With the beginning of the Arab Spring new opportunities for research on democratization emerged. One of the elements that could be examined is the external factors of democratization. The aspect of external factors is analyzed in the article with the focus on the French policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt because these countries experienced the biggest changes in comparison with other countries of the Arab Spring. The article analyzes the rhetoric and actions of France aimed at Tunisia, Libya and Egypt during the Arab Spring. In the article it is argued that French policy towards the analysed states is a combination of pragmatism and idealism. This coexistence leads to emergence of double standards in foreign policy with short-term interests taking priority, but the long-term aspirations are not denied, especially what concerns rhetoric of France. The article argues that synthesis of the classical realism, the neo-liberalism and democratic peace theories can provide explanation for double standards and inconsistency in the French foreign policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt during the Arab Spring. The article ends with evaluation of successes and failures of the French foreign policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt in context of the Arab Spring.
With the beginning of the Arab Spring new opportunities for research on democratization emerged. One of the elements that could be examined is the external factors of democratization. The aspect of external factors is analyzed in the article with the focus on the French policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt because these countries experienced the biggest changes in comparison with other countries of the Arab Spring. The article analyzes the rhetoric and actions of France aimed at Tunisia, Libya and Egypt during the Arab Spring. In the article it is argued that French policy towards the analysed states is a combination of pragmatism and idealism. This coexistence leads to emergence of double standards in foreign policy with short-term interests taking priority, but the long-term aspirations are not denied, especially what concerns rhetoric of France. The article argues that synthesis of the classical realism, the neo-liberalism and democratic peace theories can provide explanation for double standards and inconsistency in the French foreign policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt during the Arab Spring. The article ends with evaluation of successes and failures of the French foreign policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt in context of the Arab Spring.
With the beginning of the Arab Spring new opportunities for research on democratization emerged. One of the elements that could be examined is the external factors of democratization. The aspect of external factors is analyzed in the article with the focus on the French policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt because these countries experienced the biggest changes in comparison with other countries of the Arab Spring. The article analyzes the rhetoric and actions of France aimed at Tunisia, Libya and Egypt during the Arab Spring. In the article it is argued that French policy towards the analysed states is a combination of pragmatism and idealism. This coexistence leads to emergence of double standards in foreign policy with short-term interests taking priority, but the long-term aspirations are not denied, especially what concerns rhetoric of France. The article argues that synthesis of the classical realism, the neo-liberalism and democratic peace theories can provide explanation for double standards and inconsistency in the French foreign policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt during the Arab Spring. The article ends with evaluation of successes and failures of the French foreign policy towards Tunisia, Libya and Egypt in context of the Arab Spring.
In the times of global war on terror there are no paid considerable attention for a state terror, even if this term is used more and more in political discourse defying a single states as being terroristic. Therefore the main research question is why in the era of global war on terror the international community are not fighting with a state terror, which undermines the same human lifes, rights and values as "terrorism" does? In this study, titled "State Terror in the Context of Global War on Terror: Case Study of US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan", the author analyses the concept of state terror in academic, political and juridical level. The main goal of this study is to analyze, why in the context of global war on terror the states are divided into separate categories: some states become enemies, others avoid criticism, even if they can be treated as state terror systems. In order to carry out the tasks set, the study has been divided into six chapters: In the first chapter there was determined a problem of state terror conceptualization. It was concluded that there are three main reasons: conceptualization, emotional and lack of information or data about state terror. The second chapter analyzed a juridical definition of state terror. The analysis of UN conventions and other counter terrorism law data proved that there is no legal definition of state terror and therefore any preventive instruments of fighting against it become neutralized. The study has thus confirmed the hypothesis, that the lack of a legal definition of state terror presupposes a legitimization of the term. In the third chapter there was analyzed an academic definition of state terror. Traditionally, terror is divided in a terror "from below" (widely known as "terrorism") and terror "from above" (state terror, or terror which is implemented by legal state forces). In the academic point of view, this study might be useful as giving a conceptual state terror term. The conceptualization was made on a basic of political, juridical and academic discourse, defining main criteria for identifying a state terror. These criteria were used for defining a state terror of Egypt and Uzbekistan. The study assumes that the lack of above mentioned concept (especially on juridical level) presupposes a legitimization of Uzbekistan and Egypt state terror as analysis in fifth and sixth chapter concerning US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan has proved. The study concludes that the lack of a legal definition of state terror gives a possibility for singles states to legalize and use its state terror. Therefore, the hypothesis that the main participating states in global war on terror (in this study case – US) doesn't fight against them because of the strategic, economic or other political interest as it was proved in analysis of US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan, was confirmed.
