American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect

ISSN 2227-8540 ISSN 2312-5748 (Online)

AKADEMIA DIPLOMATIKE SHQIPTARE

Vol. IV, Numri 2 • Maj 2015

Prof. Dr. Lisen Bashkurti

Anglofobia, - Ksenofobia më ndikuese me bazë nacionale në Evropë /Faqe 6

PhD Kandidat, Alban Përmeti

Riorientimi dhe riorganizimi i Shërbimit diplomatik shqiptar pas rënies së komunizmit /Faqe 20

Vol. IV, Nr. 2 / 2015 1

AKADEMIA DIPLOMATIKE SHQIPTARE

QENDRA PËR STUDIME NDËRKOMBËTARE DHE DIPLOMATIKE ADRESA: Rr. “Rexhep Jella” Selitë e Vogël Tiranë - SHQIPËRI Cel: +355 69 512 4444 Website: www.albdiploacademy.com E-mail: [email protected]

REVISTË SHKENCORE PERIODIKE

Volumi IV, Numri 2 Tiranë, Maj 2015 © ADSH Press ISSN 2227-8540 ISSN 2312-5748 (Online)

REVISTË SHKENCORE PERIODIKE Botim i Akademisë Diplomatike Shqiptare

Drejtor

Prof. Dr. Lisen Bashkurti [email protected]

Kryeredaktor

PhD Kandidat, Alban Përmeti [email protected]

Redaktorë Shkencor

Doc. Dr. Astrit Memia [email protected]

Msc. Margarita Muho [email protected]

Këshilli Shkencor

Prof. Dr. Lisen Bashkurti Prof. Dr. Bashkim Rama Prof. Dr. Aleksandër Biberaj Prof. Dr. Joseph Mifsud Prof. Dr. Nabil Ayad Dr. Mlladen Andrlic Dr. Ilir Kulla Prof. Dr. Arben Puto Prof. Dr. Vasillaq Kureta Dr. (PhD Uni Graz) Endri Papajorgji Dr. Rovena Vata

Kopertina

Olti Përmeti

Korrektor

Majlinda Bashkurti Margarita Muho

Faqosje

Olti Përmeti

ISSN 2227-8540 ISSN 2312-5748 (Online)

Përmbajtja 1 Prof. Dr. Lisen Bashkurti Anglofobia, - Ksenofobia më ndikuese me bazë nacionale në Evropë

6

2 PhD Kandidat, Alban Përmeti Riorientimi dhe riorganizimi i Shërbimit diplomatik shqiptar pas rënies së komunizmit

20

3 PhD Kandidat, Nexhmedin Bardhi Etika dhe përgjegjësia për edukim qytetar

26

4 Msc. Naim Berisha Evropa në Prag të Luftës së Parë Botërore

40

5 Msc. Agim Kastrati Perfitimet e bizneseve nga auditimi i pasqyrave financiare

49

6 Student, Endrit Binakaj Sfidat Globale në zbatimin e marrëveshjeve ndërkombëtare për çështjet e ambientit

58

7 Student, Gurakuç Kuçi American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect

68

8 Dr. Rovena Vata & Tan Kazazi Elementët fantastik dhe gjysmë-fantastike në historitë e shkurtra të Kutelit

76

9 PhD Kandidat, Endrit Musaj Raportet e Shqipërisë dhe Bashkimit të Republikave Socialiste Sovjetike para Luftës së Dytë Botërore

82

10 Studente. Trebeshina Hëna Kontributi i Eqrem Çabejt për tekstet e vjetra shqipe

94

11 MA. Gjenis Haxhimehmeti & MA. Florentina Haliti Fondi Monetar Ndërkombëtar si instrument financiar në dorë të shteteve

103

12 PhD Kandidat, Valmir Hylenaj Aktorët me ndikim më të madh rajonal - SHBA dhe ndihma e BE-së në Ballkan

115 Vol. IV, Nr. 2 / 2015 5

American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect | Student. Gurakuç Kuçi

