Task Forces


Preventive Diplomacy

By Zoran Vitorovic, Prof, DR Hsc.



Prof h.c. Dr. h.c. Zoran R. Vitorovic, President, Association Swiss Morning Star

(e-mail: zoransv1@gmail.com)




In this paper the author focuses on preventive diplomacy in order to increase confidence and diffuse tensions between the parties of a conflict. Since the concept of preventive diplomacy has become binding on all members of the UN, they must build trust and partnership relations in order to reduce the prospects of violent conflict between states by applying PD. The paper also deals with why states have not yet managed to find a solution to form the Global Village, a key vision in seeking to combat conflict and crisis.


Key words: asymmetry, diplomacy, conflict, UN, concept



Introduction -magic phrase “Preventive Diplomacy (PD)”


In the multipolar world of today, which is slowly growing, one of the models for easing and

reducing the incidence of asymmetric conflicts is certainly the use of preventive diplomacy. The basic idea was promoted by the first UN General Secretary U Tanta and developed by UN General Secretary Boutros Boutros – Ghali in a UN “Report Agenda for Peace”1. The idea is that, at the very least, by recognising and paying attention to the appearance of “smoke” we may be able to prevent the outbreak of “fire and conflict”. This focus on prevention was discussed at numerous international conferences.


It was not until 1971, however, when the expert of psychodynamics of ethnic conflict, Professor Joseph Montville2, pointed out the importance and essence of preventive diplomacy (PD) as a mechanism for preventing the emergence of conflicts, that PD really became an integral part of global processes. This was the reason why I addressed this concept of Preventive Diplomacy in a book issued in 20033 under the same name.


In that book I am pointing out that this concept moves beyond the diplomacy of everyday situations which are linked by “vertical lines” inside of one society, and “horizontal lines” through the so called “bridges of interest groups” between two states, that can be in some form of conflict.


People of the same ideas connect first through informal groups, after that when the number of informal group members increases they begin to put pressure on the top of the pyramid in the society or state administration. This bonding takes place in various spheres of sports (sports diplomacy), and in literature, science, culture, politics.


The basic motives for all those involved in these informal groups are spreading the idea of communion, unity of diversity, and ultimately (at the end) the prevention of conflict. One of the ultimate consequences of the use of preventive diplomacy is the change of existing structures in power, and another is a stronger connection with the same-minded “on the other side of the state border.”


When the so-called “critical mass” is formed, it begins to act like a torrent of a river flowing in one direction. At a later stage, this torrent, by the nature of the dynamics of the groups involved in social processes, chooses the leaders. In the beginning, everything is structured in so-called informal social groups, and in the end, the political entity is born in the form of a party or movement. The most obvious example is the case of “Solidarnosc” in Poland which ultimately chose Leh Valens as leader.


However, like any idea born on healthy ground, the ways in how preventative diplomacy has been used and pursued often looks like a case of Nobel’s Dynamite. The dynamite was supposed to help people to overcome easily the natural obstacles. However, it was used more in conflicts and wars rather than more upstream for genuine peaceful preventative purposes. More clearly explained, it all looks like the story about a little Indian who came back from the forest. Dad, the tribal chief asked him, “Son, I see that you had try to send smoke signals, but I did not understand the message.” The little Indian replied “I did not send anything, my blanket was on fire”.


Today, the practice of how preventive diplomacy is used, often seems to look like story of small Indian.


It’s enough to point out the cases of “Arab Springs” that began with the goals of getting rid of power from dictatorial and authoritarian regimes, and at the end of the day all switched to chaos and destabilization of Libya, Egypt and Iraq. The same has happened in Ukraine, after “Majdan”, where a dispute started with a protest and finally ended with a civil war.


American strategists were the first who had used the program of preventive diplomacy to develop mechanisms of the so-called non-violent regime change. On other side, great superpowers like China or Russia did not sit with crossed hands and wait. They also began the develop and implement numerous models of preventive diplomacy in order to achieve their own desired geopolitical aims. The importance of preventative diplomacy concepts can be seen in the number of centres that have been established in America, China, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Morocco, and Indonesia.


