Connect with us

Middle East

Libya and the essence of the agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC countries

Giancarlo Elia Valori



[yt_dropcap type=”square” font=”” size=”14″ color=”#000″ background=”#fff” ] L [/yt_dropcap]ibya is planning to double its crude oil production next year. Although it has been an OPEC member since 1962, as well as the African country with the largest (and best quality) oil reserves, for obvious geopolitical reasons it has not been involved in the recent agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC countries, which favours the Russian Federation, reconnects Russia to Saudi Arabia, thus avoiding too close a link between Russia and Iran, and make Russia play a primary broker’s role in the Middle East.

Also Iran has no intention to sabotage this agreement on oil prices, which will certainly favour also the Shiite republic.

Conversely Nigeria and Libya itself have increased their production, while the whole non-OPEC area, Russia, Brazil, Canada, Norway and Kazakhstan have increased stocks, especially because a decrease in oil and gas demand is expected, starting from China.

According to the statements made by the President of the National Oil Corporation (NOC), Mustafa Sanalla, currently Libya extracts 708,000 barrels/day, but production is expected to soon reach 900,000 and level off at around 1 million barrels per day in late 2017.

It is worth recalling that, pending the crazy and senseless Libyan civil war, production had fallen to 200,000 barrels per day.

Later it was NOC itself to deal with the various armed groups deployed to patrol the pipelines in exchange for considerable money payments and resorting to the effective support of General Khalifa Haftar’s forces.

In fact, Libya’s new presence on the global oil market was made possible by an agreement reached last September between NOC and General Khalifa Haftar, who holds power over most Libyan ports and, above all, on Ras Lanuf and Es Sider.

As already said, Libya was not involved in the agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC countries, along with Nigeria and Iran which, however – as stated by the Oil Minister, Zangrneh – supports the process of controlled reduction of the Vienna-based cartel’s oil production and of the even larger oil production of the non-OPEC area.

For the time being, the agreement is operating particularly between Russia, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Venezuela.

Moreover, for the first time since 2012, few days ago Iran resumed its oil exports to Europe.

If the agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC countries works, Iran will have every interest in becoming an integral part of it.

If Saudi Arabia – albeit unwillingly – withdraws 4.5% of its daily oil production from the market, equivalent to 500,000 barrels a day, all the non-OPEC area will cooperate and contribute to this bullish operation for a total of 600,000 barrels a day, while the Russian Federation is ready to cut its daily production by 300,000 barrels.

Hence, with specific reference to Libya, a quick economic revival is expected – driven, as usual, by oil and gas – which will certainly not bring back the country to the glories of Muammar El Gaddafi’s leadership, with its 1.6 million barrels a day, but will certainly allow to somehow rebuild this poor and very unfortunate country.

Hence Libya as a sort of oil “replacement economy” for the rest of OPEC, which will allow to improve its economy but could even weaken – and virtually stultify – the OPEC and non-OPEC countries’ efforts to make the oil barrel price rise again.

Nevertheless we do not believe that NOC will shoot itself in the foot. Quite the reverse. We are certain that Libya will follow the rise on the markets with careful daily adjustments of its oil production.

Furthermore, in the second half of 2017, nothing prevents OPEC from adapting to another further decrease in oil production. If an oil barrel price of 60 US dollars were recorded – as is likely – also Iran would have an interest in participating in the process.

So far Iraq has lobbied to avoid having to enter into the agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC countries, considering that it must back a military and social effort against terrorism and the so-called Al Baghdadi’s “Caliphate”, but it eventually agreed to a daily ceiling of 4.35 million barrels a day.

Russia pressed for the agreement also with Iraq and, despite extraction restrictions, probably the increase above 60 dollars a barrel will allow high liquidity.

According to the independent analysts of this particular market, currently compliance with the agreement accounts for 90% approximately. This will enable Saudi Arabia, which has agreed to make the largest cuts, to stabilize the Middle East region. It will also enable Russia to become the great player and mediator in the Middle East and even the United States to make the oil shale extraction very profitable.

According to the most reliable economic intelligence analyses, however, the break-even point of the US shale oil is well under 30 US dollars per barrel – and this is the real Saudi Arabia’s problem.

