Suchergebnisse

Simple Summary: Commercial free-range production has become a significant sector of the fresh egg market due to legislation banning conventional cages and consumer preference for products perceived as welfare friendly, as access to outdoor range can lead to welfare benefits such as greater freedom of movement and enhanced behavioural opportunities. This study investigated dispersal patterns, feather condition and activity of laying hens in three distinct zones of the range area; the apron area near shed; enriched zone 10–50 m from shed; and outer range beyond 50 m, in six flocks of laying hens under commercial free-range conditions varying in size between 4000 and 24,000 hens. Each flock was visited for four days to record number of hens in each zone, their behaviour, feather condition and nearest neighbour distances (NND), as well as record temperature and relative humidity during the visit. Temperature and relative humidity varied across the study period in line with seasonal variations and influenced the use of range with fewer hens out of shed as temperature fell or relative humidity rose. On average, 12.5% of the hens were observed on the range and most of these hens were recorded in the apron zone as hen density decreased rapidly with increasing distance from the shed. Larger flocks appeared to have a lower proportion of hens on range. The hens used the range more in the early morning followed by a progressive decrease through to early afternoon. The NND was greatest in the outer range and decreased towards the shed. Feather condition was generally good and hens observed in the outer range had the best overall feather condition. Standing, pecking, walking and foraging were the most commonly recorded behaviours and of these, standing occurred most in the apron whereas walking and foraging behaviours were recorded most in the outer range. This study supported the findings of previous studies that reported few hens in the range and greater use of areas closer to the shed in free-range flocks. This study suggests that hens in the outer range engaged more in walking and foraging activities and showed signs of better welfare than those closer to the shed. Abstract: In this study, the range use and behaviour of laying hens in commercial free-range flocks was explored. Six flocks were each visited on four separate days and data collected from their outdoor area (divided into zones based on distance from shed and available resources). These were: apron (0–10 m from shed normally without cover or other enrichments); enriched belt (10–50 m from shed where resources such as manmade cover, saplings and dust baths were provided); and outer range (beyond 50 m from shed with no cover and mainly grass pasture). Data collection consisted of counting the number of hens in each zone and recording behaviour, feather condition and nearest neighbour distance (NND) of 20 birds per zone on each visit day. In addition, we used techniques derived from ecological surveys to establish four transects perpendicular to the shed, running through the apron, enriched belt and outer range. Number of hens in each 10 m × 10 m quadrat was recorded four times per day as was the temperature and relative humidity of the outer range. On average, 12.5% of hens were found outside. Of these, 5.4% were found in the apron; 4.3% in the enriched zone; and 2.8% were in the outer range. This pattern was supported by data from quadrats, where the density of hens sharply dropped with increasing distance from shed. Animals 2016, 6, x 2 of 13 Consequently, NND was greatest in the outer range, least in the apron and intermediate in the enriched belt. Hens sampled in outer range and enriched belts had better feather condition than those from the apron. Standing, ground pecking, walking and foraging were the most commonly recorded activities with standing and pecking most likely to occur in the apron, and walking and foraging more common in the outer range. Use of the outer range declined with lower temperatures and increasing relative humidity, though use of apron and enriched belt was not affected by variation in these measures. These data support previous findings that outer range areas tend to be under-utilized in commercial free-range flocks and suggest positive relationships between range use, feather condition and increased behavioural opportunities and decline in the use of range in cold and/or damp conditions.

