Suchergebnisse

W niniejszym artykule autor analizuje procesy kształtowania się politycznych systemów w państwach Kaukazu Południowego. Wskazuje przy tym na patologiczne zjawiska funkcjonujące w elitach władzy oraz w systemach politycznych tych państw. Analizie poddane zostały także konflikty w Górskim Karabachu, Abchazji i Osetii Południowej, które nadal dominują w życiu politycznym Armenii, Azerbejdżanu i Gruzji. Są podstawą ideologii i programów politycznych elit walczących o władzę, a także znacząco wpływają na styl przywództwa. W politycznej walce znaczącą rolę odgrywały elity wojskowe, które szybko awansowały na szczyt władzy. Autor próbuje wyjaśnić, jak konflikty w Górskim Karabachu, Abchazji i Osetii Południowej wpływają na proces transformacji ustrojowej państw regionu. Kolejnym aspektem analizy jest odpowiedź na pytanie, jak tradycja, kultura, psychologia, styl życia i interesy politycznych elit Armenii, Azerbejdżanu i Gruzji wpływają na rezultaty pokojowego uregulowania konfliktów. ; The Author analyses proces of the formation of political regimes in Southern Caucasus. He points to the pathological phenomena in the functioning of power elites and political regimes of those states. The Author analyses the influence of conflict in Nagorno Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia on the domestic and foreign policy of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. He proves that the described conflict for many years dominated in the political life of this country and was a basis of the ideology and the programs of elites struggling for power. In the struggle of the elites, the military elites played the main role, while being an important path to advancement to the peaks of power. The author tries to explain the influence of the Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia question on political transformation of the states in conflict. Another important thread of the analysis is to search answers to the question, how tradition, culture, psychology, life styles and political interests of elites in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia affect the course and the effects of a peacemaking process aimed solving the Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

It is assumed that on 16 February 2001, Albanians started fighting for their rights in Macedonia with the use of force. On that day armed groups attacked Macedonian police stations in the village of Tanuševci near Tetov. The clashes of various intensity lasted until major amendments to Macedonian constitution were adopted in November 2001.In the first stage of fighting (until May 2001), the Macedonians attempted to disarm the Albanian rebels and destroy the weapons which they had accumulated. This proved difficult because of the support which the latter had in Kosovo and the Prešev Valley, and the guerrilla strategy that they had developed earlier in Kosovo and now adopted. What is more, the Macedonian military actions were slowed down by Americans with the intention of limiting the number of casualties. In April, EU members and the US managed to establish a wide coalition.The major political parties of the country, both governing and oppositional (Macedonian and Albanian) decided to start negotiations concerning the conditions of the future peace treaty - that is, concessions for Albanians living in Macedonia and awarding them more rights. At the same time, the US and members of the EU states opposed the introduction of martial law in the country in order to deal with Albanian rebels by force.The leaders of Albanian parties in Macedonia and the main leaders of the Albanian revolution signed the Prizren Agreement, which was to provide a new plain for the future peace negotiations. Boris Trajkovski, the President of Macedonia, largely agreed with US and UE politics, but for the Prime Minister, his environment and most prominent Macedonian intellectuals - with Georgi Efremov, the President of MANU - the only solution was the division of the Macedonian territory and exchange of their minority groups. The representatives of the EU and US opposed such actions and emphasised that preserving the territorial integrity of Macedonia was absolutely crucial. ; It is assumed that on 16 February 2001, Albanians started fighting for their rights in Macedonia with the use of force. On that day armed groups attacked Macedonian police stations in the village of Tanuševci near Tetov. The clashes of various intensity lasted until major amendments to Macedonian constitution were adopted in November 2001.In the first stage of fighting (until May 2001), the Macedonians attempted to disarm the Albanian rebels and destroy the weapons which they had accumulated. This proved difficult because of the support which the latter had in Kosovo and the Prešev Valley, and the guerrilla strategy that they had developed earlier in Kosovo and now adopted. What is more, the Macedonian military actions were slowed down by Americans with the intention of limiting the number of casualties. In April, EU members and the US managed to establish a wide coalition.The major political parties of the country, both governing and oppositional (Macedonian and Albanian) decided to start negotiations concerning the conditions of the future peace treaty - that is, concessions for Albanians living in Macedonia and awarding them more rights. At the same time, the US and members of the EU states opposed the introduction of martial law in the country in order to deal with Albanian rebels by force.The leaders of Albanian parties in Macedonia and the main leaders of the Albanian revolution signed the Prizren Agreement, which was to provide a new plain for the future peace negotiations. Boris Trajkovski, the President of Macedonia, largely agreed with US and UE politics, but for the Prime Minister, his environment and most prominent Macedonian intellectuals - with Georgi Efremov, the President of MANU - the only solution was the division of the Macedonian territory and exchange of their minority groups. The representatives of the EU and US opposed such actions and emphasised that preserving the territorial integrity of Macedonia was absolutely crucial.

