International Organisations

Vahur Made Estonian School of Diplomacy October 10-13, 2011

Course outline

International Organisations
Course content
- Description of IO phenomenon - World organisations with the main focus on the UN, - Regional organisations, - Discussion on multilateralism on global and regional level (Eugrasp and EU4Seas working papers, particularly WPs of van Langenhove and Vaquer).

International Organisations
Grading - Research paper on an UN topic given by me, - Delivered to: vahur@edk.edu.ee, - Should reach this address by November 4, 2011. 24:00 Estonian time. - All late-coming papers are automatically graded F.

International Organisations
Different types of short papers: - Referative piece: description only, - Essay: presentation of a point of view, - Research paper: argument based on knowledge (literature, published sources). However, no need to produce new knowledge (primary sources, unpublished data etc.).

International Organisations
Grading is based on four components: - mastering of the subject matter, - existence of clear research argument together with logical argumentation, - logical structure, - bibliography and sources used and refereed.

International Organisations
Technical features: - 4-6 pages (NOT MORE!), - 12 points font, - Times New Roman style, - 1.5 line space COPY-PASTE IS PROHIBITED! ANY SUCH PIECE WILL BE GRADED F.

International Organisations
Electronic databases (1): EBSCO http://search.epnet.com UN: ylikool PW: derp1632 EBSCO host Text Only Academic Search Premier

International Organisations
Electronic databases CIAONET www.ciaonet.org Register yourself as a temporary (30 days) trial user. * International Relations and Security Network (ISN) free-of-charge! www.isn.ethz.ch

International Organisations
UN-related links: - http://www.un.org - http://www.globalpolicy.org EU 7th FP research projects: - http://www.eugrasp.eu - http://www.eu4seas.eu

International Organisations
General introduction

IOs in IR
IO: not only a phenomenon but also a CONCEPT in IR The principal dilemma: concept of ORDER the IOs are seen challenging the position of STATES as institutions of order

IOs in IR
State-based orders in IR - International society (all sovereign states) - International community (all sovereign states following the common rules of conduct)

IOs in IR
Forms of order in IR (Hedley Bull. The Anarchical Society: a Study of Order in World Politics, 1977) - balance of power (balance of fear, bipolarity) - great power domination (pax Romana, pax Americana) - international law/justice/arbitration - diplomacy - war

IOs in IR
Critique of state-based order of IR

States

National interests

Disorder

IOs in IR
We need IOs for (idealist view): - preventing states creating disorder - keeping the existing forms of order - helping to re-establish order after disorder States = disorder IOs = order

IOs in IR
IOs vis--vis States
SUPREME
(supranational) IL scholars, federalists

IO

EQUAL
(multilateral)
Buzan, functionalists, institutionalists

State

SUBMISSED
(uni- and bilateral) Morgenthau, realists, transgovernmentalists

IOs in IR
Other concepts related to the IOs - international (supranational) law/norms - violence - legitimacy

IOs in IR
IOs and international (supranational) law/norms
- IOs as creators of international law (law/norm initiatives, negotiations) Alfred Zimmern. League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 1939. - IOs as international control and coercion bodies (monitoring, fact-finding, sanctioning)

IOs in IR
IOs and violence (in case of political IOs) Violence creating order or disorder? (WW1 example) IOs monopoly of violence? Peace builders? security communities (Karl Deutsch)?

IOs in IR
World War 1 influence on IOs - unprecedented violence (20 mil. casualties) violence becomes non-legitimised - old monarchies fall (Germany, Austria, Russia), elites distrusted - diplomacy and secrecy discredited, demand of open diplomacy - national self-determination state equality

IOs in IR
Security community An international community where violence is not used in mutual relations

IOs in IR
IOs and legitimacy (1) IOs as providers of legitimacy IOs more legitimate than states? Why states seek IO legitimacy?

