Suchergebnisse

Il saggio si propone di riaprire il "caso" Nixon-Kennedy, il primo dibattito presidenziale televisivo della storia, un evento aurorale che si è fatto mito e ha segnato in più modi il dibattito sul rapporto fra media, politica e immagine dei candidati. Gli strumenti d'analisi semiotica possono, anche a distanza di tempo, farci vedere il caso sotto una luce diversa. In particolar modo, grazie al concetto di enunciazione, possiamo superare le semplificate dicotomie fra forza della parola radiofonica e forza dell'immagine televisiva in modo da cogliere le forme semiotiche che hanno segnato in profondità l'efficacia di quell'evento e che ancora oggi sono in gioco nella costruzione dei simulacri della presidenzialità e della leadership.

Završio je Drugi svjetski rat, a svijetu je bio potreban mir. Većina lidera složila se da zajedno porade na tome. Radi toga je osnovana Organizacija Ujedinjenih naroda, kako bi zajednički radili na provedbi mira. Međutim, odmah nakon rata SAD i SSSR se sukobljavaju oko raznih važnih pitanja. Započinje razdoblje hladnog rata – vrijeme naoružavanja, natjecanja i stalne nesigurnosti. Siromašne afričke i azijske zemlje pokreću proces dekolonizacije tražeći suverenitet za svoje zemlje. Predvodnik tog pokreta je Indija, a nakon nje susjedne azijske države. Proces se nakon toga širi u Afriku. Azijske i afričke zemlje se počinju sastajati te s vremenom pokreću Pokret nesvrstanih. Veliku ulogu u tome imaju Naser, Nehru i Tito. Pokretom afričke i azijske zemlje dobivaju na važnosti na diplomatskoj sceni. Sukladno uz to, velike sile se bore za strateške točke te dolazi do mnogih sukoba. Najteži se događaju u Aziji i Africi. Veliki sukob dogodio se između Židova i Arapa na Bliskom istoku. U isto vrijeme događaju se i veliki sukobi na Korejskom i Indokineskom poluotoku. U sva tri sukoba bili su uključene velike sile, a neke od njih su sukobe čak i inicirale. ; The World War II ended and the world needed peace. Most of the leaders agreed to work together for this aim. That is why the United Nations was established. However, immediately after the war, the United States and the USSR are confronted about various important issues. The Cold War begins - the time of armament, competition and constant insecurity. The poor African and Asian countries are launching a process of decolonization, seeking sovereignty for their countries. The leader of this movement was India, and its neighboring Asian state. Then, the process spreads to Africa. Asian and African countries are beginning to meet and in time launch Non-Aligned Movement. Naser, Nehru and Tito had a major role in this. With NonAligned Movement, African and Asian countries gain importance on the diplomatic scene. Accordingly, great powers struggle for strategic points and many ...