According to UN report Azerbaijan is ranked as one of the top countries with the vast majority of refugees and internally displaced persons- every eight Azerbaijani citizen belongs to one of these groups. What makes that matter worse is that 79% of IDP`s suffers from poverty or social discrimination. That situation is a result of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorny Karabakh which broke out in the end of 80s`. The first migrations started in 1987 and finished in 1991 and concerned mainly Azerbaijanis and Armenians going back to their motherlands(around 500.000 people all together). In 1988 situation in the region was getting very serious and hardly nobody killed in Sumgait and in Baku. In 1992-1994 a regular war broke out between Armenia and Azerbaijan. That is when the biggest migrations took place- Azerbaijanis and Kurds had to leave their homes because of the Armenian invasion on Shushi and Khodzaly. The most traumatic event occurred in 1993- Azerbaijan lost 13% of its territory and all people leaving there were forced to move out. In may 1994 a ceasefire under auspicious of CIS was signed between these two former-Soviet countries. Since then, something what might be called "a peace-war state" between Armenia and Azerbaijan has been existing. The peacemaking process is still in progress- there are OSCE Minsk Group (with Russia, USA, France) and UN working on that- unsuccessfully. The potential IDP`s comeback will be impossible even in next decade. That is connected with unsettled status of Nagorny Karabakh and Lachin corridor (which is a buffer zone) ; Według rankingu ONZ Azerbejdżan jest jednym z czołowych państw, na których terenie występuje wysoki odsetek przesiedleńców. Mniej więcej co ósmy Azerbejdżanin przynależy do jednej z tych grup. Sprawę pogarsza fakt, że ok. 79 % przesiedleńców cierpi z powodu ubóstwa lub społecznej dyskryminacji. Sytuacja ta jest rezultatem konfliktu między Armenią a Azerbejdżanem o Górski Karabach, który rozpoczął się u schyłku lat 80- tych. Pierwsze migracje rozpoczęły się w 1987 roku, a zakończyły w 1991 i dotyczyły głównie Azerów i Ormian powracających do ojczyzny (około 500.000 wszystkich razem). W 1988 sytuacja w regionie była już bardzo groźna i prawie nikt nie potrafił przejąć nad nią kontroli. Zaczęło dochodzić do pogromów, w wyniku których zginęło wielu ludzi w Sumgait i Baku. W latach 1992-94 doszło do regularnej wojny między Armenią i Azerbejdżanem. Gdy miały miejsce największe migracje, wielu Azerów i Kurdów musiało opuścić swe domy z powodu ormiańskiej inwazji w Szuszi i Chodżali. Najbardziej traumatyczne wydarzenia miały miejsce w roku 1993, podczas których Azerbejdżan utracił 13% swego terytorium, a wszystkich ludzi stamtąd zmuszono do wyniesienia się. W maju 1994, pod auspicjami WNP, podpisano zawieszenie broni między tymi dwoma poradzieckimi państwami. Od tego czasu między Azerbejdżanem i Armenią ma miejsce coś, co można nazwać "stanem pokojowo-wojennym". Prace nad przywróceniem pokoju, w które zaangażowane są Mińska grupa OBWE (z Rosją, USA, Francją) oraz ONZ, wciąż trwają bez powodzenia. Niemożliwy będzie potencjalny powrót przesiedleńców nawet w następnej dekadzie. Jest to związane z nieuregulowanym statusem Górskiego Karabachu i Korytarza Laczyńskiego (stanowiącego strefę buforową

