Cross-border engagement is entering a new and increasingly structured phase as international meetings, institutional outreach and partnership-building efforts gather fresh momentum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Under the direction of Prof. Dr. Bilal Semih Bozdemir, the developing initiative brings together several interconnected areas of international activity: academic cooperation, institutional diplomacy, education, research, media, culture, professional networking and strategic communication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The objective is not simply to increase the number of international contacts. The wider ambition is to transform individual conversations into durable institutional relationships capable of producing practical, measurable and mutually beneficial results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This new phase reflects an important transition. Early outreach often begins with introductions, exploratory correspondence and general discussions about possible cooperation. As engagement develops, however, the process requires greater structure, clearer priorities and more disciplined follow-up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Potential partners must be evaluated. Institutional needs must be understood. Areas of compatibility must be identified. Responsibilities must be defined. Where appropriate, meetings must lead to written proposals, implementation plans and carefully prepared cooperation frameworks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The emerging model therefore places emphasis on continuity rather than visibility alone. A successful international meeting is not regarded as an isolated event. It becomes one stage in a longer process that may include research, institutional verification, technical discussions, project design, legal review and formal implementation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The international environment is crowded with proposals, invitations and general expressions of interest. Universities, public institutions, companies, professional associations, cultural organisations and diplomatic structures receive large volumes of correspondence every day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In such an environment, sending a message is relatively easy. Establishing a credible relationship is much more difficult.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The new outreach approach recognises that genuine engagement requires more than a standard introductory letter. Institutions need to understand who is contacting them, why cooperation is being proposed, what each side can contribute and how the relationship may develop over time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This means that communication must be relevant to the institution receiving it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A university may be interested in student mobility, joint research, academic publishing or professional certification. A cultural institution may prefer exhibitions, heritage projects or public education programmes. A business organisation may focus on investment, trade, sectoral information or workforce development. A diplomatic office may be more interested in cultural relations, public diplomacy or links between institutions in different countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The outreach process must therefore be adapted to each field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Rather than relying on one general proposal for every organisation, the developing strategy encourages targeted communication. Each approach should reflect the recipient\u2019s official responsibilities, public priorities and institutional capacity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This increases the likelihood that correspondence will reach the correct person and result in a meaningful conversation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International meetings are often treated as ceremonial occasions. Photographs are taken, broad statements are made and participants express goodwill. Yet many such encounters produce no lasting activity because there is no clearly defined process after the meeting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The new chapter of cross-border engagement seeks to use meetings as working platforms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A productive meeting should clarify the interests of both sides. It should identify potential areas of cooperation, reveal possible obstacles and establish who will be responsible for the next steps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The most important outcome may not be an immediate agreement. In many cases, the real value of a first meeting is the information it produces.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Participants may discover that their original idea is not legally or academically possible in its proposed form. They may identify a more suitable programme, a different department or a smaller initial project. They may conclude that further documentation is required before a formal proposal can be considered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is not a failure. It is part of responsible institutional development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International cooperation is more sustainable when it grows through informed decisions rather than rushed announcements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For that reason, meetings are increasingly being approached with defined agendas, background research and post-meeting action points. The emphasis is on what happens before and after the conversation, not only during it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cross-border engagement is not limited to diplomatic relations between governments. It also includes cooperation between universities, research centres, professional bodies, civil-society organisations, media institutions, museums, technology providers and businesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These relationships can have a significant international impact even when they do not involve formal state-to-state agreements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A university partnership can connect students and academics in two countries. A joint publication can bring researchers from different regions into the same intellectual conversation. A museum project can strengthen cultural understanding. A professional network can transfer expertise. A media partnership can increase public awareness of a subject that receives limited international attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The developing engagement model therefore treats institutions outside traditional diplomacy as important participants in international relations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This wider approach is particularly relevant in a world where many global challenges cannot be managed by governments alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Education, public health, mental well-being, migration, environmental protection, digital transformation, cultural preservation, energy, mining and economic development all require cooperation between different types of organisations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Universities contribute research and expertise. Public institutions provide regulatory frameworks. Businesses bring technology and implementation capacity. Professional associations connect practitioners. Media organisations support public communication. Cultural institutions preserve identity and encourage dialogue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By connecting these sectors, cross-border engagement can become more practical and socially relevant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Academic diplomacy is one of the strongest components of the broader engagement strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Universities are uniquely positioned to build international relationships. They bring together students, researchers, experts and future decision-makers. Their partnerships can continue for many years and often remain active even when political circumstances change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Academic cooperation can take many forms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Institutions may organise international seminars, guest lectures, research projects, student exchanges, faculty visits or collaborative publications. They may explore articulation agreements, credit-transfer pathways, progression routes, joint programmes or dual-degree structures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, complex