Suchergebnisse

The object of research is the trust problem in the relations of the East and the West. The author in detail analyzes the phenomenon of trust, its principles and distinctive signs. Special attention is paid to conditions of formation of trust as on micro (between individuals) and at the macro level (between societies). The author connects the trust problem with a categorization "friend-or-foe", considered in the civilization aspect of the subject. Thus, the author in the research used the case study method and content analysis. The novelty of research consists in approach to understanding intensity between civilizations of the East and the West through a problem of the possibility of confidential relations between them. The author comes to a conclusion that in the modern international relations there is a paradoxical situation: the trust measure between the countries decreases, in volume time as it is possible to cope with new calls and threats only through consolidation of the world community on the basis of mutual trust.

The object of research is the trust problem in the relations of the East and the West. The author in detail analyzes the phenomenon of trust, its principles and distinctive signs. Special attention is paid to conditions of formation of trust as on micro (between individuals) and at the macro level (between societies). The author connects the trust problem with a categorization "friend-or-foe", considered in the civilization aspect of the subject. Thus, the author in the research used the case study method and content analysis. The novelty of research consists in approach to understanding intensity between civilizations of the East and the West through a problem of the possibility of confidential relations between them. The author comes to a conclusion that in the modern international relations there is a paradoxical situation: the trust measure between the countries decreases, in volume time as it is possible to cope with new calls and threats only through consolidation of the world community on the basis of mutual trust.

Bilateral relations between the Republic of Turkey and the individual successor states of former Yugoslavia differ, after thirty years since its dissolution, in form and in substance. While just after the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Turkey managed to establish and sustain cordial ties with such countries as, for instance, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, relations with Serbia (Serbia and Montenegro) remained tense and the two countries perceived themselves, in the best case, as traditional opponents. The basic aim of this paper is to analyse the bilateral relations of these two states and Turkish foreign policy towards Serbia, a country currently perceived as a 'neighbour,' despite the fact that they do not share common border. The paper argues that rapprochement of two countries, so clearly visible in several dimensions after 2002, marks a new phase in Turkey's general foreign policy. The paper will trace the thirty-year evolution of bilateral contacts while arguing that the current positive relations have their source also in the domestic arena, both of Turkey and Serbia, which is willing to increase influence in the Western Balkans and institutionalise her international position. Thus, the two states for the first time share similar foreign policy goals. The whole analysis is theoretically anchored in the behavioural approach of the 'middle power' paradigm. An author-applied qualitative content analysis is the main research technique. The main sources are official documents, selected monographs, academic articles, and analytical reports.

International relations are a form of human action so they should become the object of praxiology as a science oriented to efficiency. The traditional approach however must be changed. As it suggested in this article, human action is divided into three sections – cooperation, struggling and rivalry, which correspond to three types of theories. It should be added that cooperation is a positive-sum game, struggling – a negative-sum game and rivalry – a zero-sum game. The theory of international relations should be focused on the link between principles of cooperation and principles of struggling. This means that theory of foreign policy should be a theory of control in the zero-sum game system. ; International relations are a form of human action so they should become the object of praxiology as a science oriented to efficiency. The traditional approach however must be changed. As it suggested in this article, human action is divided into three sections – cooperation, struggling and rivalry, which correspond to three types of theories. It should be added that cooperation is a positive-sum game, struggling – a negative-sum game and rivalry – a zero-sum game. The theory of international relations should be focused on the link between principles of cooperation and principles of struggling. This means that theory of foreign policy should be a theory of control in the zero-sum game system.

