Suchergebnisse

In November 2003 the ex-soviet state of Georgia experienced a change of incumbents, which was famously dubbed "Rose revolution". This event propelled to power a group of pro-western politicians, led by a young, charismatic leader Mikhail Saakashvili. So-called Rose revolution marked a begining of new chapter in Georgia-Russia relations. As soon as he became president, Saakashvili declared that his main aim was to seek Georgia's eventual accesion to European Union and NATO. This announcement was met in Moscow with clear irritation. In 2006 Georgia became the target of comprehensive Russian economic sanctions. These sanctions inflicted considerable damage on Georgian economy. Moreover, in the summer of 2008 a brief military conflict erupted between Tbilisi and Moscow. The conflict ended badly for Georgians. Soon, the diplomatic relations between Georgia and Russia were severed. It looked like Tbilisi-Moscow relations had reached a definitive dead end with neither of the two neighboring countries seeking to normalize the evidently strained relationship. However, in 2012 and 2013 Georgian elections Saakashvili's party was soundly defeated by an upstart political movement "Georgian Dream", led by billionaire who made his fortune in Russia, Bidzina Ivanishvili. One of the key reasons of Ivanishvili's electoral success was poor economic situation in Georgia largely due to Russian sanctions. During his campaign, he constantly spoke about the need to improve relations with Kremlin. This slogan was met rather positively among Georgian population. This thesis attempts to solve an interesting paradox. While economic sanctions theories claim that external economic pressure frequently encourages sanctioned populations to rally around the flag, it was the opposite scenario in Georgia. Incumbents led by Mikhail Saakashvili essentialy lost voters' trust and were driven from office through electoral means. The goal of this thesis is to investigate, why Saakashvili-led political powers lost the support of the Georgian people, although theoretically that same population should have been determined to support its regime during the latter's efforts to defy economic pressure. In order to achieve the aforementioned goal, three tasks are set in this thesis. First, to analize thoroughly the influence of Moscow's economic pressure on the Georgian economy as a whole. Second, to study the results of the Georgian public opinion polls, conducted in the space of 2006 – 2013. Third, to determine which other factors besides Russian sanctions may have had impact on the change of governing powers in Georgia. Previous research on economic sanctions has identified one important aspect about their presumable success. It concerns the role of target regime type. There appears to be a clear difference between the political impact of sanctions on democratic regimes and the political impact of sanctions on autocracies. Many scholars argue that democratic incumbents may be considerably more vulnerable to external economic pressure than authoritarian incumbents. This assumption occupies a significant place in this thesis. The main conclusions of this thesis suggest that Russian sanctions dealt a particularly strong blow to Georgia's agricultural sector, which at the time still occupied a large share of country's economy. Sanctions imposed by Moscow effectively increased levels of unemployment and poverty among Georgian society. This was due to the fact that the aforementioned agricultural sector in 2006 was essentially the main provider of jobs to Georgian citizens. With the lucrative Russian market suddenly closed to Georgian production, the future prospects for many of these citizens did not look bright. This inevitably fueled popular dissatisfaction among Georgian people. It eventually broke out during the 2012-13 elections, when incumbents associated closely with Saakashvili lost in a landslide to a newly formed coalition "Georgian Dream".

In November 2003 the ex-soviet state of Georgia experienced a change of incumbents, which was famously dubbed "Rose revolution". This event propelled to power a group of pro-western politicians, led by a young, charismatic leader Mikhail Saakashvili. So-called Rose revolution marked a begining of new chapter in Georgia-Russia relations. As soon as he became president, Saakashvili declared that his main aim was to seek Georgia's eventual accesion to European Union and NATO. This announcement was met in Moscow with clear irritation. In 2006 Georgia became the target of comprehensive Russian economic sanctions. These sanctions inflicted considerable damage on Georgian economy. Moreover, in the summer of 2008 a brief military conflict erupted between Tbilisi and Moscow. The conflict ended badly for Georgians. Soon, the diplomatic relations between Georgia and Russia were severed. It looked like Tbilisi-Moscow relations had reached a definitive dead end with neither of the two neighboring countries seeking to normalize the evidently strained relationship. However, in 2012 and 2013 Georgian elections Saakashvili's party was soundly defeated by an upstart political movement "Georgian Dream", led by billionaire who made his fortune in Russia, Bidzina Ivanishvili. One of the key reasons of Ivanishvili's electoral success was poor economic situation in Georgia largely due to Russian sanctions. During his campaign, he constantly spoke about the need to improve relations with Kremlin. This slogan was met rather positively among Georgian population. This thesis attempts to solve an interesting paradox. While economic sanctions theories claim that external economic pressure frequently encourages sanctioned populations to rally around the flag, it was the opposite scenario in Georgia. Incumbents led by Mikhail Saakashvili essentialy lost voters' trust and were driven from office through electoral means. The goal of this thesis is to investigate, why Saakashvili-led political powers lost the support of the Georgian people, although theoretically that same population should have been determined to support its regime during the latter's efforts to defy economic pressure. In order to achieve the aforementioned goal, three tasks are set in this thesis. First, to analize thoroughly the influence of Moscow's economic pressure on the Georgian economy as a whole. Second, to study the results of the Georgian public opinion polls, conducted in the space of 2006 – 2013. Third, to determine which other factors besides Russian sanctions may have had impact on the change of governing powers in Georgia. Previous research on economic sanctions has identified one important aspect about their presumable success. It concerns the role of target regime type. There appears to be a clear difference between the political impact of sanctions on democratic regimes and the political impact of sanctions on autocracies. Many scholars argue that democratic incumbents may be considerably more vulnerable to external economic pressure than authoritarian incumbents. This assumption occupies a significant place in this thesis. The main conclusions of this thesis suggest that Russian sanctions dealt a particularly strong blow to Georgia's agricultural sector, which at the time still occupied a large share of country's economy. Sanctions imposed by Moscow effectively increased levels of unemployment and poverty among Georgian society. This was due to the fact that the aforementioned agricultural sector in 2006 was essentially the main provider of jobs to Georgian citizens. With the lucrative Russian market suddenly closed to Georgian production, the future prospects for many of these citizens did not look bright. This inevitably fueled popular dissatisfaction among Georgian people. It eventually broke out during the 2012-13 elections, when incumbents associated closely with Saakashvili lost in a landslide to a newly formed coalition "Georgian Dream".