Arabska Wiosna przybrała w Libii formę wojny domowej, w następstwie której doszło do zewnętrznej interwencji zbrojnej i obalenia reżimu Muammara Kaddafiego. Bez mała siedem lat od wybuchu wojny państwo nadal pogrążone jest w chaosie. Brak zgody co do kształtu ustrojowego i przywództwa państwa konserwuje status quo i sprawia, że wyjście z impasu jest coraz trudniejsze. W artykule podjęto próbę analizy sytuacji politycznej Libii oraz czynników determinujących impas polityczny, którymi są – zdaniem autorki – przede wszystkim: współistnienie kilku ośrodków władzy, konflikty etniczne, aktywność ugrupowań zbrojnych (milicji), tworzonych zarówno przez wojskowych, jak i islamistów, a także słabość i brak jedności aktorów zewnętrznych, w tym ONZ, w wypracowywaniu kompromisu dotyczącego Libii. ; The Arab Spring in Libya took the form of a civil war, which led to the external military intervention and overthrowing the Muammar Qaddafi regime. Nearly seven years since the war broke out, the country has still remained in chaos. A lack of consensus regarding the form of political system and leadership in the country maintains the status quo and makes the current deadlock increasingly difficult to be broken. The article seeks to analyse the political landscape in Libya as well as the factors affecting the political impasse in the country, which, in the opinion of the author, comprised primarily of the coexistence of several power centres, ethnic conflicts, the activity of armed groups (militias) created both by military members and Islamists, and the weakness as well as the lack of unity in making a compromise on Libya among external actors, including the UN.

Publikacja recenzowana / Peer-reviewed publication ; Arabska Wiosna przybrała w Libii formę wojny domowej, w następstwie której doszło do zewnętrznej interwencji zbrojnej i obalenia reżimu Muammara Kaddafiego. Bez mała siedem lat od wybuchu wojny państwo nadal pogrążone jest w chaosie. Brak zgody co do kształtu ustrojowego i przywództwa państwa konserwuje status quo i sprawia, że wyjście z impasu jest coraz trudniejsze. W artykule podjęto próbę analizy sytuacji politycznej Libii oraz czynników determinujących impas polityczny, którymi są – zdaniem autorki – przede wszystkim: współistnienie kilku ośrodków władzy, konflikty etniczne, aktywność ugrupowań zbrojnych (milicji), tworzonych zarówno przez wojskowych, jak i islamistów, a także słabość i brak jedności aktorów zewnętrznych, w tym ONZ, w wypracowywaniu kompromisu dotyczącego Libii. ; The Arab Spring in Libya took the form of a civil war, which led to the external military intervention and overthrowing the Muammar Qaddafi regime. Nearly seven years since the war broke out, the country has still remained in chaos. A lack of consensus regarding the form of political system and leadership in the country maintains the status quo and makes the current deadlock increasingly difficult to be broken. The article seeks to analyse the political landscape in Libya as well as the factors affecting the political impasse in the country, which, in the opinion of the author, comprised primarily of the coexistence of several power centres, ethnic conflicts, the activity of armed groups (militias) created both by military members and Islamists, and the weakness as well as the lack of unity in making a compromise on Libya among external actors, including the UN.

