Search results

In today's world, marked by an increasing interdependence, national security is becoming a component of international security, which is not a mere sum of individual national securities, but a permanent international framework of universally acceptable values. Inter-ethnic relations today are central for a state's security, as well as for international order. There is the question of whether the international system must guarantee individual & collective security of ethnic groups/minorities, regardless of the state they live in. Today, human & minority rights have become an important institutionalized international factor of security & stability & a concern of the entire international community, despite the fact that many states still claim that minority policy is their internal problem into which international community has no right to interfere. The affirmation of the rationalist approach to contemporary security implies that the responsibility for guaranteeing security lies not only on individual states & unions but also on the international system as a whole. 8 References. Adapted from the source document.

Different parts of state territory on land, sea, & in the airspace are explained first. The concept of territorial sovereignty is envisaged through principles of its all-inclusiveness & its exclusivity, subject to many exceptions & restrictions imposed either by rules of general international law or by specific treaty obligations that can be assumed by a state. The concept of state servitudes was not assimilated in the practice of international courts & tribunals. Besides, it can be the cause of some misconceptions & confusion in public international law. Within the explanation of territorial boundaries are discussed the so-called natural boundaries -- such as rivers, lakes, & mountain boundaries -- as well as the artificial boundaries. An explanation of the principle of uti possidetis, of procedures of fixing boundaries, & of special legal scope of boundary treaties in international law is offered in conclusion. Adapted from the source document.

The disintegration of the socialist regime in Europe did away with the bipolar model of world order & inaugurated a new phase in seeking a new structure & model of international relations. This new world order, only broadly outlined & characterized by (mostly) unilateral leadership, has already been challenged. Two superpowers -- the People's Republic of China & Russia -- condemn the hegemony, unilateralism, & attempts at dictating international relations. China & Russia are supported by a group of disgruntled countries who also think that a broadly based multipolarity is the direction that international relations & the new world order should take. Judging by these challenges & criticisms, it might be said that only multilateral cooperativeness can guarantee validity to the nascent world order. 15 References. Adapted from the source document.

Ethnic minorities & minorities-related conflicts have always been one of the most important security issues for the international community. The durability of ethnic conflicts in certain regions & the difficulties in their resolution, have resulted in the outbreak of many armed conflicts, the collapse of multi-ethnic states, the changes of borders & of demographic relations. Despite the increasing number of security challenges & needs, it is still not possible to talk about a certain uniform & universally accepted model of solving the problems among ethnic minorities. It is obvious that in the post-Cold War period this is going to be an increasingly pressing need of international community. The paper deals with most basic security problems that are caused by the unsettled relationships between ethnic minorities & majority; it also covers the policies of their resolution. By analyzing the model of resolving ethnic conflicts in South Tyrol, two groups of ethnic conflicts' resolution policies are looked into: the policy of the elimination of differences & the policy of managing differences. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.

Following the disintegration of the socialist system in Europe & the end of the bloc-based relations, American politics has changed the course of its operation. In present-day circumstances, southeast Europe is becoming increasingly prominent in American foreign policy projections, particularly during Clinton's administration. Clinton has defined a clear-cut policy towards Europe's southeast due to its vicinity to certain neuralgic points of American engagement (Near East, the Caspian region, the Gulf, eastern Mediterranean). In this way American politics has proved its leading global role. At the time of scarcity of foreign policy events, Clinton's team has thus been served on a platter a major foreign policy arena, in which its engagement -- which has all the symptoms of a long-lasting one -- has not proved too costly. Adapted from the source document.

The author analyzes the process of the NATO expansion in Europe following the collapse of the Berlin Wall & the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. Paradoxically, after the end of the Cold War, the security conditions in Europe have not improved. On the contrary, the danger of military conflicts has increased. That is why most former communist countries, including the newly created states that emerged after the disintegration of Yugoslavia & the Soviet Union, have been trying to eliminate this danger & strengthen their security by joining NATO. The Russian Federation is the main opponent of the NATO expansion in Eastern Europe, particularly into the states that came into being after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The author describes in detail the geostrategical & geopolitical implications of the admittance of the first group of Eastern European countries into NATO (Poland, the Czech Republic, & Romania), as well as the prospects of the NATO expansion into the other countries in the region. He sees the American initiative for cooperation in Southeastern Europe as a complement to the process of NATO expansion. In the end he criticizes NATO's process of selection of new members, the process that has left Croatia (for the time being) in a sort of a geostrategical void. 5 Appendixes. Adapted from the source document.