In November 2003 the ex-soviet state of Georgia experienced a change of incumbents, which was famously dubbed "Rose revolution". This event propelled to power a group of pro-western politicians, led by a young, charismatic leader Mikhail Saakashvili. So-called Rose revolution marked a begining of new chapter in Georgia-Russia relations. As soon as he became president, Saakashvili declared that his main aim was to seek Georgia's eventual accesion to European Union and NATO. This announcement was met in Moscow with clear irritation. In 2006 Georgia became the target of comprehensive Russian economic sanctions. These sanctions inflicted considerable damage on Georgian economy. Moreover, in the summer of 2008 a brief military conflict erupted between Tbilisi and Moscow. The conflict ended badly for Georgians. Soon, the diplomatic relations between Georgia and Russia were severed. It looked like Tbilisi-Moscow relations had reached a definitive dead end with neither of the two neighboring countries seeking to normalize the evidently strained relationship. However, in 2012 and 2013 Georgian elections Saakashvili's party was soundly defeated by an upstart political movement "Georgian Dream", led by billionaire who made his fortune in Russia, Bidzina Ivanishvili. One of the key reasons of Ivanishvili's electoral success was poor economic situation in Georgia largely due to Russian sanctions. During his campaign, he constantly spoke about the need to improve relations with Kremlin. This slogan was met rather positively among Georgian population. This thesis attempts to solve an interesting paradox. While economic sanctions theories claim that external economic pressure frequently encourages sanctioned populations to rally around the flag, it was the opposite scenario in Georgia. Incumbents led by Mikhail Saakashvili essentialy lost voters' trust and were driven from office through electoral means. The goal of this thesis is to investigate, why Saakashvili-led political powers lost the support of the Georgian people, although theoretically that same population should have been determined to support its regime during the latter's efforts to defy economic pressure. In order to achieve the aforementioned goal, three tasks are set in this thesis. First, to analize thoroughly the influence of Moscow's economic pressure on the Georgian economy as a whole. Second, to study the results of the Georgian public opinion polls, conducted in the space of 2006 – 2013. Third, to determine which other factors besides Russian sanctions may have had impact on the change of governing powers in Georgia. Previous research on economic sanctions has identified one important aspect about their presumable success. It concerns the role of target regime type. There appears to be a clear difference between the political impact of sanctions on democratic regimes and the political impact of sanctions on autocracies. Many scholars argue that democratic incumbents may be considerably more vulnerable to external economic pressure than authoritarian incumbents. This assumption occupies a significant place in this thesis. The main conclusions of this thesis suggest that Russian sanctions dealt a particularly strong blow to Georgia's agricultural sector, which at the time still occupied a large share of country's economy. Sanctions imposed by Moscow effectively increased levels of unemployment and poverty among Georgian society. This was due to the fact that the aforementioned agricultural sector in 2006 was essentially the main provider of jobs to Georgian citizens. With the lucrative Russian market suddenly closed to Georgian production, the future prospects for many of these citizens did not look bright. This inevitably fueled popular dissatisfaction among Georgian people. It eventually broke out during the 2012-13 elections, when incumbents associated closely with Saakashvili lost in a landslide to a newly formed coalition "Georgian Dream".