So today we have:


- The Center for Preventive Diplomacy of Japan, founded in 1995, led by distinguished Japanese dipomat Jasusi Akashi. Given that the term “preventive diplomacy” was quite incomprehensible for most of NGO activists in Japan, and following the need for a wider social engagement, the founders were in February 2002. Renamed the Center’s name into the Conflict Prevention Center.




The Centre strives to work through programs which could properly address potential conflicts “at an early stage of development”. If the conflicts fail, then the activation of a whole series of actions leading to rapid conflict eruption follows. After that, the program’s accent is to eradicate all neuralgic spots whose activation and to stop the conflict with to prevent all points which could lead to wars again. In the prevention programs are included literally all - from individuals to the state and non-governmental organizations and business associations.


To make the prevention effective, it is necessary:

- first, clearly define the terms used in each phase of conflict prevention,

- secondly, to establish the theoretical framework for the determination of one particular conflict and

- thirdly, develop an early warning system for all potential problems that may escalate into an armed conflict


The Chairman of the Centre, Mr. Jasusi Akashi, says that after 1989, the largest number of conflicts in the world is based on ethnic or religious diversity and adds:


“If the international community really wants an effective way to deal with potential conflicts, then it must adopt a general principle that would correspond with the UN Charter, were is particularly important to distinguish and established : the rule of law, social justice, respect for human rights, freedom of the media and the good State Administration (good governance)”.


- Jordanian Institute for Democracy


Founded in June 2000 as a Centre for Early Warning and Conflict Prevention. In the strategic development policy, it was first started from the determination of the present current situation in this part of the world, which, according to analysts, has always had plenty of ties, misunderstandings and potential hot spots. The next step in the development of the centre is the establishment of a data bank on the economic, political and social development of the countries of the Middle East, in cooperation with representatives of the ministries of Foreign affairs ... To keep peace and stability and prevent all forms of conflict disputes, the Centre has formed the huge network of non-governmental organizations for early warning of potential conflicts.


- Swedish IDEA Institute


In Sweden, the International Institute for Democracy and Election Support IDEA works largely on analyses of current events and the prevention of potential conflicts. The IDEA’s characteristic of the work is to link the conflict-management tools with a process of the development of democracy, whereby democratic institutions are used as a basic tool for solving potential conflicts. IDEA’s orientation is to stimulate the development of dialogue by strengthening civic society organizations, tolerance of confinement, which most directly affects the prevention of all types of possible conflicts. The programs are so pious that they offer practical means for democratization of some environment, whereby resources are adapted to concrete truths. For example, in the guide “Democracy and Reconciliation”, the creators of political processes give concise instructions and advice that help them implement the democratic values in a post-conflict society.


- German’s Schleswing-Holstein Institute for PeaceResearch (SHIP)


 It was formed in the German city of Kille at the Kristian Albrecht Institute in 1995. with goals aimed at solving potential conflicts in the Baltic region of the state. In the publication “Papers from Kiel”, which is regularly issued by the SHIP Institute, problems in the domain of preventive diplomacy are dealt with in particular.


- Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)


After the Paris Summit of the Heads of State or Government, held on November 19-21. In November 1990, OBES began with the establishment of the CPC Conflict Prevention Centre. At the Paris Summit of the OSCE, new elements of international politics have been introduced, which the organization is especially mindful of: human rights, democratization of society and the rule of law. A decade later, when analysing the structure of the OSCE, we see that the basic elements of preventive diplomacy are: early warning, information gathering, monitoring the development of events - and also the basic settings in the work of the OSCE.


Today, the OSCE has a number of mechanisms and instruments that it seeks to successfully implement the core principles of the Preventive Diplomacy Program. These mechanisms or instruments are:

- Permanent Forum for Security Cooperation, meets once a month

- Personal Representative of the Chairperson of the OSCE for the Crisis regions - Georgia, Ukraine, Tadzgistan ...

-Office for the development of democratic institutions and human rights

- OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, and others.


According to OSCE experts, it is currently not only the largest regional organization that has not only focused its work on the development of sub-programs of the Preventive Diplomacy program, but also helps other regional organizations such as the OSCE Mediterranean Partnersor ASEAN to form their Regional Conflict Prevention Center.


