So far, this blog has been fairly quiet on the topic of Russia and Crimea (though it did have several previous posts on Ukraine). This hasn't been for any intentional reason, though the topic has been covered in the news fairly thoroughly. It is not trifling to consider that the standoff between Russia and the West contains the hallmarks of future conflict.
This week, the drama entered a new phase when the G8 became the G7. Russia was essentially booted from the G8, to which it has belonged since 1998. It seems unclear whether the expulsion is a disagreement that may be temporary, or if this action is somewhat permanent. Given the severity of the infraction and the tough talk from both sides, even a temporary suspension is unlikely to be short at all. Frankly, Russia does not seem to care.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's comments are particularly telling. Lavrov didn't even really need to use words. His words echoed his actions, suggesting that Russia felt the G8 was simply an informal club to which it had experienced a temporary visit. It's not that big of a deal to leave after all.
How Russia feels is important if tensions are to calm. Russia has never felt it had an opportunity to lead in Western multilateral institutions. It has long sought to carve its own leadership role in its own institutions within spheres of influence it has much stronger control over - historically, economically, and politically. At times over the past few decades, it has sought to spread that influence, but it has always returned home. In a sense, it is a form of atavism.
The Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) has been Russia's response to NATO. Russia has reassured its allies in this bloc that they are not expected to be involved in any military action related to Ukraine. While full-scale war is far off, it would be significant. If the CSTO does not exist as an alliance, how far from the Soviet Union is it? Other Russian-led institutions continue to build influence over and connections between its former republics.
Ideally, deeper conflict will be averted and solutions to the Ukraine dilemma will be found. At this time, everyone seems to be prepared for a long, entrenched fight, though the West is not nearly as sure of its next move as Russia is. It would behoove Western nations, and the United States in particular, to give the situation some serious consideration. This kind of chess has not been played in a good while.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Monday, March 17, 2014
Libya Update, Part II
Overnight, moves were taken to secure Libyan unity. United States Navy Seals boarded and took control of the oil tanker - Morning Glory - that had escaped the naval blockade of Libya's eastern, rebel-held ports. The tanker is now on its way back to Libya to an undisclosed, government-held port. This action underlines American support for Libya's government and greatly undermines the actions of the rebel government. Moreover, it emphasizes the willingness of action upon necessity, including appropriate military response.
In related news, two Israeli nationals and a Senegalese were detained upon suspicion of attempting to purchase oil from the tanker off the coast of Cyprus. They were released and it is, at this time, unclear if there is any suspicion remaining, if their actions were pure opportunism, or if they were part of any premeditated plan with the tanker's crew.
In related news, two Israeli nationals and a Senegalese were detained upon suspicion of attempting to purchase oil from the tanker off the coast of Cyprus. They were released and it is, at this time, unclear if there is any suspicion remaining, if their actions were pure opportunism, or if they were part of any premeditated plan with the tanker's crew.
Sunday, March 16, 2014
A Divided Libya in the Backlog of International News
International events seem to be ablaze right now. Between the fear of Crimea seceding to the frantic search for Malaysia Airlines flight 370, there's just not much else that is getting more than a byline these days.
Libya seems to be one of those stories being pushed below the fold. There remains a lack of unity between the eastern and western sections of the country. The 2011 Libyan Civil War may have freed the country from Muammar Gaddafi's dictatorial chains, but they have not mended social, political, and economic divisions since. As with many resource-based economies, some of the most potent underlying resentment stems from regions where resources are found and extracted and the capital, where they are often spent. Eastern Libya has been, by many definitions, operating as an autonomous region of Libya for over a year now.
The rebel government recently tested its autonomy. Just over a week ago, an oil tanker - Morning Glory - docked in Sidra, breaking the blockade of eastern ports held by the rebel government. The rebel government quickly began to load the tanker with oil. Somewhat ironically, the tanker is flying the flag of North Korea. Initially, Libya threatened to bomb the tanker were it to load oil and attempt to leave, having previously fired warning shots at other tankers near ports. The tanker ended up loading 234,000 barrels of oil, evading the naval blockade after being fired on for two days, and is now in the Mediterranean Sea, though the rebels claim it has reached its final destination.