In November 2003 the ex-soviet state of Georgia experienced a change of incumbents, which was famously dubbed "Rose revolution". This event propelled to power a group of pro-western politicians, led by a young, charismatic leader Mikhail Saakashvili. So-called Rose revolution marked a begining of new chapter in Georgia-Russia relations. As soon as he became president, Saakashvili declared that his main aim was to seek Georgia's eventual accesion to European Union and NATO. This announcement was met in Moscow with clear irritation. In 2006 Georgia became the target of comprehensive Russian economic sanctions. These sanctions inflicted considerable damage on Georgian economy. Moreover, in the summer of 2008 a brief military conflict erupted between Tbilisi and Moscow. The conflict ended badly for Georgians. Soon, the diplomatic relations between Georgia and Russia were severed. It looked like Tbilisi-Moscow relations had reached a definitive dead end with neither of the two neighboring countries seeking to normalize the evidently strained relationship. However, in 2012 and 2013 Georgian elections Saakashvili's party was soundly defeated by an upstart political movement "Georgian Dream", led by billionaire who made his fortune in Russia, Bidzina Ivanishvili. One of the key reasons of Ivanishvili's electoral success was poor economic situation in Georgia largely due to Russian sanctions. During his campaign, he constantly spoke about the need to improve relations with Kremlin. This slogan was met rather positively among Georgian population. This thesis attempts to solve an interesting paradox. While economic sanctions theories claim that external economic pressure frequently encourages sanctioned populations to rally around the flag, it was the opposite scenario in Georgia. Incumbents led by Mikhail Saakashvili essentialy lost voters' trust and were driven from office through electoral means. The goal of this thesis is to investigate, why Saakashvili-led political powers lost the support of the Georgian people, although theoretically that same population should have been determined to support its regime during the latter's efforts to defy economic pressure. In order to achieve the aforementioned goal, three tasks are set in this thesis. First, to analize thoroughly the influence of Moscow's economic pressure on the Georgian economy as a whole. Second, to study the results of the Georgian public opinion polls, conducted in the space of 2006 – 2013. Third, to determine which other factors besides Russian sanctions may have had impact on the change of governing powers in Georgia. Previous research on economic sanctions has identified one important aspect about their presumable success. It concerns the role of target regime type. There appears to be a clear difference between the political impact of sanctions on democratic regimes and the political impact of sanctions on autocracies. Many scholars argue that democratic incumbents may be considerably more vulnerable to external economic pressure than authoritarian incumbents. This assumption occupies a significant place in this thesis. The main conclusions of this thesis suggest that Russian sanctions dealt a particularly strong blow to Georgia's agricultural sector, which at the time still occupied a large share of country's economy. Sanctions imposed by Moscow effectively increased levels of unemployment and poverty among Georgian society. This was due to the fact that the aforementioned agricultural sector in 2006 was essentially the main provider of jobs to Georgian citizens. With the lucrative Russian market suddenly closed to Georgian production, the future prospects for many of these citizens did not look bright. This inevitably fueled popular dissatisfaction among Georgian people. It eventually broke out during the 2012-13 elections, when incumbents associated closely with Saakashvili lost in a landslide to a newly formed coalition "Georgian Dream".

This article presents macro-level study of voting in Lithuania's local elections, with emphasis on changing electoral support for the incumbent parties. Presented statistical analysis of vote change in two periods between municipal elections (year 1997-2000 and 2002-2007) aims to explain the success (and failure) of dominant parties in national government and municipal councils (two separate cases). Article is mainly oriented into the search of economic voting, but hypotheses related to other, political-institutional factors are also tested. It is discovered that dynamics of unemployment change helps to explain vote change for the party that is dominant in the municipal council, but it is not important when state of economy is worsening. The dominant party in the national government is unanimously punished when unemployment is rising, but when the state of economy is improving, average vote change for such party is not outstanding. The dispersion of vote change in both cases (when dependent variable is vote change for the dominant party in the national government) is better explained by the political-institutional variables (firstly, turnout change). Adapted from the source document.

Straipsnyje is viesosios tarnybos susitarimu modelio perspektyvos aptariamos viesojo sektoriaus politizacijos teorines prielaidos ir nagrinejamas sarysis su viesojo sektoriaus vadovu lojalumu politikams. Remiantis siomis izvalgomis aptariami Lietuvos viesajame valdyme istoriskai susikloste egalitariniai, o kai kuriais atvejais ir individualistiniai lojalumo elementai, kuriuos sustiprino fragmentuota sovietine institucine struktura su lygiagrecia personaliniu lojalumu ir neformaliu rysiu tinklu besiremiancia valdymo struktura. Taip pat apzvelgiama siandieninio Lietuvos viesojo valdymo lojalumo sampratos fragmentacija, parodant, kad politiku ir vadovu santykius apibrezti kaip sutarima galima tik tam tikruose sektoriuose, o daugumoje sriciu lojalumo aspekta politikai ir viesuju organizaciju vadovai interpretuoja skirtingai. Tai vyksta nepaisant bandymu institucionalizuoti su istorine tradicija nesisiejancia hierarchine lojalumo struktura This article deals with politicisation of the public sector in Lithuania in the context of ensuring loyalty of high public officials to the politics of the government of the day. The theoretical framework of Public Service Bargains (PSBs) was used in order to analyse historical changes and the contemporary perception of loyalty among politicians and high public officials. From the PSBs perspective a historically dominant egalitarian type of loyalty bargain with some individualistic elements among the ruling elite is discussed. During the Soviet period this type of loyalty bargain was secured by a personal loyalty network based on formal and informal ties. Integration to the EU was a factor that was used by the administrative elite of Lithuania in order to try eliminating most of the instruments ensuring formal loyalty and securing a hierarchical loyalty bargain in a formal and legalistic way without reaching a common understanding with politicians. Today's politico-administrative interaction provides a mixed picture regarding the praxis of loyalty bargain in the Lithuanian public sector. There is some evidence that politicians prefer an egalitarian loyalty bargain and do not recognise a formal hierarchical loyalty setting. This situation could be regarded as cheating on loyalty bargain from both sides that provoke politicians to search for new ways in achieving the loyalty of high public officials to the politics of the incumbent government and exercise politicisation practices for that purpose. Adapted from the source document.