IOs in IR
IOs and legitimacy (2) IOs as providers of legitimacy - heritage of concert diplomacy - attempt of bringing democratic standards to the IR - basis of international cooperation in technical fields

IOs in IR
IOs and legitimacy IOs more legitimate than states? - international law can not be generated by one or some states only, but it can be generated by an IO - political decisions of an IO are hardly disputed by international community, decisions by individual states are often disputed

IOs in IR
IOs and legitimacy Why do states seek IO legitimacy? - consent of international community (cases of Kosovo and Iraq) - consent of domestic public (IO legitimacy may not be always needed) - main aim is to lessen the burden of policymaking (Morgenthau and the realist view)

IOs in IR
Union of International Associations
Established in Brussels in 1907 Publishes The Yearbook of International Organizations Keeps online databases of IOs and IO-related matters

Homepage

http://www.uia.be/

IOs in IR
Seven features of IO (by UIA): - Three-members rule (voluntarity rule) - Round-table principle - International treaty - Non-profit - International civil servant - Charter and permanent administration - Uninterrupted activity

IOs in IR
IO as an international legal entity - IO is juridically equal to state and can have state-like features - independent bureaucracy - diplomatic representation - territory (UN) - postal service (UN) - armed forces (UN,NATO) - foreign policy (EU) etc.

IOs in IR
Cooperation Common policies without the transfer of sovereignty Integration Common policies with the transfer of sovereignty

IOs in IR
IO classification - membership type - membership geographic scope - areas of activity - structures

IOs in IR
Competence

Comprehensive

UN

EU

Membership

Universal ILO WHO OPEC ESA

Restricted

Issue-specific

IOs in IR
IOs by membership type inter-governmental IOs international nongovernmental organisations hybrid IO transgovernmental IO international political party

IOs in IR
International regimes Institutions that have common features to the IOs but which do not make policy decisions but carry out monitoring and control functions only (GATT, International Ocean Convention).

IOs in IR
Trans- and Multinational Corporations - TNC private corporation which operates in many countries but has the headquarters in one country (Coca-Cola) - MNC business enterprise established by an international treaty (SAS) TNCs and MNCs are not considered being IOs. But they may create IOs (like professional world federations)

IOs in IR
Membership geographic scope - global organisations (multicontinental organisations, organisations without geographically restricted membership) - regional organisations (organisations with geographically restricted membership)

IOs in IR
Areas of IO activity
Religious Multifunctional IO Technical

Monofunctional

Political

IOs in IR
IO classification by structure - Division of powers between plenary and permanent structures - Members voting power (equal or not) - Members influence on IOs decisions

IOs in IR
Function
Programme organisations Loosely binding Strong in implementation Operational organisations

Authority
Strongly binding

Delegation
Intergovernmental Supranational Intergovernmental

Example
UN EU OSCE

Supranational
Intergovernmental Supranational

IWC
OPEC IMF, World Bank

Weak in implementation

Intergovernmental
Supranational

ICO
UNHCR

IOs in IR
Main dilemmas related to IO implementation: - program IOs aiming at implementation of their decisions,

- state sovereignty versus strong IO implementation.

IOs in IR
IO structures Plenary bodies Parliamentary bodies Permanent (restricted membership) bodies Secretariates Judicial and arbitrary bodies

IOs in IR
Member states
Governments

Plenary body

Parliamentary body

Executive body

Administrative body

Judicial or arbitrary body

IOs in IR
IO decision making - majority voting (consensus, simple-, absolute- and qualified majority) - weighted voting - conference strategy - package deal

IOs in IR
History of IO development (1) Early IO-like institutions - unions of states (defence, trade) - Roman Catholic Church - religious orders

IOs in IR
Oldest still-existing IO The Order of Emperor Constantine Established in 312

Aimed at educating the cross-congregational Christian elite

IOs in IR
History of IO development (2) Conditions necessary for modern IOs (Inis Claude): - large number of sovereign states - increasing number of interstate relations (notably increased trade and communication) - increasing need to solve the problems of coexistence

IOs in IR
History of IO development (3) Emergence of technical organisations in the 19th century - on IG level the transport organisations (1805 Central Navigation Commission of Rhein River) - NGO level the anti-slave trade organisations (1840 International Anti-Slavery Convention, 1864 International Red Cross)

IOs in IR
History of IO development (4): On the 20th century the political IOs emerge: 1899 and 1907 Hague conferences (restrictions on the use of violence, rules of war, international arbitration etc.) 1919 the League of Nations, 1945 UN

League of Nations
In comparison with the UN

LON and UNO

League of Nations Established in 1919 in Paris Peace Conference Ended its activities in 1946 Had all together 63 member states, 45 in 1946 Covenant United Nations Established in 1945 in San Francisco Conference Has currently 192 member states Charter www.un.org