Los autores desean agradecer a la Unidad de Protección de la Salud del Distrito Sanitario Huelva-Costa las facilidades mostradas para la realización de este trabajo. ; Objetivo. En España, el vigente Real Decreto 865/2003 establece una serie de medidas destinadas a la prevención de la legionelosis que inciden especialmente en el mantenimiento de las instalaciones de riesgo relacionadas con la proliferación y transmisión de Legionella. Este trabajo pretende revisar determinados aspectos estructurales, de mantenimiento, operacionales y documentales que, desde el punto de vista del Control Oficial, podrían ser incluidos en una futura nueva norma que pudiera ser más efectiva, si cabe, en la prevención y control de la legionelosis en las instalaciones de riesgo. Materiales y Métodos. Se ha utilizado la normativa nacional vigente en materia de la legionelosis, documentación técnica de apoyo, otras normativas de aplicación en países de la Unión Europea, así como servicios en línea de información científica (ISI Web of Knowledge) y bases de datos de bibliografía médica (MEDLINE PubMed). Resultados y Discusión. Tras más de una década en vigor, es necesario que ciertos aspectos técnicos de las instalaciones de riesgo en la transmisión de la legionelosis sean revisados y adecuados al conocimiento actual y a la experiencia adquirida. Entre ellos se encuentran la clasificación de riesgo de las instalaciones, aspectos técnicos y operacionales de los sistemas de agua fría de consumo humano y caliente sanitaria, de los equipos de enfriamiento evaporativos, de los sistemas de agua climatizada y de los procedimientos de toma de muestras. Por último, se discute sobre la inclusión de técnicas analíticas basadas en la Biología Molecular (qPCR) como método oficial en la determinación de Legionella. Conclusiones. Una posible nueva normativa sobre prevención y control de la legionelosis debe contemplar una clasificación de las instalaciones en función del riesgo, que recoja las de reciente aparición que han sido asociadas a brotes. También deberá contar con anexos sobre las medidas preventivas para cada una de ellas, que desarrollen protocolos de toma de muestras específicos y modelos para la evaluación de riesgos adecuados que tengan en cuenta establecimientos especialmente sensibles, debería estudiarse la inclusión de las técnicas analíticas moleculares como métodos oficiales o complementarios a los oficiales. Esta actualización permitirá una actuación más rápida y eficaz ante la identificación de casos y la asociación de los mismos a las instalaciones de riesgo implicadas. ; Objective. In Spain, Royal Decree 865/2003 establishes actions aimed at the prevention of legionellosis on the maintenance of systems related to the proliferation and transmission of the disease. This work aims to review certain structural, operational, of maintenance and documentary aspects which, from the point of view of Official Control, could be included in a future new legal regulation that might be more effective in preventing the emergence and proliferation of Legionella in the risk systems. Materials y Methods. To carry out this work Spanish legislation on Legionella, technical support documentation, other regulations from countries of EU and online services of scientific information (ISI Web of Knowledge) and databases of medical literature (MEDLINE PubMed) were used. Results and Discussion. After more a decade, it is necessary that certain technical aspects of risk systems in the transmission of legionellosis are reviewed and adapted to current knowledge and experience. These include the risk classification of the systems, technical and operational aspects of cold drinking and hot water systems, evaporative cooling equipment, spa pools and sampling procedures. Finally, the inclusion of molecular analytical techniques based qPCR as official methods in determining Legionella is discussed. Conclusions. A new legal regulation on the prevention and control of legionellosis should include a classification risk-based of the systems that collect emerging that have been associated with outbreaks. It must have annexes on preventive action to each of them, specific sampling procedures and models to assess appropriate risk that take into account sensitive establishments. Last it should be considered including molecular analytical techniques such as official or complementary methods. This update will allow a faster and more effective performance at identifying cases and associating them to risk systems. ; Sin financiación

A lo largo de esta investigación se analizaron comparativamente tres experiencias auto-definidas como de Educación en Derechos Humanos, a saber, una organización no gubernamental, la Escuela de Derechos Humanos de Cinep; un colegio oficial de la ciudad de Bogotá, la IED Eduardo Umaña Mendoza; y un movimiento social, el Movimiento Nacional de Víctimas de Crímenes de Estado-Capítulo Bogotá. En lo fundamental, se analizaron los procesos de constitución de cada escenario, los discursos, y las prácticas políticas y pedagógicas a la luz de un enfoque antropológico de la Educación en Derechos Humanos. Lo que he denominado el enfoque o mirada antropológica de esta noción, implica, por una parte, una aproximación etnográfica alrededor de los discursos, las prácticas y los sentidos que los protagonistas movilizan en cada escenario con respecto a lo educativo, a los Derechos Humanos y a los sentidos de la Educación en Derechos Humanos, y por otra, la distinción entre la diversidad de redes de significado que precedieron su proceso de institucionalización, a lo cual denominaré campo simbólico, y su cohesión como un campo de saber dotado de claves analíticas propias. Campo simbólico y campo de saber operan como dos momentos analíticos diferenciables. A través del primero, se hacen evidentes las representaciones políticas, sociales y culturales heredadas del "mundo bipolar" y