Suchergebnisse

The breakup of Yugoslavia & especially the war in Bosnia & Herzegovina made many people ask a simple question: Why did this happen? The main goal of this article is to give an answer to this question. More specifically, the article asks: Why did the "eastern" concept of nationalism prove to be more successful than the "western" one during the time of social & political changes in Yugoslavia? Although the article focuses on the end of the 1980s & the beginning of the 1990s, it also touches on some aspects of the historical background. Before explaining the ideological fragmentation in Yugoslavia & Bosnia & Herzegovina, the article defines the term nationalism with a special focus on the differentiation between "eastern" & "western" versions of this ideology/doctrine. References. Adapted from the source document.

Socialism was born out of the belief in the bright future of mankind. Thus, the utopian vision of classless society occupied the minds of the early communist avant-garde. Yet, such hopes did not survive the initial revolutionary enthusiasm. As the social organization of the 'real socialism' turned out to be a rigid bureaucratic system, the visions of the 'bright future' were replaced by the 'picture of the golden age', namely the image of the revolution itself. Accordingly, rituals commemorating the 'founding fathers of socialism' substituted the ritualized commitments to building the 'ideal society of equals'. The ideological content of socialism vanished. Past memories occupied the present. With the breakdown of communism the present could for a moment release itself from the iron grip of the past. The "envelope of the unhistorical" seemed to be open for the deeds of new reformers. Yet, the present could not escape too far. It was almost immediately caught again either by the past or by the future. In the first case, post-communist nationalisms (Brubaker 1996) monopolized the political field; in the second case, the "scientists of the not yet" (Stark and Bruszt 1998: 1-11) disseminated their neoliberal visions of free-market economy. As a result, the present was defined either in terms of national myths going far back to history or by visions to be realized by imitation of the Western model of capitalism. The focus of this paper is the different paths taken by different countries in the region after the collapse of socialism. The paper distinguishes between the 'nationalizing alternative' as one basic direction, and the 'catching up option' as another one. The paper further argues that this dichotomy itself forms around two clusters of several potential stances which could have been taken in the process of transformations. The goal of the paper is to propose a general framework, with the help of which the interactions 'behind' the political decisions taken by political elites in the post-socialist countries ...

This paper deals with the issue of building Wales as a unique region in the context of the European Union and its resources. The author focuses on the period after 1999, i.e. the time when devolution took place and when official Welsh representatives emerged via the National Assembly for Wales (NAW). Since then, Wales has entered into cooperation with the EU, in order to gain access to resources provided by the Union. The cooperation is however of a specific kind, since officially, Welsh representatives have to communicate with the EU through the political representation of Great Britain. Nevertheless, by acting informally, Welsh representatives manage to avoid the British government in relevant contexts and communicate with the EU directly. In this way, they are able to exploit the formal and informal rules for their advantage (i.e. for building Wales as a unique region). The main purpose of this text is to show that the case of Wales can be replicated by any region that has official political representation, even if it has only weak representative institutions and has to deal with limitations posed by the existence of a central government.

This article deals with the Iranian motivations for building military nuclear programme. The motivations are analyzed through three models presented by Scott D. Sagan (1997): the security model, the domestic politics model and the norm model. These models are used in a competitive way. We claim that despite the fact that all the models are able to find certain motivations in the case of Iran, the security model is the best model in terms of applicability, but only when its weak aspects are overcome. Regarding the domestic politics model we were able to identify the structures (the Revolutionary Guards and scientists) which might have the greatest profit from Iran's nuclearization. However, other motivations within the political system are hardly found. From the perspective of the normative model we discuss the role of international and cultural norms in the context of the Iranian nuclear programme, and we especially discuss the image of modernity, nationalism and the double standard applied from the side of the Western countries in connection with this topic. Adapted from the source document.

Despite a consensus on the benefits of liberal international economic regimes, there are important differences in the perspectives of different actors. This article deals with two ideal types of perspectives on international trade liberalization. The first of them is the liberal perspective, & the second is the perspective of economic nationalism. Differences can be found in a number of aspects. We discuss the perception of comparative advantage, economic growth & its determinants, the logic of absolute or relative gains from the global economy, I the causal i relationship between the level of economic development & free trade, the issue of competitiveness in the global economy & the problem of existence, & the role of strategic sectors of the economy. If there exist important differences in presumptions, interests & policy preferences between actors, what are the conditions & limits for the perceived compatibility of the defined perspectives? Under which conditions will an individual actor support the progress in the liberalization of world trade & what are the most important risks? How can the past successes in building the liberal economic regimes be interpreted & what are the prospects for the future? This article also attempts to contribute to the discussion of paradigmatic perspectives in the international political economy. Therefore the text confronts the liberal perspective & economic nationalism & discusses some important aspects of these theories. Adapted from the source document.