The article is devoted to the federal system in the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria (North and East Syria), or the so-called Rojava. The case of this system is for many reasons special: on the one hand, it realizes the concept of ethnofederalism; on the other hand, it realizes the doctrine of democratic confederalism, i.e. political thought of Abdullah Öcalan. Democratic confederalism, referring largely to the communalism and municipalism of Murray Bookchin, advocates the implementation of a new order in the Middle East, in which various self-administrating ethnic and religious communities could co-exist in a confederal network based on the principles of participatory democracy, legal pluralism, federalism, equality of women and men, ecology and the social economy. According to its proponents, it leads to peace: first in Syria and later in the entire Middle East. ; Artykuł jest poświęcony systemowi federalnemu w Demokratycznej Federacji Północnej Syrii (Północnej i Wschodniej Syrii), tzw. Rożawie. System ten stanowi przypadek szczególny: z jednej strony ze względu na realizację koncepcji etnofederalizmu, z drugiej zaś z uwagi na zakorzenienie w doktrynie demokratycznego konfederalizmu (tj. myśli politycznej Abdullaha Öcalana). Demokratyczny konfederalizm, nawiązując w dużej mierze do komunalizmu i municypalizmu Murraya Bookchina, opowiada się za realizacją na Bliskim Wschodzie nowego ładu, w którym rozmaite wspólnoty etniczne i religijne mogłyby w ramach swoich odrębnych, lecz połączonych ze sobą w konfederalną sieć, organizacji realizować model demokracji partycypacyjnej i pluralizmu prawnego. Porządek ten, oparty na zasadach demokracji, federalizacji, równouprawnienia kobiet i mężczyzn, ekologii oraz ekonomii społecznej, ma prowadzić do wygaszenia istniejących konfliktów i pokojowej współpracy pomiędzy społecznościami – najpierw Syrii, a później całego regionu.

Memorial sites are a material proof of the Poland-Ukraine military conflict in the Podkarpacie Region, which took place in the years 1944-50. It is here, on the Poland-Ukraine borderland that there is a permanent conflict of interests of the local community of different historical identity. In order to commemorate bloody incidents and numerous victims on both sides memorial sites are erected both in Poland and in Ukraine causing conflicts in the past and present. In the article I have shown thesignificance of the dependence between the memory of the ethnical community and the specifics of the language of the group, which while aiming at the commemoration of events and memorial sites important for them, do not obey the regulations of Polish law. The analysis of the legal basis for erecting these commemorations shows that there is a need to update the law. The importance of the mental layer in context of the intangible value of the cultural heritage of individual ethnic groups, which is often underestimated, can lead to conflicts that reach beyond the border area becoming conflicts of nationwide or even international concern. ; Miejsca pamięci są materialnym dowodem zbrojnego konfliktu polsko-ukraińskiego na Podkarpaciu, który rozegrał się w latach 1944-50. To właśnie tutaj, na południowo-wschodnim pograniczu dochodzi do permanentnego konfliktu interesów społeczności lokalnych o różnej tożsamości historycznej. W celu upamiętnienia krwawych zajść i licznych ofiar po obu stronach, wznoszone są upamiętnienia na ziemiach polskich i ukraińskich, stanowiąc zarzewie konfliktów, zarówno w przeszłości, jak i obecnie. W artykule wykazałam wagę zależności pomiędzy pamięcią społeczności etnicznej, a specyfiką języka grupy, która dążąc do upamiętnienia ważnych dla siebie wydarzeń i miejsc pamięci, nie przestrzega istniejących przepisów prawa państwa Polskiego. Analiza podstaw prawnych wznoszenia upamiętnień pokazuje, że wymagana jest aktualizacja przepisów prawa. Powszechnie niedoceniana wartość warstwy mentalnej w kontekście wartości niematerialnej dziedzictwa kulturowego poszczególnych grup etnicznych doprowadza do sytuacji konfliktogennych, które wykraczają poza teren pogranicza, stając się konfliktami o zasięgu ogólnopolskim, a coraz częściej nawet międzynarodowym.

