Suchergebnisse

Raspad Sovjetskog Saveza uzrokovao je nezapamćenu geopolitičku katastrofu u modernoj povijesti, ostavljajući nestabilne međuetničke prostore sudbini vlastitih nacionalizama. Sovjetski etno-kartografi su kompromisnim rješenjima ustrojili dinamičan prostor novog euroazijskog carstva ignorirajući i odgađajući srž međuetničkih problema. Sovjetskom politikom stvoreni su uvjeti za kontrolu Južnog Kavkaza koristeći međusobne odnose naroda za održavanje moći centralne vlasti pritom potpaljujući međuetničke sukobe. Iako su sovjetske politike težile rješavanju problema, njihov cilj je bio kontrola prostora Južnog Kavkaza pomoću čvrste državne moći čijim su nestankom i započeli odgođeni sukobi koji traju i dandanas. ; The collapse of the Soviet Union has caused an unprecedented geopolitical catastrophe in modern history, leaving unstable inter-ethnic spaces to the fate of their own nationalisms. Soviet ethno-cartographers formed the dynamic space of a new Eurasian empire with compromise solutions, ignoring and delaying the essence of inter-ethnic problems in the South Caucasus. Soviet policies created the conditions for the control of the South Caucasus by using the interrelations of its peoples to maintain the power of the central government, and by stoking inter-ethnic conflicts. Although Soviet policies sought to address the problem, their goal was to control the South Caucasus by means of state power, the disappearance of which marked the beginning of deferred conflicts that continue to this day.

Nakon raspada SSSR-a 1991.godine, zemlje Južnog Kavkaza našle su se pred novim izazovom: stvaranjem neovisne države sa svim svojim institucijama. Bez, ili s vrlo malo prethodnog demokratskog iskustva, sve su se tri južnokavkaske države suočile s tranzicijom koja se ne može nazvati demokratskom. U ovom radu problematizira se institucija predsjednika države koja je igrala iznenađujuće veliku ulogu u stvaranju političkog režima i institucija kakve danas postoje u Azerbajdžanu, Gruziji i Armeniji. S obzirom da je politička povijest ovih zemalja vrlo slična, zanimljivo je promatrati kako su, i zbog kojih razloga, izgradile svoje političke režime. Nalazeći se na poprištu različitih političkih utjecaja i s azijske i s europske strane, ove države usvojile su ponešto iz oba svijeta: demokratske elemente sa zapada i autokratske elemente s istoka. Iako je prošlo skoro 30 godina od osamostaljenja, uloga predsjednika države u kreiranju državne politike snažnija je nego u mnogim europskim zemljama koje su prošle demokratsku tranziciju. ; After the dissolution of USSR in the 1991, countries of South Caucasus face new challenges: making of independent state with all of its institutions. Without, or with very little previous democratic experience, all three of Soutcaucasian countries faced a transition that cannot be called democratic. This thesis delas with the institution of state's president who played an amazingly important role in creating political regimes and institutions that exist in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia today. Given that the political history of these countries is very similar, it is interesting to observe how, and for what reason, these countries built their political regimes. Faced with variety of political influences from both Asian and European sides, these countries have adopted somewhat of both worlds: democratic elements from the West and autocratic elements from the East. Although nearly 30 years have passed since their independence, the role of the state's president in creation of state policies is ...

The article is an analysis of the metaphor of Munich Agreement in the Czech political & media discourses concerning three foreign policy issues from the last three years: the discord about the diplomatic recognition of Kosovo by the Czech Republic, the discussion of the conflict between Russia & Georgia & the issue of the US radar base in the Czech Republic. The text does not aspire to judge which usage of the analogy with Munich is correct. Instead, it works with it as a specific frame which is intended to mobilize a presupposed national "us" for a specific political agenda. The goal is to depoliticize the political discord -- to solve it by referring to a morally strong precedent & subordinate it to this precedent. Munich is used in this way by the followers of very different political camps. Using the analogy of Munich has two main modalities -- the interventionist modality (it is necessary to intervene against a dictator, not to appease him) & the sovereignist modality (it is necessary to defend the sovereignty of the state against an intervention or against aggressive demands of minorities). The former is more in accord with the use of the Munich analogy by Western politicians, while the latter corresponds more with the Czech context center. Adapted from the source document.

Mirne pobune protiv sirijskog predsjednika koje su započele 2011. s vremenom su prerasle u oružani sukob, a zatim i u građanski rat koji do dana današnjeg ne jenjava. Vrlo brzo je privukao i brojne regionalne, ali i međunarodne aktere. Iako se na početku činilo kako će sirijski predsjednik vrlo brzo morati napustiti svoju funkciju, to se nije dogodilo. Zahvaljujući ruskoj vojnoj intervenciji 2015. vratio je kontrolu nad većinom sirijskog teritorija te na taj način osigurao svoju daljnju vlast. Cilj ovoga rada jest prikazati rusku intervenciju u Sirijskom građanskom ratu kao dio nove ruske vanjske politike, odnosno novoga ruskog intervencionizma. Politika koja je započeta intervencijom u Gruziji, a zatim nastavljena u Ukrajini činom aneksije Krima, svoj nastavak dobiva upravo na teritoriju Sirije. Kako ćemo vidjeti kroz rad upravo se ova politika pokazala ključnom za vraćanje Rusiji statusa globalne sile. ; Peaceful uprisings against the Syrian president that began in 2011., over the time escalated into an armed conflict, and then into a civil war that has not abated to this day. It quickly attracted numerous regional and international actors. Although at first it seemed that the Syrian president would have to leave his funcion very soon, this did not happen. Thanks to Russian military intervention in 2015, he regained majority control over Syrian territory and thus secured his further rule. The aim of this paper was to present Russian intervention in the Syrian civil war as a part of a new Russian foreign policy, the policy of interventionism. The policy, which began with the intervention in Georgia, and then continued in Ukraine and the act of annexation of Crimea, gets its continuation on the territory of Syria. As we will see further, it is precisely this policy that has proved crucial for restoring Russia's global power status.