This research theorizes an ongoing, global, grand trend of geopolitical disintegration, in the Post-Cold War, and increasingly in post-1989 time. The proposed paradigm may be useful to analyze redistribution of internal power within every state, from developed old Western powers, to new developed powers as China and India, well beyond the dissolved former real-socialist countries and the so-called failing states. The focus is on not empirical description of each local request of more autonomy, self-government, or even independence, but on the reached limits of the centuries-long and planet-wide integration process, from which the modern states and contemporary world have arisen, and that has now left room to a time of disintegration. This insight draws on a wide range of positions and contributions from International Relations theorists, along with other political scientists and scholars of geopolitics, anthropologists and sociologists, political geographers and economists, historians of colonialism and nationalism, experts of secession, critics of globalization and postmodern intellectuals, federalists and anarchists. * The first of the three parts of this study, is dedicated to an historical insight about the geopolitical integration process that had westernized and globalized the entire world. War, the state and expansionism, were not an inevitable destiny. Instead, a very small group of modern states, in competition and imitation amongst themselves, started a particularly steady conquering march on the planet. Their power expanded in intensity and extension for centuries and, with and because of the Industrial Revolution, culminated in totalitarian states and in total wars. * * The second part treats the social and national movements that have led to the end, in 1989, of the bipolar paramountcy of the two industrial superpowers, United States and Soviet Union. Along with the dissolution of blocs and states, a steady decreasing of states wars, crimes and violences, is registered and explained in the study. A slippery use of the word and concept of nationalism, particularly in post-1989 geopolitical crises, is frontally attacked in this part, drawing from early works of Ernest Gellner and Tom Nairn. Under the umbrella term of nationalism, integrationist projects and their victims, colonizers and colonized, oppressors and resistants, are likely to be confused. An early intuition of Karl Deutsch about the social awareness and mobilization of people in post-totalitarian, post-industrial and post-colonial societies, is here crossed with the work about coercion, capital, inclusion and consent of Charles Tilly. Masses, once enslaved in industrialized obedience, have evolved in networks of active citizens – and netizens – able, in a less violent international system, to claim for more personal liberties but also, as communities, for social, economical, and geopolitical change. A theoretical conjecture is also presented in this second part: in the Post-Cold War, no old or new powers will be able to keep enough concentration of power, in order to compete for world domination. We have entered a permissive state of disintegration. Redistribution of power from center to peripheries, empowerment of federal units, multiplication of small states, may occur, from now on, because there is nobody and nothing capable of preventing it. From this geopolitical point of view, the 1989 is at the very beginning. While sharing certain premises of a well-known thoughtful article by Alexander Wendt, on the inevitability of a world state (2003), this work reaches a different conclusion. * * * In the third and last part, the scope and the nature of the break in the sameness of international life is explored, with normative purposes. History is not repeating, and integration prejudices along with integrationist projects should be overcome. Every state may substantially devolve powers to its internal authorities, or even breakup, and many new smaller states, or self-governing units within states, might come out. In this increasing number of polities, an overwhelming number of citizens may go well beyond electoral democracy and have direct access to power. They may coalesce around what Brian Ferguson defined an «identerest» complex: constructed identities and tangible interests, inextricably intertwined. Citizens and netizens demanding power on their own territories and disintegration of their states, are required to take care of citizenry's duties, not only citizenship's rights. A model of responsible, moderate, pragmatic, «princely citizenry», echoing Machiavelli and Gramsci, is here proposed. -|- Acquisitions of this study are bluntly offered as a contribution to political action in a time of geopolitical change, in which it would be important to rely on expertise, but also on compassion, and on a real interest in the historical and geographical, spiritual and material pathways that each local, concrete human community is pursuing. Western-led state-building hubris, for instance, should be put aside in Afghanistan and many other corners of the world, it is recommend by this study. In favor of bottom-up cantonization, for example, an ancient Swiss wisdom which would deserve more consideration in a changing world. While burdened by the contradictions of modernity and menaced by recurrent economical and ecological crises, local princely citizenries, demanding sovereignty in their place of dwelling, are probably the main and the best possible challengers to the status quo. Concentrating on their territory and population, they may change their everyday reality, overcoming political corruption, bureaucratic impotence, economical inequality, ecological destruction. It may reveal be easier to scale down, rather than tear down, the pyramids of oppression. Leopold Kohr, Ivan Illich and don Lorenzo Milani's prophecies of justice and peace in geopolitical smallness, may become inspiring visions, in a time of disintegration.

Democracy promotion – or democracy assistance – has always represented a fil rouge in U.S. foreign policy. At least since the beginning of the 20th century, the United States has used such issue in its global and regional agenda. Despite during the Cold War the quest for national and international security in a bipolar world system restricted the role of democracy promotion as an autonomous feature in US foreign policy, since the '90s the promotion of democracy has been growing steadily. In fact, democracy promotion became a distinguishing feature in both the "Clinton doctrine" and George W. Bush's foreign policy after the 9\11 attacks. Although, under Obama, US democracy promotion has experienced a consistent re-orientation, it has not disappeared from the US global agenda. This article aims to show the evolution of US democracy promotion, in particular from the Cold War bipolar world to the multipolar system of the 21th century: from both a theoretical and practical perspective, democracy promotion has gone through different phases and evolutions but it is still vividly alive within US foreign policy.