Postal sector as a part of communications industry is undergoing rapid changes nowadays, both becoming more modern and striving to retain its traditional values of reliability and respectability. PLC Lithuania Post was selected as a representational model of the provider of ordinary post services in a developing state, which is highly influenced by the spread of electronic communications, in which active information society is forming and the requirements of customers for various communications services are increasing. While being state enterprise up to 2006 Lithuania Post underwent certain political control, which is inherent to the companies subsidized from state budget, which adjusted dynamics of the enterprise. However after the change of its legal status from 2006 Lithuania Post became public limited company, the shares of which still belong to the state, and got the impulse to improve the efficiency of its activity and to prepare for the full market opening of postal services. Lithuania post retained universal postal service obligation and as an incumbent operator is obliged to provide postal services throughout whole territory of the country. Object of work – future of Lithuania Post as a representative of global postal market. Aim of work – to analyse current activity of the company and to link its development to the overall perspective of the traditional post. Following tasks of work were formulated: - To discuss crucial events of Lithuania Post evolution, to evaluate changes in operational efficiency (two pillars – activity as a state enterprise and as a public limited company) and prospects of services; - With reference to the achievements of recent years, to analyse the preparation of the company for the full market opening and to review benchmarks for the work under severe competition; - With reference to the investigations performed by Communications Regulatory Authority and own quantitative survey to examine the opinion and expectations of consumers regarding the company and postal services; - To identify the reasons for changes in the postal sector and to pattern possible outcomes as well as future tendencies. After analysing data of Lithuania Post activity and after performance of quantitative survey of customer opinion, it was grounded that the change of status of the company did not impact its work significantly, that this altered legal status is considered to be a strong impulse for the future privatisation of the company, that after full market opening in 2013 the quality of postal service should improve. With reference to up-to-date progress of Lithuania Post it was determined that the company should pay greater attention to the services, which are related to Internet trade (eg. parcel services). Also it is necessary to improve customer service and to do it via greater motivation of the employees, since all these elements highly correlate with the overall image of the company and of course influences the its prospects.

Postal sector as a part of communications industry is undergoing rapid changes nowadays, both becoming more modern and striving to retain its traditional values of reliability and respectability. PLC Lithuania Post was selected as a representational model of the provider of ordinary post services in a developing state, which is highly influenced by the spread of electronic communications, in which active information society is forming and the requirements of customers for various communications services are increasing. While being state enterprise up to 2006 Lithuania Post underwent certain political control, which is inherent to the companies subsidized from state budget, which adjusted dynamics of the enterprise. However after the change of its legal status from 2006 Lithuania Post became public limited company, the shares of which still belong to the state, and got the impulse to improve the efficiency of its activity and to prepare for the full market opening of postal services. Lithuania post retained universal postal service obligation and as an incumbent operator is obliged to provide postal services throughout whole territory of the country. Object of work – future of Lithuania Post as a representative of global postal market. Aim of work – to analyse current activity of the company and to link its development to the overall perspective of the traditional post. Following tasks of work were formulated: - To discuss crucial events of Lithuania Post evolution, to evaluate changes in operational efficiency (two pillars – activity as a state enterprise and as a public limited company) and prospects of services; - With reference to the achievements of recent years, to analyse the preparation of the company for the full market opening and to review benchmarks for the work under severe competition; - With reference to the investigations performed by Communications Regulatory Authority and own quantitative survey to examine the opinion and expectations of consumers regarding the company and postal services; - To identify the reasons for changes in the postal sector and to pattern possible outcomes as well as future tendencies. After analysing data of Lithuania Post activity and after performance of quantitative survey of customer opinion, it was grounded that the change of status of the company did not impact its work significantly, that this altered legal status is considered to be a strong impulse for the future privatisation of the company, that after full market opening in 2013 the quality of postal service should improve. With reference to up-to-date progress of Lithuania Post it was determined that the company should pay greater attention to the services, which are related to Internet trade (eg. parcel services). Also it is necessary to improve customer service and to do it via greater motivation of the employees, since all these elements highly correlate with the overall image of the company and of course influences the its prospects.