(Morning Glory, from marinetraffic.com via RT.com)
For what it's worth, North Korea denied involvement and claimed to revoke the tanker's registration. It is unlikely that any countries within so few sailing days are willing to risk strained relations with Libya; it's last recorded position seems to be off the coast of India, but that was prior to reaching Libya. It also may have truly been under the Liberian flag.
Nonetheless, any evidence of associations between Libyan rebels and North Korea are bound to strain relations further. The weakness of Libya's government in stopping the tanker led to Prime Minister Ali Zeidan being voted out of office, which doesn't exactly help strengthen faith in government. Around the world, there exists a fear that oil will prove to be Libya's undoing and lead to a second and more violent iteration of the Civil War. It seems that, for the time being, Libya is stuck between the possibility of further war and the Iraq-Kurdistan model of resource-based autonomy, which has not fared so well either. It couldn't hurt to suggest that oil revenues be used wisely, with perhaps technical assistance and planning from some experienced Western powers. Libya's population of just over six million is not so far from Norway's five million, after all.
Libya seems to be one of those stories being pushed below the fold. There remains a lack of unity between the eastern and western sections of the country. The 2011 Libyan Civil War may have freed the country from Muammar Gaddafi's dictatorial chains, but they have not mended social, political, and economic divisions since. As with many resource-based economies, some of the most potent underlying resentment stems from regions where resources are found and extracted and the capital, where they are often spent. Eastern Libya has been, by many definitions, operating as an autonomous region of Libya for over a year now.
The rebel government recently tested its autonomy. Just over a week ago, an oil tanker - Morning Glory - docked in Sidra, breaking the blockade of eastern ports held by the rebel government. The rebel government quickly began to load the tanker with oil. Somewhat ironically, the tanker is flying the flag of North Korea. Initially, Libya threatened to bomb the tanker were it to load oil and attempt to leave, having previously fired warning shots at other tankers near ports. The tanker ended up loading 234,000 barrels of oil, evading the naval blockade after being fired on for two days, and is now in the Mediterranean Sea, though the rebels claim it has reached its final destination.
For what it's worth, North Korea denied involvement and claimed to revoke the tanker's registration. It is unlikely that any countries within so few sailing days are willing to risk strained relations with Libya; it's last recorded position seems to be off the coast of India, but that was prior to reaching Libya. It also may have truly been under the Liberian flag.
Nonetheless, any evidence of associations between Libyan rebels and North Korea are bound to strain relations further. The weakness of Libya's government in stopping the tanker led to Prime Minister Ali Zeidan being voted out of office, which doesn't exactly help strengthen faith in government. Around the world, there exists a fear that oil will prove to be Libya's undoing and lead to a second and more violent iteration of the Civil War. It seems that, for the time being, Libya is stuck between the possibility of further war and the Iraq-Kurdistan model of resource-based autonomy, which has not fared so well either. It couldn't hurt to suggest that oil revenues be used wisely, with perhaps technical assistance and planning from some experienced Western powers. Libya's population of just over six million is not so far from Norway's five million, after all.
Sunday, March 2, 2014
Qatar's Migrant Worker Problem
With much of the world media covering the Ukraine situation (latest update: Russian troops have taken over Crimea), this post will take a different tact and focus on an issue that is slowly gaining traction: the deadly exploitation of migrant workers in Qatar in the lead-up to the 2022 World Cup.
Back in September 2013, The Guardian issued a scathing article about the conditions faced by migrant workers in Qatar. That article focused primarily on the conditions of Nepalese workers. A related article quoted the International Trade Union Confederation in estimating that 4,000 migrant workers would die working on World Cup-related projects by 2022. Given that Nepal relies on its migrant workers going to Qatar, Nepal was disinclined to criticize Qatar in the wake of those reports.
Last week, the issue was raised once again as The Guardian reported that more than 500 Indian migrant workers had died in Qatar since January 2012. The downside was that the numbers, which were released from the Indian embassy pursuant to a FOIA-type request from media, did not explain the exact nature of those deaths. The Qatari government capitalized on this omission by making the dubious claim that the worker death rate was normal, given the number of Indian migrant workers in Qatar (500,000), and claiming that there was a "campaign" against Qatar.