LON and UNO

Founding of the League of Nations + Post WW1 environment (German defeat) + Woodrow Wilsons initiative + US withdrawal + Organisation dominated by Britain and France + Accession of Germany + Withdrawal of Japan, Germany and Italy + Accession and expulsion of the USSR

LON an UNO
League of Nations historical landmarks + Post WW1 conflicts in Europe (German borders in the East, Lithuania and Poland, Aland islands, Corfu incident and other Balkan conflicts) + Mosul crisis 1923-1926 + Manchuria 1931-1933 + Abyssinian war 1935-1937 + Finnish-Soviet war 1939-1940

LON and UNO

Structure of the League of Nations + Assembly + Council (permanent and semi-permanent members) + Secretariate + Secretaries-General: James Eric Drummond (1919-1933), British Joseph Avenol (1933-1940), French Ian Sean Lester (1940-1946), Irish

LON and UNO

LNO: other issues + mandates (A,B,C) + disarmament + refugees + technical and humanitarian issues

UN birthday
On 26 June 1945 in San Francisco the UN Charter was signed, On 24 October 1945 the Charter came into force the UN Day, On 20 April 1946 the League of Nations was dissolved

LON and UNO

Founding of UN (problems) + very closely attached to the international situation of April 1945, Charter as the document of winners + a frozen Charter, almost impossible to amend the UN charter + many important powers of the current world underreprsented (Germany, Japan, Arab countries, EU, India etc.)

LON and UNO

LON Covenant + 26 articles + membership, structures + disarmament, security guarantees (art. 10), arbitration, definition of agression and sanctions (art. 16) + int. treaties, mandatory system, humanitarian issues UN charter + 19 chapters New things: Definition of sovereignty Human rights Conflict prevention Regional security organisations Chp. 17 (WW2 clauses)

LON and UNO

UNO structures: main differences compared to LON + veto + ECOSOC + Trusteeship Council + network of sub-institutions and regional headquarters (the UN system)

Why the LNA was not reformed?

LNA a Franco-British institution, too Eurocentric, USSR was expelled in 1939, USA never became a member, Axis allies and Baltic states members, The idea of world policeman.

United Nations

UN Charter
UN goals: - maintenance of peace and resolution of conflicts, - human rights, - equality (gender, big and small states etc.), - socio-economic well-being. International community: - sovereign states only.

UN Charter
UN membership: - Every peace-loving nation, - Currently 192 members, Holy See (Vatican) and Palestine Authority are observers (should EU also become an observer?) - Members approved by GA majority, recommendation from SC needed.

UN Charter
UN institutions * General Assembly, * Security Council, * Secretariate, * ECOSOC, * Trusteeship Council, * International Court of Justice, * UN system.

UN Security Council
Importance of Security Council: - binding resolutions, - right to impose sanctions (incl. military), - together with Secretary General exercises leadership in UN peace-and-conflict activities, - approves new Members States and appoints new Secretaries General, - since 1945 there have been 4,000 SC meetings

UN Security Council
UN Security Council composition: - 5 permanent members (P5), - veto-right, one or more P5s votes against the SC resolution - 10 non-permanent members (6 before 1965), - Military Staff Committee.

UN Security Council
Development of P5 concept prior San Francisco conference: * USA and UK announcing Atlantic Charter 1941, UK agrees that UN should be established and LNA demolished, * USSR adheres to AC in 1942, agrees with the idea of UN, * China promoted by the USA in 1943 Cairo conference as the main ally against Japan, USSR hopes that after Communist victory China becomes its ally in the UN, * France disliked by the USA (particularly de Gaulle), but supported by UK, and eventually USSR. Stalin hopes that critical de Gaulle weakens US position in the UN. Finally approved by Roosevelt in 1945 Yalta conference.

