Research on political speeches is often done in countries with strong presidential powers, typically in the USA. However, political speeches by presidents are also a critical method of influencing public opinion in the Czech Republic. Therefore this article is focused on the analysis of speeches of the former President of the Czech Republic, Vaclav Klaus. Our research is based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative content analysis of Klaus' speeches (thematic units are used as the unit of analysis) found on his website (www.klaus.cz) in the period from 1995 to the end of his presidency, March 2013 (N = 470). We aim to identify the changing structure of political issues in Klaus' speeches and changes in Klaus' position on those issues, and to uncover any characteristic features of his speeches (the use of personal pronouns, the role of the speaker, the tone of the speech, etc.). 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.
