Suchergebnisse

Replicirajući na tekst Riječ Uredništva u Šumarskome listu br. 3-4/2016., predsjednik Uprave Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. mr. sc. Ivan Pavelić u svojoj poruci poslanoj elektroničkom poštom na adresu predsjednika i tajnika HŠD-a zaključuje, da "kao Uprava društva, ne želimo podržavati "naklapanja" i "razračunavanja" podvedena pod znanost, a time nećemo financijski potpomagati izlazak tog vašeg takozvanog znanstvenog časopisa".Mi nećemo na ovaj tekst dati paušalno mišljenje, kao što je to učinio odnosni gospodin, umjesto da je argumentirano odgovorio na postavljena pitanja u našem tekstu i otklonio sve sumnje ako one ne stoje. Ponajprije odgovor na pitanje o znanstvenom statusu časopisa. Na temelju mišljenja tada nadležnog Ministarstva informiranja RH br. 523-91-2 od 6. 3. 1991.g., a potom Ministarstva znanosti i tehnologije od 2000 g., Šumarski list se označava znanstvenim časopisom. Za reći što je, a što nije znanstveno, posebice u biotehnološkoj znanosti, koja je ovdje u pitanju, trebaju i neke reference koje gosp. Pavelić nema, kao što nema ni stručnih referenci za rukovođenje tako zahtjevnom gospodarskom granom kojoj nije samo cilj proizvodnja drvne mase, što on svojim rukovođenjem potvrđuje. Osim toga znanstveni status časopisa potkrijepljen je citiranjem članaka u relevantnim međunarodnim znanstvenim časopisima, a posljednjih godina i sa značajnim Impact faktorom, koji potvrđuje visoku kvalitetu časopisa. No, Šumarski list nije samo znanstveno, on je Znanstveno-stručno i staleško glasilo Hrvatskoga šumarskoga društva, kako stoji u podnaslovu, što znači da svi tekstovi imaju isključivo znanstveno-stručnu i stalešku podlogu, a ne političku. Postavljena pitanja u odnosnome tekstu nije "izmislilo" Uredništvo časopisa, nego je samo uobličilo mišljenja struke putem Upravnog odbora HŠD-a koji je ujedno i Uređivački savjet, a kojega između ostaloga čine predsjednici 19 ogranaka, ne postavljeni od središnjice, nego izabrani od svojega članstva (oko ukupno 3000 članova), te delegiranih predstavnika Šumarskoga fakulteta, Akademije šumarskih znanosti, Hrvatskog šumarskog instituta, HKIŠDT i resornog ministarstva. Prema tome, kompetencije ovdje nisu upitne, posebice kada navedenima pridodamo i članove Uredničkoga odbora koji su specijalisti iz pojedinih znanstveno-stručnih područja. No, gosp. Pavelić i ne treba odgovoriti na postavljena pitanja, jer je on predstavnik državnog "kocesionara" kojemu je povjereno upravljanje i gospodarenje nacionalnim bogatstvom, a kojega treba kontrolirati resorno ministarstvo tijekom cijeloga mandata. Da li je ono to činilo ili čini, i da li su odgovorni u resornom ministarstvu i Vladi RH svjesni što je sve "žrtvovano" da bi se ostvarila hvaljena "papirnata" dobit (profit) i naravno, polučili menadžerski bonusi, to je upitno? Glede spomenutih menadžerskih bonusa o kojima je bilo dosta riječi u medijima svih vrsta, interesantno je napomenuti kako se raspravljalo samo o tome, da li su u podjeli te nazovi dobiti trebali adekvatno sudjelovati i svi zaposlenici Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o. Niti jedne riječi o tome koje su štete nešumarskim gospodarenjem učinjene na šumi i šumskom staništu. Nitko, pa ni šumarski inženjeri iz rukovodstva sindikata, nisu tražili odgovore na pitanja koja smo postavili u Riječi Uredništva u Šumarskome listu br. 3-4/2016., a koja su "razljutila" arogantnog predsjednika Uprave Hrvatskih šuma d.o.o.Glede financijskog potpomaganja časopisa, moramo odgovoriti da to nije financijsko potpomaganje, nego pretplata na časopis, pa dotični gospodin svojom odlukom zaključuje da šumarskim stručnjacima nije potrebno cijelo-životno obrazovanje, te otkazuje pretplatu kao prvi rukovoditelj koji je to učinio nakon 140 godina tiskanja časopisa, upravo u godini kada obilježavamo ovu značajnu obljetnicu.Osim toga, analiza postavljenih pitanja nije tema za "komunikaciju na placu ili možda razgovor uz kavicu" kako navodi gosp. Pavelić, nego upravo za ozbiljnu raspravu na najvišoj znanstveno-stručnoj pa i političkoj razini, jer ovdje je riječ o nacionalnom bogatstvu neprocjenjive vrijednosti. Uredništvo ; Reacting to the Editorial published in the Forestry Journal No 3-4/2016, Ivan Pavelić, MSc, President of the Management Board of Croatian Forests Ltd, sent an e-mail to the President and Secretary of the Croatian Forestry Association, in which he stressed that "the Management Board does not wish to get involved in "idle prattle" and "score-settling" under the pretence of science. In other