Stability is defined as an international system with the same distribution of power for a long period of time. World order is defined as a governance anchored to the promotion of four steady values (the units of measurement) in each arena of international relations: democracy (political), market (economic), peace (military), national self-determination leading to single-nation states (cultural). Multipolar and bipolar systems were stable, but disordered, as values promoted by the main powers were not steady. Change periods were/ are unstable: from 1915 to 1945 and after 1989. In the 1990s there was an attempt to consolidate both order and stability, through the concert of powers; as pluri-national states prevailed after 1989, it was only a 'near order'. Since 2001, there has been neither stability (both unipolarism and multipolarism failed), nor order, as the promotion of those values has been weakened by the West (especially by Obama and Trump) because of the objections of Islamic fundamentalist groups (and in part by China, Russia, Venezuela). A "disordered stability" and the return to the conservative diplomacies of 'real-politik' (with the West promoting 'lesser evil' authoritarian regimes and waging wars to fight Islamic fundamentalism) has not re-emerged yet. The Usa are not a great power anymore, as both Obama and Trump were/are shy and uncertain in foreign policy. An "unstable order" would be anchored to the promotion of single-nation (only Shiite or only Sunni, Palestinian, Kurd) states. ; La stabilità di un sistema internazionale è collegata alla stessa distribuzione del potere per un lungo periodo di tempo. L'ordine mondiale può essere definito come quella forma di governance che viene ancorata alla promozione di alcuni valori costanti (le unità di misura) in ogni arena delle relazioni internazionali: democrazia (politica), mercato (economica), pace (militare) e auto-determinazione nazionale che porta a stati mono-nazionali (culturale). I sistemi multipolari e bipolari sono stati stabili, ma disordinati, perché i valori promossi dalle maggiori potenze non erano costanti. I periodi di cambiamento sono di solito instabili: dal 1915 al 1945 e dopo l'89. Negli anni '90 c'è stato un tentativo di consolidare sia l'ordine che la stabilità, attraverso il concerto delle potenze, ma siccome gli stati pluri-nazionali hanno prevalso, c'è stato solo un ordine "zoppo". Dopo il 2001, non c'è stata né stabilità perché sia l'unipolarismo che il multipolarismo sono falliti, né ordine, perché l'Occidente (soprattutto con Obama e Trump) ha indebolito la promozione di quei tre valori di fronte alle obiezioni dei gruppi islamici fondamentalisti, e (in parte) di Cina, Russia, Venezuela. Non è ancora riemersa una "stabilità disordinata" e il ritorno alle diplomazie conservatrici della real-politik, con l'Occidente che promuove regimi autoritari considerati "mali minori" e che scatena guerre per combattere i fondamentalisti islamici. Gli Usa non sono più una grande potenza, a causa della politica estera timida e incerta di Obama e Trump. Un "ordine instabile" sarebbe collegato alla promozione di stati mono-nazionali: uno palestinese, uno curdo, ed entità con cittadini solo sciiti o solo sunniti.