academic cooperation requires careful preparation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Every institution operates within a legal and regulatory framework. Programmes may be subject to national approval, accreditation requirements, quality-assurance rules and professional recognition procedures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For this reason, an international academic proposal must be evaluated not only according to its educational attractiveness but also according to its legal and institutional feasibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The new engagement phase places importance on distinguishing between early discussion and confirmed cooperation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An exploratory meeting does not automatically mean that a partnership has been completed. A memorandum does not necessarily create an operational programme. A public announcement should not be made before the parties have agreed on the essential academic, financial and administrative conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This careful approach protects institutions and students while strengthening the credibility of the final partnership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International cooperation brings together organisations with different cultures, expectations and decision-making procedures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some institutions respond quickly and operate through relatively flexible administrative systems. Others require several levels of approval. A proposal may need to be reviewed by an international office, academic faculty, legal department, finance unit, senate, governing board or external authority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These differences can create frustration when one side expects an immediate response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A lack of speed, however, does not always mean a lack of interest. It may reflect internal procedures, workload, language differences, national holidays or the need for additional authorisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At the same time, prolonged silence cannot automatically be interpreted as progress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Professional engagement therefore requires a balanced follow-up strategy. Correspondence should be respectful and persistent without becoming excessive. Deadlines should be realistic. Important discussions should be documented. Changes in contact personnel should be tracked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Trust develops when both sides communicate honestly about what they can and cannot do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Institutions should not promise programmes that they are not authorised to deliver. They should not exaggerate the stage of negotiations. They should not use the name or logo of another organisation without permission. They should not create expectations among students, investors or the public before the necessary approvals have been obtained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These principles are essential for long-term credibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The quality of international engagement often depends on the work completed before the first message is sent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Potential partners should be researched carefully. Their legal status, institutional mission, official leadership, programme portfolio and international priorities should be examined through authoritative sources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The contact person should also be relevant to the proposal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A message concerning a university partnership is more likely to receive attention when directed to an international relations office, partnership director, rectorate or appropriate academic dean. A cultural proposal may belong with a museum director, curator or ministry department. A business proposal may require a chief executive, international development unit or sector-specific manager.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Generic addresses can still be useful, especially when an institution does not publish direct contact information. But they should not be the only channel when more suitable official contacts are available.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The proposal itself should be concise enough to be read yet detailed enough to demonstrate seriousness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An effective initial communication normally explains:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Long background material can be provided separately. The initial message should create interest, not overwhelm the recipient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cross-border engagement creates opportunities, but it also introduces risks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An organisation may have an impressive website while lacking the legal authority or operational capacity it claims. An individual may present themselves as an official representative without current authorisation. A proposed partnership may involve unclear financial arrangements, disputed intellectual property or misleading statements about recognition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Institutional due diligence is therefore a fundamental part of the process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Before entering a formal relationship, the parties should verify one another through official sources. Relevant documents may include government registrations, accreditation records, institutional statutes, authorisation letters, annual reports, official directories and legally valid identification of signatories.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The level of verification should correspond to the significance of the proposed cooperation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A guest lecture may require relatively simple confirmation. A student recruitment agreement, financial partnership, joint academic programme or large cultural project requires more extensive review.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Banking details, payment responsibilities, ownership of materials, data protection, termination rights and dispute-resolution procedures should be clearly documented when relevant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Due diligence does not indicate mistrust. It is a normal element of responsible international cooperation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Indeed, reputable institutions are generally more comfortable with partnerships when both sides conduct appropriate verification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One of the central goals of the new engagement phase is to reduce the gap between discussion and implementation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International meetings can produce many attractive ideas. The challenge is deciding which of those ideas should move forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An implementable project needs a defined purpose, responsible personnel, realistic timetable, available resources and a method for evaluating success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For example, a proposed international conference should identify its subject, target participants, organising institutions, speakers, format, budget and publication plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A research partnership should define the research question, methodology, data responsibilities, ethical approvals, funding requirements and intended outputs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An academic programme should specify admission criteria, curriculum, teaching responsibilities, assessment, quality assurance, fees, student support and the institution authorised to issue the qualification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A cultural exhibition should address the selection and ownership of objects, transportation, insurance, security, interpretation, promotion and return arrangements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Without this operational detail, a promising proposal may remain permanently at the discussion stage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The emerging strategy therefore favours pilot projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A limited initial activity allows institutions to test their ability to work together. They can evaluate communication, reliability and professional