Suchergebnisse

В 2014-2019 рр. історична політика в Україні перетворилась на важливе для політичної еліти поле, в межах якого розгорнулась активна діяльність за посилення національного наративу, як його розуміли реалізатори політики. Головним актором на цьому полі став Український інститут національної памяті, на чолі з істориком Володимиром В'ятровичем. Основним підґрунтям для активізації «битв за минуле» стала агресія Російської Федерації і конфлікт на Донбасі. З точки зору діячів історичної політики та правлячого істеблішменту їх активність мала консолідувати українське суспільство. Однак, вся діяльність Інституту перетворилась на перманентний конфлікт з інтелектуалами та суспільством. Інтелектуали були занепокоєні інструменталізацією історії і фактичним перетворенням діяльності Інституту у пропаганду, глорифікацією праворадикальних рухів часів Другої світової війни. Активні групи в суспільстві і активісти турбувались з приводу нехтуванням з боку Інституту прав жінок – наступом на свято 8-го березня, тавруванням критиків Інституту, як «п'ятої колони Кремля». Зміна голови Інституту наприкінці 2019 р. дозволяє сподіватись на зміну політики. Однак, ситуацію ускладнює те, що чинна команда залишається на своїх посадах. Але, більш важливим є контекст, в який можна вписати український випадок – зміна політичних трендів у Східній Європі, а можливо і за її межами. Головні ознаки цього повороту – прихід до влади правих урядів, які використовують популістську риторику, в якій може бути присутня ксенофобія, мова ненависті, шовінізм. В умовах військового конфлікту українське суспільство, яке переживає певну мілітаризацію життя, стає легкою здобиччю такої політики і схожої риторики. В цьому фокусі, діяльність Інституту лише відповідає таким трендам, і обслуговує інтереси політичного істеблішменту. ; In 2014–2019 historical policy in Ukraine has turned into an important field for the political circle, within the framework of which vigorous activity has been developed to strengthen the national narrative, as policy implementers understood it. The main actor in this field was the Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance, led by historian Volodymyr Viatrovich. The main ground for intensifying the "battles for the past" was the aggression of the Russian Federation and the conflict in the Donbass. From the point of view of historical figures and the political establishment, their activity was to consolidate Ukrainian society. However, all the activities of the Institute turned into a permanent conflict with intellectuals and society. Intellectuals were concerned about the instrumentalization of history and the actual transformation of the Institute's activities into propaganda, the glorification of right-wing radical movements since World War II. Active groups in society and activists were worried about the Institute's neglect of women's rights - an attack on the 8th of March, stigmatization of the Institute's critics as the "fifth column of the Kremlin". A change in the head of the Institute at the end of 2019 gives hope for a change in policy. However, the situation is complicated by the fact that the current team retains its positions. But even more important is the context into which the Ukrainian case can be entered - a change in political trends in Eastern Europe, and possibly beyond. The main signs of this turn are the rise to power of right-wing governments, which use populist rhetoric, which may include xenophobia, hate speech, chauvinism. In the context of the military conflict, Ukrainian society, which is undergoing a certain militarization of life, becomes an easy prey for such a policy and similar rhetoric. In this light, the Institute's activities only correspond to such trends and serve the interests of the political establishment.

Ukraine is the largest country that is included in European Neighborhood Policy. That is why the European Union should spotlight relations with this eastern partner, especially by foreign policy instruments like association agreement. The focus here is on the EU's involvement in the Ukrainian crisis in period from Maidan revolution at the end of 2013, which was occasioned by the rejection of the association agreement with the EU by President Viktor Yanukovych, and to the presidential election in 2014. The main issue is to evaluate the EU's scope to stabilize the political environment in the nearby neighborhood and eliminate threats, which are the results of war between Ukraine and Russia.

Unterschiedliche Vorstellungen über die Prioritäten bei den Reformen im Verteidigungsbereich nach 2014, Unstimmigkeiten bei den Erfolgskriterien für diese Reformen und das Fehlen einer klaren Vision darüber, welche Art Streitkräfte die Ukraine benötigt, haben zu Schwierigkeiten in der Partnerschaft zwischen der NATO und der Ukraine geführt.