In the times of global war on terror there are no paid considerable attention for a state terror, even if this term is used more and more in political discourse defying a single states as being terroristic. Therefore the main research question is why in the era of global war on terror the international community are not fighting with a state terror, which undermines the same human lifes, rights and values as "terrorism" does? In this study, titled "State Terror in the Context of Global War on Terror: Case Study of US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan", the author analyses the concept of state terror in academic, political and juridical level. The main goal of this study is to analyze, why in the context of global war on terror the states are divided into separate categories: some states become enemies, others avoid criticism, even if they can be treated as state terror systems. In order to carry out the tasks set, the study has been divided into six chapters: In the first chapter there was determined a problem of state terror conceptualization. It was concluded that there are three main reasons: conceptualization, emotional and lack of information or data about state terror. The second chapter analyzed a juridical definition of state terror. The analysis of UN conventions and other counter terrorism law data proved that there is no legal definition of state terror and therefore any preventive instruments of fighting against it become neutralized. The study has thus confirmed the hypothesis, that the lack of a legal definition of state terror presupposes a legitimization of the term. In the third chapter there was analyzed an academic definition of state terror. Traditionally, terror is divided in a terror "from below" (widely known as "terrorism") and terror "from above" (state terror, or terror which is implemented by legal state forces). In the academic point of view, this study might be useful as giving a conceptual state terror term. The conceptualization was made on a basic of political, juridical and academic discourse, defining main criteria for identifying a state terror. These criteria were used for defining a state terror of Egypt and Uzbekistan. The study assumes that the lack of above mentioned concept (especially on juridical level) presupposes a legitimization of Uzbekistan and Egypt state terror as analysis in fifth and sixth chapter concerning US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan has proved. The study concludes that the lack of a legal definition of state terror gives a possibility for singles states to legalize and use its state terror. Therefore, the hypothesis that the main participating states in global war on terror (in this study case – US) doesn't fight against them because of the strategic, economic or other political interest as it was proved in analysis of US relations with Egypt and Uzbekistan, was confirmed.
Egypt is one of the most important Middle East countries for the USA in a strategic sense. This article deals with the USA-Egypt relations and the USA democracy promotion in Egypt during the Arab Spring (2011) with an emphasis on interaction of pragmatic interests and idealistic aspirations. The aim is to reveal the influence of the USA on ongoing change of Egypt's regime. Revolution in Egypt gives the USA a reason for concern because their interests could be no more guaranteed because of the instability in Egypt, which may be very harmful to bilateral relations of the United States and Egypt. The main interest of the USA is the stability of Egypt. The USA is also interested in the Middle East conflict settlement, cooperation in counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation, projects of infrastructure, secure military and commercial transport transit through the Suez Canal, continuous transit of oil and gas. With reference to the democratic peace theory, establishment of democracy in Egypt can be considered a long-term interest of the United States, but the promotion of democracy has been often overshadowed by short-term and medium-term interests. In the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the USA relied on the moderate rhetoric rather than concrete actions. The USA still strongly supports the Egyptian army, which should ensure the governance of the state in the period of transition to democratic governance. B. Obama has been highly criticized for cutting funding for. [to full text]
Egypt is one of the most important Middle East countries for the USA in a strategic sense. This article deals with the USA-Egypt relations and the USA democracy promotion in Egypt during the Arab Spring (2011) with an emphasis on interaction of pragmatic interests and idealistic aspirations. The aim is to reveal the influence of the USA on ongoing change of Egypt's regime. Revolution in Egypt gives the USA a reason for concern because their interests could be no more guaranteed because of the instability in Egypt, which may be very harmful to bilateral relations of the United States and Egypt. The main interest of the USA is the stability of Egypt. The USA is also interested in the Middle East conflict settlement, cooperation in counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation, projects of infrastructure, secure military and commercial transport transit through the Suez Canal, continuous transit of oil and gas. With reference to the democratic peace theory, establishment of democracy in Egypt can be considered a long-term interest of the United States, but the promotion of democracy has been often overshadowed by short-term and medium-term interests. In the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the USA relied on the moderate rhetoric rather than concrete actions. The USA still strongly supports the Egyptian army, which should ensure the governance of the state in the period of transition to democratic governance. B. Obama has been highly criticized for cutting funding for. [to full text]