Saudi Arabia did everything – even cutting the oil barrel price down, as until recently – to eliminate the North American competition since the very beginning, although the shale oil production cost in the United States varies greatly from one region to the other.

Saudi Arabia dreams of reducing the number of companies operating in the US shale oil sector to fewer than ten, so as to later try to achieve a vertical consolidation of that market with some large international players.

On the other hand, the Saudi oil production cost is very low and the country can afford a trade war with the US shale oil as long as it wants.

With specific reference to natural gas, which has a structurally different market compared to the oil one, a trade war is foreseen in the near future between some US operators and the EU traditional Russian gas suppliers, while Gazprom will take remedial measures by flooding European countries with low-cost natural gas.

Hence another trade war looming over the energy systems, not to mention the fact that if very low oil prices had continued to dominate the markets for another two years, Saudi Arabia would have gone into default in mid-2018 – and the 30 US dollars a barrel prolong Saudi Arabia’s life by approximately six months.

The other “poor” OPEC countries are in the same situation as the rich Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia, however, has favoured the too low oil prices with a view to destroying the US and, above all, the Russian production.

Now, with the new agreement, the OPEC area becomes a point of reference for Russian geopolitics, and even Libya will increasingly operate in close connection with Russia, considering that it was exactly the Russian pressure that led to the “finalization” of the Algiers agreement and, later, to the Doha agreement.

Nevertheless Saudi Arabia, which has monetary reserves to the tune of 655 billion US dollars, cannot accept – for a long period of time – even a barrel price above 60 US dollars, unless it cuts its public spending and starts its external indebtedness.

Furthermore also Russia has the problem of the impoverishment of its oil fields in Western Siberia. Hence the production reduction, which for Moscow is not high, is a blessing for prices and for extending the lifecycle of oil wells – not to mention the fact that the sanctions, imposed as a result of the Ukrainian issue, blocked the arrival of modern extraction technologies in Russia, with the related increase in production costs.

Therefore if – thanks to this agreement with OPEC – Vladimir Putin succeeds in reaching the level of 100 US dollars per barrel within a time frame acceptable to international investors, the new “big game” in Central Asia and the Greater Middle East will begin.

Saudi Arabia began to extract large and unexpected oil quantities in the mid-1980s, on the basis of a political and financial agreement with the United States, which further destroyed the Soviet economy – but now the mechanism is working exactly in the opposite way.

Currently the Russian oil barrel production cost is equal to 5.4 US dollars. Saudi Arabia’s cost is only 3 US dollars, while obviously the next start of offshore extraction activities will only increase production costs.

In Libya, the production cost – net of the country’s political disaster – is similar to the Saudi one, but data shows that, without an increase – as expected – in production and prices, the Libyan State, or what remains of it, would have no more funds by the end of this year.

To some extents this is also the Russian problem.

Russia’s federal deficit amounts to 1.5 trillion rubles (23.2 billion US dollars) and, according to the relevant Ministers, the Russian Reserve Fund could dry up just at the end of 2017.

Hence, without the oil price recovery, the whole Russian strategic architecture would go to ruin, thus causing an even more severe geopolitical disaster than the one which led to the USSR collapse – as Putin put it.

However, as we have seen, if the agreement between OPEC and non-OPEC countries works – and is even strengthened during the year – the stabilization (and diversification) of the Russian economy and, consequently, the stabilization of the entire Middle East crisis arc, will be a reality.

Advisory Board Co-chair Honoris Causa Professor Giancarlo Elia Valori is an eminent Italian economist and businessman. He holds prestigious academic distinctions and national orders. Mr Valori has lectured on international affairs and economics at the world’s leading universities such as Peking University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Yeshiva University in New York. He currently chairs "La Centrale Finanziaria Generale Spa", he is also the honorary president of Huawei Italy, economic adviser to the Chinese giant HNA Group and member of the Ayan-Holding Board. In 1992 he was appointed Officier de la Légion d'Honneur de la République Francaise, with this motivation: "A man who can see across borders to understand the world” and in 2002 he received the title of "Honorable" of the Académie des Sciences de l'Institut de France

Continue Reading

Middle East

The role of spin doctors in the Eastern Ghouta crisis



When it comes to war, it is exceedingly important to get all the facts straight: always remember there are—at least—two sides to every story and be careful to distinguish reality from propaganda.