The process of European integrations, with growing political, economic, & security interdependence of member states is designed in such a way that, among other things, it can eventually result in developing a collective approach to defense, whose features would be a far cry from any other form of traditional alliances. The signatories of the Maastricht Agreement vowed to shape a common defense policy that would in time lead to the common defense. The common defense policy, whose structure would be built on the basis of the models & trends of the defense policies of the leading West European countries, should evolve as an integral part of EU's common foreign & security policy. It should address all the aspects of the use of military power, & it will require an analysis of a broad spectrum of possible scenarios that may pose a threat to EU's security. EU countries have demonstrated certain shortcomings in their military capacities, eg, transport equipment & other capacities for deployment. Although in the economic field they have achieved consensus on numerous issues, it is obvious that defense issues such as nuclear weapons, professionalization of the military, & the policies of defense industry are still a major bone of contention for EU members. Though EU, WEU, & NATO represent only a segment of the European security architecture, they will most probably serve as the key institutional framework for the development of a common defense policy & common defense. Further expansion of this triangular institutional framework is going to be interdependent, mutually supportive, & parallel. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.

The policy of pressure on Croatia as an illustrative -- although not isolated -- example has not inspired empirical & theoretical studies of this phenomenon. The discussion has remained at the level of everyday political discourse, even "coffee-house politics." Due to its extreme topicality, as well as its theoretical "solvency," the author has attempted with this essay to come up with a theoretical definition of the concept of pressure & to demonstrate on the Croatian example its goals, scope, dynamics, & future prospects & outcomes. Among the existing approaches, the author has chosen the "politico-economic approach" which defines the policy of pressure as a specific form of political communication between the "center" & the "periphery" in Wallerstein's "world system." The example of Croatia serves the author as an ideal-type model of such communication through a combination of political science & sociological analysis. In his opinion, & due to certain favorable contingencies, Croatia is the nearest to the ideal type of such communication. Due to a lack of systematic empirical data, the discussion naturally remains at the theoretical-hypothetical level, & should be understood as an invitation to further discussion & as an incentive for more extensive empirical research. However, since this is a very dynamic phenomenon, the question is: is the author's argumentation still valid today as it was at the time when the essay was written? There have been two changes: (1) the war on Kosovo which proves the author's hypotheses; & (2) a certain "thaw" in the relations between the international community (particularly USA) & Croatia (it is still unclear whether this change concerns the fundamental strategic trends or is solely a "politico-meteorological" phenomenon (the alteration of colder & warmer periods). This is why the author did not deem any alterations in the text necessary; one should wait & in the meantime expose the (hypo)theses to some critical scrutiny. 12 References. Adapted from the source document.

In many countries the violations of human rights & the deterioration of democracy are a direct consequence of the inability of the civilian government to control their military & security forces. The military are a part of society & as such should be monitored regularly & efficiently by the civilian, political authorities. The civilian control of the military in the US was enacted by the Constitution of 1789. The initiative "Partnership for Peace" has the central role in the transformation of the armed forces in the transitional countries, & the civilian control of the army is the prerequisite for bolstering democracy. Analysis of the political & defense system of the Republic of Croatia definitely indicates that in Croatia, even at this stage, there is efficient control of the armed forces. 14 References. Adapted from the source document.

Helmuth Plessner's study, The Belated Nation, is very topical for Croatian readers since it (via comparing the constitutions of the French & the German national communities) shows how the different types of polities within which national communities are formed (the state & the Reich) are central for the constitution of national awareness. German history proves how the international community, primarily that of Europe, immediately upon its constitution as a system of national states, forced the "belated" nations to give up on the concept of empire & constitute themselves as national states. Plessner's book is also topical in the postcommunist regimes because it superbly proves the significance of both the process of modernization & bourgeoisie as the social class in building national states. Adapted from the source document.

The American & international publics look up to American presidents as the chief creators of American foreign policy. A review of the contemporary history of US foreign policy is mostly a review of foreign policy platforms & initiatives of American presidents. Although fundamental prerequisites exist -- constitutional powers, executive office of the President as support in the creation, & implementation of certain decisions, the expectations of the Congress & the public that President should lead the nation in the foreign policy arena -- not all American presidents have taken an equal interest in foreign policy decision making & the creation of American foreign policy; this has depended on their personal interests & experiences. Despite significant constitutional restrictions of president's autonomous action in foreign policy & occasionally successful attempts of the legislature to assume control over foreign policy, as well as frequent challenges to presidential powers & numerous actions by the public, we can conclude that American presidents are nevertheless dominant figures in the field of American foreign policy. Adapted from the source document.