Istnienie w Europie ruchów separatystycznych i dezintegracyjnych, punktów zapalnych oraz konfliktów zbrojnych przekonuje, że nasz kontynent nie jest miejscem spokojnym ani bezpiecznym. Nawet, jeżeli uważamy go za najbezpieczniejszy na naszym globie. Po 1989 roku zapanowała w Europie demokracja, w latach 1999–2013 do zachodnich struktur obronnych (NATO) i gospodarczych (UE) włączono kraje Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, wiązano z tym wielkie nadzieje na przyszłość. W drugiej dekadzie XXI wieku w Europie pojawiły się zupełnie inne tendencje. W prawie wszystkich krajach europejskich nasiliły się ruchy separatystyczne i populistyczne. W artykule postawiono następujące pytania badawcze:1. Jakie jest źródło ruchów separatystyczno-populistycznych?2. Co leży u podstaw odrodzenia nacjonalizmu w państwach europejskich?3. Dlaczego polityka autonomii regionów nie skutkuje?4. Co może być skutkiem rozbicia etnicznego kolejnych państw w Europie? Posłużono się metodą komparatystyczną oraz analizą systemową. Rozpoznając badany problem, autor doszedł do następujących wniosków:1. W Europie występują problemy, które prowadziły i mogą doprowadzić do wojen.2. Żadne państwo nie może się czuć bezpieczne, nawet, jeśli samo jest stabilne i demokratyczne.3. Ekstremistyczne ugrupowania i ruchy polityczne mogą zdestabilizować kontynent.4. Jednym antidotum w uspakajaniu konfliktów oraz eliminowania sytuacji separatystycznych jest ugruntowana i stabilna demokracja.5. Polityka europejska (UE) powinna w tej kwestii być jednoznaczna i stabilna. ; The existence of separatist and disintegrating movements in Europe, hot spots and armed conflicts, argues that our continent is neither peaceful nor safe place. Even if we consider it the safest place on our planet. After 1989, democracy prevailed in Europe, in 1999–2013 the Central and Eastern European countries were included into the Western defence (NATO) and economic (EU) structures, with great hopes for the future. In the second decade of the twenty-first century completely different tendencies appeared in Europe. Separatist and populist movements intensified their activity in almost all European countries (Rostowska 2018). The article raises the following research questions:1. What is the source of separatist-populist movements?2. What is the basis of the revival of nationalism in European countries?3. Why is the policy of autonomous autonomy not working?4. What can be the result of the ethnic disintegration of other countries in Europe? The article uses the comparative method and system analysis. Analyzing the problem, the author came to the following conclusions:1. There are problems in Europe that have led and may lead to wars.2. No state can feel safe even if it is stable and democratic.3. Extremist political parties and movements may destabilize the continent.4. The only antidote in calming conflicts and eliminating separatist situations is a well-established and stable democracy.5. European policy (EU) should be unambiguous and stable in this matter.