de la guerra fría que en términos generales exponen una defensa a ultranza de los valores y principios de la democracia liberal y de la lucha anti-comunista. Por otra parte, la noción de campo de saber permite 6 esbozar las trayectorias que le han permitido a la Educación en Derechos Humanos recrear nociones como la de sujeto de derechos o pedagogías de la memoria, claves que sin lugar a dudas cohesionan un cuerpo de saber ciertamente autónomo, dotado de fronteras porosas y móviles. La distinción entre una y otra esfera de análisis permite trazar cuando menos tres rutas de emergencia e institucionalización de la Educación en Derechos Humanos que, como se expondrá en el análisis de las experiencias, no trascurren paralelamente sino en medio de superposiciones, intersticios y desplazamientos. Así, se hacen plausibles las huellas del colonialismo, permanentemente ligadas a voces disonantes que eventualmente arrojan pistas en torno a una Educación en Derechos Humanos capaz de impugnar su propia institucionalización. ; Throughout this research we are comparatively analyzed three self-defined as Human Rights Education, namely a non-governmental organization, the Human Rights School Cinep experiences; an official school of Bogota, FDI Eduardo Umaña Mendoza; 7 and a social movement, the National Movement of Victims of State Crimes-Chapter Bogota. In essence, the process of constitution of each stage, speeches and educational policies and in the light of an anthropological approach to human rights education practices were analyzed. What I have called the focus or anthropological view of this notion implies, on the one hand, an ethnographic approach around speeches, practices and senses that the players mobilized in each scenario with regard to education, Human Rights and sense of the Human Rights Education, and on the other, the distinction between network diversity meaning that preceded the process of institutionalization, which will call a symbolic field, and their cohesion as a field of knowledge endowed with own analytical keys. Symbolic field and field of knowledge operate as two distinguishable analytical moments. Through the first, the inherited political, social and cultural representations of the "bipolar world" and the Cold War that generally exhibit a stubborn defense of the values and principles of liberal democracy and struggle are evident anti- Communist. Moreover, the notion of field of knowledge enables us to outline the paths that have enabled the Human Rights Education recreate notions such as rights holders or pedagogies of memory keys that undoubtedly cohere certainly a body of knowledge autonomous, equipped with porous and shifting boundaries. The distinction between each sphere of analysis allows to draw at least three emergency routes and institutionalization of human rights education, as will be discussed in the analysis of experiences, parallel but not elapse between overlaps, gaps and displacements. So, it becomes plausible traces of colonialism, permanently linked to 8 dissonant voices that eventually shed tracks around a Human Rights Education able to challenge their own institutionalization.

In 2010, the International Neuropsychiatric Pula Symposia, from 2005 Congresses (INPS/INPC), founded in 1961 by Zagreb and Graz University Neuropsychiatry Departments, celebrated their 50th anniversary of successful development. The co-author of the paper, Boško Barac, witnessed their growth from 1966, collaborating in their organization from 1974 with the first Secretary General Gerald Grinschgl; elected for his successor after his unexpected death in 1985, he was leading the Kuratorium (Scientific Board) as Secretary General for 23 years, collaborating in this period with his Austrian partner and friend Helmut Lechner. In 2007, Barac handed over this responsible function to the co-author Vida Demarin. Starting when neuropsychiatry was a unique discipline, the INPC followed the processes of emancipation of neurology and psychiatry and their evolution to independent disciplines with new subspecialties. These respectable conferences greatly surpassed the significance of the two disciplines, neurology and psychiatry, granting collaboration of borderland medical and non-medical disciplines, connecting experts from the region, European countries and the world. Inaugurated in 'cold-war' times, in their first phase they enabled to make professional and human contacts between scientists from the two divided 'blocs' thanks to the 'non-aligned' position of the then Yugoslavia, fostering the ideas of mutual understanding and collaboration. On the other hand, the scientific development of the meetings took in the center of their study fields connecting the two disciplines, giving a quite unique quality to these meetings. For many years, the meetings cherished specific neurologic and psychiatric topics, at the same time planning increasing important topics of the 'borderland areas' in their programs. For the important achievements, they earned the title of the Pula School of Science and Humanism, promoting interdisciplinary scientific collaboration important for humanistic goals of medicine. Medicine, as science and practice, although founded on biological grounds, is primarily a human activity serving to individual man and the whole human race. Modern neurology and psychiatry are no longer restricted to diagnosing and curing brain and nerves or psychiatric disorders, and are nowadays important as a science of human mind and discipline caring about the human brain, the complex organ of each individual man, collective human consciousness and our mental life. Such atmosphere contributed to the fall of the totalitarian, narrow-minded political, ideological or nationalistic thinking, aiming to tolerance and humane democratic developments in the united Europe and the preparation for peaceful living of various nations, races, religions and