Why, with conflict all around the world, is the situation of migrant workers in Qatar a pressing issue? Well, for one, the kafala system ingrained into Qatar's economic system is a system designed for worker exploitation. Under the kafala system, a migrant worker is sponsored by an employer; the employer then has near-total control over the migrant worker's life. The employer can take the worker's passport, withhold pay, make the worker labor long hours (in the Middle Eastern desert) without sufficient access to water, and keep the worker in squalid living conditions. If the worker wants to change jobs, there is often no recourse; the employer is supposed to provide an identification card but often doesn't, making an employee who flees an undocumented worker subject to arrest and deportation. Moreover, there is even an "exit visa" requirement whereby an employer who has a dispute with a worker can legally prevent the worker from leaving Qatar. This issue gained international attention when a professional French soccer player was denied an exit visa and was forced to stay in Qatar for a year while he negotiated a settlement with his soccer team-employer. The international soccer player's union responded to this by calling on Qatar to end the kafala system for pro soccer players because it "goes to the heart of respecting their basic human rights." The fact that a professional athlete was forcibly kept in Qatar by his employer -- and that such a practice is built into the legal system -- is emblematic of the extreme level to which employers control migrant workers' lives in Qatar.
The conditions of these workers is in itself a reason to call attention to Qatar's state-sponsored abuse of migrant workers. The fact remains, however, that this is now the world's responsibility: by accepting Qatar's assurances that it could transform itself into a host site for the World Cup, the world community must now recognize that it has implicitly blessed Qatar's massive infrastructure development. And that development is not just stadium-building. Indeed, the massive project will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and includes building an entire city from scratch. Moreover, this massive re-shaping of the country, and its attendant migrant worker abuse, is inextricably linked to the 2022 World Cup:
Back in September 2013, The Guardian issued a scathing article about the conditions faced by migrant workers in Qatar. That article focused primarily on the conditions of Nepalese workers. A related article quoted the International Trade Union Confederation in estimating that 4,000 migrant workers would die working on World Cup-related projects by 2022. Given that Nepal relies on its migrant workers going to Qatar, Nepal was disinclined to criticize Qatar in the wake of those reports.
Migrant workers in Qatar line up to take buses back to their living accommodations (Source: The Guardian)
Last week, the issue was raised once again as The Guardian reported that more than 500 Indian migrant workers had died in Qatar since January 2012. The downside was that the numbers, which were released from the Indian embassy pursuant to a FOIA-type request from media, did not explain the exact nature of those deaths. The Qatari government capitalized on this omission by making the dubious claim that the worker death rate was normal, given the number of Indian migrant workers in Qatar (500,000), and claiming that there was a "campaign" against Qatar.
Why, with conflict all around the world, is the situation of migrant workers in Qatar a pressing issue? Well, for one, the kafala system ingrained into Qatar's economic system is a system designed for worker exploitation. Under the kafala system, a migrant worker is sponsored by an employer; the employer then has near-total control over the migrant worker's life. The employer can take the worker's passport, withhold pay, make the worker labor long hours (in the Middle Eastern desert) without sufficient access to water, and keep the worker in squalid living conditions. If the worker wants to change jobs, there is often no recourse; the employer is supposed to provide an identification card but often doesn't, making an employee who flees an undocumented worker subject to arrest and deportation. Moreover, there is even an "exit visa" requirement whereby an employer who has a dispute with a worker can legally prevent the worker from leaving Qatar. This issue gained international attention when a professional French soccer player was denied an exit visa and was forced to stay in Qatar for a year while he negotiated a settlement with his soccer team-employer. The international soccer player's union responded to this by calling on Qatar to end the kafala system for pro soccer players because it "goes to the heart of respecting their basic human rights." The fact that a professional athlete was forcibly kept in Qatar by his employer -- and that such a practice is built into the legal system -- is emblematic of the extreme level to which employers control migrant workers' lives in Qatar.
The conditions of these workers is in itself a reason to call attention to Qatar's state-sponsored abuse of migrant workers. The fact remains, however, that this is now the world's responsibility: by accepting Qatar's assurances that it could transform itself into a host site for the World Cup, the world community must now recognize that it has implicitly blessed Qatar's massive infrastructure development. And that development is not just stadium-building. Indeed, the massive project will cost hundreds of billions of dollars and includes building an entire city from scratch. Moreover, this massive re-shaping of the country, and its attendant migrant worker abuse, is inextricably linked to the 2022 World Cup:
Fifa and the Qatar World Cup organising committee are now tangled in a Gordian knot. The human rights groups that have been pressuring Fifa and the Qataris demand to know whether there will be any meaningful reform to improve the welfare and safety of workers on all building projects. In Qatar itself, where politics has been described as akin to a medieval star chamber, an internal battle is raging. There are liberal forces who want to change the labour laws but are equally aware that sweeping away the kafala system that ties migrant workers to their employers would place huge question marks over its ability to fulfil its "2030 Vision" for the country.