Istnienie w Europie ruchów separatystycznych i dezintegracyjnych, punktów zapalnych oraz konfliktów zbrojnych przekonuje, że nasz kontynent nie jest miejscem spokojnym ani bezpiecznym. Nawet, jeżeli uważamy go za najbezpieczniejszy na naszym globie. Po 1989 roku zapanowała w Europie demokracja, w latach 1999-2013 do zachodnich struktur obronnych (NATO) i gospodarczych (UE) włączono kraje Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, wiązano z tym wielkie nadzieje na przyszłość. W drugiej dekadzie XXI wieku w Europie pojawiły się zupełnie inne tendencje. W prawie wszystkich krajach europejskich nasiliły się ruchy separatystyczne i populistyczne. W artykule postawiono następujące pytania badawcze: 1. Jakie jest źródło ruchów separatystyczno-populistycznych? 2. Co leży u podstaw odrodzenia nacjonalizmu w państwach europejskich? 3. Dlaczego polityka autonomii regionów nie skutkuje? 4. Co może być skutkiem rozbicia etnicznego kolejnych państw w Europie? Posłużono się metodą komparatystyczną oraz analizą systemową. Rozpoznając badany problem, autor doszedł do następujących wniosków: 1. W Europie występują problemy, które prowadziły i mogą doprowadzić do wojen. 2. Żadne państwo nie może się czuć bezpieczne, nawet, jeśli samo jest stabilne i demokratyczne. 3. Ekstremistyczne ugrupowania i ruchy polityczne mogą zdestabilizować kontynent. 4. Jednym antidotum w uspakajaniu konfliktów oraz eliminowania sytuacji separatystycznych jest ugruntowana i stabilna demokracja. 5. Polityka europejska (UE) powinna w tej kwestii być jednoznaczna i stabilna. ; The existence of separatist and disintegrating movements in Europe, hot spots and armed conflicts, argues that our continent is neither peaceful nor safe place. Even if we consider it the safest place on our planet. After 1989, democracy prevailed in Europe, in 1999-2013 the Central and Eastern European countries were included into the Western defence (NATO) and economic (EU) structures, with great hopes for the future. In the second decade of the twenty-first century completely different tendencies appeared in Europe. Separatist and populist movements intensified their activity in almost all European countries (Rostowska 2018). The article raises the following research questions: 1. What is the source of separatist-populist movements? 2. What is the basis of the revival of nationalism in European countries? 3. Why is the policy of autonomous autonomy not working? 4. What can be the result of the ethnic disintegration of other countries in Europe? The article uses the comparative method and system analysis. Analyzing the problem, the author came to the following conclusions: 1. There are problems in Europe that have led and may lead to wars. 2. No state can feel safe even if it is stable and democratic. 3. Extremist political parties and movements may destabilize the continent. 4. The only antidote in calming conflicts and eliminating separatist situations is a well-established and stable democracy. 5. European policy (EU) should be unambiguous and stable in this matter.

The intensification of separatism in Ukraine in 2014 became possible due to profound changes in the worldview of a significant part of the population, which manifested in the changing of national self-identification. The purpose of the article is to clarify scientific ideas about the essence and relationship of separatism and identity on the example of Donbas. The article argues for the idea of the absence of an ethnic marker in the conflict in Donbass, where separatism is based on the specific regional identity, to which, through the efforts of Russian propaganda, the cultural, ideological, civilizational characteristics of the «Russian world» are added.

The issue оf contemporary Macedonian state consolidation in the context of its aspiration to the European Union Since its establishment, the Republic of Macedonia has been facing the crisis of social and political system. This is connected with the complicated ethnic and religious relations, diffi­cult economic condition of the state and complex, international circumstances in the Balkans. The European Union makes the membership of Macedonia in its structures dependent on the implementation of solutions preventing the renewal of the armed conflict between the Mace­donian authorities and Albanian rebels in the year 2001. The reforms implemented on the basis of the Ohrid Framework Agreement (2001) are designed to provide the social and economic stability in the country, mainly through the cooperation between Macedonians and Albanians. The imbalance between the strengthening of the position of the Albanian national minority in the entirety of the state system and the progress in the establishment of the civil society raises the concern of the observers of the social and political life in Macedonia. The division of the society based on the ethnicity criterion is strengthened in Macedonia. The opportunity of the development of cooperation over the ethnic divisions is limited due to a strong role of nationalistic sentiments, insufficient legitimacy of framework agreement by the citizens and pathologies of social and political life (corruption, organized crime). It is likely that ethnic criteria that are the basis for currently implemented system changes in the Republic of Mace­donia shall dominate the pursuit to democratize the state as a whole. It will be a threat for the consolidation of the republic, since the particularistic tendencies may outweigh the peaceful cooperation for strengthening the unity of the state.