Postal sector as a part of communications industry is undergoing rapid changes nowadays, both becoming more modern and striving to retain its traditional values of reliability and respectability. PLC Lithuania Post was selected as a representational model of the provider of ordinary post services in a developing state, which is highly influenced by the spread of electronic communications, in which active information society is forming and the requirements of customers for various communications services are increasing. While being state enterprise up to 2006 Lithuania Post underwent certain political control, which is inherent to the companies subsidized from state budget, which adjusted dynamics of the enterprise. However after the change of its legal status from 2006 Lithuania Post became public limited company, the shares of which still belong to the state, and got the impulse to improve the efficiency of its activity and to prepare for the full market opening of postal services. Lithuania post retained universal postal service obligation and as an incumbent operator is obliged to provide postal services throughout whole territory of the country. Object of work – future of Lithuania Post as a representative of global postal market. Aim of work – to analyse current activity of the company and to link its development to the overall perspective of the traditional post. Following tasks of work were formulated: - To discuss crucial events of Lithuania Post evolution, to evaluate changes in operational efficiency (two pillars – activity as a state enterprise and as a public limited company) and prospects of services; - With reference to the achievements of recent years, to analyse the preparation of the company for the full market opening and to review benchmarks for the work under severe competition; - With reference to the investigations performed by Communications Regulatory Authority and own quantitative survey to examine the opinion and expectations of consumers regarding the company and postal services; - To identify the reasons for changes in the postal sector and to pattern possible outcomes as well as future tendencies. After analysing data of Lithuania Post activity and after performance of quantitative survey of customer opinion, it was grounded that the change of status of the company did not impact its work significantly, that this altered legal status is considered to be a strong impulse for the future privatisation of the company, that after full market opening in 2013 the quality of postal service should improve. With reference to up-to-date progress of Lithuania Post it was determined that the company should pay greater attention to the services, which are related to Internet trade (eg. parcel services). Also it is necessary to improve customer service and to do it via greater motivation of the employees, since all these elements highly correlate with the overall image of the company and of course influences the its prospects.

Postal sector as a part of communications industry is undergoing rapid changes nowadays, both becoming more modern and striving to retain its traditional values of reliability and respectability. PLC Lithuania Post was selected as a representational model of the provider of ordinary post services in a developing state, which is highly influenced by the spread of electronic communications, in which active information society is forming and the requirements of customers for various communications services are increasing. While being state enterprise up to 2006 Lithuania Post underwent certain political control, which is inherent to the companies subsidized from state budget, which adjusted dynamics of the enterprise. However after the change of its legal status from 2006 Lithuania Post became public limited company, the shares of which still belong to the state, and got the impulse to improve the efficiency of its activity and to prepare for the full market opening of postal services. Lithuania post retained universal postal service obligation and as an incumbent operator is obliged to provide postal services throughout whole territory of the country. Object of work – future of Lithuania Post as a representative of global postal market. Aim of work – to analyse current activity of the company and to link its development to the overall perspective of the traditional post. Following tasks of work were formulated: - To discuss crucial events of Lithuania Post evolution, to evaluate changes in operational efficiency (two pillars – activity as a state enterprise and as a public limited company) and prospects of services; - With reference to the achievements of recent years, to analyse the preparation of the company for the full market opening and to review benchmarks for the work under severe competition; - With reference to the investigations performed by Communications Regulatory Authority and own quantitative survey to examine the opinion and expectations of consumers regarding the company and postal services; - To identify the reasons for changes in the postal sector and to pattern possible outcomes as well as future tendencies. After analysing data of Lithuania Post activity and after performance of quantitative survey of customer opinion, it was grounded that the change of status of the company did not impact its work significantly, that this altered legal status is considered to be a strong impulse for the future privatisation of the company, that after full market opening in 2013 the quality of postal service should improve. With reference to up-to-date progress of Lithuania Post it was determined that the company should pay greater attention to the services, which are related to Internet trade (eg. parcel services). Also it is necessary to improve customer service and to do it via greater motivation of the employees, since all these elements highly correlate with the overall image of the company and of course influences the its prospects.