words, we will not continue to financially support your so-called scientific journal".We will not follow suit of the gentleman in question and give our opinion on this email, unlike the gentleman in question, who failed to use arguments to answer the questions raised in our text and remove all doubts if they are groundless. We would first like to clarify the scientific status of the journal. According to the decree of the Croatian Ministry of Information No. 523-91-2 of 3rd March 1991 and the decree of the Ministry of Science and Technology of 2000, the Forestry Journal is denoted as a scientific journal. To say what is and what is not scientific, particularly in the biotechnological sciences, requires some references, which Mr Pavelić, judging from his manner of management, does not possess. Neither does he possess professional references for managing such a demanding economic branch, whose primary goal should not be the production of wood mass only. The scientific status of the journal is confirmed by articles cited from relevant international scientific journals, and more recently, by the important Impact Factor, which further exemplifies the high quality of the journal. The Forestry Journal is not only a scientific magazine; it is a scientific-specialist and professional journal of the Croatian Forestry Association, as stated in its sub headline. This means that all the texts are based on exclusively scientific-specialist and professional foundations rather than on political ones. The questions raised in the subject text were not "concocted" by the Journal's Editorial Board. The Editorial Board only formulated the opinion of the profession via the CFA Management Board, which is also the Journal's Editorial Council. The Editorial Council is comprised of presidents of 19 branches (who were not appointed by the Headquarters but were elected from a membership of about 3,000 members in all), and of representatives of the Faculty of Forestry, Academy of Forestry Sciences, the Croatian Forest Research Institute, HKIŠDT (Croatian Chamber of Forestry and Wood Technology Engineers) and the competent Ministry. The above confirms the unquestionable status of competences. Moreover, the list can further be widened by members of the Editorial Board who are specialists in different scientific-specialist fields. Mr Pavelić does not have to answer all the questions raised in the journal because he is a representative of the state "concessionaire", who has been entrusted with the administration and management of the national treasure and who should be supervised by the competent Ministry throughout his term of office. Whether the competent Ministry has done so or is doing so, and whether those responsible in the Ministry and the Government of the Republic of Croatia are aware of what has been "sacrificed" in order to achieve the glorified profit "on paper" and probably obtain managers' bonuses remains doubtful. As for the bonuses, a topic on which much has been written in different media, it is interesting to point out that the discussions focused only on whether the distribution of so-called profit should have involved all those employed in the company Croatian Forests Ltd. Not one word was said about the enormous damage inflicted on the forests and forestland by inadequate forest management. No one, not even forestry engineers, union members, sought answers to the questions raised in the Editorial of Forestry Journal 3-4/2016, which so incensed the arrogant President of the Management Board of Croatian Forests LtdRegarding the financial support to the journal, we should just point out that this is not financial support but subscription to the journal. By declaring his decision, the gentleman in question concludes that forestry experts do not need life-ling learning and cancels the subscription, thus becoming the first manager to do so after 140 years of the publication of the Journal, precisely in the year in which we celebrate this important anniversary.To sum up, the questions raised in the journal are not the topic of "street chit-chat or coffee shop small talk", as Mr Pavelić says. On the contrary, it is the topic that requires serious and qualified discussions at the highest scientific-specialist and political level. After all, what is at stake here is national treasure of immeasurable value. Editorial Bord