"Der Beitrag geht am Beispiel der Ukrainekrise 2014 der Frage nach der verhaltenssteuernden Wirkung des Unrechtsausschließungsgrundes des Eingreifens auf Einladung nach. Diese Frage stellt sich in besonderer Schärfe dort, wo - wie in der Ukraine - die Vetomächte des UN-Sicherheitsrats betroffen sind. Der Beitrag beleuchtet dazu im Schwerpunkt, inwieweit die unterschiedlichen Einladungen zur Intervention, die im Verlauf der Ukrainekrise von verschiedenen Akteuren ausgesprochen worden sind, als rechtlich wirksam zu betrachten sind. Die Untersuchung gelangt zu dem Ergebnis, dass die vorhandenen Regeln so klar und bestimmt ausgestaltet sind, dass sie es auch in einem veränderten sicherheitspolitischen Kontext Drittstaaten ermöglichen, die missbräuchliche Inanspruchnahme des Unrechtsausschließungsgrundes klar zu identifizieren und zurückzuweisen." (Autorenreferat)

In the article the author presents his analysis of the current political events in Ukraine, beginning with the origin of the Euromajdan and the mistakes of president Yanukowych that eventually led to his removal. The Ukrainian society is depicted with strong emphasis on the high level of political awareness that is characteristic of that society and their determination to reach their goals, as well as their political and economic aspirations. According to the author, the Ukrainian-Russian war started on February 28, 2014 when unidentified troops began occupation of administrative buildings in Crimea and the development of this conflict will bring severe consequences for both countries. Furthermore, the possible reasons why Putin chose the Crimea as an arena of his political pursuits are provided, as well as his minimum, maximum and interval targets concerning Ukraine. The author also maintains that the West and its actions or lack thereof is crucial for Ukraine; he notices that the demands made by the Western side are ignored, but he sees them not as "empty words" but announcements of future political events. He believes that the Western countries will take action in two ways: they will introduce immediate symbolic sanctions, as well as long-term sanctions aimed to prevent violating international law in the future. The article also presents the author's prediction concerning the future actions of the Western states and the likelihood of direct NATO intervention. Additionally, the author considers the situation in Ukraine also from the perspective of Poland.

In the article the author presents his analysis of the current political events in Ukraine, beginning with the origin of the Euromajdan and the mistakes of president Yanukowych that eventually led to his removal. The Ukrainian society is depicted with strong emphasis on the high level of political awareness that is characteristic of that society and their determination to reach their goals, as well as their political and economic aspirations. According to the author, the Ukrainian-Russian war started on February 28, 2014 when unidentified troops began occupation of administrative buildings in Crimea and the development of this conflict will bring severe consequences for both countries. Furthermore, the possible reasons why Putin chose the Crimea as an arena of his political pursuits are provided, as well as his minimum, maximum and interval targets concerning Ukraine. The author also maintains that the West and its actions or lack thereof is crucial for Ukraine; he notices that the demands made by the Western side are ignored, but he sees them not as "empty words" but announcements of future political events. He believes that the Western countries will take action in two ways: they will introduce immediate symbolic sanctions, as well as long-term sanctions aimed to prevent violating international law in the future. The article also presents the author's prediction concerning the future actions of the Western states and the likelihood of direct NATO intervention. Additionally, the author considers the situation in Ukraine also from the perspective of Poland.

Introduction: the most influential lobbyist of Ukraine in the world -- Ukraine in Aleksander Kwasniewski's geopolitical strategy -- The European Union's special envoy to Ukraine -- Russia won't stop": the Russian factor in the disintegration of Ukraine -- The west's strategy -- Epilogue: in the center of the whirlwind.

The Ukrainian parliamentary elections of 26 October 2014, according to international monitoring groups, marked an important step in Ukraine's aspirations to consolidate democratic elections in line with its international commitments (OSCE/ODHIR, 2014). The elections also produced results that can be considered ground-breaking in comparison with the outcomes of all previous elections in the post-Soviet period. These results have the potential to set the Ukrainian political process more firmly on the pro-European trajectory than at any point prior since independence. This note examines the results of the 2014 elections, identifies what can be considered its particularly consequential outcomes, and analyzes reasons for these outcomes and their possible impact on Ukraine's political future. [Copyright Elsevier Ltd.]

German observers tend to view the causes and consequences of the Ukraine conflict in a Euro-Atlantic context. Their primary focus lies on Europe's economic well-being and stability. The political discourse in Japan reveals a very different perception of the events. In Japan, Russia is viewed not primarily as a European power but rather as an Asian power. In their analysis of the causes and consequences of the conflict, Japanese experts consequently concentrate on the Asian context. Many of them call on Japan to intensify relations with Moscow – even if doing so means departing from the G7 line and Western sanctions policy. Japan's interests, they argue, are best served by such a course of action. (Autorenreferat)