viewpoints in the 21st century. ; Međunarodni neuropsihijatrijski Pulski simpoziji, od 2005. godine Kongresi (INPS/INPC), osnovani 1961. godine od strane neuropsihijatrijskih klinika u Zagrebu i Grazu, 2010. godine proslavili su svoju pedesetu godišnjicu uspješnog postojanja. Boško Barac, koautor ovoga rada, svjedočio je njihovom rastu od 1966., sudjelujući u organizaciji od 1974. s prvim glavnim tajnikom Geraldom Grinschglom te je izabran za njegovog nasljednika nakon njegove iznenadne smrti. Tijekom 23 godine je vodio Kuratorium u suradnji sa svojim austrijskim partnerom i prijateljem Helmutom Lechnerom. Godine 2007. Barac je predao svoju odgovornu funkciju koautorici Vidi Demarin. Počevši od kada je neuropsihijatrija bila jedinstvena disciplina, INPC je pratio process emancipacije neurologije i psihijatrije i njihov razvoj u neovisne discipline s novim subspecijalizacijama. Ove ugledne konferencije uvelike nadmašuju važnost samih disciplina, neurologije i psihijatrije, omogućujući suradnju graničnih medicinskih i nemedicinskih disciplina, spajajući stručnjake iz regije, Europe i svijeta. Inauguriran za vrijeme "hladnog rata", u svojoj prvoj fazi omogućavao je profesionalni i ljudski kontakt među znanstvenicima dvaju "blokova" zahvaljujući "nesvrstanom" položaju Jugoslavije, udomljujući ideje međusobnog razumijevanja i suradnje. Znanstveni razvoj ovih sastanaka je s druge strane povezivao dvije discipline dajući im jedinstvenu kvalitetu. Dugi niz godina njegovane su specifične neurološke i psihijatrijske teme, uz istodobno planiranje posvećivanja programa "graničnim područjima". Zbog svojih postignuća dobila je zasluženi naslov Pulska škola znanosti i humanizma, promovirajući interdisciplinarnu suradnju važnu za humanističke ciljeve u medicini. Medicina, kao znanost i praksa, iako temeljena na biološkoj osnovi, primarno je humana aktivnost koja služi pojedincu i cijelom ljudskom rodu. Moderna neurologija i psihijatrija više nisu ograničene na dijagnosticiranje i liječenje mozga i živaca ili psihijatrijskih poremećaja, već su danas važne kao znanosti ljudskog uma i kao discipline koje se brinu o ljudskom mozgu, složenom organu svakog pojedinca, zajedničke ljudske svijesti i našem mentalnom životu. Takva je atmosfera doprinijela padu totalitarnog, uskoumnog političkog, ideološkog ili nacionalističkog razmišljanja, u cilju tolerancije i humanog demokratskog razvoja u Europi i pripreme za miran suživot različitih nacija, rasa i religija u 21. stoljeću.

Yüksek Lisans Tezi ; "Türk Dış Politikasında 1962 Küba Krizinin Önemi Üzerine Bir İnceleme" adlı bu tezin amacı 1962 Küba Kriziyle üçüncü bir dünya savaşının başlamasına Dünyanın İki Süper gücü olan ABD ve SSCB'nin liderlerinin ağızlarından çıkacak kelimelere bağlı olması ve bu dönemde ABD ve SSCB çıkarları doğrultusunda nasıl bir siyaset izlediği ve ABD'nin çıkarları doğrultusunda müttefiki Türkiye'yi gizli pazarlık konusu yapmasının ve Türk Dış Politikasının Kriz öncesinde ve kriz döneminde nasıl etkilendiği ortaya konmasıdır. ABD ve SSCB arasında yaşanan Küba Krizinin Türk Dış Politikasına etkisi ve iki süper güç arasında gelişen olaylar sonuçlarıyla birlikte açıklamaktır. Bu konular ele alınırken oluşturulan tarih ve olay sıralaması bir bütünlük içinde yürütülerek birbirine bağlanmıştır. II. Dünya savaşının sona ermesiyle birlikte iki kutuplu dünya düzenin ortaya çıkmıştır. ABD ve SSCB'nin silahlanma yarışına başlamasıyla birlikte Soğuk Savaş döneminin başlaması ABD'nin Orta Doğuda etkinliğini arttırmak ve SSCB'yi çevrelemek politikası adı altında Truman Doktrini ve Marshall Planı adı altında Türkiye'ye yardımlar yapması ve Türkiye'nin de bu yardımlar sayesinde SSCB tehdidine karşı ABD ile yakınlaşmaya başlamıştır. Bu olaylar sonrasında ABD'nin SSCB'ye karşı Avrupa'da askeri savunma olarak 1949 yılında NATO'yu kurması ve Türkiye'nin 1952 yılında NATO'ya üye olması sonucu gerilen ortam ABD'nin Türkiye'nin de içinde bulunduğu Avrupa ülkelerine Orta Menzilli Füzeler yerleştirmesiyle tırmanışa geçmiştir. Buna karşılık olarak SSCB'nin ABD'nin komşusu olan Küba'ya yakınlaşmaya başlamış ve 1962 yılında Küba'ya Orta Menzilli Füzeler yerleştirmesiyle Dünya üçüncü bir savaşla karşı karşıya kalmıştır. ABD lideri J.F. Kennedy ve SSCB lideri Nikita Kruşçev'in aralarında yaptıkları gizli pazarlıklar sonrasında Türkiye'deki Jüpiter Füzelerine karşılık Küba'daki füzelerin takası ile kriz sona ermiştir. Ancak Türk Hükümeti krizin atlatılmasından kendilerini takas olarak kullanıldıklarını daha sonra anlamışlardır. Kriz sırasında ABD'nin kendi çıkarları doğrultusunda hareket etmesi ve kriz sonrasında Kıbrıs Sorununda da Johnson Mektubuyla ABD'nin yine Türkiye'nin çıkarlarına aykırı hareket etmesi. Türk Hükümetinin ABD ile müttefiklik konusunda düşünmesine sebep olmuştur. Bu olaylar sonrasında tezin ana konusu olan Türk Dış Politikasında Küba Krizinde ABD'nin izlemiş olduğu politikaya karşı Türkiye'nin de bundan sonraki süreçte dış politikasının nasıl etkilendiği ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır. ; abstract ; This thesis statement titled "An Examination of the Importance of 1962 Cuba Crisis in Turkish Foreign Policy" aims to present that the emergence of a third world war depends on the declarations of the leaders of world's two super powers- the USA and USSR-, the policies carried out by the USA and USSR, that the USA made his ally Turkey a secret matter of negotiation, and how Turkish Foreign Policy was affected in pre-crisis and crisis period. The effect of Cuba Crisis between the USA and USSR on Turkish Foreign Policy and the incidents emerging between two super powers are examined with their results. While examining these subjects, chronology and sequencing are conducted and interconnected in harmony. Bipolar world order emerged as a result of World War II. The armament race of the USA and USSR causedthe outbreak of Cold War; Truman Doctrine aimed to increase the