Dugo je vremena koncept suvereniteta smatran kamenom temeljcem domaćeg i međunarodnog prava te političke misli. Koncepcija suvereniteta blisko je povezana s koncepcijom države. Bilo je to »normalno« stanje države, u kojem ona ima vrhovnu ili konačnu vlast u unutarnjim političkim i pravnim pitanjima, a svojstvo neovisnosti prema drugim državama. Međunarodnu zajednicu činile su ravnopravne i neovisne države. Danas, na početku 21. stoljeća, koncept suvereniteta izložen je mnogim izazovima, od kojih je najznačajniji proces globalizacije koji je doveo do sve veće međupovezanosti ljudi širom svijeta vidljive na svim poljima: političkim, vojnim, ekonomskim, kulturnim i pravnim. U ovom radu usredotočit ćemo se na pitanje kako globalizacija utječe na državni suverenitet te da ti pregled argumenata korištenih u novijoj literaturi. ; The concept of sovereignty was for a long time considered as one of the cornerstones of national and international law, and of political thought. The concept of sovereignty was closely connected with the concept of the state. It was a »normal« situation of a country where it had supreme or final power in political and legal matters in its domestic affairs, while at the same time it was independent in relation to all other countries. The international community used to consist of equal and independent states. At the beginning of the 21st century, the concept of sovereignty is faced with many challenges, both in theory and in practice. What happens within a country's territory and to its inhabitants is now less a consequence of national politics than the result of international circumstances – the difference between internal and foreign affairs is becoming increasingly vague. Several processes are happening simultaneously: globalisation (the development of information and communication technology; increase in foreign investments, the development of multinational corporations, and strengthening of the international economic and trade organisations' role), the process of European integration, the development of international protection of human rights (the development of cogent rules of international law, humanitarian interventions, the role of transnational non- governmental organisations), and the phenomenon of »failed states«. All the above mentioned has created a need to redefine the concept of sovereignty.

Dugo je vremena koncept suvereniteta smatran kamenom temeljcem domaćeg i međunarodnog prava te političke misli. Koncepcija suvereniteta blisko je povezana s koncepcijom države. Bilo je to »normalno« stanje države, u kojem ona ima vrhovnu ili konačnu vlast u unutarnjim političkim i pravnim pitanjima, a svojstvo neovisnosti prema drugim državama. Međunarodnu zajednicu činile su ravnopravne i neovisne države. Danas, na početku 21. stoljeća, koncept suvereniteta izložen je mnogim izazovima, od kojih je najznačajniji proces globalizacije koji je doveo do sve veće međupovezanos- ti ljudi širom svijeta vidljive na svim poljima: političkim, vojnim, ekonomskim, kulturnim i pravnim. U ovom radu usredotočit ćemo se na pitanje kako globalizacija utječe na državni suverenitet te dati pregled argumenata korištenih u novijoj literaturi. ; The concept of sovereignty was for a long time considered as one of the corner- stones of national and international law, and of political thought. The concept of sovereignty was closely connected with the concept of the state. It was a »normal« situation of a country where it had supreme or final power in political and legal matters in its domestic affairs, while at the same time it was independent in relation to all other countries. The international community used to consist of equal and independent States. At the beginning of the 21st Century, the concept of sovereignty is faced with many challenges, both in theory and in practice. What happens within a country's territory and to its inhabitants is now less a consequence of national politics than the result of international circumstances - the difference between internal and foreign affairs is becoming increasingly vague. Several processes are happening simultaneously: globalisation (the development of information and communication technology; increase in foreign Investments, the development of multinational corporations, and strengthening of the international economic and trade organisations' role), the process of European integration, the development of international protection of human rights (the development of cogent rules of international law, humanitarian interventions, the role of transnational non/governmental organisations), and the phenomenon of »failed States«. All the above mentioned has created a need to redefine the concept of sovereignty.