Many words have been spoken about the ongoing crisis in Eastern Ghouta: the Damascus district, in fact, is paying the price of the umpteenth conflict between pro-Syrian government forces and rebels.

The protests against President Bashar al-Assad have been going on in the area since 2011 and the next year the rebel fighters managed to establish their control over the territory.

The initial tensions rapidly developed into a full-blown war that did not spared civilians—including a large percentage of children—from being a target.

In the last few weeks, a global campaign of solidarity—#IAmStillAlive—has been launched on social media platforms to support the children trapped in the rebel-held enclave, where there is almost no food left, nor medical supplies and humanitarian access has been completely cut off.

In this regard, it is necessary to remember that international aid convoys have been regularly delivered from the United Nations, the Syrian government, the Syrian Arab Red Crescent and Russia. It became known, anyway, that the supplies do not always reach civilians falling, instead, directly in the hands of the rebels.

But who are exactly the so-called “rebels”?

Numerous groups are active inside the besieged region and, despite being in opposition to each other, they stand together against the Syrian Arab Army.

Jaysh al-Islam represents the largest factionwith an estimated 10-15,000 members. Formerly allied with Al-Nusra Front—al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria— they conducted several deadly attacks, such as the infamous “Adra massacre”.

The Syrian Military claimed that in last December 2013 over 80 people were executed in the city of Adra and, during the following days, dozens of others were kidnapped and use as human shields.

Geopolitical analyst Patrick Henningsen believes that the foreign encouragement of rebel forces was to blame for that tragedy; in an interview with RT he goes even further, claiming that “there is involvement by the Western intelligence agencies that have links to some of those radical jihadist groups.

The Hay’-at Tharir al-Sham and the Faylaq al-Rahman—which is also affiliated to the Free Syrian Armyorganizations are linked to al-Qaeda and they are responsible for a huge amount of atrocities, including the heinous attack that took place on 16 December 2016 in the Al-Midan neighborhood in Damascus, when jihadi-father Abu Nimr al-Suri sent his two daughters to die in a suicide-bombing attack against the police station.

The Ahrar al-Sham coalition is probably the biggest terrorist group in Syria and it is currently aligned with Jaysh al-Islam against al-Nusra Front.

The criminal organizations above—some more than others—aim at the extermination of Syrian religious minorities, proving themselves to be nothing but terrorist groups.

Furthermore, they are said to have received “donations” from Saudi Arabia, Qatar ,Turkey and the US, although they rejected those claims.

The Western Media seemed initially reluctant to highlight the Tafkiri-Jihadi inspired nature of the rebels, depicting them as “moderate rebels” or “freedom fighters”.

Once again, it is necessary to check the accuracy of sources of information and report on solid facts exclusively.

It can be quite tricky, since much of the country is inaccessible to journalists on the ground and news coming out is often filtered through “media activists” or unofficial outlets.

Every major newspaper and outlet gleaned the information from the often quoted Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), a UK-based monitoring group—actually a one-man band—run by Rami Abdul Rahman.

According to the New York Times “military analysts in Washington follow its body counts of Syrian and rebel soldiers to gauge the course of the war,” as well as providing mainstream media with daily updates about the Syrian crisis.

In the same article from the NYT, he admitted to receive “small subsidies from the European Union and one European country that he declines to identify.

Mr. Abdul Rahman—born Osama Suleiman—is a three-term convicted criminal in Syria, due to his years of activism against the Assad regime.

He fled to the United Kingdom eighteen years ago and the government relocated him to Coventry, in the West Midlands region; he has not returned to his home country ever since.

In the UK, he has had direct access to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London, where has been documented meeting with the former Foreign Secretary William Hague.

Both Hague and current Foreign Minister Tobias Ellwood endorse Rahman’s political position.

Among Rahman’s network of contacts there is Rafid al-Janabi, better known as “Curveball”. The Iraqi defector played a crucial role in the 2003 Iraq War, falsely accusing Saddam Hussein of having weapons of mass destruction and pushing the US and its allies into launching offensive.