UN Security Council
Veto * veto I prohibit * 1,400 SC resolutions (1946-1990 annual average 15 resolutions, after 1990 annually about 60 resolutions) * 300 vetoes * Election of a new SG 15% * Admission of a new MS 20% * Chapter VII (threats to international peace and security) and implemantation of previous SC resolutions 65%

UN Security Council
Frequency and nature of veto-use: * 1946-1961: beginning of the Cold War, 40-60% SC resolution drafts vetoed, in 1949 and 1956 80% vetoed, almost entirely USSR vetos, * 1961-1970: after Cuban missile crisis (1961) clear vetodecrease, 5-20% vetoed, almost entirely USSR vetos, * 1970-1990: late Cold War, veto-increase, 20% vetoed, predominantly US vetos. * 1990-2007: post Cold War, drastic veto-drop, 21 vetos alltogether, 2% vetoed, mostly US vetos. The hidden veto: many issues are not brought to resolution level as P5 members indicate their likely veto (Kosovo 1999 and currently).

UN Security Council
Bargaining in the Security Council

Veto powers 1+2

Veto power 3

Veto power 4+5

Military intervention

Sanction

No action

UN Security Council
Alternatives to bargaining: - purchasing of votes (economic and financial concessions through aid or loans), - bypassing the SC.

UN Security Council
Veto-users Top-5 (vetos on electing SG are classified): * USSR/Russia (since 1991): 123 * USA: 82 * UK: 32 * France: 18 * China (until 1971 Taiwan): 6

UN Security Council
USSR/Russian veto-using: * First veto in 1946 * Vetos in major Cold War crises (Greece, Czechoslovakia in 1948 and 1968, Berlin, disarmament and arms control, Hungary, Israel/Egypt(Suez)/Syria,Lebanon, India/Pakistan, Cyprus, Vietnam/Cambodia/China, Afghanistan) * UN membership of pro-Western states (Finland 1947, Italy 1948). Culmination in 1955. * Last Cold War-veto by USSR in 1984, first post Cold War veto by Russia in 1993. * 3 post Cold War vetos (Cyprus, Bosnia, Myanmar). * Usually vetoes alone. In 1946 one veto with France and 1972 and 2007 with China.

UN Security Council
Importance of veto to USSR/Russia: * Great power status symbol, * Guarantee (sovereignty, US domination), * (Imaginary) tool to control the USA and its use of force, * Russia sees the UN and SC exactly the same way as US does. If UN restricts Russian sovereignty then Moscow is very ready to take actions without UNs consent (Trans-Nistria, Abkhazia, South-Ossetia etc.).

UN Security Council
US veto-using: * First veto in 1970, * Major Cold War issues: Middle East (Israel/Palestine/Lebanon/Syria/Libya) and Central America (Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama), * Together with UK and France conflicts in South Africa (SAR, Namibia, Rhodesia, Angola), * Post Cold War issues: Middle East (Israel/Gaza) and International Criminal Court.

UN Security Council
Importance of veto to the USA: * US sees itself as an alternative institution to the UN (coalitions of willing), * Veto is seen not quite as a sovereignty guarantee but rather as a tool of US foreign policy, * Veto helps to marginalise UN if US interests require so.

UN Security Council
British and French veto-using: * First French veto in 1946, British in 1956, * Mainly joint vetos or in association with the USA, * Suez crisis, colonial issues (Rhodesia, SAR, Namibia, Comoros, Falkland), Libya. Veto and the EU: * Britain and France have not managed to bring the EU voice to the SC, * It is the USA who is pushing the EU to replace the UN in European affairs (ex-Yugoslavia).

UN Security Council
Chinese veto-using: * First veto in 1955 by Taiwan, first Communist veto in 1972, * Wanting to present its great power-status (Middle East 1972), * UN membership applications (Mongolia 1955, Bangladesh 1972), * Because of official relations to Taiwan (Guatemala 1997, Macedonia 1999), * Wanting to preserve a neighboring friendly regime (Myanmar 2007), * If China dislikes the SC resolution then usually abstaines from voting seeing that USA or USSR/Russia will do the job anyway, * China has NOT vetoed: Korean war (1950), India/Pakistan, Vietnam/Cambodia (1970s), Vietnam-China war (1979), * China sees the SC mainly as a security and sovereignty guarantee. SC veto guarantees that China is not considered neither as US nor Russian client. * China is not quite enthusiastic about UN international intervention mechanisms seeing them as threats to its sovereignty.