compatibility before committing to a larger programme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A successful webinar may lead to a conference. A conference may produce a publication. A publication partnership may lead to joint research. A short academic course may provide the foundation for a longer institutional programme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This gradual development creates evidence of cooperation and reduces unnecessary risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cross-border strategy cannot be based on the assumption that every region operates in the same way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Europe, the Caucasus, the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and other regions have distinct institutional cultures, regulatory structures and development priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some countries place strong emphasis on formal government approval. Others allow institutions greater independence. In certain regions, personal introductions are extremely important. Elsewhere, formal electronic procurement or partnership systems may be required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The subjects that attract institutional interest also vary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A country with a rapidly growing youth population may prioritise education, skills development and digital learning. A mining economy may be interested in engineering, environmental management, worker safety and international investment. A tourism-oriented country may focus on hospitality education, cultural heritage and destination promotion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Engagement becomes more effective when these regional realities are understood.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A proposal should demonstrate awareness of the local environment rather than presenting international cooperation as a one-sided export of ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mutual benefit must be visible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The receiving institution should be able to understand what it will gain, what it will contribute and how the project responds to its priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The scale of international engagement increasingly requires digital support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Contact databases, communication-management systems, translation tools, scheduling platforms, digital meeting services and document repositories can significantly improve efficiency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Technology can help identify institutions, organise contacts, track replies and schedule follow-up correspondence. It can also reduce duplication and preserve institutional memory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, digital systems must be used carefully.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Large-scale communication should not become indiscriminate messaging. Poorly targeted outreach damages credibility and may cause legitimate proposals to be treated as spam.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Automated tools can locate publicly available information, but they cannot fully determine whether a partnership is suitable. A website may contain outdated information. A contact may have changed roles. An institution may have revised its priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Human review remains essential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The most effective model combines technology with professional judgement. Digital systems handle repetitive administrative work, while experienced decision-makers evaluate relevance, credibility and strategic value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Data protection must also be respected. Contact information should be collected and used lawfully. Individuals should not be subjected to intrusive or misleading communication. Records involving sensitive information must be protected appropriately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Language is another major factor in international engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
English is widely used as a working language, particularly in higher education and international business. Yet English-only communication may not always be sufficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A proposal translated into the recipient\u2019s language can demonstrate respect and increase comprehension. At the same time, poor translation can create confusion or legal ambiguity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Critical documents should therefore be reviewed carefully. Terminology related to accreditation, academic recognition, financial obligations, representation and legal authority must be precise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cultural communication also extends beyond language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Forms of address, meeting etiquette, negotiation style and expectations concerning hierarchy vary between countries. A highly direct approach may be appreciated in one environment but considered discourteous in another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Effective international engagement requires cultural awareness without relying on stereotypes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The best approach is to observe the institution\u2019s own communication style, use respectful formal language and clarify uncertainty when necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International activity naturally creates opportunities for public communication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
News reports, interviews, institutional announcements and social media updates can help build awareness of developing initiatives. Visibility may attract new partners and demonstrate progress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, public communication must accurately reflect the status of a relationship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There is an important difference between contacting an institution, holding an exploratory meeting, signing a non-binding memorandum and launching an operational programme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These stages should not be presented as though they are identical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Responsible public diplomacy strengthens credibility by explaining progress without exaggeration. It can describe the purpose of a meeting, the subjects discussed and the intended next steps while making clear that negotiations may still be continuing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is particularly important in education, diplomacy and investment, where premature claims can affect students, institutions and public expectations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The new phase of engagement therefore treats communication not simply as promotion but as part of institutional accountability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International initiatives often depend heavily on individual leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A determined person can open doors, identify opportunities and maintain momentum. But a project that exists only in one individual\u2019s memory or personal correspondence remains vulnerable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sustainable cross-border engagement requires institutional continuity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Documents must be organised. Contact histories must be preserved. Responsibilities should be shared where possible. Partners should know who has authority to communicate and make decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Leadership remains important, but it should gradually create systems that can continue beyond a single meeting or individual relationship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Prof. Dr. Bilal Semih Bozdemir\u2019s role in the developing initiative includes connecting different fields of activity and encouraging a coordinated approach to international communication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Academic projects, media initiatives, cultural programmes and institutional partnerships can reinforce one another when they are guided by a coherent strategy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For example, research may support a conference. The conference may lead to a publication. Media coverage may expand the project\u2019s audience. A cultural institution may provide a venue. A professional network may connect the project with practitioners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The value lies in building an ecosystem rather than a collection of unrelated contacts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International engagement should be evaluated according to substance rather than appearance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The number of messages sent, meetings held or countries contacted may provide useful operational data, but these figures do not reveal the quality of the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