- ASEAN’s Regional Forum


The states assembled in the ASEAN Association established the Regional Forum for Strengthening Cooperation and Conflict Prevention at a meeting held on 7th-8th. November 1996 in Paris in cooperation with the Washington Center for International Strategic Studies CSIS, the French Institute for International Relations and the OSCE. A special emphasis in the line of the ASEAN Forum is on preventive diplomacy programs. After the founding of the Forum, it began with the establishment of a “early warning networks” to the conflicts in Southeast Asia.


-America’s CSIS-Center for International Strategic Studies, Washington


Since 1994. CSIS has a special department under the name of the Program of preventive diplomacy run by Dr Joseph Montvil. The program is widespread and includes the most explosive ethnic national problems in various parts of the world. The essence of these programs is the development of ethnically religious dialogues.


- Interpaz-International Institute for Peace Studies, Brazil


 This private non-profit institute was founded in 1995 in the city of Kiritibu in Brazil with the aim of developing projects in the field of culture, education and science. The emphasis in this paper is to study the problem of establishing, maintaining and developing a global culture of peace, tolerance, cooperation and dialogue. The most important project for Iterpaz is the development of the Center for the Study of the World Peace. Within the Center, there are Peace Information Sector and the Training Department for individuals who making decisions in conflict prevention. The orientation is to promote processes for the prevention of all forms of conflict through the promotion of social activities different ethnic, cultural or religious groups.


- “Abdullah’s Initiative” - Saudi Arabia


Due to the specificity of the political system in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, initiatives in the domain of prevention of The Middle Eastern conflicts arise more as a result of the deliberate efforts of the members of the ruling Al Saud family. One of them is the Prince Abdullah al-Saud’s Initiative, aimed at strengthening dialogue between Israel and Palestine.


From the basic ideas of the preventive diplomacy during ages has been “born” ideas and concepts of  cultural diplomacy, public diplomacy4, soft diplomacy5, sports diplomacy, and more. Basically, today we are talking about “permanent transformation” of classical diplomatic theory and practice.


Global Village - yes, but how?


Accelerated development of technology and artificial intelligence, known as a fourth industrial revolution (automation, digitalization and robotics), poses numerous challenges in front of humanity. One is a clear move to an interconnected Global Village in which there will no longer be places for be isolated societies. This was discussed in 1995 when the first United Nations Conference on Human Rights6 was held at the United Nations in Vienna. At that time, the basic guiding idea was “how the Global Village should be built” in view of the galloping process of developing technologies that force us in that direction.


All subject of the international community, from the permanent members of the Security Council -China, Russia, Great Britain, France and USA - to the representatives of the countries of Latin America, Asia and the Arab world, agree that this is “the direction of the future development of the Earth’s globe.” At the UN conference, it was necessary to define the minimum human rights as the basis on which the national, regional and international legal order would be developed.


Regardless of the good will to seek a peace settlement, UN member states failed to agree on the baseline values of the future Global Village. The adopted declarations and conclusions of the UN Human Rights Conference have not only been “Lukewarm” and non-binding, but also emerged at a time at the beginning of a whole range of regional, national and intranational conflicts which took place for the next 20 years, after the end of the conference. Each side has tried to convince the other, in practice, that their concept of Global Village was the only correct one. Behind the formal proclaimed aims, very soon it was clear that the ultimate priority for states was in geostrategic and geopolitical interests.


The lines of deep divisions were not only between the states, but also within the national political business structures and establishments inside countries. In the end, in 2017, everything “exploded” when it was clear for everyone that behind the scene is a tectonic conflict between the owners of huge capital. They are split into main groups - one is a still for the option that Global Village must be built on a form of transnational, regional, social structures in which national states will “drown”. On other side are all those who still believe that regional organisations could be functional and effective only with a stronger presence, in the decision-making processes, of national states.


An additional stroke, was the knowledge that when the world was confronted with a Global

financial crisis (2009), huge state interventions resulted in many countries like Russia and China and in Western economies.


This was a shock for many Western analysts who until that moment had repeated, like a mantra, that the time “of the state’s interference with the economy is going to pass, and that it is enough to release the free market could on their own successfully regulate all financial problems and crisis.” In the end, it became clear that Global multipolar Society is slowly growing up and that liberal capitalism must be essentially reformed in a basic ground.