The dizzying and unprecedented plan to spend hundreds of billions transforming the infrastructure of a country that was largely desert as recently as the 1970s can only be founded on cheap migrant labour.
Therein lies the dilemma – not only for the Qatari authorities, but for the British, German and French companies that have profited handsomely from the bonanza.
Abolish the culturally embedded kafala system and with it may go the mechanism for ensuring the almost absurdly ambitious plans to build cities, metro lines, roads and airports from scratch.Ultimately, Qatar may indeed be transformed into a dizzying spectacle of modernity for all the world to admire, but to do so it will rely on the age-old practice of worker exploitation. The world -- or at the very least, Fifa -- must decide how far it will go to hold Qatar accountable for these practices.
Friday, February 21, 2014
Stalled Talks, Grand Confusion in Syria
Given that this story is a few days old, this post will be fairly brief.
The Syrian peace talks have not exactly been going splendidly. Neither side seems to be at the talks for the same reasons and the fighting continues all the while. The talks are practically an exercise in futility.
UN mediator Lakhdar Brahimi recently blamed the al-Assad regime for hampering the talks for refusing to discuss a transition of power. This should really come as no surprise. The government came to the talks indicating that it would refuse to discuss regime change. The opposition came only for that reason. It seems as if the talks were doomed from the start. Apart from discussing Syria's future, the talks have never even been on the same page.
It will be impressive if the UN, as well as the two sides who are backed by their respective world powers, can re-energize the talks to really begin to talk about facts on the ground and move toward some sort of path toward resolution and peace, however slow that may be.
The Syrian peace talks have not exactly been going splendidly. Neither side seems to be at the talks for the same reasons and the fighting continues all the while. The talks are practically an exercise in futility.
UN mediator Lakhdar Brahimi recently blamed the al-Assad regime for hampering the talks for refusing to discuss a transition of power. This should really come as no surprise. The government came to the talks indicating that it would refuse to discuss regime change. The opposition came only for that reason. It seems as if the talks were doomed from the start. Apart from discussing Syria's future, the talks have never even been on the same page.
It will be impressive if the UN, as well as the two sides who are backed by their respective world powers, can re-energize the talks to really begin to talk about facts on the ground and move toward some sort of path toward resolution and peace, however slow that may be.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
A Fundamentalist Divide: Al Qaeda Separates Itself from ISIL
It seems you can be "too much," even for al Qaeda. On Monday, the terrorist group formally cut off its relationship with the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS). This declaration follows al Qaeda's demand that ISIL remain separate from the al Nusra Front, al Qaeda's branch in Syria, which ISIL has attempted to consolidate into itself over the past year. In fact, it is apparent that ISIL and al Qaeda have been at odds for several years, dating to the mid 2000s. While it is unlikely that the two groups will become equal rivals, it is, at the same time, clear that they may view themselves that way in the near future. In the ongoing infighting of Syria's opposition forces, al Qaeda has propped up its links to the al Nusra Front and ISIL signed a truce with Suqour al Sham. Consolidation in the region could mean less infighting, but could also lead to a severely split opposition, making it more difficult for outside powers to support either side.
(Map of ISIL operations, Source: Red24)
Critically, al Qaeda's declaration may reflect which battle it now envisions as more winnable - Syria or Iraq. While it has made occasional gains in Iraq, al Qaeda forces, by and large, have been continually beaten back. Moreover, the continued presence of American troops and related support hinder operations in Iraq. Syria, meanwhile, has limited Western interference while it collapses - The Economist's "The Death of a Country" piece ran nearly a year ago - leaving a potential vacuum of power in all but al Assad's western strongholds. In the end, this could make Syria's near term future only more violent, a fact that is difficult to imagine given the United Nations' February 4 report detailing the violence there today.
