looming Depression.
(By Dragan Pavlovic, Research Director, Greifswald University, Germany. The photo is from “Art of Manliness”: http://community.artofmanliness.com/profiles/blogs/so-be-it-the-suez-canal)
The Causes of the Bosnian War
Recently, the news has arrived from the Hague ICTY that Mr. Vojislav Seselj must be returned to The Hague ICTY prison institution. However, according to the United Nations resolution 37/194, on "Medical Ethics", adopted by the General Assembly in 1982, Mr. Vojislav Seselj cannot be returned to prison, but the treatment must continue in an appropriate medical institution that provides the particular patient the "same treatment" as other patients suffering from such or similar disease. In principle, the maximal/optimal medical care is not available in the Hague prison or cannot be and has never been provided to the inmates in the past.
In the "Annex" UN Resolution 37/194 of 1982 is to read:
(United Nations, The General Assembly, Principles of Medical Ethics, A/RES/37/194: Resolution 37/194, 111th plenary meeting, 18 December 1982)
Principle 1. " Health personnel, particularly physicians, charged with the medical care of prisoners and detainees, have a duty to provide them with protection of their physical and mental health and treatment of disease of the same quality and standard as is afforded to those who are not imprisoned or detained. " (…)
Principle 6. There may be no derogation from the foregoing principles on any ground whatsoever, including public emergency. (Emphasis ours)
The aforementioned institutions ("Court" in The Hague), which ordered the return of Mr. Seselj, in principle could assure adequate treatment in the local university hospital, and such an arrangement has never been provided to the inmates and will almost certainly not be offered to Mr. Seselj. There is a risk, as the experience with some prisoners has shown, some of whom died under unclear circumstances, that the treatment in the Hague will be inadequate and therefore will be not in accordance with the prescription of the International Law, i.e. not in accordance with the UN Resolution 37/194. The only available solution would be to treat Mr. Seselj in Serbia. Therefore, Mr. Seselj should stay in Serbia and start therapy without delay.
In the meantime, Mr. Seselj should file an appeal to the OHCHR. This attempt to bring Mr. Seselj back to the Hague prison is a violation of human rights by the ICTY, and should probably contribute decisively to the end of illegal practice of this institution.
The cited resolution has been violated number of times in the past. Very frequently the experts do not pay sufficient attention to its prescriptions. For example, Ivan Jankovic in his book "The prohibition of abuse - manual for police and prison staff," the Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, 2010 - although superficially discussed this aspect of the health care of prisoners, does not mention some important aspects that are treated in the resolution 37/194, such as a Principle 1 and Principle 6 of the cited Annex. Although there is a controversy (Judge Michael Reilly, Guidance on Physical Healthcare in a Prison Context, 2007, published 18th April 2011, Ch 3, p. 16 and further) in the case discussed here, the resolution 37/194, as a supreme legislation, must be imposed.
The resolution can be found here: