Humanitarian Intervention – Again? Written by James Bissett Wednesday, 30 March 2011

http://policystudies.ca/library-mainmenu-76/96-international-affairs/411-humanitarian-intervention-again

Humanitarian Intervention – Again?
Written by James Bissett
Wednesday, 30 March 2011
As in the case of Serbia twelve years ago, Canada’s air force is once again
bombing a country presenting no threat to the safety or security of our country.
In fact, we are at war. There has been no declaration of war. There has been no
serious attempt to intervene peacefully to help resolve the conflict. There has
been no debate in our Parliament. There was no suggestion of sending a mission
to Libya to assess the situation on the ground.
More seriously, there has been no satisfactory explanation of what the bombing
is designed to do and little idea of who it is we are fighting for.
The United Nations Security Council has authorized a no-fly zone to be enforced
over Libyan skies but it is not clear what exactly this means. In the meantime
some Western nations – including Canada – have interpreted it to mean they are
authorized to attack and destroy Qaddafi’s forces fighting against an armed
rebellion to overthrow the dictator. Other countries do not agree. Among them
are: Germany, Russia, China, India, Brazil and, more importantly, the Arab
League.
Some have argued the aim is to prevent the Libyan despot, Muammar Qaddafi, from
slaughtering thousands of his people, but there has been no evidence that this
was his intention before the bombing took place.
President Sarkozy of France has made it clear that, as far as the French are
concerned, the intervention is to change the regime and replace Qaddafi. France
has already recognized the rebels in Benghazi as the legitimate representatives
of the Libyan people. This extraordinary step seems to rule out any possibility
of negotiating with Qaddafi for a peaceful solution to the armed struggle. It
also implies what amounts to a demand for his unconditional surrender – a demand
that almost always leaves your opponent no choice but to fight to the bitter
end.
As for the United States we are not sure what President Obama has in mind.
Initially, he was hesitant to lead his country into yet another war against a
Muslim nation. However, a hyped-up media and a number of his close advisors
urged him to intervene militarily. Having done so, he was anxious to at least
pretend that the lead in the continuing conflict would be taken by others, and
the “others” now seem to have been designated as some of the NATIO countries –
minus Germany and Turkey.
The waves of unrest and upheavals in the Arab world have created great hope but
at the same time potential danger. Who or what might replace the deposed despots
is not known, One thing seems clear, none of the Muslim countries involved is
ready for, or even desires to have, western style democracy.
For the most part the values of these Muslim countries are not western values,
and lurking in the background is the menacing threat of religious extremism.
This may be especially true in Libya, which has produced a high proportion of
suicide bombers and mujahedeen fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq.
As a general rule it is unwise to take sides in a civil war unless our own vital
interests are at stake. What is taking place in Libya today is a civil war and
we find ourselves playing the role of air force for the rebels. Unfortunately,
we really have no idea of who they are or what they represent. Moreover, we do
not know where the conflict will lead, how long it might last or the broader
implications for the region after the fighting ends.
All of this fiasco has turned out to be a colossal mess and is unlikely to end
well. This is not unusual when the excuse for intervention is based primarily on
so-called humanitarian reasons.
Military intervention for humanitarian reasons is not a new phenomenon. Even
Hitler justified his invasion of Czechoslovakia on the grounds that the ethnic
Germans in the Sudetenland were being mistreated and abused by their fellow
Czechoslovaks.
The concept has, however, found renewed popularity following the failure to
prevent the Rwanda genocide. It gained momentum during the civil war in Bosnia
and later in Kosovo, when charges of ethnic cleansing and crimes against
humanity were levelled against the Serbs. The NATO intervention in Bosnia and
Kosovo – despite strong evidence to the contrary – continues to be hailed as
highly successful operations.
The Balkan experience led directly to the new doctrine of the “responsibility to
protect” or R2P – the right to intervene in a sovereign state to protect
populations there who are at risk. R2P has become the new term for humanitarian
intervention and has laid out the conditions to be met for such intervention.
The key provision of this doctrine is that if a state is failing to protect its
citizens from mass atrocities, and peaceful measures to do so are not working,
the international community has the responsibility to intervene at first
diplomatically, and then more coercively, and at last resort, with military
force.
It is worth noting that the United Nations Charter does not permit the use of
military force for humanitarian intervention. However, in 2005 the General
Assembly did adopt the principle of R2P, provided that the parties to the
dispute “first of all seek a solution through negotiation, enquiry, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or
arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.”
If such peaceful means have been tried but have failed then and only then can
the United Nations Security Council authorize the use of force. Clearly none of
these peaceful methods were tried before the decision was taken to bomb
Qaddafi’s forces.
R2P has many loyal advocates both in Canada and the United States. In Canada,
our former foreign minister, Lloyd Axworthy, and retired General Romeo Dallaire
are leading proponents of the doctrine. In the United States, one of its
foremost advocates is Samantha Powers, author, foreign policy analyst, and now
member of the US National Security Council. Powers was appointed to the NSC by
President Obama and is said to have strongly influenced the President to
intervene in Libya.
Powers exemplifies the potential dangers of having a doctrine that invites the
violation of national sovereignty on the basis of alleged human rights abuse.
For human rights proponents like her there are few conflict situations that do
not deserve military intervention. In 2002, during the second
Palestinian Intifada, she pushed hard for US military intervention against
Israel with the aim of establishing and protecting a Palestinian state.
It is fortunate that R2P is not a mandatory obligation for the international
community. It provides a framework for intervention and guidelines to be
followed but it remains the responsibility of the United Nations Security
Council to authorize military intervention in a sovereign state. The veto power
remains a last resort to prevent the violation of sovereignty for whatever
reason.
There is great danger in assuming that the western democratic nations can
exercise wise judgment about when they should intervene in a conflict taking
place in developing countries. There is even more danger in assuming that the
intervention is motivated by real humanitarian concerns and not for selfish
political or foreign policy objectives as was clearly the case in Bosnia and
Kosovo.
The R2P concept is too easily high-jacked by leaders who see an opportunity to
gain political mileage at home by playing the role of protecting the rights of
suffering victims in far away places. If the country to be punished is headed by
a dictator and is not too powerful to take on, then the risk is worth taking.
If the intervention can be in concert with other allied nations so much the
better. For Canada, acting as part of NATO becomes particularly important as it
was in the bombing of Serbia, and is now in the case of Libya. Quite apart from
the substance of the issues involved Canada feels it must go along with our NATO
partners whether the military action is justified or not. Our political leaders
do not need to consult Parliament because NATO has decided the matter for us.
This is not a satisfactory situation for a democratic country. Other NATO member
countries do not always feel obliged to follow the NATO lead if they do not
agree with a military solution to the problem. Greece refused to take part in
the bombing of Serbia in 1999 and Germany has refused to join its NATO partners
in the Libya intervention.
Going to war is a serious business and it should be only done with the full
agreement of the Parliament of Canada after a vote in the House of Commons. It
is well to remember that at the outbreak of the Second World War it was only
after debate in the House of Commons and a vote that Canada declared war on
Germany.
Decisions about war and peace that affect the safety and security of our armed
services and citizenry are the paramount expression of a nation’s sovereignty.
Canada should not abdicate that responsibility in any circumstances.

Народни антифашистички сабор 6. априла

70 година од немачког, нацистичког бомбардовања. Не у НАТО! Зa државни савез Србије и Русије!
Србија је субјекат, а не објекат.

http://1389.org.rs/manifestacija-vaskrsnja-bombardovanja-6.april.html

Vladimir Putin Visits a Serbia on the Edge of Collapse: “Pro-Western” Belgrade Locked with Pristina in Race to the Bottom

Subject: Vladimir Putin Visits a Serbia on the Edge of Collapse: “Pro-Western”
Belgrade Locked with Pristina in Race to the Bottom (American Council for
Kosovo)

Vladimir Putin Visits a Serbia on the Edge of Collapse:
“Pro-Western” Belgrade Locked with Pristina in Race to the Bottom

http://www.savekosovo.org/default.asp?p=9&leader=0&sp=570

James George Jatras
Director, American Council for Kosovo
Washington, DC
March 31, 2011

Last week’s visit to Serbia by Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putincould not
have come at a better time or – depending on how you look at it – at a worse
time.

Mr. Putin came to a country that depends almost entirely on Russia for what’s
left of its international standing, especially defense of its sovereign rights
over the province of Kosovo and Metohija, occupied since 1999 by NATO and the EU
on behalf of the separatist Albanian Muslim administration in Pristina.   While
Serbs as a whole and most of the opposition sincerely value Russia’s steadfast
support, the current “yellow” government in power in Belgrade feigns friendship
while conducting a “pro-western” policy guided by the very powers that bombed
Serbia starting 12 years ago this month.

Meanwhile, the existing coalition in Belgrade counts on demoralization and
apathy amid the deepening gloom to maintain their hold on power:

Economy:  With unemployment topping 20 percent, annual inflation at 12 percent,
and a burgeoning foreign debt, the ruling coalition can only harp on the one
note they seem capable of sounding: that Serbia eventually – someday, somehow –
will be invited to join the European Union.   Aside from the fact the dangling
prospect of EU accession is reminiscent of the communist “radiant future” that
never managed to arrive, the question of how membership in a European Union that
is itself in deep crisiscan help Serbia is never explained.   Still, Mr. Putin
was barely out of the way before President Boris Tadic scurried to Brussels, the
yellows’ true North Star.  Instead of wasting time with the EU mirage, Serbia
needs to focus on cooperation with Russia on South Stream and other initiatives
that are on the table now.

Kosovo and Metohija:  While in Belgrade Mr. Putin once again stated Russia’s
full support for Serbia based on Resolution 1244, which affirms Serbia’s
sovereignty over Kosovo and Metohija and which, he noted, has not been
annulled.   With regard to direct talks between Belgrade and the terrorist cabal
based in Pristina, Mr. Putin said, “It is solely up to the people of Serbia to
decide on how to conduct their policies, any kind of negotiations are better
than conflicts and if required to do so, Russia would back the process.”  He
politely declined to note that Belgrade is in no way “required” to talk with the
criminals ensconced in Pristina and insists on doing so to please their western
sponsors.   Not even the erosionof the “KosovA” pseudo-state’s already meager
credibility in the wake of the accusations of organ-trafficking by “prime
minister” Hashim “Snake” Thaciwere reason to cancel negotiations that can only
lead to de facto, if not de jure, Serbian recognition.   In fact, President
Tadic specifically rejectedthe organ-harvesting allegations as grounds to call
off talks with Thaci or indeed “anyone whom Kosovo Albanians elect as their
legitimate[sic] representative.”  Thaci reportedly is afraid to travel abroad
for fear of arrest but no thanks to any action by Belgrade, which has not lifted
a finger to secure an Interpol “red notice” for Thaci’s apprehension – either
for the organ-harvesting murders committed by his KLA underlings or on an
outstanding warrant for terrorism and murder, which Serbian officials admit is
still in effect.   If prospects for talks collapse, it will be due not to any
stand of principle by Belgrade but to political disarray in Pristina, including
invalidation of the “presidency” of Behgjet Pacolliand the possible fall of
“Snake’s” coalition.  Meanwhile, shamefully, Belgrade will wait patiently at the
table for whoever the KLA-mafiaeventually decides to send to meet with them.

NATO:  With any further NATO expansion eastward dead in the water following the
election in Ukraine last year of an administration opposed to membership, the
alliance has shifted its focus to the country it bombed in violation of every
applicable legal standard: Serbia.   The Tadic government has responded with a
crafty ambiguity about its intentions, clearly designed to leave the door to
NATO membership open without quite saying so.  At the same time, Mr. Tadic says
Serbia “fully and genuinely supports Montenegro’s intention to become a NATO
member,” but added Serbia would remain neutral (at least for the time being, one
hastens to add).   He didn’t address how Montenegro’s joining NATO would
contribute to Serbia’s security, meaning that his country would be completely
surrounded by NATO states, with the probably temporary exceptions of
Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the latter of
which is kept out of the alliance only because of its dispute with Greece over
its name.  According to a WikiLeaked February 2010 cable from the U.S. Embassy
in Belgrade, “Tadic believes that Serbia cannot remain outside of NATO forever,
but doesn’t say this often because of the political sensitivity of the issue.”
In other words, as with Kosovo and Metohija, Mr. Tadic pays lip service to
Serbia’s position – in the case of NATO, the December 2007 National Assembly
Resolution on Military Neutrality – while in effect engaging with his U.S. and
European partners in a conspiracy against his own people.  Meanwhile Russia is
under no illusions what a NATO path for Serbia would mean.  “If Serbia joins
NATO, NATO will make all the decisions,” Putin has been quoted as saying. “If
NATO deploys its rocket systems in Serbia, Russia will be forced to direct its
nuclear potential towards Serbia.” In short, NATO accession for Serbia
immediately would jeopardize its national security by turning its staunchest
defender overnight into a potential adversary.