Monday, February 3, 2014
Stifling Dissent and Thwarting Protests in Post-Revolution States
Protests in Ukraine
The protests in Ukraine have received extensive media coverage in recent weeks. These protests, which began as an almost spontaneous reaction to President Victor Yanukovych's decision to scuttle a trade deal with the EU at the last minute, have transformed into a massive expression of widespread discontent with the current regime. (The trade deal was more of a spark that ignited protests for myriad underlying reasons. For a more in-depth treatment of those underlying reasons, see this previous post from early December 2013).
The Yanukovych government's reactions to the protests have varied greatly; the common thread has been their lack of success. First, three days after the iconic toppling of the Lenin statue in Kiev, the government tried cracking down by forcibly removing protest barricades. When this proved unavailing, in mid-December the government suggested it would soon sign the trade deal with the EU after all. It soon went in the complete opposite direction, negotiating a shadowy deal with Russia on December 17th involving a $15 billion loan and large cuts in natural gas prices amounting to approximately a 1/3 drop in prices. Details of that deal remain unclear, but protesters were suspicious. In fact, the protests were re-energized in late December 2013.
The government's next move was to pass new laws in mid-January greatly restricting the right to protest and sending individuals who slandered government officials to one year of "corrective labor." Protesters were undeterred, clashed with riot police, and even took over some government buildings. Yanukovych then offered the prime ministership and top government posts to opposition leaders, which they rejected. This past Tuesday, the prime minster and his cabinet resigned and the government repealed the anti-protest laws it had passed in mid-January. The government also passed an amnesty law for the protesters which was conditioned on the fact that they stop protesting within two weeks; the protesters rejected this measure.
Protests in Egypt
In Egypt, the military government has similarly found itself the target of resilient protests. Its response has escalated and been even harsher than Ukraine's. Outlawing participation in protests generally and the Muslim Brotherhood specifically failed to end anti-government protests. The government then labeled the group a terrorist organization and made mere participation in the Brotherhood an offense punishable by five years' imprisonment. The protests, as well as arrests for them, have continued into the new year.
In 2013, the government also clamped down on freedom of the press. It shut down media it deemed to harbor pro-Brotherhood sympathies, with the notable exception of al Jazeera. The seeming exception for al Jazeera has proven illusory, as the government previously imprisoned several of the media organization's employees and just recently indicted 20 al Jazeera reporters -- eight are in custody while the rest were declared fugitives -- for creating "false" portrayals of the Brotherhood's protests.
The Bottom Line
Ukraine and Egypt are both deeply divided countries struggling to forge their respective post-revolution identities. In Ukraine, the pro-Western movement saw its 2004 Orange Revolution gains dissipate as Victor Yanukovych -- the standardbearer of pre-revolution, pro-Russian policies -- came to power. Yet Yanukovych himself took steps toward European integration, and the current crisis is a result of his backtracking on those steps. In Egypt, meanwhile, the 2011 revolution that led to Mubarak's ouster also led to the electoral victory of the Muslim Brotherhood and, after a year of rule under Mohammed Morsi, a return to military rule after a protest-inspired military coup. That military government is now struggling to clamp down the persistent protests of the ousted Brotherhood. In Ukraine, the deep split is over pro-Europe and pro-Russian sentiments (and the split is itself largely divided along geographic lines), whereas in Egypt the split is between secularism and Islamism. In both countries, however, the current crises of legitimacy stem from the governing group's inability to satisfactorily address that divide.
While the narrative of a deeply divided country is hardly unique, and indeed can be found in many countries throughout the world, what is unique to Egypt and Ukraine in current world affairs is the months-long persistence of protests aimed at bringing down a post-revolution regime. While many people imagine slow steps forward following a pro-democratic revolution, both of these countries have addressed the protests by clamping down on freedoms of protest and the press. This strategy might have prevailed in the pre-social media days or even today in a tightly-controlled country ala North Korea, but it has proven grossly ineffective in both countries. As part of their growing pains, the current regimes will have to learn that to govern means to be criticized; to govern effectively, moreover, might even mean listening to your critics.
Previous Illexum Posts
Ukraine: Overlooked, Underreported
Ukraine Protests Grow, Government Wavers, World Begins to Take Notice
Egypt Update: Muslim Brotherhood Declared Terrorist Organization
The protests in Ukraine have received extensive media coverage in recent weeks. These protests, which began as an almost spontaneous reaction to President Victor Yanukovych's decision to scuttle a trade deal with the EU at the last minute, have transformed into a massive expression of widespread discontent with the current regime. (The trade deal was more of a spark that ignited protests for myriad underlying reasons. For a more in-depth treatment of those underlying reasons, see this previous post from early December 2013).