In 2011 he eventually admitted that he “had the chance to fabricate something to topple the regime,” and spread the fake information that became the centerpiece of then-Secretary of State Colin Powell’s pro-intervention speech at the United Nations.

It is hard to believe that the Western press never considered to examine its main source’s political connections and background before using hisnot-necessarily-objective reports.

Funded in 2013 by  ex-military officerJames Le Mesurier, the White Helmets NGO aims to rescue civilian survivors trapped in bombed buildings and the people who   volunteer for the corps are hailed as some sort of heroes in the West.

The Netflix heart-breaking Oscar-winning documentary (“The White Helmets”, 2016) focuses indeed on the “perilous work of volunteers who brave falling bombs to rescue civilians from the carnage of Syria’s civil war.”

They present themselves as an unarmed, non-governmental and neutralorganization, yet they have had a leading role in various controversial events.

Although they claim to be apolitical, they actually actively campaign for a no-fly zone and they are largely funded by Western governments which advocate for regime change.Their principal funder is, in fact, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), along with the UK, and Europe.

They work exclusively in rebel-controlled areas, which raised doubts about the independence of their reports; in addition, some volunteers happened to be photographed while assisting in terrorist executions.

In 2016 members of the group were caught staging a rescue scene, later justified as their version of the popular ‘mannequin challenge,’ in which people were supposed to freeze for the camera. They apologized for the fact calling it an “error of judgment,” but the footage has been subject of harsh criticism on social media.

This does not mean that their effort as rescue workers is unappreciated, but it truly indicates the need to examine whatever information they provide with a critical eye.

In order to understand the reasons that could lead media to distort information, we have to introduce the concept of “spin”.

Spin is a form of propaganda used by public relations agencies—referred as “spin doctors” in this case—which provide a biased interpretation of facts and data to influence public perception on significant matters.

Cited as an invaluable source of information by Western media outlets, the Syria Campaign is a public relations and marketing company that, among other operations, branded and promoted the White Helmets to the international public.

The agency presents itself as impartial and non-political, yet they not only called for a no-fly zone, but also pushed for military intervention in several occasions.

They even attacked the UN’s work in Syria by publishing a 50-page report on a dedicated website that used a UN logo soaked in blood.

Ironically, among the supporters of their anti-UN campaign was the previously mentioned Ahrar Al-Sham.

The supposed most-reliable media outlets feed us altered and even fake news sometimes.

The majority of information we have about the Syria’s war do not come from  disinterested observers: citizen journalists and activists, in fact, are either pro-rebel or pro-regime, which is no guarantee of objectivity.

In conclusion, we have a duty to question where the news is coming from, whether it has been manipulated or whether there is an intentional attempt to shape our own opinion.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Three Years of Saudi Heinous Crimes in Yemen

Sondoss Al Asaad



Yemen a miserable isolated Arab country has been devastated by an ongoing Saudi bloody war. Since March 2015, Saudi Arabia and its gulf allies (GCC) have launched a vicious military campaign against Yemen to reinstall its former government. Recently, the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s visit to the UK has refocused attention on this silent conflict.

The collation has imposed a blockade on the port of Hodeida city, the main entry point for food and medicines and has been repeatedly accused of unlawful airstrikes on civilian targets which amount to war crimes. Obviously, the U.K., U.S. and other Western governments back, supply weapons and provides training to the GCC soldiers.

Amid the global silent and the mainstream media hypocrisy, the criminal collation systematically targets residential areas, claiming it would control arms transfer to the Houthi rebels. Saudi Arabia regards the Houthis as Iranian proxies and intervened to check their advance. These heinous massacres have prompted accusations by some Western opposition MPs and human rights groups of significant responsibility for civilian casualties. Thousands of Yemenis have been killed and the infrastructure has been thoroughly pulverized.

The GCC collation has imposed a blockade on Yemen’s air, sea and land borders in November 2017 in response to Huthis firing missiles towards Riyadh airport, closing an aid lifeline to tens of thousands of starving Yemenis. The U.K. government denies that its forces are advising the Saudis on specific targets, though they admit that, after a raid, British officers can give advice on future targeting policy.