Political intimidation:  Unable to explain their failures, the ruling coalition
in Belgrade predictably resorts to character assassination and defamation of
their opponents.  Top of the list is the effort by prosecutors to try to
associate Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) leader Vojislav Kostunica with the
2003 assassination of then-prime minister Zoran Djindjic.  Mr. Kostunica
responds that he has already told everything he had to tell about the killing
and that he will not respond to summons for the interrogation: “The prosecution
knows that there are no grounds to interrogate me.”  DSS has responded with a
domestic and international petition campaignagainst the regime’s smear
tactics.   (Not coincidentally, the anti-Kostunica slanders coincide with DSS’s
launch of an anti-NATO membership campaign and a planned April demonstration to
commemorate the 1999 NATO bombing and the Nazi bombing of Belgrade during World
War II.   DSS, in addition to opposing Serbia’s NATO accession and to advocating
a non-aligned policy, similar to Ukraine, Finland, Sweden, Ireland, Switzerland,
and other democratic states, promotes strong economic ties with Russia.   It is
hard to believe there is not a hidden hand of the U.S., NATO, and perhaps the EU
in the anti-Kostunica campaign.)  Also worthy of mention is Radical Party leader
Vojislav Seselj, held for eight years by the NATO-controlled International
Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia at The Hague.  (While of course, jihad
killers like Naser Oric, Ramush Haradinaj, Agim Ceku, and Hashim Thaci– whose
crimes are well known to their western sponsors – walk free.)  Disintegration of
the prosecution’s case against Seselj evidently is neither reason for his
release nor for Belgrade to question the further detention of a Serbian citizen
without justification.  From the perspective of the “pro-western” coalition,
however, what importance do details like evidence or national sovereignty have
compared to obeying diktats of their foreign patrons?

The Church:   Last but certainly not least, the quislings in Belgrade are aware
that no effort to degrade and demoralize Serbia can succeed without sowing
discord and contention within the mainstay of the nation’s spiritual life, the
Serbian Orthodox Church.  This means first and foremost the politically
motivated action forcibly to remove His Grace, Bishop Artemije– a pillar of
Orthodoxyand foremost defender of Serbia’s sovereignty over Kosovo and Metohija–
from tending his threatened flock in Kosovo and Metohija.   Let us remember, as
reported by Julia Gorin, that as far back as January 2010, at a regional
security meeting in Pec, “a KFOR officer informed the grouping that it was
likely that Bishop Artemije of Raska and Prizren would be replaced and a new
Bishop of the Serbian Orthodox Church would be installed in his place, one who
was open to cooperation with the West and more open to dialogue.”  That is also
why, when Vladika Artemije returned to his diocese after he was first physically
removed, he quickly was banished a second time by the joint “authority” of the
NATO occupation, the current regime in Belgrade, and the KLA mafia in Pristina –
and of course their collaborators inside the Church.  Nonetheless, despite such
provocations, Vladika Artemije categorically rejects any possibility of schism
in the Serbian Orthodox Church and demands, simply and without qualification,
that the canons of the Church be followed.  Stating his unwillingness to abide
by any uncanonical directives, heremains until the end of his life the Bishop of
the Eparchy of Ras and Prizren.  But instead of a reasonable and peaceful
response to Vladika Artemije’s witness, those seeking to remove him have
resorted to tactics worthy of Hashim Thaci and his minions, throwing Molotov
cocktails at the homes of monks loyal to their martyric archpastor.

In short, the two ruling cabals – in Belgrade under Tadic & Company and in the
separatist entity in Pristina under Thaci & Company – are locked in a bizarre
race to the bottom, in symbiotic obedience to the same foreign masters.   In the
case of the separatist entity based in Pristina, “bottom” means the final
stripping away of the threadbare pretense of being a state in any normal sense
of the word.  At this point, the main relevant question is not which countries
might still make the mistake of recognizing the KLA terrorist fiefdom but which
of the countries that were duped into doing so will be the first to withdraw its
recognition – a process, once begun, that will trigger a “run” on the bank of
Pristina’s vanishing credit.   In eerie parallel, the “bottom” for Serbia means
the current regime’s managing to hang onto power long enough to complete its
betrayal of Serbia’s sovereignty, finish off what’s left the country’s economy,
and undermine any points of political and spiritual resistance.  It remains to
be seen if either “pro-western” cabal can get away with it.