In the end of the year 2003, hundreds of thousands of Georgians went out to the streets in order to protest against the fraudulent presidential elections. Incumbent E.Shevarnadze was forced to resign. This event, called Rose Revolution, raised hope of the end of political chaos and brought a brand new democracy to the World. However, political reforms in the country revealed a different trend. According to the Freedomhouse ratings, Georgia still remains only a partly-free country as before the Revolution. Paradoxically, just a few years after the Roses of democracy were planted to the Georgian soil, the opposition again finds itself in the streets protesting against the lack of democracy. This situation raises a research question why the consequences of the Rose Revolution, which seemed a manifest of democracy in its essence, were so short-lasting. In search for the answer the author of this master thesis argues for an alternative context of analysis and theoretical background which differ from the ones prevailing in the scientific discourse on the issue. Many works rest on the premise that The Rose Revolution was an extraordinary event in the country. One of the main aims of this case study is to prove that it was not unique. Furthermore, taking into consideration "devaluation" of the term revolution in nowadays political science Georgia is worth a diagnosis of entire "revolutionary syndrome" as a similar model of the government change has taken place already a few times during the thirteen years of independence before the Rose Revolution and unsuccessful attempts to repeat it were demonstrated recently. The inquiry reveals that analysis of this phenomenon has to be performed in the context of country's political history. Otherwise, one cannot get a full and deep picture of its causes. It is not enough to refer to ad hoc success criteria of the Rose Revolution but to seek for the institutionalized thinking and behaviour patterns of the political actors which leads to the radicalization of political conflict. This goes as the second aim of this paper. The findings of this study show that the recent stagnation, if not setback, of democratization in Georgia disproves a somehow romantic scientific discourse which sees the Rose Revolution as a victory of democracy against authoritarianism. The Rose Revolution in its essence was not an extraordinary event in country's political context and not a democratic breakthrough. There are some historically formed patterns of political actors' interplay which are favourable for radicalization of political conflict. Firstly, under formally existing multi-party system, a single party permanently dominates in all branches of governance. For this reason political struggle becomes a zero-sum game. Secondly, political parties almost unexceptionally are created and dominated by a single leader. In such situation they become not organizations of political representation but more a projection of personal power and an instrument for its realization. The struggles among such parties are based not on ideological but on personal arguments. In this case, clear guidelines for solving such conflicts and making compromises do not exist. Thirdly, political leaders in Georgia tend to present themselves as apolitical. That is, they claim to represent not the interests of particular groups or ideologies but universal interests which are common to all the citizens. For this reason, a normal pluralism of interests is denied and political opponents are treated as the traitors or state enemies. Finally, a tradition of resistance to the state and bureaucratic hierarchy traces back a few centuries into Georgia's history and has acquired a self-contained value. The vitality of tradition of revolt is proved by using protest as a prevailing means of solving conflicts.

In the end of the year 2003, hundreds of thousands of Georgians went out to the streets in order to protest against the fraudulent presidential elections. Incumbent E.Shevarnadze was forced to resign. This event, called Rose Revolution, raised hope of the end of political chaos and brought a brand new democracy to the World. However, political reforms in the country revealed a different trend. According to the Freedomhouse ratings, Georgia still remains only a partly-free country as before the Revolution. Paradoxically, just a few years after the Roses of democracy were planted to the Georgian soil, the opposition again finds itself in the streets protesting against the lack of democracy. This situation raises a research question why the consequences of the Rose Revolution, which seemed a manifest of democracy in its essence, were so short-lasting. In search for the answer the author of this master thesis argues for an alternative context of analysis and theoretical background which differ from the ones prevailing in the scientific discourse on the issue. Many works rest on the premise that The Rose Revolution was an extraordinary event in the country. One of the main aims of this case study is to prove that it was not unique. Furthermore, taking into consideration "devaluation" of the term revolution in nowadays political science Georgia is worth a diagnosis of entire "revolutionary syndrome" as a similar model of the government change has taken place already a few times during the thirteen years of independence before the Rose Revolution and unsuccessful attempts to repeat it were demonstrated recently. The inquiry reveals that analysis of this phenomenon has to be performed in the context of country's political history. Otherwise, one cannot get a full and deep picture of its causes. It is not enough to refer to ad hoc success criteria of the Rose Revolution but to seek for the institutionalized thinking and behaviour patterns of the political actors which leads to the radicalization of political conflict. This goes as the second aim of this paper. The findings of this study show that the recent stagnation, if not setback, of democratization in Georgia disproves a somehow romantic scientific discourse which sees the Rose Revolution as a victory of democracy against authoritarianism. The Rose Revolution in its essence was not an extraordinary event in country's political context and not a democratic breakthrough. There are some historically formed patterns of political actors' interplay which are favourable for radicalization of political conflict. Firstly, under formally existing multi-party system, a single party permanently dominates in all branches of governance. For this reason political struggle becomes a zero-sum game. Secondly, political parties almost unexceptionally are created and dominated by a single leader. In such situation they become not organizations of political representation but more a projection of personal power and an instrument for its realization. The struggles among such parties are based not on ideological but on personal arguments. In this case, clear guidelines for solving such conflicts and making compromises do not exist. Thirdly, political leaders in Georgia tend to present themselves as apolitical. That is, they claim to represent not the interests of particular groups or ideologies but universal interests which are common to all the citizens. For this reason, a normal pluralism of interests is denied and political opponents are treated as the traitors or state enemies. Finally, a tradition of resistance to the state and bureaucratic hierarchy traces back a few centuries into Georgia's history and has acquired a self-contained value. The vitality of tradition of revolt is proved by using protest as a prevailing means of solving conflicts.