A UN panel of experts that reviewed 10 Saudi airstrikes found Saudi denials of involvement in these specific airstrikes were implausible, and individuals responsible for planning, authorising or executing the strikes would meet the standard for the imposition of UN sanctions. The panel reported early in January, “even if the Saudi Arabia-led coalition had targeted legitimate military objectives … it is highly unlikely that the principles of international humanitarian law of proportionality and precautions in attack were respected.”

At the end of February, Russia vetoed a UK draft resolution that included a condemnation of Iran for violating the UN arms embargo in Yemen over claims that it supplied the missiles used by the Houthis that were fired towards Riyadh.The ongoing war has witnessed heinous atrocities, which emphasizes the urgent need of taking all necessary and possible steps to stop the war, bring the perpetrators to justice and ensure impunity.

Since the beginning of the military campaign, the coalition has targeted numerous facilities including schools, hospitals, airports, ports, universities, water and electric utilities, roads, bridges.  Although international conventions grant full protection for civilian installations, the Saudi warplanes have systematically targeted civil facilities using several internationally forbidden weapons, during the systemic raids over densely populated areas.

Medics have voiced alarm over the raging spread of the cholera epidemic in the impoverished country, saying that one child is infected every minute. Malnourished children, who number more than two million in Yemen, are greatly susceptible. Yemeni Health Ministry says that the Saudi aerial embargo has prevented patients from travelling abroad for treatment, and the entry of medicine into the country has been blocked. Over the following three years, the war has engulfed the entire country causing unbearable suffering for civilians. Due to the relentless bombardment, many civilians have been killed or injured, and a humanitarian crisis has spiraled, while the world ignores this raging war and hears little about its devastating consequences.

Various hospitals were shut because of the bombarding, and the insufficient medical teams. Further, vaccinations of major infectious diseases have been banned, amid the growth of the indicators of child malnutrition, and the spread of epidemics. In addition, more than 95% of doctors, nurses and consultants have been killed or fled the country. The lack of medicines has caused the deaths of many with Thalassemia and Anemia who need a monthly blood transfusion. Dialysis centres have made an SOS to save the lives of more than 6 thousand patients with Renal failure by providing them with necessary medical supplies, pointing out that the number of deaths of patients with renal failure exceeded 17 deaths in every 8 months.

The blockade imposed by the coalition has left more than 12,000 people killed, 49,000 injured and around 20 million people in need of humanitarian assistance. It has also created the world’s largest food security emergency. Human Rights Watch has accused the Saudi-led coalition of committing war crimes, saying its air raids killed 39 civilians, including 26 children, in two months. Additionally, The International Committee of the Red Cross has said that the number of suspected cholera cases in war-torn Yemen has hit one million. More than eight million Yemenis are on the verge of starvation, making Yemen the scene of, what the United Nations calls, the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.The Saudi regime has launched his war to eliminate the Houthis movement and to reinstall a Riyadh-friendly regime in Yemen.

However, the collation has failed to achieve its geopolitical and ideological objectives regardless of spending billions of dollars and enlisting the cooperation of its vassal states as well as some Western countries. The world’s largest humanitarian crisis caused by Saudi prolonged military onslaught has pushed millions of Yemenis to the brink of starvation. Unfortunately, the UN has not yet taken any effective measures to halt the humanitarian tragedy for the sake of the ultimate objective that Saudi Arabia is pursuing in the country, which is eliminating the threat of the Houthis. Obviously, the Saudis have not achieved their basic goals; hence, they are seeking revenge on the innocent Yemenis through their aimless bombardment.

Continue Reading

Middle East

West using JCPOA as lever to pressurize Iran



Recently, Reuters claimed European countries had commenced negotiations with Iran over the country’s role in the region in order to ease U.S. President Donald Trump’s concerns over the Iran nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Reuters alleges that the talks got off the ground on the fringes of the Munich security conference, with Yemen and certain regional issues taking center stage, and that the negotiations are going to continue in the future.

“European powers and Iran have started talks over Tehran’s role in the Middle East and will meet again this month in Italy as part of efforts to prove to U.S. President Donald Trump that they are meeting his concerns over the 2015 nuclear deal,” wrote Reuters.