effectiveness of the USA in Middle East and enclose USSR; and supporting Turkey under the name ofMarshall Plan resulted in the convergence of Turkey to the USA against USSR thread.Afterwards, founding NATO in 1949 by the USA as a military defense in Europe against USSR, Turkey's joining to NATO in 1952 created a tense environment, which increased as a result of locating Intermediate Range Missiles in European Countries including Turkey by the USA. In return, USSR began to converge with Cuba, a neighbor of the USA, and located Intermediate Range Missiles in Cuba in 1962, therefore the world was confronted with a third world war. As a result of secret negotiations between J. F. Kennedy, the leader of the USA, and Nikita Khrushchev, the leader of USSR, the crisis was ended with the interchange between Jupiter Missiles in Turkey and the missiles in Cuba. However, Turkish Government later on realized to be used as barter for weathering the storm. The fact that the USA behaved for its own benefit during the crisis and against the benefits of Turkey with Johnson's Letter in Cyprus Issue in pre-crisis period caused Turkey to reconsider its alliance with the USA. After this issues, this thesis statement aims to present, in line with its mainsubject, the effect of the policy carried out by the USA in Cuba Crisis on Turkish Foreign Policy in post-crisis period.

Рассматриваются зарождение сотрудничества немецких и советских историков, создание, деятельность и итоги работы Комиссии историков СССР и ГДР на протяжении 1949-1954 гг. Проводится анализ состояния исторической науки ГДР в послевоенные годы. Подчеркнута роль советских историков в становлении марксистской исторической науки ГДР. Отмечены основные направления в деятельности Комиссии историков СССР и ГДР. Статья написана на основании материалов Архива Российской академии наук, использовались данные фондов А.С. Ерусалимского Отделения истории РАН, Главного управления внешних связей Академии наук СССР и личных встреч с историками членами Комиссии историков СССР и ГДР -Я.С. Драбкиным и М.Н. Машкиным. ; After the German reunification in 1990 relations between Russian and German historians reached a new level and became more organized and productive. This is confirmed by the creation in 1997 of the Joint Commission to study the contemporary history of Russian-German relations whose work at the beginning of the XXI century became systemic. Because of this interest arose in the origins of cooperation between the historians of the USSR and Germany after the war, the main element of which during the Cold War was the establishment and activities of the Commission of the USSR and the GDR Historians. The purpose of this article is to analyze the formation of cooperation between the USSR and the GDR historians, to consider the direction in which the Soviet politicians, publicists and historians helped to create the historical science of the GDR under the sign of Marxism-Leninism. The chronological framework of this article covers the first period of cooperation between historians from 1949 to 1961. For a detailed analysis of the topic the author used materials from the Archive of the Russian Academy of Sciences and personal meetings with historians members of the Commission of the USSR and GDR historians. This article opens up with the examination of the situation in the postwar historiography in the GDR and the description of the activities of the SED in the field of training young Marist historians. In the second half of the 1950s the idea of rapprochement between the Soviet and East German historians was put forward. In this respect, first of all, the author pays attention to the activities of A.S. Erusalimsky who during his business trips to the GDR carefully analyzed the position of the historical science in the GDR, defined its weaknesses and later, in cooperation with the German journalist and historian L. Stern, initiated the establishment of the USSR and GDR Historians Commission. He submitted a request to the Department of Science of the CPSU Central Committee with the proposal to establish the Commission. The author argues that by 1957 in both the USSR and the GDR the essential prerequisites for bilateral cooperation between the historians had formed, the first contacts between whom contributed to the formation of the Commission. The need for its creation was explained with a number of reasons: among the scientific problems facing historians of the USSR and the GDR there were such that could be thoroughly and comprehensively investigated only by joint efforts. On February 5, 1957 "The Final Protocol on the establishment of the Commission of the USSR and GDR Historians" was signed which clearly identified the main tasks, structure, functions, and basic forms of the Commission's activity. The author draws readers' attention to the difficulties in the work of the Commission and notes that the USSR and the GDR researchers focused on the following issues: the Second World War, fascism and anti-fascism, the Great October Socialist Revolution and the November Revolution in Germany, German-Russian and Soviet-German relations. In the conclusion of the article the author notes that the main result of the post-war cooperation between Soviet and German publicists and historians was the establishment of the Marxist conception of history in the GDR historiography. During the first five years of the Commission, the Soviet and German historians gradually developed a single point of view on important historical events, on the history and the science of history in general. During its work the Commission took into account the Communist Party's ideological orientation and its interpretation of the events in Germany and in the USSR. In political terms, the creation of the Commission increased the Sovietization of historical education and research in the GDR and strengthened the ideological basis of the SED regime.