UN Security Council
Veto reform proposals: * Abolishing veto, * Allowing veto only in Chapter 7 cases * New permanent members without veto * Veto needs at least two supporters

UN Security Council
P5 reform proposals: * Germany and Japan (P5+2), * Common seat for the EU, * India, * Africa (Egypt, SAR, Nigeria rotating), * Latin America (Brazil)

UN Security Council
Non-permanent members (NPMs): * Currently 10 NPMs: 3 from Africa, 2 from Asia, Western Europe and Latin America, 1 from Eastern Europe, * Nominated by regional groups, elected by the GA, * 75 states (39% of UN members) have never been elected to the SC, * Cathegories of NPMs: - Aspirants to permanent membership (Germany, India), - Medium-sized NPMs (Sudan, Sweden), - Small-sized NPMs (Finland, Panama), - Outsiders (too small/micro or poor, in bad terms with P5 or otherwize problematic, passive).

UN Security Council
UN SC of 24 members? Why it is important to become an UN SC nonpermanent member? - Influence? - Information? - Prestige? - Experience? - Diplomatic training?

UN General Assembly
Importance of the GA: * Forum for all UN members, * High-level meetings/dialogues, * Non-binding resolutions (GA committees), * Initiatives put forward in the GA may lead to international conventions, become international law, * Possibility to bypass SC veto-situations, * Elections and appointments to UN bodies.

UN General Assembly
GA is competing with other UN institutions: * Secretary-General (reforms, agenda, policy), * Security Council (security, conflicts, peace-keeping), * ECOSOC (socio-economic matters).

UN Secretariate
UN Secreataries General: Trygve Lie (Norway) 1946-1952 Dag Hammarskjld (Sweden) 1953-1961 Sithu U Thant (Burma/Myanmar) 1961-1971 Kurt Waldheim (Austria) 1972-1981 Javier Perez de Cuellar (Peru) 1982-1991 Boutros Boutros-Ghali (Egypt) 1992-1996 Kofi Annan (Ghana) 1997 2007 Ban Ki-moon (South-Korea) 2007 -

UN Secretariate
Electing UN Secretary General: - Candidates presented by Regional Groups, - P5 citizens do not apply, - SC vote. P5 support is crucial. GA vote is only formal. UN Secreatariate reform (management reform): - More or less personell? - Skills or representation? - Structural duplication - 38th floor gap

UN in peace and conflict

Forms of UN peace-and-conflict activities: - preventive diplomacy (SG and SC), - peace-keeping (SG and SC), - peace enforcement (collective security, humanitarian intervention SC, member states, SG), - post-conflict missions (police missions, nation building etc SG and SC) Role of regional organisations?

UN preventive diplomacy
What the SG can do? * Bring the conflict to the UN agenda, * Use early warning, co-operate with media and member states, During the Cold War SG had to ensure the support of both the USA and USSR, or the majority of Non-Aligned Movement states. After the Cold War the possibility of humanitarian catastrophy activates the member states. It is important to: * Target the conflict in its preliminary stage, * Start negotiations with conflicting parties, * Bring in the third parties who are able to offer exitstrategies, * Face-saving of conflicting parties is very important.

UN and humanitarian intervention

Just war, Intervene to save civilian lives, Congo crisis first HI, Human rights or state sovereignty? Attitudes towards foreign intervention: - Exremely negative in Asia and Latin America, - Rather supportive in Sub-Saharan Africa, - What about ex-Yugoslavia?

UN and humanitarian intervention

Responsibility to Protect (2001): - UN has the responsibility to protect the civilian lives, - International community has to prevent conflicts, react rapidly, and rebuild after the conflict, - Before using force all other methods of conflic management should be used (contradiction with rapid reaction?), - Use of force must be in right proportions, - Only for saving civilian lives. No other goals (like restoring democracy etc.).

UN and nation-building
Number of failed states is growing. Nation building is UNs main post-conflict activity. Legitimity in the eyes of local population: does nation-building succeed through the UN-led foreign autocracy? Democracy or stability? Should UN help to build stabile but non-democratic institutions? Democracy is not everywhere legitimite. EU and nation-building in ex-Yugoslavia.

UN peace-keeping
Problems: * Financing, * Mandate flexibility, * Conflicting interests of member states, * Local tradition of conflict escalation. Successes: * Cyprus case, * Helps to prevent inter-state conflicts escalating, * Still a valuable form of international military cooperation.