The Yanukovych government's reactions to the protests have varied greatly; the common thread has been their lack of success. First, three days after the iconic toppling of the Lenin statue in Kiev, the government tried cracking down by forcibly removing protest barricades. When this proved unavailing, in mid-December the government suggested it would soon sign the trade deal with the EU after all. It soon went in the complete opposite direction, negotiating a shadowy deal with Russia on December 17th involving a $15 billion loan and large cuts in natural gas prices amounting to approximately a 1/3 drop in prices. Details of that deal remain unclear, but protesters were suspicious. In fact, the protests were re-energized in late December 2013.
 |
| January 25, 2014: Protesters clash with riot police in Kiev, Ukraine. (Source: Yahoo News) |
The government's next move was to pass new laws in mid-January greatly restricting the right to protest and sending individuals who slandered government officials to one year of "corrective labor." Protesters were undeterred, clashed with riot police, and even took over some government buildings. Yanukovych then offered the prime ministership and top government posts to opposition leaders, which they rejected. This past Tuesday, the prime minster and his cabinet resigned and the government repealed the anti-protest laws it had passed in mid-January. The government also passed an amnesty law for the protesters which was conditioned on the fact that they stop protesting within two weeks; the protesters rejected this measure.
Protests in Egypt
In Egypt, the military government has similarly found itself the target of resilient protests. Its response has escalated and been even harsher than Ukraine's. Outlawing participation in protests generally and the Muslim Brotherhood specifically failed to end anti-government protests. The government then labeled the group a terrorist organization and made mere participation in the Brotherhood an offense punishable by five years' imprisonment. The protests, as well as arrests for them, have continued into the new year.
 |
| January 17, 2014: Protesters clash with riot police in Cario. (Source: CNN.com) |
In 2013, the government also clamped down on freedom of the press. It shut down media it deemed to harbor pro-Brotherhood sympathies, with the notable exception of al Jazeera. The seeming exception for al Jazeera has proven illusory, as the government previously imprisoned several of the media organization's employees and just recently indicted 20 al Jazeera reporters -- eight are in custody while the rest were declared fugitives -- for creating "false" portrayals of the Brotherhood's protests.
The Bottom Line
Ukraine and Egypt are both deeply divided countries struggling to forge their respective post-revolution identities. In Ukraine, the pro-Western movement saw its 2004 Orange Revolution gains dissipate as Victor Yanukovych -- the standardbearer of pre-revolution, pro-Russian policies -- came to power. Yet Yanukovych himself took steps toward European integration, and the current crisis is a result of his backtracking on those steps. In Egypt, meanwhile, the 2011 revolution that led to Mubarak's ouster also led to the electoral victory of the Muslim Brotherhood and, after a year of rule under Mohammed Morsi, a return to military rule after a protest-inspired military coup. That military government is now struggling to clamp down the persistent protests of the ousted Brotherhood. In Ukraine, the deep split is over pro-Europe and pro-Russian sentiments (and the split is itself largely divided along geographic lines), whereas in Egypt the split is between secularism and Islamism. In both countries, however, the current crises of legitimacy stem from the governing group's inability to satisfactorily address that divide.
While the narrative of a deeply divided country is hardly unique, and indeed can be found in many countries throughout the world, what is unique to Egypt and Ukraine in current world affairs is the months-long persistence of protests aimed at bringing down a post-revolution regime. While many people imagine slow steps forward following a pro-democratic revolution, both of these countries have addressed the protests by clamping down on freedoms of protest and the press. This strategy might have prevailed in the pre-social media days or even today in a tightly-controlled country ala North Korea, but it has proven grossly ineffective in both countries. As part of their growing pains, the current regimes will have to learn that to govern means to be criticized; to govern effectively, moreover, might even mean listening to your critics.
Previous Illexum Posts
Ukraine: Overlooked, Underreported
Ukraine Protests Grow, Government Wavers, World Begins to Take Notice
Egypt Update: Muslim Brotherhood Declared Terrorist Organization
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)