Talking about five priorities for the current 2017 year the founder of the World Economic

The Davos Forum, Professor Klaus Schwab7, stressed that “for the leaders of the global elite urgent priority must be of reform of existing structure of liberal market capitalism”.


Professor Schwab says “it is most important to constructively think about the future and to catch up with existing problems. Instead of hacking and expanding pessimism, it is more important to examine what specific measures should be taken to overcome the problems. One thing is clear: market capitalism has to change, to improve, but we simply do not have a better system for the development of democracy.”


“Representatives of the elite and political leaders had made a lot of mistakes because they had been concentrate on the needs in contexts of short-term (daily) solutions. Instead of that, they should be dedicated to activities that will lead to the fulfilment of long-term vision.”



Sub regional structures versus national states?


One of the asymmetric conflicts which is present around the world has been created as a reflection in the processes of Global integration - conflicts between national countries versus sub-regional structures.


For example, the idea of the great (and perhaps the last) visionaries of the common

European Union- Mitterrand and Koll- to develop the EU “first through the strengthening of the euro currency and then through the integration of common European values” is largely in crisis and retreat.


What happened? Best explained by EU Parliament President Martin Schulz (WEF Davos 2017)8 who said: “The primary goal, when building the EU and insisting on the freedom and rule of law, was to prevent the emergence of authoritarian or dictatorial regimes. Unfortunately, in some countries like Poland or Hungary, is the emergence of authoritarian regimes, and that’s contrary to the basic values on which the EU was built.”


Martin Schulz emphasizes that “the EU is not a federal state and the EU Commission is not a federal government. The EU is an alliance of sovereign states. The EU is neither pro-Germany nor pro-France! Our institutions are clearly defined by agreements that all 28 members have accepted and signed. So, decisions are made unanimously and it does not matter if a country is ‘small’ or ‘big’, economically stronger or weaker, all members are equal. The EU is a joint project of all member states.”


The “double standards” of the political representatives of EU member states are explained by Schulz with the words “And now, one minister comes to a meeting in Brussels, he actively participates in the work of the Commission or the Parliament, and then when he returns home, for domestic audience he says I have nothing to do with it. They decided there in the EU!  It’s scandalous! Here, we all participate in the decision-making process and then they ‘do not know anything.’ That’s exactly why we have lost confidence of citizens in the EU institutions!”.


In the meantime, some countries like the United Kingdom through a referendum of citizens decided to “exit from the Common Europe”. In other words, the clashes between supranational organizations (EU, Mercosur, ASEAN, etc.) and national states have been intensifying.


Let’s take as a second example China. It has, along with active participation in the organization of ASEAN countries, started with developing the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the project “Road and Ring of Silk in the 21st Century” as a model for the realization of Chinese interests from Asia to Europe.


From the above examples of double standards - political representatives of the members of the European Union and China’s geopolitics - it is evident that the policies that most countries are following are related more to national priorities instead of readiness to develop Subnational state structures.


Princeton economist Dani Rodrik27, speaking several times at the World Economic Forum in Davos, underlined that the causes of Brexit and the „intensified conflicts” between  national states and regional organizations are in a ground because of “Globalisations trilemma” According to Rodrik, democracies and national sovereigns, which are highly valued among the inhabitants of the state, are incompatible with unlimited models of globalization expanding : free trade and free capital flows. Rodrik remarks that when a state signs contracts on the free flow of capital, it ceases to have control over many elements of national economy, and consequently, there is a lack of stability, primarily financial and social28.


With Rodrichad agreed many leading Russian and Chinese economists who reiterate that many countries, such as China or India, have maintained control over the key parts of their economies, which is contrary to international free trade agreements and World Trade Organization regulations-WTO. Only when businesses and economies were sufficiently strong, these countries, but again selectively, accepted the standards of the World Trade Organization WTO.


Financial analysts say that there is no system of regulation on the Globe, the world capital market, but that in many respects North American, European and Asian are totally opposite. For example, in the European Union, offshore companies are banned while in the USA.