UN and peace-keeping
Main conflicts dealt by UN + Arab-Israeli, since 1948 + Near East (Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Afghanistan) + India-Pakistan (since 1947) + Korea (1950-1953) + Africa (Congo, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South-Africa, Rwanda, Darfur etc.) + Central America (Nicaragua, El Salvador) + Cyprus + Cambodia + East Timor + Ex-Yugoslavia

* During the Cold War marginal role for the UN. Actual conflict management was carried out through the bilateral US-USSR negotiations.

UN peace keeping
Currently 16 operations, 55,000 military personell UNs limits of its capacities? Deployment of great powers (part. US) military forces? Post 9/11: terrorism more important than peace keeping Lakhdar Brahimi report (2000): Pre-Mandate Commitment Authority, rapid deployment (90 days), Department for Peacekeeping Operations Africa: 7 operations, 85 per cent of UN personell, role of regional organisations, British and French interests

UN and USA
Since the 1960s the GA becomes increasingly antiAmerican, UN Secretariate recruits personell on the basis of regional representation, USA becomes increasingly critical towards the UN, First serious US-UN crisis during Reagan administration in the 1980s. US starts to curb its contribution into UN regular and peace-keeping budget, Clinton administration in the 1990s. US takes lead in conflict management and sidelines the UN. Serious conflicts with Boutros Boutros-Ghali. Kosovo crisis 1999, Bush Jr. administration since 2001. Iraq 2003. Oil-forFood crsis 2005-2006. John Bolton.

UN and USA
USA has not joined the agreements on: * climate change (Kyoto protocol), * small arms proliferation, * biological weapons prohibition, * land mines prohibition, * missile defence systems limitation, * nuclear desting prohibition.

UN system
Specialised agencies (19) Related organisations (4) Programmes and funds (13) Research and training institutes (5) Functional and Regional commissions (9+5) Other entities and bodies

Regional organisations

UN Charter and regional organisations

Chapter 8 of the UN Charter encourages for the regional arrangements for maintenance of international peace and security, Simultaneously it also says that no enforcement action shall be taken under regional agreements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the SC.

Key regional organisations

Europe: * The EU family (EU+EFTA(-Switzerland) =EEA), * NATO, * Council of Europe, * OSCE, * EBRD, * Sub-regional organisations.

Key regional organisations

Asia: * The Arab League, * ASEAN, * APEC, * ASEM/ ASEF (an EU-Asia linkage), * ADB, * SAARC, Shanghai CO, CIS and other sub-regional organisations.

Key regional organisations

Africa: * AU (formely OAU), * AfDB, * ECOWAS, SADC, COMESA and other sub-regional organisations.

Key regional organisations

America: * OAS, * NAFTA, * MERCOSUR, * FTAA, * IADB, * Andean Community, Central-American FTA, Carribean Cooperation Council and other subregional organisations.

Regional organisation concepts

Classification of regional organisations: * Top-level: Supra-regional dominators (EU, AU, OAS). Political, economic or both. * Medium-level: Aspiring supra-regional dominators (NAFTA, MERCOSUR, ASEAN, others??).Mainly economic, with emerging political ambitions. * Ground-level: Sub-regional organisations (dominators, margins). Mostly economic, both often with clear political ambitions. * Discussion forums (international regimes). Bringing in global actors beyond regional or sub-regional borders (APEC, FTAA, development banks etc.).

Sub-regionalism
Reasons for sub-regionalism: * Powers: resources, ideas, norms, legitimacy, * Counterweight to the supra-regional powers, * Support for the middle-powers.

Models of regionalism
Europe: - No dominating supra-regional power, - No power of decisive global influence, - Global power emerges from united forces of supra-regional powers (UK+Germany+France), - Cooperation of attractiveness.

Models of regionalism:
Africa (Europes mirror-image): - No dominating supra-regional power, - African countries do not have any substantial global influence, - Cooperation based on shared poverty, and on common appeal for outside resources.

Models of regionalism
Asia: * Very powerful sub-regions with individual global influence, * No chance of emerging the one dominating supra-regional organisation, * Sub-regions versus China/Japan, * Political power is the key element of regionalisation.

Models of regionalism
America: * USA versus the rest, * Brazil versus Latin America, * Cooperation based on antagonisms, * Can Europe (still) be a model for America?

Regional organisations
Established domination political ambitions, conflict resolution. Emerging leadership economic and technical integration. Establishing phase economic and technical cooperation.

THANK YOU!