Krajem Hladnog rata i kolapsom blokovskog sustava dolazi do procvata mirovnih operacija Ujedinjenih naroda koji teže utemeljiti svoju transformiranu ulogu u novom globalnom okruženju. Jedne od prvih demonstracija nove, aktivnije uloge UN-a bile su dvije, svojom složenošću vrlo slične, mirovne misije: UNTAC u Kambodži i UNPROFOR u bivšoj Jugoslaviji. Unatoč brojnim zajedničkim karakteristikama, te su misije ishodile vrlo različitim rezultatima. Dok UNTAC mirovnu misiju u Kambodži UN ponosno ističe kao jednu od najvećih uspjeha, UNPROFOR u bivšoj Jugoslaviji je priznat kao jedan od najvećih neuspjeha međunarodne zajednice. Rad se vodi idejom da bi upravo navedene misije, s potpuno različitih krajeva spektra, mogle otkriti jedan od ključnih faktora koji utječu na uspješnost peacekeepinga. Podrobnom analizom oba sukoba i obije misije potvrdit će se hipoteza kako se upravo taj odlučujući faktor, koji je odredio uspjeh u Kambodži, odnosno neuspjeh u bivšoj Jugoslaviji, ne nalazi unutar same mirovne misije, već se odnosi na karakter sukoba, to jest dužinu njegova vremenskog trajanja. ; Along with the Cold War ending and the Communist bloc demise, the United Nations, while seeking to establish its transformed role in the new global environment, begin to rapidly increase the number of peacekeeping missions. One of the first demonstrations of UN's new, more active role were two, by their complexity, very similar peace missions: UNTAC in Cambodia and UNPROFOR in Former Yugoslavia. Despite the numerous shared features, these missions produced substantialy different results. While the UN proudly upholds the UNTAC peace mission as one of the Organization's greatest archievements, UNPROFOR in the Former Yugoslavia is regarded as one of the biggest defeats of the international community. This paper aims to detect one of the key factors which influence the probability of peacekeeping success while comparing two missions from different ends of the spectrum. With the detailed analisis of both conflicts and missions, the hypothesis ...

Post hladnoratovsko proširenje NATO-a, u dosad provedena dva kruga, predstavlja najveću i najvažniju geopolitičku promjenu u Europi, nakon geopolitičke tranzicije koja se u Europi odigrala u razdoblju od 1989. do 1991. g. Treći krug proširenja, koji uključuje Hrvatsku i Albaniju, otvoren je davanjem pozivnica ovim državama na Summitu NATO-a u Bukureštu u travnju 2008. g. Proširenje je bilo i još uvijek jest dio preobrazbe NATO-a u post hladnoratovskom razdoblju u kojem je NATO evoluirao iz tradicionalnog vojnopolitičkog saveza u kombinaciju saveza i sigurnosne zajednice. Proširenje je također bilo i jest izraz američke pobjede u hladnom ratu i uzdizanja SAD-a u jedinu svjetsku supersilu. NATO je povećao svoj teritorijalni obuhvat, promijenio svoje misije, sposobnosti i ciljeve, te ih nastavlja mijenjati kako bi ostao spreman odgovoriti na buduće sigurnosne izazove koji se postavljaju pred njegove članice. Najveći izazov NATO-u u budućnosti mogao bi doći iznutra, a to je mogućnost da postane sredstvo američke globalne geostrategije i njenih ciljeva. Ako NATO želi ostati legitimnim savezom i izrastati u sigurnosnu zajednicu, ne smije postati sredstvo za ispunjavanje geopolitičkih i geostrateških ciljeva samo jedne države, pa čak ni SAD-a. Stoga je u odnosima SAD-a i Europe potreban uravnotežen pristup, prema kojem SAD ne bi koristile vojnu moć kako bi nametale svoje geopolitičke i geostrateške ciljeve pod svaku cijenu. ; The Post-Cold War enlargement of NATO, in two rounds so far, was the biggest and the most important geopolitical change in Europe, after the geopolitical transition that took place in Europe from 1989 to 1991. A third round of the enlargement, which includes Croatia and Albania, was opened at the NATO summit in Bucharest in April 2008, by sending invitations to these two states. Enlargement was and still is a part of NATO's transformation in the Post-Cold War Era in which NATO has evolved from a traditional form of military-political alliance into a combination of an alliance and security community. It also was and still is an expression of American triumph in the Cold War and the rising of the USA to a status of the world's only superpower. NATO has enlarged its territorial reach, changed its missions, capabilities and objectives, and is continuing to modify them so that it could stay prepared for the future security challenges facing its members. The biggest challenge facing NATO in the future may be coming from the inside – the possibility of becoming a tool of USA's global geostrategy and its aims. If NATO wants to remain a legitimate alliance and develop itself towards the security community, it must not become a tool for fulfilling the geopolitical and geostrategic goals of only one state, not even the USA. Therefore, a balanced approach in American-European relations is needed, according to which the USA would not use its military power to impose its geopolitical and geostrategic objectives at any cost.

The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one. ; The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one.

The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one. ; The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one.