Stosunki międzynarodowe są postacią działania ludzi, dlatego powinny stać się obiektem zainteresowania prakseologii jako nauki nastawionej na sprawność działania. Dotychczasowe rozumienie sprawności musi być jednak odmienne od tradycyjnego. Zgodnie z propozycją zawartą w artykule, ludzkie działanie dzieli się na trzy działy – współpracę, walkę oraz rywalizację , którym odpowiadają trzy rodzaje teorii. Charakterystyczne jest to, że współpraca jest grą o sumie dodatniej, walka – grą o sumie ujemnej, natomiast rywalizacja – grą o sumie zerowej. Teoria stosunków międzynarodowych powinna skupiać się na teorii rywalizacji, rozpostartej pomiędzy współpracą a walką. Oznacza to, że teoria stosunków międzynarodowych powinna opierać się na zasadach współpracy i zasadach walki, a teoria polityki międzynarodowej państwa powinna być teorią sterowania w systemie gry o sumie zerowej. ; International relations are a form of human action so they should become the object of praxiology as a science oriented to efficiency. The traditional approach however must be changed. As it suggested in this article, human action is divided into three sections – cooperation, struggling and rivalry, which correspond to three types of theories. It should be added that cooperation is a positive-sum game, struggling – a negative-sum game and rivalry – a zero-sum game. The theory of international relations should be focused on the link between principles of co- operation and principles of struggling. This means that theory of foreign policy should be a theory of control in the zero-sum game system.

Celem artykułu jest przedstawienie działalności Polskiego Towarzystwa Nauk Politycznych z zaznaczeniem ukierunkowania na sprawy internacjonalizacji. Od początku swojej działalności PTNP współpracowało z IPSA. W Polsce powstało wiele cennych publikacji przestawiających historię i stan obecny politologii w Polsce. Szczególnie ważnym dla polskiej politologii wydarzeniem była organizacja światowego kongresu politologii w lipcu 2016 r. Ważne miejsce zajmują także polskie czasopisma naukowe, które w ostatnich latach podlegają silnej internacjonalizacji. Przed PTNP stoi wiele wyzwań i możliwości podejmowania kolejnych działań, które sprzyjają dalszemu rozwojowi i promocji nauki w kraju i zagranicą. ; The aim of the article is to present the activities of the Polish Political Science Association, underlining the issues of internationalization. Since the beginning the organization, PPSA has been cooperating with IPSA. Many valuable publications regarding history and contemporary situation of Political Science have been published in Poland. Particularly important for Polish political science was the organization of the World Congress of Political Science in July 2016. The Polish scientific journals, that have been strongly internalized in recent years, take an important place nowadays. Polish Political Science Association has to face many challenges and take new possibilities in further activities that encourage further development and promotion. ; Publikacja sfinansowana przez Wydział Studiów Międzynarodowych i Politologicznych UŁ.

The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisciplinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplomacy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment.Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as actors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda. ; The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisciplinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplomacy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment.Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as actors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda.

Celem tekstu jest wskazanie na nową dyplomacją publiczną jako na obszar badawczy, który wymaga podejścia interdyscyplinarnego. Na obecnym etapie rozwoju tej dyscypliny dominują podejścia badawcze i narzędzia zaczerpnięte z nauki o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Autorka postuluje włączenie podstawowych paradygmatów badań nad komunikacją polityczną do analizy nowej dyplomacji publicznej. Na razie jednak nie można wskazać takiego podejścia badawczego, które wychodziłoby poza prostą sumę metod stosowanych w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych i badaniach nad komunikacja polityczną. Na potrzeby artykułu dyplomacja publiczna została zdefiniowana jako symetryczna forma międzynarodowej komunikacji politycznej, której celem jest wspieranie osiągnięcia celów państwa za granicą poprzez wpływanie na opinię publiczną. Współcześnie dyplomację publiczna określa się jako "nową", aby odróżnić ją od dyplomacji publicznej Stanów Zjednoczonych, uprawianą przed 1999 r. oraz wskazać na dostosowanie tej formy komunikacji politycznej do procesów globalizacji, w tym do rosnącego znaczenia aktorów niepaństwowych w stosunkach międzynarodowych. W tym ujęciu dyplomacja publiczna nie jest tożsama z propagandą. ; The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisci - plinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplo - macy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment. Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as ac - tors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda

The author distinguishes threats to international security from challenges faced by the security policy of states and collective international actors but approaches them as a certain continuum. The following phenomena are considered threats and challenges in the second decade of the 21st century: military threats (nuclear weapons and their proliferation, conventional weapons and huge military spending), terrorism, other threats (cybernetic, economic and energy-related, ecological), as well as the migration challenge. A separate major challenge, which the author analyses in detail, is the reconfiguration of the international order that has been taking place for more than a decade now. The author believes that this reconfiguration constitutes a serious challenge to the West, including to its security policy. In order to take up this challenge, benefit from it and prevent the emergence of new threats to international security, the West needs to not only consolidate its security system but also engage in dialogue and cooperation with the emerging competitors and rivals challenging the West's global leadership (the emerging powers from BRICS), as the American political scientist Charles Kupchan proposed in 2010, emphasising that lasting peace can be achieved by turning enemies into friends. It is, however, uncertain what kind of foreign policy will be conducted by the new US President, Donald Trump, elected in November 2016.

The article aims to present the current situation in Ukraine through international relations theory that is able to provide the necessary theoretical background to analyse the complex problems that unfold in the contemporary international environment. These problems are analysed through several perspectives including realist, postmodern and socialconstructivist dimensions, as well as from the point of view of classical institutionalism. What is more, on the basis of their deliberations, the authors describe several possible scenarios of the future events, including the strategy of Russia to continue destabilization in Ukraine in order to seize control over its entire territory and the long-term effects of international sanctions on the Russian economy with the possibility of the collapse of the aggressor state. Nonetheless, the Crimean crisis reveals an important fact that, according to the authors, has deep ramifications for the entire international security system – at present, the international community is not able to exert influence on any of the nuclear powers through military means. While other, non-military means of influence can be used, such as broad economic sanctions or political isolation of an aggressor-state, they are not effective immediately thus allowing the aggressor states to violate international law with a feeling of impunity and invincibility.

The article aims to present the current situation in Ukraine through international relations theory that is able to provide the necessary theoretical background to analyse the complex problems that unfold in the contemporary international environment. These problems are analysed through several perspectives including realist, postmodern and socialconstructivist dimensions, as well as from the point of view of classical institutionalism. What is more, on the basis of their deliberations, the authors describe several possible scenarios of the future events, including the strategy of Russia to continue destabilization in Ukraine in order to seize control over its entire territory and the long-term effects of international sanctions on the Russian economy with the possibility of the collapse of the aggressor state. Nonetheless, the Crimean crisis reveals an important fact that, according to the authors, has deep ramifications for the entire international security system – at present, the international community is not able to exert influence on any of the nuclear powers through military means. While other, non-military means of influence can be used, such as broad economic sanctions or political isolation of an aggressor-state, they are not effective immediately thus allowing the aggressor states to violate international law with a feeling of impunity and invincibility.

Jednym z fundamentalnych przedmiotów badań nauki o polityce pozostaje niezmiennie język polityki (w swoich licznych odmianach i formach). Analiza naukowa tego przedmiotu badań przysparza jednak politologii nadal szereg problemów, wynikających z nieprzystawalności metod językoznawstwa do funkcji i zadań współczesnej nauki o polityce. Pojawia się więc potrzeba wypracowania politologicznej metody analizy tekstu, która to metoda pozwoliłaby – za pomocą języka – odkryć i wyeksponować założenia kształtujące orientacje i postawy podmiotów politycznych, czyli treści tworzące ogólną przestrzeń polityczną. Propozycją odpowiedzi na to zapotrzebowanie jest prezentowana w artykule metoda, wyróżniająca trzy podstawowe poziomy analizy: konwencjonalną warstwę tekstu, opisową oraz presupozycjalną. Na przykładzie analizy inauguracyjnych orędzi polskich prezydentów, ukazano specyfikę poszczególnych wymiarów: determinant sytuacyjny (na pierwszym poziomie), kreację treści korzystnych wizerunkowo (na poziomie deskryptywnym), wreszcie – najistotniejszy dla politologa – mechanizm odkrywania założeń ukrytych na poziomie presupozycjalnym. ; The language of politics (in its numerous variations and forms) continues to be one of the fundamental objects of political science research. The academic analysis of this object of research, however, continues to generate considerable difficulties for political science as a result of the incompatibility of language studies methodology with the function and tasks of modern political science. Therefore, there emerges a need to develop a method of text analysis for political science that will allow us to use language to discover and present the assumptions that shape the attitudes and ideologies of political entities, or in other words – the content of general political environment. This paper responds to this need by presenting a method that distinguishes three basic levels of analysis: a conventional layer of text, a descriptive one and a presuppositional one. Analyzing the inaugural addresses given by Polish presidents the specificity of their individual dimensions is presented: the situational determinant (level one), the creation of content to boost image (on a descriptive level), and – most importantly to the political scientist – a mechanism revealing the assumptions concealed at the presuppositional level.