Автор исследует наследство двух великих христианских мыслителейамериканца Райнхольда Нибура и итальянца Джорджио Ла Пиры. Райнхольд Нибур был протестантским богословом и политическим советником Совета международных отношений и штаба стратегического планирования Джорджа Кеннэна. Мэр Флоренции Джорджио Ла Пира был третичным доминиканцем и преподавателем римского права; он был знаменитым итальянским государственным деятелем и одним из отцов итальянской конституции. Во время периода холодной войны оба играли существенную роль во влиянии на общественное мнение, оба, так случилось, оказались среди большинства влиятельных религиозных мыслителей XX столетия. Автор анализирует их представления о международных отношениях, особенно о западной политике по отношению к Советскому Союзу, использованию ядерного оружия, войне во Вьетнаме и коммунистической проблеме. Наследство этих двух мыслителей очень актуально для этической стороны выбора в международной политике сегодня. Поэтому имена христианских мыслителей вернулись снова на передний план. Стоит отметить, что президент Обама цитирует Нибура в качестве одного из своихлюбимых философов. В интервью «Нью-Йорк таймс» Обама посчитал необходимым подчеркнуть идею Нибура относительно того, что есть «реальное зло, усталость и боль в мире и нужно быть осторожным и скромным в вере в способность устранить эти вещи. Однако мы не должны использовать его в качестве оправдания за цинизм и бездействия». Европейские наблюдатели и ученые также признают, что Обама следует за мыслью Нибура, который демифологизировал идею Америки как земного Царства Божия. Нибур хорошо знал об ограниченности всех гуманитарных схем. ДжорджиоЛа Пира знал также, что политика должна всегда базироваться на этических принципах и отражать существующее духовное, культурное, политическое и экономическое разнообразие. Его главной целью было формирование новой иерархии ценностей. Точно так же, как Райнхольд Нибур, Джорджио Ла Пира размышлял над ключевыми событиями ХХстолетия, искал политику, основанную на предписанияххристианства. Точно также, как Райнхольд Нибур, Ла Пира заявлял о приоритете политики по отношению к экономике. Однако между этими двумя мыслителями были некоторые различия. Онтологический пессимизм Нибура был известен. Напротив, Ла Пира был оптимистом. Он искренне полагал, что его личная политика поможет человечеству способствовать появлению нового мира. ; The author examines the legacy of two great Christian thinkers, the American Reinhold Niebuhr and the Italian Giorgio La Pira. Reinhold Niebuhr was a protestant theologian and political adviser to the Council of Foreign Relations and George Kennan's Policy Planning Staff. The Mayor of Florence, Giorgio La Pira was a Dominican tertiary and professor of Roman law; he was a prominent Italian statesman and one of the fathers of the Italian Constitution. During the Cold War period both played a significant role in influencing public opinion, both proved to be among most influential religious thinkers of the 20th century. The author analyzes their views on international relations, in particularly on the western policy towards the Soviet Union, the use of nuclear weapons, the war in Vietnam and the communist issue. The legacy of the two thinkers is highly topical in front of the ethical dimension of choices in international politics today. Therefore the names of Christian thinkers are back again to the fore. It is worth noting that President Obama cites Niebuhr as one of his favorite philosophers. In an interview with «The New York Times» Obama felt it necessary to emphasize the Niebuhr's idea that there is "a real evil, fatigue and pain in the world, and one should be careful and modest in his belief of being able to eliminate these things. Nevertheless, we should not use it as an excuse for cynicism and inaction". European observers and scholars also admit that Obama is following the thought of Niebuhr, who was demythologizing the idea of America as a visible place of the Kingdom of God». Niebuhr was well aware of the limitations of all humane schemes. Giorgio La Pira was aware as well that politics should always base on ethical principles and reflect the existing spiritual, cultural, political and economic diversity. His main purpose was the formation of a new hierarchy of values. Just like Reinhold Niebuhr, Giorgio La Pira, reflecting on key events of the 20th century, looked for a policy based on the precepts of Christianity. Just like Reinhold Niebuhr, La Pira stated the primacy of politics over economics. However there were some differences between the two thinkers. Niebuhr's ontological pessimism was well known. On the contrary, La Pira was an optimist. He sincerely believed that his personal policy would help mankind to promote the cause of a new world.

