Suchergebnisse

Abstract in English:Russia and the Beginning of HistoryMorgan Olofsson's Russia and the Beginning of History consists of several interviews that the former Swedish news correspondent made with people he met in the 1990s. The purpose, he says, is to see how people have fared in the timespan from the 1990s to 2018, but also, more ambitiously, to sustain a dialogue between people on topics like the gradual dissemination of authoritarian political systems. Olofsson argues that we "need to learn from history" to protect democratic values; that is, values that connect people. The structure of the book is reminiscent of Mikhail Zygar's All the Kremlin's Men (2016), short annotated chapters, with introductions. The interviews stand out as sharp and perceptive, but the structure and editing of the book leaves more to be desired.

Abstract in English: Close and Distant. Political Executive-Media Relations in Four CountriesElin Strand Larsen reviews Close and Distant. Political Executive-Media Relations in Four Countries. Edited by Karl Magnus Johansson and Gunnar Nygren, the book is based on a three-year long research project and analysis of the relationship between politicians, press secretaries and journalists in four countries – Finland, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden. By conducting thorough, well-coordinated research and numerous research interviews (20–25 from each country), the research group has studied the interplay between government and media in the period 2014–2017. The anthology contains four country-specific chapters, as well as the following cross-national themes: government communication, social media, source-journalist relationships, mediatisation and political communication cultures.

Abstract: Security and Vulnerability After Armenia's Velvet Revolution: Elite Perceptions on Gender Equality, Human Rights and Conflict ResolutionThe Velvet Revolution in spring 2018 and the snap elections that followed in December 2018 shook Armenia. This article examines the country's new political elite and other central social elites, and their affective and evaluative beliefs with respect to human security, drawing on an elite survey conducted in 2017 and 2019, complemented by in-depth interviews. The aim is to shed light on whether Armenia's elite-level political culture is headed for progressive change concerning the rights of disadvantaged groups, primarily women and sexual minorities – an expectation among the young and educated in Yerevan. This study finds that, as regards reducing vulnerability and increasing the security and freedom of choice for those traditionally disadvantaged in Armenian society, the values and judgments of the new elites have remained basically traditional.

Abstract: Trauma and Collective Memories in Georgia's Foreign PolicyGeorgia's foreign policy since the mid-1990s would appear to be a regional anomaly. While Georgia's neighbors have either accommodated to Russia's geopolitical interests or sought to navigate between Russia and the West, Georgian governments have pursued a comparatively stable pro-Western foreign policy orientation. Thus, structural arguments like geographic proximity, or Russia's assertive foreign policy, cannot account for the variation in foreign-policy orientation among post-Soviet states. Moreover, although alternative explanations, like Georgia's European identity and commitment to democracy, or explanations related to qualities of the Mikheil Saakashvili government, are not without merits, they cannot fully account for the continuity in Georgia's pro-Western foreign policy over time. This article argues that the collective memory of the traumatic years 1989–1994 is a key factor for understanding Georgia's foreign policy continuity. The collective memory and trauma related to loss of territory, together with a weak state and Russia's negative involvement, have shaped the strategic thinking of Georgia's foreign policy elites. This trauma explains Georgia's shift to a pro-Western foreign policy in the mid-1990s and the continuity of this policy up until today. This argument is supported by the author's interviews with key Georgian decision-makers responsible for foreign policy decisions.