Now available from The American Council for Kosovo!

Kosovo:
The Score
1999-2009

The American Council for Kosovorecently has located additional quantities of
this classic book, published on the tenth anniversary of the NATO aggression
against Serbia.    Kosovo: The Score provides the definitive explanation of the
little-understood Whys and Hows of the Kosovo war, as well as of the aftermath
that still plagues the region – and the world – today.

Among the experts contributing incisive analyses to Kosovo: The Score:

James Bissett
Doug Bandow
James George Jatras
Julia Gorin
Srdja Trifkovic
Diana Johnstone
Gregory R. Copley
. . . and many others!

Kosovo: The Scoreis available on request from The American Council for Kosovo,
which gratefully welcomes contributions of any size.  Book requests can be made
on the contribution page, by email, or by writing to:

The American Council for Kosovo
P.O. Box 14522
Washington, DC 20044

POZIVNICA – PRIREDBA ZA DECU

Poštovani,

U nedelju 10. aprila u 17.00h u KUD-u „ORO“,Heddernheimer Landstr. 151, Frankfurt na Majni, priređujemo priredbu za decu „Ala je lep ovaj svet“ u kojoj učestvuju deca i odrasli sa recitacijama, kraćim pozorišnim predstavama i muzičkim prilozima. Sa radošću pozivamo sve devojčice i dečake, pesnike za decu i muzičke talente, koji žele da daju svoj doprinos obogaćivnju programa ove već tradicionalne manifestacije za decu da nam se pridruže.

Srdačan pozdrav

UP „Sedmica“
Ljubiša Simić, predsednik
Tel.: 0173-6941770

Rüstungsexport durch die Bundesregierung

Newsletter vom 31.03.2011 – Hoflieferant autoritärer Regime

DÜSSELDORF (Eigener Bericht) – Der deutsche Rüstungskonzern
Rheinmetall baut in Algerien eine Transportpanzer-Fabrik zur
Aufrüstung der algerischen Armee. Dies berichtet die algerische
Presse. Das Projekt, das kürzlich mit der Gründung der Firma
„Rheinmetall Algérie SPA“ auf den Weg gebracht worden ist, ist Teil
eines umfassenden Vorhabens, an dem sich auch der deutsche
Daimler-Konzern beteiligt. Es zielt auf die Produktion von rund 10.000
Kraftfahrzeugen pro Jahr in Algerien ab, darunter vor allem die
Daimler-Modelle „Sprinter“ und „Unimog“. Damit rüsten erneut deutsche
Unternehmen ein repressives Regime in der arabischen Welt auf, während
die Bundesregierung vorgibt, die Demokratiebewegung der Region stützen
zu wollen. Rheinmetall hat schon in der Vergangenheit lukrative
Geschäfte unter anderem mit dem Mubarak-Regime getätigt, verzeichnet
jährlich neue Rekordumsätze und strebt einen Platz unter den Top 20
der globalen Rüstungsindustrie an. Als Voraussetzung gilt eine laxe
Vergabe von Genehmigungen zum Rüstungsexport durch die
Bundesregierung. Dass diese als gesichert gelten kann, zeigen seit
Jahren die Genehmigungen für Rheinmetall-Exporte in die arabischen
Spannungsgebiete.

mehr
http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/de/fulltext/58040

Mlada Puljanka Jasmina Čelica, vrijedna i perspektivna studentica poslijediplomskog studija, svoj je život tragično završila prije dvije i pol godine – koliko je mlad život svoje gradjanke vredan Zagrebu!?