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent "town hall" gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the "debt trap" it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

El fracaso de la invasión del valle de Arán en la Operación Reconquista, desarrollada en octubre de 1944 hizo necesario establecer un centro hospitalario para atender a los heridos y enfermos de la operación. En octubre de 1944 se dotó el Hospital Varsovia, en el barrio de Saint Cyprien, en Toulouse. El objetivo de este artículo es hacer una revisión crítica de la historia del centro hospitalario durante la etapa española, apoyándose en las publicaciones y fuentes primarias disponibles. La presencia de una gran cantidad de refugiados necesitados de cuidados sanitarios y el fracaso de las operaciones militares contribuyeron a la transformación en un centro de cuidados gratuitos para la población civil exiliada y en un lugar de encuentro. El centro recibió apoyos internacionales, el principal a través de Join Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, distribuidos a través de la organización humanitaria Unitarian Service Committee. El hospital se constituyó como un modelo de hospital republicano, con vistas a la implantación del mismo al retornar el régimen democrático a España. Fruto de la campaña anticomunista por el inicio de la guerra fría el centro hospitalario fue acusado de ser "refugio de agentes soviéticos". El 7 de septiembre de 1950, dentro de la Operación Bolero-Paprika fueron encarcelados en Toulouse 50 personas, entre ellas todo el equipo médico del hospital Varsovia. El proyecto se vio truncado por el viraje de la política internacional pero consiguió salvaguardarse gracias a la implicación de médicos franceses y al apoyo económico del PCF, que aseguró su continuidad como centro asistencial hasta nuestros días. ; The failed invasion of Arán Valley during Operation Reconquest developed in October 1944 made it necessary to establish a hospital to take care of the sick and injured from the operation. In October 1944, the Warsaw Hospital is opened in the Saint Cyprien neighborhood of Toulouse. The objective of this article is to do a critical revision of the history of the hospital during the Spanish stage, basing our reflexion on the available publications and primary sources. The presence of numerous refugees in need of medical care and the failure of the military operations contribute to the hospital's transformation into a center of free care for the exiled civil population and also a meeting place. The center receives international aid, principally from the Join Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee distributed through the humanitarian organization Unitarian Service Committee. The hospital is instituted with the aim of being a model republican hospital so as to be implemented with the return of a democratic regime in Spain. As a result of the anticommunist campaign at the onset of the cold war the hospital is accused of being a "refuge of soviet agents". On 7 September of 1950, during Operation Bolero-Paprika, 50 people are imprisoned in Toulouse, amoung them the medical staff at the Warsaw hospital. The project was cut short by the change in international politics but managed to be saved thanks to the involvement of French doctors and the economic support of the PCF, guaranteeing its survival as a welfare center until nowadays. ; O fracasso da invasão do vale de Aran, na Operação Reconquista, desenvolvida em outubro de 1944, fez necessário estabelecer um centro hospitalar para atender aos feridos e aos doentes da operação. Em outubro de 1944 inaugurou-se o Hospital Varsóvia, no bairro de Saint Cyprien, em Toulouse. O objetivo deste artigo é fazer uma revisão crítica da história do centro hospitalar durante a etapa espanhola, apoiando-se nas publicações e fontes primárias disponíveis. A presença duma grande quantidade de refugiados que necessitam de cuidados sanitários e o fracasso das operações militares contribuíram à transformação num centro de cuidados gratuitos para a povoação civil exilada e num lugar de encontro. O centro recebeu apoios internacionais, o principal a través do Join Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee, distribuídos a través da organização humanitária Unitarian Service Committee. O centro constituiu-se como um modelo de hospital republicano, com vistas à implantação do mesmo ao retornar a regime democrático à Espanha. Fruto da campanha anticomunista pelo começo da guerra fria, o centro hospitalar foi acusado de ser "refúgio de agentes soviéticos". O 7 de setembro de 1950, dentro da Operação Bolero-Paprika, foram presos em Toulouse 50 pessoas, entre elas toda a equipe médica do Hospital Varsóvia. O projeto viu-se decepado pela mudança da política internacional, mas conseguiu manter-se graças à implicação de médicos franceses e ao apoio do PCF, que garantiu a sobrevivência assistencial até hoje.

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments. When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions-the Commission, the Council and the Parliament-collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany. Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent 'town hall' gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers-such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schauble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together-as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future. The peace-building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era. To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the 'debt trap' it is in-and which austerity alone will only deepen-and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe. The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001-ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe. Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then-chancellor Gerhard Schroder. Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development. Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president. Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace-making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions. Adapted from the source document.