The “double standards” of the Politics representatives and the “trilemma” of globalization are increasingly undermining overall stability in most of the countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America, creating conditions for the exponential rise of crises and military offensives. Along with these, relations within regional organizations are becoming more and more unstable, and one consequence has been reflected as a conflict with national states (along with the Damocles still present global economic crisis, which is partly consolidated after 2008, but not solved) threaten to seriously damage the Global Peace.



Islamic (religious) radicalism as a rebellion and a renaissance of a Muslim society or a mechanism for demolition of “disobedient” regimes


One of the factors that further reinforces all aspects of asymmetric threats to peace and stability is the global strengthening of radical, Islamic fundamentalism. The reasons for this are numerous, from the socioeconomic to the average Muslim’s sense of “inferiority” in relation to the West or Asia.


The reflection of the power of Islamic radicalism has been felt by the peoples of Iraq, Libya, Syria. Instead of building up a prosperous society system after the “Arab Spring” - with more democracy, rights and freedom - civil wars have exploded. The so-called secular Islamic states are slowly becoming either a warlike conflicts places with incalculable consequences, or like Algeria, in order to calm the emotions of the population to establish more radical political structures of power.


However, this phenomenon, which many, first of all in Europe, had looked at a specific form of Autism (“it happens somewhere there”), with a growing migrant crisis began seriously to “move” on the domestic European terrain.


With the “tsunamis” of the refugees in Europe came (covert) the whole brigade of fighters of Islamic fundamentalists, whose presence began to become more and more present with  a number of terrorist strikes, known as “bites of green axes”. From Berlin, Marseilles, Paris, Brussels, London, Manchester, the brigade pointed out a problem which can never be solved by the use of classic police military models.


Terrorist attacks in Barcelona and Kanlibris9, 17. and 18 August 2017.1 and then in Finland on 19 August10 indicate a heightened intensity of terrorist actions and obviously Europe is waiting a “hot” autumn.


Every “eye closing” or minimizing real threats from new attacks by Islamic terrorist groups is a suicide with premeditation! On the other hand, in order to prevent the occurrence of mass fear and panic, it is necessary to regularly monitor the occurrence and transfer of all measures for their prevention.


In the preventive work, the role of religious thinkers and the political-cultural elite is especially important, because with the use of exclusively police-military measures terrorism cannot be defeated in the long run. It is necessary to develop awareness of the need for more general wider society prevention in which the representatives of liberal Muslims have a special role to play11.


It is very strange that all former wars (First and Second World War, ex-SFRY war, etc.), “tsunami” of migrants and increasingly frequent attacks by Islamic terrorists (from Brussels, Nice, Paris, Berlin, London, Barcelona ...) as well as the warnings of the US CIA, the Russian FSB and the Israeli Mossad, have not yet sufficiently sensitized the leadership structures of the Europe’s operative security systems. This comes primarily from political leaders and security service leaders.


The old, troubled and dysfunctional security structures are a feature of the security apparatus in Germany, since it was only after the attack in Berlin publicly known that “the German police and the relevant agencies did not have a central coordinating body to exchange information and coordinate actions. It was so that military services intelligence had knew all about potential terrorists and their intentions, and that the civilian services of the provinces do not have any information about it. “


Diligence, unwillingness and thoroughness are the only explanations why, only after the terrorist attacks in Barcelona and Berlin were carried out, a whole set of measures of physical and technical protection of the set-up zones of the downtown centres of these cities was applied, for example by imposing concrete obstacles.


Another aspect of the problem is related to information that were served to the public after something happens. The need for panic prevention is understandable, but certainly the truthfulness and timeliness of information is far more effective than selective one.


 The best example for this is the “case of Barcelona”. In the first information, the media “talked” about several dead and dozens of wounded civilians. Only three days later, official sources of the police confirmed everything that analysts had suspected at the first moment: they were coordinated attacks on four counts, two were successfully taken in Barcelona and Kanbilis, twice shaken (Valencia and suburb of Barcelona), the number of dead a total of 30 and injured over 130.