Student. Gurakuç Kuçi

American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect

Abstract Many times, many international relations theorists, had declared dead realistic theory, and each time they were out wrong. Even complementary theories of realism, did not weaken essence of realism. Even other fields theorists and theories, despite criticism that, they were not able to weaken realism, because realism is not only supporters within the theory itself, but there are also critics within the itself theory. It would be unfair approach of ours, if we say that realism don’t have transformation, but its transformations are just adapting to the time and circumstances, which have always been different, the twentieth and twenty-first century brought changes which were impossible sometimes followed by radical studies even by foreign policy analysts. Classical realism is the subject of our study, with case study of the US intervention with ally in Iraq. Our objective was to elaborate the events and actions of the United States from the classical realism perspective, to achieve up to a theoretical realistic conclusion that would tell us that realism is still very strong basis in international relations. The findings of our study, showed once again that realism today still continues to be used in international relations, but its approach has new elements that strengthen only by give him a habiliment sometimes even morality, tending to a demagogic realism. The intervention in Iraq and before in Afghanistan, put in sandwich Iran and created new and other political circumstances.

Key words: realism theory, Iraq intervention, moralist realism, sandwich policy, selfish interests, Middle East bloc, demagogic realism.

68 GLOBAL CHALLENGE

History of the World, known as the history of wars, from the times immemorial, we talk, write and study on the causes and consequences, interests and glory, which created wars made by different countries empire. Peace any time, it is considered as the absence of war and not the opposite. Many philosophers and theoreticians, but also own strategists and statesmen wars have dealt with the development of selfish strategies wars. And all developments are founded on realistic grounds, the Darwinian theory of “survival of the fittest”. Development history and circumstances knew no more than the realism in various forms, as a balance of power, security dilemma, the balance of threat, hegemonic stability, etc. All these at all time, was never died and nor went mode, despite the end of the Cold War, and the creation of many international laws and mechanisms for the creation of a collective security. Realism has not gone at all, almost any war in the world, whether humanitarian interventions, and for the fact that all other theories are just that creatures after realism, and realism can have the breakdown in itself, of the nature of biological and genetic human, that man by nature is being selfish, and in the case of states, as groupist nature and power-centric. Neither the intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq, has not neglected the use of realism, but we can say that it only has reformed some of its grounds, and that has created a new basis for filling realistic studies theory. Many academic and journalistic debates dealt with the issue of Iraq intervention, and all, some open and some silently, agreed that intervention was a show or recurrence of political realism in the way as classical, as well as combined with the new circumstances. Therefore, we here try to explain and analyze the events, circumstances and various analyses that have emerged from academic and political debates. Even now, 12 years after the intervention in Iraq, debates are endless and none can be recognized as definitive, nor theorists do not have any line on this topic. This paper is based on the explanation of the circumstances and events until the intervention in Iraq, from a realistic perspective, and always trying to containing only classical realism, not incorporating new interpretations e.g. it neo-realistic.

AKADEMIA DIPLOMATIKE SHQIPTARE

Introduction

Classical realism in modern times Every major global event, bringing new lessons about global international theories. While the old realists assume that only war is the condition for changing international relations, young realists reject this assumption. The event of September 11 is not different from previous incidents, and that they were forced to turn the debate about the validity of the theories of international policy (Bunyavejchewin, 2012). The end of the Cold War, from a large part, it was thought that the time spent realistic theory, and now it was no more than something outdated. But, as it was neither the end of history, it was not the end of the realistic theory. We will stop the elaboration of realism in the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, which is the best evidence of post-Cold War realism use, with all the justification and propaganda spread. Thucydides, Machiavelli and Hobbs, taken as the authors of classical realism, not that the power of force was not used even before these authors, but were these authors who threw on paper what we today call “realistic theory”. “The fittest do what they have the power to do, and the weak accept what they have to accept,” (Thucydides, 431 BCE) says Thucydides in his book, The Peloponnesian War. This estimate not avoided historical reality, nor in modern times, and has not seen any change, from ancient times to the modern for selfish interests, Morgenthau even a classic realist of our time, considers that nuclear weapons are “the only real revolution thing that has happened in the structure of international relations since the beginning of history”. (Lebow, 2007). But, how can employ in modern case, Thucydides byword: “the single power- US does what it can do, and the weak- Iraq accept what must accept”. (Özdemir, 2011)

Vol. IV, Nr. 2 / 2015 69

American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect | Student. Gurakuç Kuçi