More meaningful indicators include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Not every contact will result in cooperation. This is normal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some institutions will decline. Others will not respond. Certain projects will prove impractical after detailed examination. Resources should not be spent indefinitely on proposals that show no realistic path forward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A mature engagement strategy knows when to continue, when to modify the approach and when to close a file.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This selective discipline allows attention to be directed toward the most promising relationships.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The phrase \u201ca new chapter\u201d reflects more than an increase in activity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It represents a move toward consistent, documented and results-oriented international engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The coming period is expected to involve a combination of direct meetings, online consultations, formal proposals, institutional research and carefully planned follow-up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Early priorities may include academic cooperation, international education, professional networks, media partnerships, cultural initiatives and dialogue with organisations interested in long-term cross-border activity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some discussions may progress quickly. Others may require months of consultation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The most important element will be maintaining direction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
International relationships rarely develop through a single message. They require repeated professional contact, evidence of reliability and a willingness to understand the other institution\u2019s position.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Momentum must therefore be supported by patience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The long-term ambition is to create partnerships that remain active after the first announcement and continue to produce value for all participants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A durable partnership does not depend entirely on personal goodwill. It is supported by clear responsibilities, regular communication and agreed objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It also allows room for change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Institutions evolve. Leadership changes. Funding priorities shift. New regulations emerge. A successful cooperation framework must be able to respond without losing its essential purpose.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Regular review is therefore important. Partners should assess what has been achieved, which difficulties have emerged and whether the relationship should be expanded, modified or concluded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This disciplined approach transforms international outreach from a campaign into an institutional capability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Cross-border cooperation carries significance beyond the organisations directly involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It can help ideas travel between regions, create opportunities for students and researchers, strengthen professional standards and introduce institutions to communities they might otherwise never reach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It can also challenge isolation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When individuals and organisations remain connected only to familiar networks, their understanding of international developments becomes limited. Cross-border engagement creates exposure to different methods, priorities and perspectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This does not mean accepting every external model without criticism. International cooperation should involve mutual learning rather than imitation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Each institution brings its own experience, identity and knowledge. The purpose of partnership is to combine strengths while respecting differences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The latest momentum surrounding international meetings and outreach suggests that the next stage will be more active, but also more selective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Priority will increasingly be given to institutions that demonstrate genuine interest, verifiable authority and the capacity to participate in practical projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Initial communication will be followed by structured assessment. Meetings will be connected to action plans. Public announcements will be expected to reflect the actual status of negotiations. Proposed cooperation will be evaluated according to legality, quality, sustainability and mutual benefit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This approach may produce fewer premature announcements, but it is more likely to create credible results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The new chapter of cross-border engagement is therefore defined not merely by movement between countries, but by the construction of relationships across institutional, academic, professional and cultural boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Under the developing strategy led by Prof. Dr. Bilal Semih Bozdemir, international outreach is moving toward a model based on preparation, trust, transparency and long-term value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The central principle is clear: international engagement becomes meaningful when meetings lead to understanding, understanding leads to responsible planning and responsible planning leads to cooperation that can endure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
International meetings, institutional dialogue and outreach efforts are gathering fresh momentum as Prof. Dr. Bilal Semih Bozdemir advances a more structured approach to cross-border cooperation, academic diplomacy and long-term partnership development. Cross-border engagement is entering a new and increasingly structured phase as international meetings, institutional outreach and partnership-building efforts gather fresh momentum. Under the direction […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":169,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[35,28,36,22,44,32,38,46,34,40,30,17,21,25,37,41,26,45,20,18,29,42,23,27,33,31,19,43,39,24],"class_list":["post-168","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-academic-cooperation","tag-academic-diplomacy","tag-cross-border-cooperation","tag-cross-border-engagement","tag-cultural-cooperation","tag-cultural-diplomacy","tag-diplomatic-outreach","tag-global-dialogue","tag-global-engagement-strategy","tag-global-mobility","tag-global-networking","tag-global-partnerships","tag-institutional-cooperation","tag-institutional-dialogue","tag-institutional-diplomacy","tag-international-collaboration","tag-international-education","tag-international-leadership","tag-international-meetings","tag-international-outreach","tag-international-relations","tag-partnership-development","tag-prof-dr-bilal-semih-bozdemir","tag-professional-networks","tag-public-diplomacy","tag-research-cooperation","tag-strategic-communication","tag-strategic-partnerships","tag-sustainable-partnerships","tag-university-partnerships"],"blocksy_meta":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=168"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":170,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/168\/revisions\/170"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/169"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=168"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=168"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/csj.ge\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=168"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}