Lithuania was among the first republics of the disintegrating Soviet Union to announce its declaration of independence, and in September 1991 established diplomatic relations with Poland. In January 1992, both countries signed a joint declaration, and in April 1994 they signed the Treaty on friendly relations and good neighborly cooperation. Over the next 10 years, ways of achieving foreign policy objectives shared by both countries were sought and eventually worked out. Mutual support in pursuit of becoming a member of NATO and of the European Union was visible, which eventually turned into profound relations that were referred to as a strategic partnership. A network of cooperation was formed. It included deep political contacts at all levels and the paying of first foreign visits after being sworn in, which on the Polish side was initiated in 1996 by President A. Kwaśniewski, has become a symbol. Both countries have undertaken joint initiatives to improve energy security and military cooperation, and conduct cross-border and interregional cooperation. The end of the second decade of the two countries' relations showed, however, that unresolved problems, mainly related to the status of the Polish minority in Lithuania, have been increasingly influencing the policy of steadily building good neighborly relations between Warsaw and Vilnius. ; Lithuania was among the first republics of the disintegrating Soviet Union to announce its declaration of independence, and in September 1991 established diplomatic relations with Poland. In January 1992, both countries signed a joint declaration, and in April 1994 they signed the Treaty on friendly relations and good neighborly cooperation. Over the next 10 years, ways of achieving foreign policy objectives shared by both countries were sought and eventually worked out. Mutual support in pursuit of becoming a member of NATO and of the European Union was visible, which eventually turned into profound relations that were referred to as a strategic partnership. A network of cooperation was formed. It included deep political contacts at all levels and the paying of first foreign visits after being sworn in, which on the Polish side was initiated in 1996 by President A. Kwaśniewski, has become a symbol. Both countries have undertaken joint initiatives to improve energy security and military cooperation, and conduct cross-border and interregional cooperation. The end of the second decade of the two countries' relations showed, however, that unresolved problems, mainly related to the status of the Polish minority in Lithuania, have been increasingly influencing the policy of steadily building good neighborly relations between Warsaw and Vilnius.

Lithuania was among the first republics of the disintegrating Soviet Union to an nounce its declaration of independence, and in September 1991 established diplomatic relations with Poland. In January 1992, both countries signed a joint declaration, and in April 1994 they signed the Treaty on friendly relations and good neighborly cooperation. Over the next 10 years, ways of achieving foreign policy objectives shared by both countries were sought and eventually worked out. Mutual support in pursuit of becoming a member of NATO and of the European Union was visible, which eventually turned into profound relations that were referred to as a strategic partnership. A network of cooperation was formed. It included deep political contacts at all levels and the paying of first foreign visits after being sworn in, which on the Polish side was initiated in 1996 by President A. Kwaœniewski, has become a symbol. Both countries have undertaken joint initiatives to improve energy security and military cooperation, and conduct cross-border and interregional cooperation. The end of the second decade of the two countries' relations showed, however, that unresolved problems, mainly related to the status of the Polish minority in Lithuania, have been increasingly influencing the policy of steadily building good neighborly relations between Warsaw and Vilnius.