In the end of the year 2003, hundreds of thousands of Georgians went out to the streets in order to protest against the fraudulent presidential elections. Incumbent E.Shevarnadze was forced to resign. This event, called Rose Revolution, raised hope of the end of political chaos and brought a brand new democracy to the World. However, political reforms in the country revealed a different trend. According to the Freedomhouse ratings, Georgia still remains only a partly-free country as before the Revolution. Paradoxically, just a few years after the Roses of democracy were planted to the Georgian soil, the opposition again finds itself in the streets protesting against the lack of democracy. This situation raises a research question why the consequences of the Rose Revolution, which seemed a manifest of democracy in its essence, were so short-lasting. In search for the answer the author of this master thesis argues for an alternative context of analysis and theoretical background which differ from the ones prevailing in the scientific discourse on the issue. Many works rest on the premise that The Rose Revolution was an extraordinary event in the country. One of the main aims of this case study is to prove that it was not unique. Furthermore, taking into consideration "devaluation" of the term revolution in nowadays political science Georgia is worth a diagnosis of entire "revolutionary syndrome" as a similar model of the government change has taken place already a few times during the thirteen years of independence before the Rose Revolution and unsuccessful attempts to repeat it were demonstrated recently. The inquiry reveals that analysis of this phenomenon has to be performed in the context of country's political history. Otherwise, one cannot get a full and deep picture of its causes. It is not enough to refer to ad hoc success criteria of the Rose Revolution but to seek for the institutionalized thinking and behaviour patterns of the political actors which leads to the radicalization of political conflict. This goes as the second aim of this paper. The findings of this study show that the recent stagnation, if not setback, of democratization in Georgia disproves a somehow romantic scientific discourse which sees the Rose Revolution as a victory of democracy against authoritarianism. The Rose Revolution in its essence was not an extraordinary event in country's political context and not a democratic breakthrough. There are some historically formed patterns of political actors' interplay which are favourable for radicalization of political conflict. Firstly, under formally existing multi-party system, a single party permanently dominates in all branches of governance. For this reason political struggle becomes a zero-sum game. Secondly, political parties almost unexceptionally are created and dominated by a single leader. In such situation they become not organizations of political representation but more a projection of personal power and an instrument for its realization. The struggles among such parties are based not on ideological but on personal arguments. In this case, clear guidelines for solving such conflicts and making compromises do not exist. Thirdly, political leaders in Georgia tend to present themselves as apolitical. That is, they claim to represent not the interests of particular groups or ideologies but universal interests which are common to all the citizens. For this reason, a normal pluralism of interests is denied and political opponents are treated as the traitors or state enemies. Finally, a tradition of resistance to the state and bureaucratic hierarchy traces back a few centuries into Georgia's history and has acquired a self-contained value. The vitality of tradition of revolt is proved by using protest as a prevailing means of solving conflicts.

In the end of the year 2003, hundreds of thousands of Georgians went out to the streets in order to protest against the fraudulent presidential elections. Incumbent E.Shevarnadze was forced to resign. This event, called Rose Revolution, raised hope of the end of political chaos and brought a brand new democracy to the World. However, political reforms in the country revealed a different trend. According to the Freedomhouse ratings, Georgia still remains only a partly-free country as before the Revolution. Paradoxically, just a few years after the Roses of democracy were planted to the Georgian soil, the opposition again finds itself in the streets protesting against the lack of democracy. This situation raises a research question why the consequences of the Rose Revolution, which seemed a manifest of democracy in its essence, were so short-lasting. In search for the answer the author of this master thesis argues for an alternative context of analysis and theoretical background which differ from the ones prevailing in the scientific discourse on the issue. Many works rest on the premise that The Rose Revolution was an extraordinary event in the country. One of the main aims of this case study is to prove that it was not unique. Furthermore, taking into consideration "devaluation" of the term revolution in nowadays political science Georgia is worth a diagnosis of entire "revolutionary syndrome" as a similar model of the government change has taken place already a few times during the thirteen years of independence before the Rose Revolution and unsuccessful attempts to repeat it were demonstrated recently. The inquiry reveals that analysis of this phenomenon has to be performed in the context of country's political history. Otherwise, one cannot get a full and deep picture of its causes. It is not enough to refer to ad hoc success criteria of the Rose Revolution but to seek for the institutionalized thinking and behaviour patterns of the political actors which leads to the radicalization of political conflict. This goes as the second aim of this paper. The findings of this study show that the recent stagnation, if not setback, of democratization in Georgia disproves a somehow romantic scientific discourse which sees the Rose Revolution as a victory of democracy against authoritarianism. The Rose Revolution in its essence was not an extraordinary event in country's political context and not a democratic breakthrough. There are some historically formed patterns of political actors' interplay which are favourable for radicalization of political conflict. Firstly, under formally existing multi-party system, a single party permanently dominates in all branches of governance. For this reason political struggle becomes a zero-sum game. Secondly, political parties almost unexceptionally are created and dominated by a single leader. In such situation they become not organizations of political representation but more a projection of personal power and an instrument for its realization. The struggles among such parties are based not on ideological but on personal arguments. In this case, clear guidelines for solving such conflicts and making compromises do not exist. Thirdly, political leaders in Georgia tend to present themselves as apolitical. That is, they claim to represent not the interests of particular groups or ideologies but universal interests which are common to all the citizens. For this reason, a normal pluralism of interests is denied and political opponents are treated as the traitors or state enemies. Finally, a tradition of resistance to the state and bureaucratic hierarchy traces back a few centuries into Georgia's history and has acquired a self-contained value. The vitality of tradition of revolt is proved by using protest as a prevailing means of solving conflicts.