Initially, it was talked about “only two assassins” , two days later we find out that in the direct preparation and execution of the attack were involved 12 terrorists with the logistical support of at least 40 participants of the action. This means that this was a campaign in which two infantry cells were engaged (the standard categorization of the JNA, infantry cells has in the peacetime composition has 30 in the war 90 fighters), which took several months to prepare the attack. How is it possible then that the security services did not notice anything? Who denied it? Agents or informers?


If the “Spaniard case,” it is obvious that the parts of the Islamic Terrorist brigade of “sleeping” terrorists, long sought after by the European Union, are scattered - from Great Britain to Finland, Germany and Spain. While political and command structures in most of the EU countries are exhausted by political legality discussions about the legitimacy and eligibility of certain anti-terrorist measures, while the “competent” are slowly consolidating and activating, so far the Islamic Brigade is increasingly showing presence.


New characteristics of terrorist attacks across Europe are:

- a large number of engaging terrorists, direct executors and supporters,

- simultaneous actions at distant points of the European Union (from Spain to Finland),

- Increased use of van and cold weapons,

- fast transfer of direct attackers from one city to another (from Barcelona to Kanbrilis and further to Italy),

- strong and efficient logistic structure (number of flats and houses for accommodation of direct executors, a large number of so-called “stacks” for withdrawal after done actions ...)

- direct perpetrators are younger and more fanatical (from 17 to 23 years of age).


This is followed by an increasingly noticeable form of autism or a blind eye to a real state of affairs, accompanied by no or very weak realistic prevention by the security structures of most EU countries.


The exception is Switzerland, which on several occasions managed to prevent the formation of the conditions for the conduct of terrorist attacks with very successful preventive actions. One more familiar case is the closure of the Mosque in Winterthur in 2016, and the expulsion of the then radical imam.12


Parallel to this, the work of Imam was documented with video and background materials, finally with the provision of two witnesses (aged 21 and 24) who were provided with all possible security protection.


At the same time, in all cantonal police of the Confederation, there are specialized sections for inter-religious dialogue13, which employ several civilian inspectors who regularly visit mosques and religious associations and monitor the life and work of members of these communities. If one feels threatened or thinks he has noticed something “somewhat suspicious and dangerous”, he certainly does (as these two males of Muslim believers who regularly visited the preaching of the radical imam).


After all the relevant information, which as a rule are “very sensitive” are obtained, the police and the security services make everything necessary to protect the “sources” of the collected data. And this additionally reinforces the confidence of all minority communities in the entire security system and the competent Swiss Confederation’s security service.

In order to avoid the occurrence of mass fear and panic, it is always necessary and timely to inform the public14, with a precise indication of the difference between “the classic criminal act committed by an individual in the appearance of mental disorder” in relation to a terrorist attack (for example, random killing and wounding passers- downtown). It does not mean that every wound is ‘cold’ or firearm and a terrorist attack.


By highlighting the difference, when something happens, between the terrorist and the criminal delict is the most reliable method of avoiding panic and general civil uncertainty. In this part, the role of social networks and means of information is remarkable.


 In the context of public debates that have been going on across Europe in recent months, it seems that a good part of the experts has not yet truly understood that the problem of terrorism cannot be resolved by using only military police measures.


It is necessary to expand and constantly engage all social segments, with emphasis on dialogue, co-existence and daily promotion of all liberal Muslim intellectuals, thinkers and religious leaders.


Unless the whole set of measures from the domain of prevention, with the participation of all parts of society, is applied, it is easy to “slip” in the zone of unilateral labelling of all Muslims as a potential danger, which brings us to a state of general chaos and mass panic. Swiss experts recall that this process must at all costs be prevented because the goal of the attackers is precisely the polarization of society and the provocation of radical actions primarily of Christian communities. If this spiral of “reaction to actions” is initiated, it leads us towards the total chaos that will never end.


The only way out is to actively involve all politicians, intellectuals; religious leaders from the Arab Muslim world in the process of suppressing this estate that can very quickly endanger not only all European countries, but also North Africa and the Middle East.15


The only way out is to actively involve all politicians, intellectuals, religious leaders from the Arab Muslim world in the process of suppressing these radical fundamentalists. At the same time, it is essential that the international community, in the form of a new “Marshall Plan”, urgently invests huge amount of money in stabilizing economic and social problems from the Maghreb to the Persian Gulf.


