Suchergebnisse

There have been a number of philosophical, legal, & political concepts dealing with the issue of peace. The most famous discourse on the topic of peace is undoubtedly Kant's writing on "perpetual peace," not only for the cogency of its ideas but also for the applicability of the majority of them in practice, particularly in terms of collective security. Kant's starting point was that peace is a rational & moral imperative of human nature, realized solely through human efforts. Though written 200 years ago, his ideas have found acolytes in the post-Cold War period since they are, to a large extent, considered as emancipatory. Kant finds the guarantees for the realization of peace in the moral doctrine & thus rejects the use of force in the creation of peace. Relations among states are based on cooperation, not competition, so that some elements of his project are reminiscent of the solutions applied in the system of collective security. The author looks into the viability of Kant's ideas in the post-Cold War period. Adapted from the source document.

At a few places in his Philosophy of Right, Hegel directly addresses the discussion with his famous predecessor, Immanual Kant. These places indicate very clearly the distinction between the two philosophical standpoints. This article focuses on Hegel's criticism of Kant's views on peace & international law. For two reasons however, it starts with Hegel's rejection of Kant's moral point of view. First, this criticism is presupposed in Hegel's rejection of Kant's view on politics. Second, at least a partial return to Kantian morality is implied in Hegel's statement that war, although not to be condemned categorically, must be limited both quantitatively & qualitatively. Adapted from the source document.

Ethnic minorities & minorities-related conflicts have always been one of the most important security issues for the international community. The durability of ethnic conflicts in certain regions & the difficulties in their resolution, have resulted in the outbreak of many armed conflicts, the collapse of multi-ethnic states, the changes of borders & of demographic relations. Despite the increasing number of security challenges & needs, it is still not possible to talk about a certain uniform & universally accepted model of solving the problems among ethnic minorities. It is obvious that in the post-Cold War period this is going to be an increasingly pressing need of international community. The paper deals with most basic security problems that are caused by the unsettled relationships between ethnic minorities & majority; it also covers the policies of their resolution. By analyzing the model of resolving ethnic conflicts in South Tyrol, two groups of ethnic conflicts' resolution policies are looked into: the policy of the elimination of differences & the policy of managing differences. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.

The author claims that all major efforts concerning European security have always been linked with the end of a war. Thus the end of the Cold War has been marked with the expansion of NATO & an attempt to create a new security. By analyzing the political scope of the expansion, the military & strategic framework, the Russian reactions, & the economic significance, the author comes to the conclusion that the expansion is not conducive to the establishment of an integral system of European security. The purpose of this development by Clinton's team was primarily to outline the new European borders (the key aspect of Clinton's foreign policy) &, in the future, to create the conditions for further expansion & admittance of new members. Only in the remote future, through constant expansion & links with other European organizations, could NATO become the central system of European security. Adapted from the source document.

The Republic of Slovenia, having obtained independence & sovereignty in the June-July war of 1991, launched an intensive build-up of its system of national security. As guidelines, it used the experiences of other states, its own historical experience, & the attitudes of the public & political parties. The analysis of Slovenian national security shows that the threats to it come in the forms of military threats, internal threats, & the threat to the living space. This was the reason that the system of national security was outlined as including the defense system, the security system, & the system of protection & preservation. Though encountering momentous problems in the build-up of the system of national security (particularly its military aspect), Slovenia made major shifts to embrace NATO standards. However, its efforts were not enough, & Slovenia was not among the countries admitted to this organization in the first wave -- Poland, the Czech Republic, & Hungary. 5 Tables, 1 Diagram, 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

A rebuttal to V. Vujacic's theses on the Balkan conflict presented in the contribution "Povijesno naslijed, nacionalisticka mobilizacija i politicke posljedice u Rusiji i Srbiji" (Historical Legacy, Nationalistic Mobilization and the Political Consequences in Russia and Serbia) The following arguments are made counter to Vujacic's theses: (1) There never was, & there is not now, any democratic opposition in Serbia; the opposition against Milosevic had nothing to do with democracy & everything to do with the disappointment that followed from the Serbian leader's failure to deliver on his promise of Greater Serbia. (2) To call the Balkan conflict a civil war is a euphemism attempting to blame equally every nation involved, while taking the responsibility for the conflict from militant Serbian politicians embarking on a bloody crusade for Greater Serbia. (3) The Croat army did not destroy Mostar but defended the town from Serbian invasion. (4) It is not true that the Serbian minority was & is persecuted in Croatia. (5) It is a complete rewriting of history postulating that Croatian nationalistic mobilization was equally responsible for the Balkan war as Serbian nationalistic mobilization. (6) It is a complete fallacy to argue that Serbian nationalism did not evolve from itself but was only a reaction to the mistreatment of Serbs by peripheral ethnic minorities during the Yugoslavia state. Z. Dubiel

The article analyzes the changed concept of security in the post-Cold War era, its importance for the international community as a whole, & its basic values. Special attention is given to the indivisibility & mutual conditions of the security problem, democracy, & markets. The research approach is multidisciplinary & aimed at an analysis of the war against Croatia within the context of the post-Cold War era & its associated obstacles to reaching peace & stability. The roots, causes, & inducements to conflict are determined & the assumptions for peace & stability in the region are researched. Starting with the case of Croatia & the consequences of international crisis caused by aggressive Serbian policy of expansion, the author offers a suggestion for a new security concept -- the concept of metasecurity -- for the era after the Cold War. 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

Since WWII, there have been opposing views of the role & the importance of the state in international affairs. Some think that the importance of the state is slowly decreasing, since the increasing interdependence of the world has an enormous influence on both the internal & foreign policies of a state. On the other hand, some point out that the state has not lost any of its importance; on the contrary, this importance will only be enhanced since the world community has not yet come up with a model to replace sovereign state entities. States generate the structure that has a significant influence on individual & group security. This particularly applies to the post-Cold-War period, since the problems & threats of the present-day world -- economic collapse, political oppression, poverty, ethnic conflicts, uncontrolled population boom, nature degradation, terrorism, crime, & disease -- directly affect many other elements of security. It is these problems that turn our attention to the state as the most important institution of the contemporary world, since it still has at its disposal the resources for reducing or eliminating these threats. Adapted from the source document.

Following the disintegration of the socialist system in Europe & the end of the bloc-based relations, American politics has changed the course of its operation. In present-day circumstances, southeast Europe is becoming increasingly prominent in American foreign policy projections, particularly during Clinton's administration. Clinton has defined a clear-cut policy towards Europe's southeast due to its vicinity to certain neuralgic points of American engagement (Near East, the Caspian region, the Gulf, eastern Mediterranean). In this way American politics has proved its leading global role. At the time of scarcity of foreign policy events, Clinton's team has thus been served on a platter a major foreign policy arena, in which its engagement -- which has all the symptoms of a long-lasting one -- has not proved too costly. Adapted from the source document.

The author analyzes the process of the NATO expansion in Europe following the collapse of the Berlin Wall & the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact. Paradoxically, after the end of the Cold War, the security conditions in Europe have not improved. On the contrary, the danger of military conflicts has increased. That is why most former communist countries, including the newly created states that emerged after the disintegration of Yugoslavia & the Soviet Union, have been trying to eliminate this danger & strengthen their security by joining NATO. The Russian Federation is the main opponent of the NATO expansion in Eastern Europe, particularly into the states that came into being after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The author describes in detail the geostrategical & geopolitical implications of the admittance of the first group of Eastern European countries into NATO (Poland, the Czech Republic, & Romania), as well as the prospects of the NATO expansion into the other countries in the region. He sees the American initiative for cooperation in Southeastern Europe as a complement to the process of NATO expansion. In the end he criticizes NATO's process of selection of new members, the process that has left Croatia (for the time being) in a sort of a geostrategical void. 5 Appendixes. Adapted from the source document.

The process of European integrations, with growing political, economic, & security interdependence of member states is designed in such a way that, among other things, it can eventually result in developing a collective approach to defense, whose features would be a far cry from any other form of traditional alliances. The signatories of the Maastricht Agreement vowed to shape a common defense policy that would in time lead to the common defense. The common defense policy, whose structure would be built on the basis of the models & trends of the defense policies of the leading West European countries, should evolve as an integral part of EU's common foreign & security policy. It should address all the aspects of the use of military power, & it will require an analysis of a broad spectrum of possible scenarios that may pose a threat to EU's security. EU countries have demonstrated certain shortcomings in their military capacities, eg, transport equipment & other capacities for deployment. Although in the economic field they have achieved consensus on numerous issues, it is obvious that defense issues such as nuclear weapons, professionalization of the military, & the policies of defense industry are still a major bone of contention for EU members. Though EU, WEU, & NATO represent only a segment of the European security architecture, they will most probably serve as the key institutional framework for the development of a common defense policy & common defense. Further expansion of this triangular institutional framework is going to be interdependent, mutually supportive, & parallel. 20 References. Adapted from the source document.

Germany's security dilemma is to fulfill the larger role in Europe & global security that is expected after reunification, while not rekindling a sense of threat, particularly among neighbors to the East. Opinion surveys of Germans & Central/East Europeans reveal substantial difficulties if Germany were to become more assertive. Changes in German behavior & constitutional interpretation suggest a maturation or "normalization" of German foreign policy. Thus far, these changes have emphasized traditional forms of diplomacy & alliance behavior focused on using the enlarged capacities of a reunited Germany that more directly pursue German interests. Alternative ways by which to perform a larger security role are discussed, particularly in light of data regarding the mutual perceptions of Germans among neighboring peoples & leaders. Adapted from the source document.