After regaining its independence Lithuania, like other post-soviet states, faced challenges associated with the recognition of the new state and its involvement in the family of old and new democracies. Lithuania made the step from a centralised and highly regulated media system towards decentralisation. Media outlets that had been previously particularly thoroughly regulated by the state had to be transferred to new owners, while the media outlets, which operated according to the model of soviet media, had to shift to democratic models operating in Western countries. The creation of the new media model (system) was driven by the last legislative act approved by the Supreme Council of Lithuania regulating the work of media. The Law on Press and Other Mass Information Media adopted in 1990 banned censorship and limited the influence of the state on the work of the media. When the media outlets were privatised in 1990 they were acquired by their incumbent editors and staff; however several years later the media outlets were sold to new publishers from abroad and Lithuania (Nugaraitė, 2004). The nascent new media system of Lithuania, the striving for freedom of speech and press, as well as the Law on Provision of Information to the Public adopted in 1996 led scientists to take a look at the Lithuanian media system and to analyse the model it belongs to and whether it is independent – separated from different external and internal influences. Discussing the Lithuanian media system, scientist D. Jastramskis concluded that the Lithuanian media system has acquired some of the features of the polarised pluralistic model. In his opinion, the debilitation of commercial media and economic undertakings prevailing in Lithuania through legal and economic measures, the increase of state support for the media, as well as the financial implications of national, municipal and political organisations' advertising orders on the budgets of media organisations determine the dependence of media organisations on the subjects of the political system (Jastramskis, 2011). Media independence and freedom of speech and press are among the key principles for the assurance of democracy in Western societies. Professional autonomy derives from the fundamental function of the media in a democratic society: providing correct and impartial information to society and revealing the diversity of opinions. Professional autonomy is one of the most important criteria of professionalism. Fulfilling the criterion the journalists should control their work themselves and conduct themselves autonomously in editorial offices (Singer, 2007). However, although the journalists make the decisions themselves and possibly control their work, these decisions are affected by greater forces in editorial offices and beyond. Relationships with other players, media institutions and society play a significant role when realising the personal autonomy of the media professional (Harro-Loit, Lauk, Kuutti and Loit, 2012). This paper is aimed at presenting a complex approach to the media autonomy concept, with particular focus on the most real aspects of journalistic activity and the factors affecting them. The paper actualises the notion of media and professional autonomy, introduces the western tradition of journalistic culture and considers the decisions being made and how they affect professional independence in Lithuanian news editorial offices. The practical research part of this paper mostly focuses on the editorial offices operating online. There are several reasons for this: these editorial offices are new and have a budding new organisational culture operating within; hence we assume that journalistic freedom and autonomy should acquire distinctive features there. Based on the findings of the research conducted into the relationships of business and government structures with the media, and the data of the survey of editors and journalists, it can be stated that several factors affect the autonomy of editorial offices and journalists of Lithuanian internet portals: owners of the media outlet; political and business interests of the owners; absence of ethical norms such as documents regulating professional activities; absence of mechanisms for feedback and resolution of conflicts of interests; lack of transparency and impartiality of internet portals; political and business interests; hierarchical structure of the editorial office. Analysis of the information about owners and documents published in internet portals revealed that the editorial offices either do not provide any information about shareholders (owners) altogether or this information is provided to the general public in a laconic and sleek manner. Regardless of the fact that some of the portals provide information that shareholders do not interfere with the work of the editorial office, none of them referred to a mechanism for dissociating the editorial office from the interests of the owners (shareholders). The portals do not provide information about the mechanisms for resolving conflicts (between the readers and the editorial office) operated in the editorial offices. Moreover, there is no information on how the conflicts of editors and journalists pertaining to professional ethics are resolved. The majority of editorial offices (except for Delfi.lt) do not familiarise readers with their work culture. The survey of the journalists and editors of internet media outlets revealed that the editorial offices are not sufficiently autonomous – the majority of those surveyed do not think they work in autonomous editorial offices. The lack of autonomy of editorial offices of the internet portals was also corroborated by the fact that there are topics avoided by journalists and editors alike. Generally they are associated with competitors, politicians or business structures, advertising customers and interests of owners. It can be assumed, based on the corpus of the replies given by editors and journalists that a strong hierarchical structure prevails in editorial offices influencing the individual autonomy of journalists. The overall analysis of the journalist replies shows that the journalists do not complete the texts themselves (texts are corrected; titles are changed). Although the corrections are coordinated with the journalists, the editors make the final decision concerning them. Moreover, the lack of professional autonomy of the journalists is also shown by the fact that journalists are commissioned to write articles, whereas certain articles are removed from the internet space.