This approach would annihilate the strength and flight of radical Islamists, and above all the “domestic public”. The ideal method to act in these two directions - the involvement of Islamic intellectuals and businessmen, as well as the implementation of an emergency and, to the extent of, a very large Marshal Plan, is the application of the overall mechanisms given in the PD.


The spread of conflicts, both local and regional, as a rescue for strongest economies ?


The former President of the EU Parliament, Martin Schulz, is one of few world’s leading politicians who underlies the hypocrisy of modern political thought and the ethics of those who made decisions using “double” standards, spinning and inversions. That is why many analysts wonder: “do we live in a time when the emergence of a crisis of liberal capitalism is sought in regional, local and sub regional conflicts” that most favour military-industrial lobbies and is the ultimate goal “stabilizing the economies of the world’s strongest powers using the fascist principle -Strengthening of the war Machineries, provoking wars and cheap post-war take-up of natural resources? “


According to my analysis, the greatest enemy of any modern political leader is he - himself. More precisely, a mirror in which every morning he looks at. If everyone would start to treat the world individually from that perspective, without having a double or triple morals, I am convinced that the current global asymmetric crisis would burst apart like soap foam. It is enough that people, ordinary citizens, start direct communication and start to build, right now and immediately, one better future and things will quickly “get into normality”.


Take as example a residential block in one building in Bosnia, after the war. When three tenants agreed (in 2002) to reconstruct and repair the entrance, all the floors, galleries, the parking space and the windows on the building, without waiting for the municipal authority - it was very fast, in two days all done. Three started the action during the day, the neighbours from all flats of the given entrance joined (in total, 42 people). After two days the entrance and stairs were shining – like new.


The inhabitants of the neighbouring entrance saw that “it is nice, everything is shining there”, with the comments “we are not any less incompetent than the neighbours” they self-organized and also brought everything in order for two days. After that, actions were transferred to the neighbouring buildings like viruses. Within 7 days, the whole quarter looked like it was recently built and tenants began to behave far more responsibly towards their immediate surroundings.


If this was possible to be done at the level of the whole quart, a multinational, after war in Bosnia, surely the same can be done at the level of the state of Bosnia and the whole Western Balkan as a region. The important point is a will, readiness for the concrete action of individuals, and that people are connected about common needs and interests, without waiting for the municipality, the canton, the state. This is a major example of preventive diplomacy in practice.




Observing the Global Village, it seems that the fear and general insecurity of the citizens are dominant. The increasingly reflection of the old ideological conceptions with the present deeper crisis of global liberal capitalism does not give hope that the use of “sincere” preventive diplomacy will give positive results for the Global Peace.


Maybe it is already too late for preventive diplomacy. If the day is known by the morning, the world is at the doorsteps of greater global conflicts and wars. The question is when this will start, how and in which forms?


If this is a case, then best definition of complete humanity is recorded in a single cartoon:

The cartoon shows the monkeys, in front of monkey is a Neanderthal, in front of the Neanderthal is a Modern Man. From the other direction is a man coming back from 23th century. He looks on a group and says: “Pease, let’s go all back. We ruined everything what we could!”




1.     http://www.un-documents.net/a47-277.htm, Agenda for Peace, Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping, Report of the Secretary General, UN, 17.jun 1992., A/47/277

2.     Josef Montwille , Intervju, Radio Deutsche Welle, 18.jun 1995

3.     Zoran Vitorovic.: „Preventivna Diplomatija,kako spreciti sukobe i ratove”,Ars Libry,Beograd,2003.Srbija

4.     Christopher Ross,”Public Diplomacy Comes of Age,” in The Battle for Hearts and Minds (Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and InternationalStudies, 2003), p. 252.

5.     “Soft power” concept,Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 1991. Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. NY: Basic Books, p.330

6.     http://www.un.org/en/development/devagenda/humanrights.shtml

7.     WEFDavos2017,www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/03/klaus-schwab-new-narrativeforglobalization

8.     www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/21/spain-terror-attacks-death-toll-main-suspect-hunted-across-europe

9.     http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/19/finnish-knifeman-moroccan-say-police/

10.  Anthony J. Blinken,”Winningthe War of Ideas,” inAlexanderT. J. Lennon, ed., The Battle for Hearts and Minds: Using Soft Power to Undermine Terrorist Networks (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), p. 287.