Selfishness, heedlessness, mutual distrust, the search for power and survival strategies for securing believed that produce (and reproduce) anarchy structures among the political community, the self-help international system, security dilemma, permanent reserves for war , violence, and unlimited policies initiated by national interests. (Behr & Kirke, 2014). These terms were used to explain their realism, authors Thucydides, Machiavelli and Hobbs. But we can say that these terms are overdue, and now they are old. We would be very unfair to ourselves if such thing would believe and assert. Today we are witness at the new wars that are taking place in different regions of the globe, and today all those things, are happening to possess energy, the seizure of Arab oil, independence from Russian gas by directing compass from other countries with gas, and wars to spread the impact and influence.

Morgenthau’s principles and other meditation The world since the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, has for tutor only one superpower, which called the US, and as Kissinger also claimed in his “Diplomacy”, the US has a neo-imperialism which does not resemble with previous conquests powers, but the US has tended to by spreading its freedom values, open market, etc., put democratic governments, which will then be easier to control (Kissinger, 1994), so we can have international peace and stability only to adapting American interests. (Özdemir, 2011) Morgenthau says: “when a country is engaged in war with another country, and anticipate victory, will pursue a policy that requires fundamental changes in the relations of power with the enemy and defeat”. (Morgenthau, 1948) This thesis assures that the US intervention in Iraq, was to change the relationship of an enemy that had Iraq the relationship of the ruler rule, but it was not all, certainly the US, there was no reason intervention in Iraq only to extend its influence in a more country. Of the six principles of Morgenthau’s realism, he, in the first principle among other things, he adds that: “for realism, theory consists in establishing the facts and giving an understanding through reason. This assumes that the foreign policy characters can only be determined by examining the political action performance and the foreseeable consequences of these actions. But facts examination if it is not enough. To give a vivid sense materialized facts in foreign policy, we need to have a real policy approach, with a kind of rational framework”. (Morgenthau, 1978) US gathered evidence to the Iraq invasion gave reason. There is evidence that the sanction against Iraq are functioning, although significant, but it appears the US was not content with self-restraint, but before we give the official justification, the thought of a realist, Richard Ned Lebow, for invasion in Iraq was that: …all Bush administration sought the Saddam’s removal, and do not even make any effort to hide their target. Their conversations with other officials and the media show that they were deeply offended by the survival of Saddam’s regime and its expected strength inversion would allow Washington to recreate the map in the Middle East and increase dramatically its influence worldwide. They assumed that the Iraqis people would welcome the Americans with open arms as “liberators” that they would accept their puppet in emigration, Ahmed Chalabi, as their new ruler and with a street in the Middle East to finish some work, gained considerable influence over Saudi Arabia, Iran and the Palestinians. Moreover, they expected that a successful military campaign of high-tech, titled “shock and panic” that removed Saddam with few American victims, would frighten North Korea and encourage wider involvement of other countries alongside the United States, they are increasing their intentions to seek favours from the United States. (Lebow, 2007) While Ramadan Özdemir, adding that: “natural resources”, in Iraq, mainly oil, it will help many American policymakers in paying war in Iraq. This would be used resources after the invasion and to compensate costs of the US military, a way which

70 GLOBAL CHALLENGE

AKADEMIA DIPLOMATIKE SHQIPTARE

will relax the US economy. “National security”, “natural resources” and “the state power”, are important reasons which are highlighted by the international theory of realism. (Özdemir, 2011) While the US and UK, invasion in Iraq argued that: there is building mass destruction weapons, and Iraq was also a supporter and supplier of aid and weapons the Al-Qaeda’s terrorist group, and as such constituted a risk senior for US security and its allies. Morgenthau in his fourth principle for realism, adds that: Political realism is aware for the importance of morality in political actions. It is also aware of the inevitable tension between the moral command and expectations for the success of political action. And he is not willing to gloss and blasting that tension and thus trouble both, the moral and political issues, prompting seen through political grim facts were morally very satisfying than they are currently, and morality laws less demanding that now. (Morgenthau, 1978) The US and UK were aware for the importance of morality in their actions, but also were aware that the support of the public opinion in their countries was great, and that tensions were raised, and in all support that was acquired, certainly leaders had responsibility towards their public, but also to the success of their political actions. And of course, leaders with such support, are not willing to lose support within the country, and their reliability as a global superpower, because of morality, but also their actions should have moralistic grounds, but should nevertheless through facts grim, that in Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, there is support terrorism, must found the golden middle of action. George Kennan, a realist and architect of the Cold War, would be expressed in the time of cold war, that primary obligation of government with “social national interests that are present”, for which he thinks are “those military security, integrity of political life that would ensure prosperity for the people” interests that are neither morally bad or good. (Conces, 2009) The fifth principle, Morgenthau argues that: Political realism refuses to identify the moral aspirations with a state, especially with moral laws that govern the universe. (Morgenthau, 1978) Even the US, with realistic methods, reach to justify their actions, or as US feels too powerful to be bound by the laws and customs that govern the universe, however, does not have a case that the United States not attempted to identify moralistic aspirations, but that came later all was untrue. For this purpose, there are theories that we can describe, and not only to explain the events, which will be much easier to do. So watching the realistic differences, we cannot say that we have a clean realistic, nor radical, nor a moralist, nor classic or modern, etc., of these I would say that we have a demagogic realism. In the six principles, Morgenthau says, that realists support autonomy in the political, economic or even the law. Morgenthau adds, that leaders define realism in interest and power terms; economists define interest in wealth terms; laypeople, see realism in conformity action with legal rules; while moralists, argue or try to justify action with moral principles (Morgenthau, 1978). Former President George W. Bush, was an American politician and a businessman, and his cabinet, ranging from Vice President Dick Cheney, who was also a politician and businessman, then so was the Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz had been president of the World Bank and ambassador to Indonesia, while national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, as an educated in political science until 1982 has been a Democrat, then she passed on the Republicans because of foreign policy disagreements with the then Democratic President Jimmy Carter, but also by the influence of her father who was a Republican. Republican Party each time with regard to acts in international affairs has been faster and more aggressive in action. Pondering that we did the cabinet of former President Bush, was intended to

Vol. IV, Nr. 2 / 2015 71

American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect | Student. Gurakuç Kuçi

show that they were all Republican realist inspiration to make such actions, given the economic aspect, the latter always seek to have land, more capital and labor, and also as a politician seeking to have more power, strength and influence. And the special occasion, we have Condoleezza Rice, which its own actions in 1982, show that it is much more realistic in international political views. All cabinet mentioned, none of them had any education which will resembled from the morality, or education in law aspect, and as such will certainly less he wanted to know about morality and law. But, to return once again to the thesis that the action in Iraq, were well covered with moralism, and applied propaganda, the media was the fourth power, but that was a good tool for propaganda, and as such was used state vital organs such as the CIA, but the classic realist theologian Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971), will be the thought that “political duties require a mixture of sagacity and loyal adaptability, of general standards of judgment and adaptability in actual power”. (Conces, 2009) Apologists would justify further the actions of the US, who claim to have overcome the temptation of morality of actions, and denounced the finding notion of explanatory power, as these show not political expediency and prudence, and as such deliver toward the demise of democracy and national suicide. (Conces, 2009)

By Hobbes to Morgenthau Thomas Hobbes in his three statements on the nature of the state: 1) People are equal; 2) They interact in anarchy; 3) They are driven by competition, distrust and war (Hobbes, 1660). Hobbes claims that these take us to the war of all against all. Once people are equal in the sense that even a weak can make force as a strong, with cynical actions or alliances. But Iraq was not even equal, but neither had an ally who would support, then why would be willing to opposing a powerful US, which were even allies. But alliances are good as well as the bad, because they are so likely to provoke conflict, much as they have to prevent it. (Lebow, 2007) In our case, the alliance was not formed to create a balance of power, or to defending, it did not provoke war, but was created specifically for war. The US, as stated earlier, did not classic conquests, it claims that by utilizing the power and the lead, bringing down regimes and put democratic governance, and then there to exercise its influence. Therefore the United States, except interest also wants to exercise justice. Classical realists do not equate power with influence, because for them, influence is only a psychological relationship that transcends the interests of the moment. Justice comes into this picture because it is the foundation of relations and the sense of belonging to a community, from which in the end, depend on the influence and safety. (Lebow, 2007) Morgenthau aimed to: • To stop policy slide in irrational contempt for humanity, had been the norm; • By depriving realism, absolutism of national interest, should put principles; • To give realism a human face, had put obligations (Conces, 2009). So the assumption that Americans would be welcomed as “liberators”, of course, despite its realism, was the other side of the coin, Iraq was a dictatorship country, and the people it was oppressed and certainly needed freedom. How changed realism and why Iraq Bill Clinton, his administration enriched by many people coming from Vietnam War protests, and with this administration changed the approach being withdrawn

72 GLOBAL CHALLENGE

AKADEMIA DIPLOMATIKE SHQIPTARE

by the concept of national interest, and that the use of force would be used only in the event of any “generous” cause. (Kissinger, 2005, p. 30) And with the disappearance of the risk of general war, young politicians saw the world as an economic opportunity, or at the instruction of the rest of the world with American virtues. (Kissinger, 2005, p. 32) The warning to use force for generous issue, tendencies indicated that it would be a genuine cause. Also, liberal approach and spread American values showed a liberal democratic cause. However, if we look at these things so complementary, we can understand that the appropriation, but the deception of the world with economic development and freedom was the way the new neo-imperialism, would be covered by the use of force with very generous terms. And this happens because: the state is a unitary actor and selfish, which follows a particular strategy in relation to other states. (Morgan, 2012, p. 32) George Bush, in 2002 in the President’s speech, and the National Strategy of the United States, put out, the doctrine of preemption, or more specifically, preventive war. (Fukuyama, 2008, p. 142) Robert Kagan, said that “Americans feel that they still live in history and need to use political means and traditional strength to cope with threats such as Iraq, Al Qaeda, North Korea and other hostile forces”. (Fukuyama, 2008, p. 172) The aftermath of September 11 and the war on terrorism, did not leave many options for restriction policy or diplomacy, but the intervention in Iraq, the definition of Kagan, and attempt the expansion of American values, can be a way to show for realistic USA goals, to the point that can change the idea that the United States is only a kind of imperialist, such as European countries. Saddam’s political survival, had forced the United States to a “dual restraint” policy against Iran and Iraq. (Kissinger, 2005, p. 292) The United States does not have good relations with Iraq or Iran, as neither of these two was not good relations with each other. The possibility to influence internally in one of two states in any revolution was very small, and much less favorable for the US. Iran every day more and more, become a more serious threat to the US, and the latter having the inability of external influence or threat Iranian with aggression. Given that cannot moderating Iran without an invasion of Iraq (Kissinger, 2005, p. 294) and that now have a stronger Turkey to resist any Kurdish shock. And the United States using rational realism, intervened in Iraq to use the media and American public opinion, to make his country by introducing the sandwich Iran, on the one hand on Afghanistan and Iraq on the other hand, that would China to stop his momentum a greater influence in Europe but also the eastern countries aligning with Russia, and all this was the biggest sources of oil on hand, to be exploited as a joker when it needs to stop Russia momentum by reducing the amount of gas it. Then, the United States using rational realism, intervened in Iraq, the use of media, and the American public opinion, bringing the Iran in sandwich, on the one side with Afghanistan, and on the other side with Iraq, that will stop him China momentum, to any greater influence in Europe, but also the eastern countries aligning with Russia.

Conclusions From all that was said, the period after 11 September 2001 does not recognize pure realism, but also realism is not outdated, although as theory is the old, it does not mean that something old is outmoded. Why have an unclean realism, it is that the United States attacked with the pretext to protect, even though it was a war between non-equals. But if this attack was for the resources, the time the US had sufficient resources, then our question is, where is the limit of sufficiency, or the United States is thinking about the future, a struggle for energy, which is happening today also in other countries, and it seems these checks it has extended in Iraq and Afghanistan, is enabling the United States to reduce the price of oil, to reduce the importance of Russian gas, but the main goal is the change of power in Iran with pro-American government. However, the world once again shows that the balance of power is a cyclical story, which had at-