Contacts between academic societies in the lands of partitioned Poland – status of and need for research (Summary)The article describes contacts between academic societies operating in the lands of partitioned Poland. Its purpose is to present the current status of research on this very wide topic and to indicate the need for research that arises in this respect. A comprehensive view of these contacts shows that the topic has not been acknowledged to-date. Therefore, it has not been properly reflected in the professional literature. Where the topic has been recognized by authors, it has often not been properly interpreted. The most frequent mistake that has been made by researchers is perceiving the issue from an exclusively ethnic angle, which – particularly in respect of the lands of partitioned Poland – is related to the conflicts arising in such conditions. Seen against the background of the contacts between the various academic institutions operating in the three partitions, it is clearly visible how complicated the matter was and how different factors played a role in forming and discontinuing relationships. ; Contacts between academic societies in the lands of partitioned Poland – status of and need for research (Summary)The article describes contacts between academic societies operating in the lands of partitioned Poland. Its purpose is to present the current status of research on this very wide topic and to indicate the need for research that arises in this respect. A comprehensive view of these contacts shows that the topic has not been acknowledged to-date. Therefore, it has not been properly reflected in the professional literature. Where the topic has been recognized by authors, it has often not been properly interpreted. The most frequent mistake that has been made by researchers is perceiving the issue from an exclusively ethnic angle, which – particularly in respect of the lands of partitioned Poland – is related to the conflicts arising in such conditions. Seen against the background of the contacts between the various academic institutions operating in the three partitions, it is clearly visible how complicated the matter was and how different factors played a role in forming and discontinuing relationships.

Contacts between academic societies in the lands of partitioned Poland – status of and need for research (Summary)The article describes contacts between academic societies operating in the lands of partitioned Poland. Its purpose is to present the current status of research on this very wide topic and to indicate the need for research that arises in this respect. A comprehensive view of these contacts shows that the topic has not been acknowledged to-date. Therefore, it has not been properly reflected in the professional literature. Where the topic has been recognized by authors, it has often not been properly interpreted. The most frequent mistake that has been made by researchers is perceiving the issue from an exclusively ethnic angle, which – particularly in respect of the lands of partitioned Poland – is related to the conflicts arising in such conditions. Seen against the background of the contacts between the various academic institutions operating in the three partitions, it is clearly visible how complicated the matter was and how different factors played a role in forming and discontinuing relationships. ; Contacts between academic societies in the lands of partitioned Poland – status of and need for research (Summary)The article describes contacts between academic societies operating in the lands of partitioned Poland. Its purpose is to present the current status of research on this very wide topic and to indicate the need for research that arises in this respect. A comprehensive view of these contacts shows that the topic has not been acknowledged to-date. Therefore, it has not been properly reflected in the professional literature. Where the topic has been recognized by authors, it has often not been properly interpreted. The most frequent mistake that has been made by researchers is perceiving the issue from an exclusively ethnic angle, which – particularly in respect of the lands of partitioned Poland – is related to the conflicts arising in such conditions. Seen against the background of the contacts between the various academic institutions operating in the three partitions, it is clearly visible how complicated the matter was and how different factors played a role in forming and discontinuing relationships.

The aim of the publication is a comparative analysis of the migration crisis of 2015 and 2022, with particular emphasis on refugee policy in Turkey and Poland and in the broadly understood context of the European Union. Embedded in the interdisciplinary field of European Studies, the article is based on the assumption that the dynamics and scale of migration flows in 2022 distinguish this crisis from the events of 2015, and the neighborly location of Ukraine influenced a different assessment of the situation than it was in the case of conflicts in sub-Saharan Africa or the Middle East. The cultural and ethnic proximity of Ukrainians has played a key role and is reflected in EU legislation regulating their status as displaced persons. The conclusions highlight the trend in Turkey and EU countries to renationalise refugee protection measures, the temporary nature of which is becoming a common standard. The research is based on the legal-dogmatic method, institutional analysis, comparative method and discourse analysis, using appropriate research techniques.