11.  https://www.srf.ch/news/regional/zuerich-schaffhausen/an-nur-moschee-in-winterthur-immer-noch-geschlossen

12. https://www.fluechtlingshilfe.ch/news/archiv/2017/zusammenarbeit-mit-der-kantonspolizei-bern-fuer-praevention.html

13. Terry Deibel and Walter Roberts, Culture and Information:TwoForeign Policy Functions (Beverly Hills: SagePublications, 1976), pp. 14-15

14. Nobel-winning economist Amartya Sen writes in “Identity and Violence,” Penguine publications, 2006.

15. „TERRORISM: TOWARDS INTERNATIONAL CRIME, OR NOT?” Maja Sahadžić International Relations Department,International University of Sarajevo, “EUROPEAN CONFERENCE IN TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY” EuroTecS-2013,p.7-17;Sakarya ÜNIVERSITESI & International University of Sarajevo, Jun 27-28,2013,Sarajevo ,Bosnia and Herzegovina

16. “Public Diplomacy:A Strategy for Reform,” Report ofan IndependentTask Force Sponsored bythe Council on ForeignRelations, New York, September 2002, (http://www.cfr.org/pubs/Task-force_final2-19.pdf).

17. Terry Deibel and Walter Roberts, Culture and Information:TwoForeign Policy Functions(Beverly Hills: SagePublications, 1976), pp. 14-15.

18. Japanski Centar za prevenciju konflikata www.jccp.gr.jp/eng

19. Jordanski Institut za Diplomatiju www.id.gov.jo

20. Svedski Institut IDEA http://idea.int

21. Centar za međunarodne strateške studije CSIS,Vašington www.csis.org

22. Centar za Globalne studije www.globalcentres.org

23. Međunarodno društvo za političku psihologiju ISPP www.ispp.org

24. Globalni trendovi vojnih konflikata, Norveški MIP, www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/kampanjer/refleks/innspill/engasjement/prio.html?id=492941

25. Međunarodna kalicija za Odgovornost za zaštitu ljudi RtoP www.responsibilitytoprotect.org

26. Slezving – Holstajn Institut za istrazivanje mira SCHIFF www.bon.iz-soz.de

27. Dani Rodrik, Das Globalisirungs-Paradox.Die Demokratie und die Zukunft der Weltwirtschaft,C.H.Beck Verlag,Berlin,2011, ISBN-13:978-3406613517

28. WEF Davos, www.weforum.org,2015.g.




1             http://www.un-documents.net/a47-277.htm,Agenda for Peace, Preventive diplomacy, peace making and peace-keeping, Report of the Secretary General, UN, 17.jun 1992., A/47/277 ), pristup interentu 23.06.2017

2             Dr Josef Montwille , Interrview, Radio Deutsche Welle, 18.jun 1995

3             Zoran Vitorovic.: „Preventivna Diplomatija, kako spreciti sukobe i ratove”,Ars Libry, Beograd, 2003., str. 23-27

4             ChristopherRoss,“Public Diplomacy Comes of Age,” in The Battle for Hearts andMinds (Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and InternationalStudies, 2003), p. 252

5          “Soft power” concept,Nye, Joseph S. Jr. 1991. Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. NY: Basic Books, p.330

8     Ibid.

27   Dani Rodrik, Das Globalisirungs-Paradox.Die Demokratie und die Zukunft der Weltwirtschaft,C.H.Beck Verlag,Berlin,2011, ISBN-13:978-3406613517.

28   WEF Davos, www.weforum.org,2015.g.

11           Anthony J. Blinken,“Winningthe War of Ideas,” in Alexander T. J. Lennon, ed., The Battle for Hearts and Minds: Using Soft Power to Undermine Terrorist Networks (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), p. 287

14          Terry Deibel and Walter Roberts, Culture and Information: Two Foreign Policy Functions(Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1976), pp. 14-15.

15          Nobel-winning economist Amartya Sen writes in "Identity and Violence," Penguine publications, 2006.