What is worth mentioning about the Reuters’ report is that the news agency claims the talks between Iran and Europe on regional issues conducted is phased. Reuters says the first round of the negotiations were held on the sidelines of the Munich security conference with the Yemen war top of the agenda, and that the Europeans hope to discuss the role of the groups supporting Iran in Lebanon and Syria. A few points need to be taken into account in this regard.

First, regional talks with Iran has been one of the common demands of the U.S. and the European Union following the conclusion of the JCPOA. When the nuclear deal was signed in July 2015, many analysts unanimously believed that Washington and the European Troika intended to use the JCPOA as a springboard for regional talks with Tehran.

Efforts by Germany, Britain and France to hold regional talks with Iran can be analyzed accordingly. Here, France seeks to play the role of a leading player. The trip to Iran by French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian comes within the same framework. Paris has promised Washington to spare no effort to hold negotiations with Iran on the Islamic Republic’s regional policies. Accordingly, Germany and Britain have got on board with France, too.

The second point is that while the general meeting of the UN General Assembly was underway in New York last summer, key talks were held between U.S. President Donald Trump and senior European officials over Iran’s regional policies and their connection with the JCPOA. In the talks, French President Emmanuel Macron promised his U.S. counterpart to channel and manage missile and regional talks with Iran. This comes as the fundamental principles of Iran’s foreign policy will remain unchanged. The principles include Iran’s backing for resistance groups, and above all, the country’s firmly dealing with the regional threats made by the U.S. and its allies and cronies. This firm approach by Iran will shatter the U.S. and Europe’s hope for regional talks with Iran. Still, the European officials believe the commencement of regional negotiations with Iran (even if unofficial), per se, can serve as a starting point to curtail Iran’s power and influence in the region. Thirdly, the Iranian diplomacy apparatus’ insistence on the unchangeable and general strategies of the country’s foreign policy, namely support for resistance groups, promotion of the resistance discourse, and fighting Takfiri terrorism will play a key role in foiling the ploys adopted by the U.S. and the European Union for talks.

One should bear in mind that the European Troika are channeling the talks on behalf of the U.S. and in coordination with the Trump administration. What Iran will employ to counter the joint game launched by Washington, Paris, London and Berlin will be the determination to safeguard the country’s strategic and behavioral principles in the region. It goes without saying that with this firm and prudent defense, the U.S. and the European Troika will not achieve any of their objectives in restricting Iran’s maneuvering power in the region. And lastly, the U.S. and the European Union are using the JCPOA as a lever to channel regional talks with Iran and pressure Tehran into giving in to Washington’s regional demands. In other words, Instead of serving its function as an independent legal document, the JCPOA has turned into a political tool to exert pressure on Iran. Here, too, the Iranian diplomacy and foreign policy apparatus should act very prudently and consider “safeguarding Iran’s regional power” as its red line, not “safeguarding the JCPOA.” Obviously, Washington and the European Troika should get to understand the definitive principle that Iran will not compromise on its fundamental strategies in the region.

First published in our partner Tehran Times

Continue Reading


Energy6 mins ago

Sustainable energy at affordable prices precondition for prospering economies in OSCE region and beyond

Energy security, the protection of critical energy infrastructure, the development and integration of renewable energy and the best use of...

Middle East1 hour ago

The role of spin doctors in the Eastern Ghouta crisis

When it comes to war, it is exceedingly important to get all the facts straight: always remember there are—at least—two...

Newsdesk2 hours ago

UNIDO to work together with the International Solar Alliance

The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) has signed an agreement to work together with the International Solar Alliance (ISA)....

Africa3 hours ago

Displacement: The Challenges Of IDPs & Refugees

As a native from South Sudan and also from Africa, I am well-aware that the U.N. has been responsible for...

Green Planet4 hours ago

China: Navigation Improvement Project Keeps Environmental Protection in Mind

Reuse of the dredged sediments The setting sun paints the sky and sea in red and orange. Tiny pieces of...

East Asia5 hours ago

If Marco Polo were alive today, what tales would he tell about China and Tibet?

In 1298, Marco Polo told astonishing stories about a marvellous land he called Cathay, modern-day China which was ruled by...

Newsdesk6 hours ago

Business leaders and policy makers engage at the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit

Business leaders from ASEAN and Australia attended a series of engagements with policy makers at the sidelines of the ASEAN-Australia...



Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy