A theory has been advanced for what is called “Disaster Diplomacy.” Its premise is that international disaster response can be a form of diplomacy. Its primary feature is that disaster aid can serve t

[ad_1]

A assumption has been slow for what is named “Disaster Diplomacy.” Its preface is that interpolitical disturbance retort can be a frame of tact. Its chief lineament is that disturbance aid can help to overpower political differences and originate an latitude of union betwixt countries that previously were adamantly opposed on most issues. Do you reach this is a realistic concept? Or is it idealistic wishful thinking that, at best, produces singly impermanent, fleeting benefits?

Show further

[ad_2]
Source embody