Vol. IV, Nr. 2 / 2015 73

American intervention in Iraq from the realistic prospect | Student. Gurakuç Kuçi

tempted to build an order, but from the insufficient effects finally delivered destabilizing effects, and so from this instability in the US, but also other force in lifting, consider themselves as proud and powerful to subject universal laws and customs. Another fact that should be noted is that the countries with the unstable internal order have external effects, but the Middle East destabilization came from abroad, after the fall of regimes sparked religious conflicts, tribal and anti-Western. US alliance only with Western countries, and without any country that would be close to Iraq, which would make this intervention the most popular, was a mistake that should not be repeated, or if there is not any potential ally, must need to find a third way for intervention because of deep cultural differences, religious, etc., did not welcome foreigners. The imposition of a regime not popular in a country, is destructive for itself successor, and the latter from the large power, demanding pride and glory can send itself to the edifice. Also, installing a non-popular regime, and especially of democracy in countries that have an unlettered population, it will send that country into chaos and anarchy, because democracy offers freedom of action, and these freedoms when given to people who do not have a level of education, they certainly maybe have the lack of ethics, to use for the good of freedom of action. Intervention in Iraq, has become even more unpopular and not welcome, the US action with very little coalition without UN support, and the entire international community, namely, actions outside the tremendous support of the community, haven’t a justice language, are not able to formulate their interests in a coherent and intelligent form. From all this, though realism is criticized is not able to give him more things explanation, it nevertheless proved far more adept at finding diagnoses, rather than analysis. The realism continues and will continue to remain for a long time as the basis of international relations, who will find ways and its development based on the context of the events, but also the legal gaps and customary international law.

74 GLOBAL CHALLENGE

1. Behr, H. & Kirke, X., 2014. Thw tale of a ‘realism’ in international relations. Available at:http://www.e-ir.info/2014/06/13/the-tale-of-a-realism-in-internationalrelations/ (18.02.2015). 2. Bunyavejchewin, P., 2012. Theories of international politics after the incident of 9/11: The Richness and weakness of realist tradition in the twentieth-first century. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/977334/Theories_of_international_politics_ after_the_incident_of_9_11_The_richness_and_weakness_of_realist_tradition_in_the_ twentieth-first_century (17.02.2015).

AKADEMIA DIPLOMATIKE SHQIPTARE

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

3. Conces, R. J., 2009. Rethinking Realism (or Whatever) and the War on Terrorism in a Place like the Balkans. Theoria, LVI(120). 4. Fukuyama, F., 2008. State Building. Tirana: AIIS. 5. Hobbes, T., 1660. The Leviathian. Available at: http://www.ttu.ee/public/m/martmurdvee/EconPsy/6/Hobbes_Thomas_1660_The_Leviathan.pdf (19.02.2015). 6. Kegley, C., 2009. Global Policy. Triana: UFO Press. 7. Kissinger, H., 1994. Diplomacy. New York: The Easton Press. 8. Kissinger, H., 2005. Does America Need a Foreign Policy?. Tirana: Plejad. 9. Lebow, R. N., 2007. In: T. Dunne, M. Kurki & S. Smith, red. Theory of International Relations. Tirana: UET Press. 10. Morgan, P., 2012. In: A. Collins, re. Contemporary Security Studies. Tirana: UET Press. 11. Morgenthau, H. J., 1948. Politics among Nations. New York: Univeristy of Chicago. 12. Morgenthau, H. J., 1978. Politics among Nations. New York: Univeristy of Chicago. 13. Özdemir, R., 2011. Invasion of Iraq: A Reflection of Realism. Turkish Journal of Politics, II(2). 14. Thucydides, 431 B.C.E. The History of the Peloponnesian War. Available at: http:// classics.mit.edu//Thucydides/pelopwar.html (17.02.2015).

Vol. IV, Nr. 2 / 2015 75

Kontribuan në këtë botim Prof. Dr. Lisen Bashkurti PhD Kandidat, Alban Përmeti PhD Kandidat, Nexhmedin Bardhi Msc. Naim Berisha Msc. Agim Kastrati

Student, Endrit Binakaj Student, Gurakuç Kuçi Dr. Rovena Vata Tan Kazazi PhD Kandidat, Endrit Musaj

Studente, Trebeshina Hëna MA. Gjenis Haxhimehmeti MA. Florentina Haliti PhD Kandidat, Valmir Hylenaj

ISSN 2227-8540

Çmimi 400 Lekë 122 GLOBAL CHALLENGE