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent "town hall" gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the "debt trap" it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent "town hall" gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the "debt trap" it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent "town hall" gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the "debt trap" it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments. When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions-the Commission, the Council and the Parliament-collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany. Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent 'town hall' gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers-such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schauble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together-as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future. The peace-building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era. To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the 'debt trap' it is in-and which austerity alone will only deepen-and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe. The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001-ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe. Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then-chancellor Gerhard Schroder. Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development. Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president. Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace-making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions. Adapted from the source document.

O rio Tapajós é um dos principais rios do Estado do Pará, fazendo parte da Bacia Amazônica, a maior bacia hidrográfica do mundo, entretanto, o aumento populacional e o desenvolvimento da agropecuária na região tem gerado o aporte de contaminantes nesse importante rio da região. O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a qualidade da água do rio Tapajós quanto à presença de metais e aos parâmetros físico-químicos, tendo como base a resolução 357-05 do CONAMA. Foram selecionadas sete estações de amostragem ao longo do rio, na camada superficial, intermediária e fundo no período de maior precipitação pluviométrica. Os elementos Ca, Mg, Al, Fe, Ba, Mn, Sr, Ti, Ag, Be, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Mo, Ni, Pb e Zn foram determinados usando a espectrometria de emissão atômica com plasma indutivamente acoplado (ICP-AES), o As foi determinado por ICP-AES com geração de hidretos, Hg foi determinado por absorção atômica com vapor frio e os parâmetros físico-químicos foram avaliados usando diversas técnicas. Em quase todos os pontos os elementos Al e Fe se apresentaram em não conformidade com os valores permitidos pela legislação brasileira, com valores médios de 280,01±294,69 µg/L e 564,89±326,5 µg/L, respectivamente. Foram observadas excelentes correlações entre Ca e Mg, Ca e Sr, Mg e Sr, Mn e Ba, Sr e OD e Mg e OD. O rio Tapajós apresentou níveis elevados de Al e Fe que comprometem a qualidade deste importante rio da Amazônia e podem causar problemas para a saúde da população. ; The Tapajós river is the main rivers of the Pará State and part of the Amazon basin is the largest world river basin, however, the population growth and development of agriculture in the region has generated the input of contaminants in this important river. The objective of this study was to evaluate the water quality of the Tapajós river in the presence of metals and physico-chemical parameters based on the CONAMA 357-05 resolution. Seven sampling stations were selected along the river in the surface, intermediate and bottom layers in low rainfall periods. The elements Ca, Mg, Al, Fe, Ba, Mn, Sr, Ti, Ag, Be, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Mo, Ni, Pb and Zn were determined using the inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), As was determined by ICP-AES with hydride generation, Hg was determined by cold vapor atomic absorption and the physico-chemical parameters were evaluated using various techniques. In almost all respects the elements Al and Fe are not presented in accordance with the values allowed by Brazilian legislation, with average values of 280.01 ± 294.69 ?g/L and 564.89 ± 326.5 ?g/L, respectively. There were excellent correlations between Ca and Mg, Ca and Sr, Mg and Sr, Mn and Ba, Sr and OD, Mg and OD. The Tapajós River showed high levels of Al and Fe that compromises the quality of this important river of the Amazon and can cause problems for the health of the population. ; O rio Tapajós é um dos principais rios do Estado do Pará, fazendo parte da Bacia Amazônica, a maior bacia hidrográfica do mundo, entretanto, o aumento populacional e o desenvolvimento da agropecuária na região tem gerado o aporte de contaminantes nesse importante rio da região. O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a qualidade da água do rio Tapajós quanto à presença de metais e aos parâmetros físico-químicos, tendo como base a resolução 357-05 do CONAMA. Foram selecionadas sete estações de amostragem ao longo do rio, na camada superficial, intermediária e fundo no período de maior precipitação pluviométrica. Os elementos Ca, Mg, Al, Fe, Ba, Mn, Sr, Ti, Ag, Be, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Mo, Ni, Pb e Zn foram determinados usando a espectrometria de emissão atômica com plasma indutivamente acoplado (ICP-AES), o As foi determinado por ICP-AES com geração de hidretos, Hg foi determinado por absorção atômica com vapor frio e os parâmetros físico-químicos foram avaliados usando diversas técnicas. Em quase todos os pontos os elementos Al e Fe se apresentaram em não conformidade com os valores permitidos pela legislação brasileira, com valores médios de 280,01±294,69 µg/L e 564,89±326,5 µg/L, respectivamente. Foram observadas excelentes correlações entre Ca e Mg, Ca e Sr, Mg e Sr, Mn e Ba, Sr e OD e Mg e OD. O rio Tapajós apresentou níveis elevados de Al e Fe que comprometem a qualidade deste importante rio da Amazônia e podem causar problemas para a saúde da população.