— On Wed, 3/30/11, nina mladinic <nina.g.mladinic@gmail.com> wrote:

Mlada Puljanka Jasmina Čelica, vrijedna i perspektivna studentica
poslijediplomskog studija, svoj je život tragično završila prije dvije i pol
godine. Preminula je nakon što je na nju u Zagrebu, na ugli Zvonimirove i
Šulekove, bezobzirno jureći u svom Jeep Cherokee autu, na pješačkom
prijelazu naletio Marko Leko. Ubio ju je radeći prometni prekršaj,
zaobilazeći drugo vozilo koje je stalo da pješake propusti – zgazio je
nedužnu studenticu ‚gurajući‘ se bezobzirno svojim SUV autom preko pješakog
prijelaza. Kamo je tako žurio? Tko je taj Marko Leko, osim što je Jasminin
ubojica? Marko Leko je sin poduzetnika, više je puta kažnjavan zbog
prekršaja u prometu. Kako se dogodila nesreća? Imao je tada Marko Leko 21
god. i projurio je pored ostalih vozila koja su stala kako bi Jasminu
propustila na pješačkom prijelazu. Naletio je na nju i odbacio je dvadeset
metara u stranu. DVADESET METARA!Zaustavio se tek nakon četrdes etak metara,
što ukazuje na preveliku i nedozvoljenu brzinu.
Mlada Jasmina preminula je od ozljeda nekoliko sati poslije. Marko Leko je
nakon uviđaja pušten!!! Čak se tim istim vozilom kojim je ubio Jasminu odmah
uputio u daljnju vožnju.
Što je bilo dalje? Od tog dana Jasminin ubojica je slobodan čovjek, koji
nije platio niti kunu kazne za ubojstvo, niti je vidio zatvor makar
izdaleka!*
Sutkinja Ivančica Cvitanović* odredila je kaznu po čl. 272 st .4 KZ – dala
je kaznu od godinu dana zatvora i tri godine bez vozačke dozvole. Na
prvostupanjsku
presudu se žalilo i državno odvjetništvo i okrivljenik.
Nakon 10 mjeseci čekanja 03.11.2009. na *Županijskom sudu u Zagrebu sudsko
vijeće u sastavu toga suda Lepe Singer kao predsjednice vijeća,
te Sonje Brešković Balent i Lidije Vidjak, kao članova vijeća ,* uz
sudjelovanje više sudske savjetnice Ivane Špehar Janković kao zapisničarke ,
donijelo je odluku da se uvaži žalba okrivljenog Marka Leka na visinu
kazne!? Odlučili su da se kaznu od godinu dana zatvora zamijeni *uvjetnom
kaznom u trajanju od tri (3) godine*, uz istovremeno oduzimanje vozačke
dozvole. Presuda je čitana u nazočnosti zamjenika Županijskog državnog
odvjetnika u Zagrebu Cvjetka Ariha i sada novog branitelja okrivljenika ,
odvjetnika Milenka Umičevića.
Kao olakotna okolnost Marku Leku uzeto mu je to što je mlad, (iako se to
inače računa
samo do 21 god starosti), te da mu je to prvi put. *PRVI PUTA ŠTO? MARKOVO
PRVO UBOJSTVO???*
Znači li to da svi mladi vozači imaju pravo jedanput, prvi put , nekažnjeno
nekome oduzeti život? *DA SVI SMIJEMO PRVI PUTA UBITI ČOVJEKA, PA DOBITI
OPOMENU I BITI SLOBODNI I BEZ KAZNE DOK PO DRUGI PUT NE UBIJEMO
ČOVJEKA???Kakvo je pravosuđe u Hrvatskoj???*
Što bi svatko od Vas, ne dao Bog te nesreće i Vama, dao nekome kao kaznu za
ubojstvo Vašeg vlastitog djeteta?
Molimo vas da o ovome upoznate javnost! Zato da se i drugima ne dogodi što i
nama.
Ogorčeni Jasminini roditelji
Sonja i Nebojša Čelica

Ako ovaj mail ne prosljedite neće se ništa dogoditi. Ali ako ga
prosljedite, možda se jednog dana nešto promjeni!

Pozdrav,

G.


*GRAFIKA KOSTIĆ d.o.o.
ZAGREB, Kijevska 46
T/F:     01/2932 535
Mob: 091/898 2250*

POZIVNICA Forum Liebfrauenberg poziva Vas na vece „KNJIZEVNOST KOJA TRAJE“

POZIVNICA

Forum Liebfrauenberg poziva Vas na vece
„KNJIZEVNOST KOJA TRAJE“
na kojem ce biti predstavljeno stvaralastvo knjizevnika
MILOSA CRNJANSKOG
u petak , 8.04.2011,  u 19.00 casova
u kafeu Liebfrauenberg, Liebfrauenstr. 24,  Frankfurt

U ime Foruma
Ruzica Cvetkovic-Pfeifer