Search results

After World War Two there have been opposing views of the role and the importance of the state in international affairs. Some think that the importan the state is slowly decreasing, since the increasing interdependence of the wo has an enormous influence on internal and foreign policies of a state. On the hand, some point out that the state has not lost any of its importance and tha the contrary, this importance will only be enhanced since the world community has not as yet come up with a model by which to replace sovereign state entities. States generate the structure which has a significant influence on individual group security. This particularly applies to the post-cold-war period since th problems and the threats of the present-day world - economic collapse, politic oppression, poverty, ethnical conflicts, nature degradation, terrorism, crime diseases - directly affect many other elements of security. It is these very problems that turn our attention to the state as the most important institution of the day world which still has at its disposal the resources for reducing or eliminating these threats. (SOI : PM: S. 43)

The author analyzes the current trends of the globalization of trade, capital, mass media, communication, transport, tourism and economic migrations. However, there is the backlash to the globalizing processes: cultural particularism which has mobilized traditions and triggered violent outbreaks of hostilities. Political scientist Francis Fukuyama has pointed out that today the key challenges to liberal democracy are a miscellany of particularistic fundamentalism, national extremism, totalitarism and authoritarian paternalism. Samuel Huntington also warns about the dangers of particularism. Within such a framework, the phenomenon of "ethnic cleansing" is only an extreme form of the trend which has marked the 20th century - ethnical homogenization as a reaction to the problems of multiethnic communities. The author is of the opinion that this development need not represent an obstacle for the dialogue and communication among cultures. (SOI : PM: S. 168)

In the first part of the article, the author analyses the latest dimensions of on the territory of the former Yugoslavia stemming from the Dayton and Paris accords. His starting point is the geographical criterion which produces five trouble spots which may jeopardize the process of security-building. He concludes that only a determined application of political, diplomatic and economic pressures, as well as military presence, may bring about a new dimension of security in Southeastern Europe. The second part of the article gives a review the analyses of the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the creation of new state this part of Europe, as well as of the concepts and schemes for a certain degr linkage and bringing together, the most prominent of which is the American initiative for the co-operation in Southeastern Europe. It is obvious that this region will go on being viewed through different lenses and that the interests of the observers, more than those of the peoples living in this part of Europe, will get precedence. (SOI : PM: S. 23)

The author is of the opinion that experts in international law are not broad-minded regarding the establishment of a state. Most legal experts take for granted the statements of the international judiciary on the existance of certain rules of general international law and consider them validated and indisputable. This faction has been given support by states since they uphold those legal statements that suit their interests. The author analyses the Opinions of the Arbitration Committee on the process of the disintegration and the criteria for the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia as well as the criteria for the creation of the new states. He considers this precedent as central for international judiciary law. (SOI : PM: S. 187)

The author is of the opinion that with the fall of the Berlin wall not all obs the free circulation of goods and people were eliminated - neither in Europe n other regions of the world, since there are numerous other walls standing in the way of establishing a global world or European order. In that context, the agreement among the members of the European Union on the comprehensive control of "its borders" towards the non-member European countries, is conside by the author as a specific form of a new "curtain", not "iron" any longer, but electronic. Its function, the author claims, is to divide Europe into the Union and the Non-Union, which is harmful for the promotion of the European idea in the spiritual and the material sense in many ways. (SOI : PM: S. 30)

Mediterranean cooperation is dealt with in the context of the creation of the Euromediterranean zone. The European Union has been developing various modes of cooperation with non-member Mediterranean countries by signing association agreements or cooperation agreements. The new European states, created after the disintegration of former socialist federations demonstrate interest for the Mediterranean cooperation, though they tend to have different attitudes towards it. Their interest is solely based on the fact that the Mediterranean cooperation has not been standardized and that it has a poorly developed institutional framework. To these countries this enables and facilitates to tune in from time to time, when it suits their purposes. Regarding the role of the new states, the author distinguishes between two types of cooperation: (a) autonomous regional cooperation, which is not beneficial for the new states (e.g. those on the Balkans) and (b) occasional, specialized and dispersed cooperation which might attract the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. (SOI : PM: S. 176)

The author thinks that the American political and military initiative in Bosnia and Herzegovina has stopped the four year war and enhanced the American influence in the region. European Union has reacted to the latest developments by adopting a new regional approach towards the countries of southeastern Europe. This approach has been employed in relation to other European and Mediterranean regions outside EU as well (central and eastern Europe, the Baltic states, the Mediterranean countries, the Union of Independent States). EU's policy towards Croatia is extremely reserved. It has insisted on a set of preconditions being fulfilled by Croatia before the negotiations about Croatia's membership in this organization may even commence. Croatia wants to forge links with the EU and is willing to comply with its demands, but is highly sceptical of regional associations. (SOI: PM: S. 161)