Suchergebnisse

This article attempts to portray basic aspects of Czech-Cambodian relations from the 16th century until the present day, 2006. It deals with the first reports of Czech missionaries in the 17th & 18th century as well as globetrotters, students, diplomats & specialists from the 19th & 20th century. Diplomatic relations between both countries were established in 1956. Mutual cooperation in the fields of economy, culture & education developed dynamically for the next 14 years, only to be violently interrupted by the Lon Nol's coup d'etat in 1970 followed by the genocidal regime of Khmer Rouge from 1975 to 1979. When the Cambodian United National Salvation Front assisted by Vietnamese troops overthrew Khmers Rouges, the communist government of Czechoslovakia & the leftist regime in Phnom Penh continued to maintain an active relationship. After the fall of communism in Czechoslovakia in 1989, mutual economic & trade cooperation fell considerably. Recently, Czechs & Cambodians try to reestablish these past ties of cooperation. The Czech program for developmental aid was favorably received by Cambodia & presently, future joint commercial projects are being discussed. Adapted from the source document.

The aim of this study is to analyze the current use of public diplomacy in foreign relations. It attempts to show how necessary public diplomacy strategy is for the formation of diplomatic relations. The first part of the study focuses on the analysis of changes in political communication in international relations. Presented are factors such as the transnationalisation or medialisation of foreign policy and the role of soft power in international relations. Then it presents a three dimensional model of public diplomacy that takes into account short-term and long-term goals. The main part of the text presents a change in the operation of today's foreign policy actors. This mainly concerns classical diplomacy, which has transformed its role, primarily by heavily engaging professional public affairs agencies and non-state actors in foreign policy. The article also cites examples from Europe and the United States of America of successful and unsuccessful strategies of public diplomacy. Adapted from the source document.

The enforcement of obligations in international relations is not governed by a supranational authority; sanctions (economic, diplomatic, communication) represent one of the possible ways in which a state may put through its rights and interests. The group of economic sanctions is very wide, and it covers measures affecting trade or financial flows (e. g. boycotts, embargoes, prohibitions on investment, payments and capital movements, withdrawal of tariff preference). The text concerns multilateral sanctions regimes applied by the United Nations and the European Union. The paper describes procedures leading to the authorization of sanctions and the circumstances under which the restrictive measures are usually applied. In both cases, the main development and widest use of sanctions occurred in the 1990s. Current economic measures are set with regard to the basic needs of common people, and they should only target the responsible elites (smart sanctions). Adapted from the source document.

The September 11th, terrorist attacks on the United States totally overshadowed the significant legislative changes in the field of the US sanctions policy, which went into effect in the years 2000 and 2001. Albeit these changes as such may appear insufficient at first sight, the decade of sanctions policy reform debates and disputes which preceded these changes justifies the conclusion that they are the best result possible, and far more important than any unsystematic shifts in the regime of imposing economic sanctions for foreign policy purposes made back in the 1990s. The need to reform the US sanctions policy was caused by afundamental change of the international environment brought about by the end of the Cold War. Unlike in the bipolar world, wherein universal sanctions measures were fully sufficient, it was necessary after the end of the Cold War to react to numerous and varied threats to US foreign policy interests. This was done by laws "tailored" for the sanctioned country. The attempt to reform US sanctions policy in the 1990s revealed infull the rivalry between the legislative and executive powers, both of which wanted to preserve the decisive influence upon administrating sanctions and making decisions about them. It was undoubtedly the legislative power the Congress -- which emerged strengthened from the decade of rivalry. The last major factor reemerging in the sanctions policy reform debate and disputes was the issue of extraterritorial effects of some us laws. The extraterritoriality of us legislation caused a backlash in the world, which the US administration could not simply ignore. Yet the United States will probably not give up this powerful tool for forced multilateralization of its unilateral sanctions since this tool enables the US to avoid protracted and uncertain promotion of its interests in the form of multilateral sanctions negotiated by traditional diplomatic means. Adapted from the source document.