Egypt is one of the most important Middle East countries for the USA in a strategic sense. This article deals with the USA-Egypt relations and the USA democracy promotion in Egypt during the Arab Spring (2011) with an emphasis on interaction of pragmatic interests and idealistic aspirations. The aim is to reveal the influence of the USA on ongoing change of Egypt's regime. Revolution in Egypt gives the USA a reason for concern because their interests could be no more guaranteed because of the instability in Egypt, which may be very harmful to bilateral relations of the United States and Egypt. The main interest of the USA is the stability of Egypt. The USA is also interested in the Middle East conflict settlement, cooperation in counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation, projects of infrastructure, secure military and commercial transport transit through the Suez Canal, continuous transit of oil and gas. With reference to the democratic peace theory, establishment of democracy in Egypt can be considered a long-term interest of the United States, but the promotion of democracy has been often overshadowed by short-term and medium-term interests. In the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the USA relied on the moderate rhetoric rather than concrete actions. The USA still strongly supports the Egyptian army, which should ensure the governance of the state in the period of transition to democratic governance. B. Obama has been highly criticized for cutting funding for. [to full text]
The research is about getting lost in a global world, about challenging your identity, and feeling uncomfortable discovering an identity in a culture other than your own. I was wondering why I want to go to Egypt, why I am idealizing it. Exploring, delving into yourself and trying to understand why something is interesting can reveal many subconscious things. It searching for the rational in the irrational. As you begin to delve deeper, many questions arise. I am inspired by that culture. This is reflected in my work. But should artist be politically correct? Is the use of other culture's traits cultural appropriation, when you try to convey what you want to say, what you feel? In a globalised world there are more and more people with no place. But the world is big and has room for everyone. One can only speculate on how our society will deal with that globalisation in the future. Will new communities form or will people become so different that individualism will flourish…
Thesis analyses imaging of women in the Cairo graffiti field that emerged after 2011 January 25 revolution. Author raises and argument that Cairo graffiti is not only a romanticized and heroic space created as genre of freedom of expression and used as a struggle against changing political systems in Egypt, but rather a pluralistic public sphere where different opinions, ideas and arguments are emerging. Thesis distinguishes major archetypes used as predominant images of women, it analyses what features are used in constructing the "correct" role of woman.
The research paper examines whether electoral participation by Islamist political parties engender moderation in their politics. The case of the Muslim Brotherhood is analyzed since it is the biggest and most influential among islamist organizations in the Muslim world. The analysis is based on the islamists' approach towards the participation in general elections in Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian territories. The focus of this analysis is on the possible moderation on sensitive political issues, such as the implementation of the islamic law, the status of religious minorities, attitude towards the use of violence, political and personal rights and liberties.
The research paper examines whether electoral participation by Islamist political parties engender moderation in their politics. The case of the Muslim Brotherhood is analyzed since it is the biggest and most influential among islamist organizations in the Muslim world. The analysis is based on the islamists' approach towards the participation in general elections in Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian territories. The focus of this analysis is on the possible moderation on sensitive political issues, such as the implementation of the islamic law, the status of religious minorities, attitude towards the use of violence, political and personal rights and liberties.
The war found J. Kekstas in Vilnius. In March 1940, the Soviet authorities arrested him and deported to hard labors in Kirov region. Having been released as a Polish citizen in a year and a half, J. Kekstas joined the army led by gen. V. Anders and moved to Persia. Subsequently he reached Iran, Iraq, Palestine, and Egypt, took part in the military campaigns and battles, and composed poems overflowing with nostalgia for his homeland. Having been injured, he was cured in South Italy. Afterwards he experienced hardships of emigration to Argentina. In 1957, the poet became seriously ill and was half-paralyzed. Thanks to the efforts of Polish writers, he moved to Poland in 1959. J. Kekstas died in April 16, 1981 and was buried in Warsaw.
The war found J. Kekstas in Vilnius. In March 1940, the Soviet authorities arrested him and deported to hard labors in Kirov region. Having been released as a Polish citizen in a year and a half, J. Kekstas joined the army led by gen. V. Anders and moved to Persia. Subsequently he reached Iran, Iraq, Palestine, and Egypt, took part in the military campaigns and battles, and composed poems overflowing with nostalgia for his homeland. Having been injured, he was cured in South Italy. Afterwards he experienced hardships of emigration to Argentina. In 1957, the poet became seriously ill and was half-paralyzed. Thanks to the efforts of Polish writers, he moved to Poland in 1959. J. Kekstas died in April 16, 1981 and was buried in Warsaw.
The war found J. Kekstas in Vilnius. In March 1940, the Soviet authorities arrested him and deported to hard labors in Kirov region. Having been released as a Polish citizen in a year and a half, J. Kekstas joined the army led by gen. V. Anders and moved to Persia. Subsequently he reached Iran, Iraq, Palestine, and Egypt, took part in the military campaigns and battles, and composed poems overflowing with nostalgia for his homeland. Having been injured, he was cured in South Italy. Afterwards he experienced hardships of emigration to Argentina. In 1957, the poet became seriously ill and was half-paralyzed. Thanks to the efforts of Polish writers, he moved to Poland in 1959. J. Kekstas died in April 16, 1981 and was buried in Warsaw.