Blaženka Mičević defended her doctoral dissertation titled Development of Agricultural Land Administration System within the Agricultural Policy Context of the Republic of Croatia at the Faculty of Geodesy, University in Zagreb on May 6, May 2016. The doctoral dissertation was defended in front of a committee composed of three members, Prof. Tomislav Bašić, PhD, Assist. Prof. Hrvoje Tomić, PhD, and Kristina Svržnjak, PhD, from the College of Agriculture in Križevci. The candidate's mentor was Prof. Siniša Mastelic Ivic, PhD.The doctoral dissertation is structured into following chapters:1 Introduction and research hypothesis2 Review of previous research3 Overview of the state of land policy4 Registers of agricultural land in the Republic of Croatia5 Disposition of the land owned by the Republic of Croatia6 Research analyses and results7 Overview of results8 Conclusion ; Blaženka Mičevič obranila je 6. svibnja 2016. na Geodetskom fakultetu Sveucilišta u Zagrebudoktorsku disertaciju Razvoj sustava za upravljanje poljoprivrednim zemljištem u okviru poljoprivredne politike Republike Hrvatske. Doktorski rad obranjen je pred povjerenstvom u sastavu prof. dr. sc. Tomislav Bašić, doc. dr. sc. Hrvoje Tomić i dr. sc. Kristina Svržnjak s Visokog gospodarskog učilišta u Križevcima. Mentor je bio prof. dr. sc. Siniša Mastelic Ivić.Doktorski rad podijeljen je na ova osnovna poglavlja:1. Uvod i postavljanje hipoteze2. Pregled dosadašnjih istraživanja3. Prikaz stanja zemljišne politike4. Evidencije poljoprivrednog zemljišta u Republici Hrvatskoj5. Raspolaganje poljoprivrednim zemljištem u vlasništvu Republike Hrvatske6. Analize i rezultati istraživanja7. Pregled postignutih rezultata8. Zaključak

The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one. ; The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one.

Kako primjereno politologijski istražiti, prikazati i vrednovati povijest i sadašnje stanje politologije u Hrvatskoj? Tekst se fokusira na pomno razmatranje predmeta znanosti o politici – što je politika? – kao pretpostavke znanstveno primjerenog odgovora na dvojbu o stručnoj profilaciji studija i polaznika studija-politologa. A u tom sklopu, na smisao određenja politologije kao "znanosti o općenitosti" i politologa kao "stručnjaka za općenitost". Objašnjava se smisao, teorijski i kontekstualni, tih određenja (Prpić, 1969), vrednuju njegove pretpostavke, domašaji i ograničenja. Dramatična, teorijska i praktična, dvojba s kojom nas je Prpić suočio neprevladiva je u povijesnom kontekstu demokratske države, s obzirom na svojstvenu joj epohalnu ambivalenciju. Pri čemu se pokazuje nesuvislost dileme između množine i jednine: politička znanost u singularu sluškinja je političke moći, a političke znanosti tek metaznanstvena humanistička kritika postojećeg svijeta, što znači da znanost o politici ne valja ni u singularu ni u pluralu. Kada je znanstvena i stručna, tada je opasna po političku slobodu, kada je pak humanistička i ne-stručna tada je nemoćna i suvišna. Politolog je pak ili "stručnjak za posebnost", etički i vrijednosno neutralni sluga političke moći, ili pak pretenciozni misionar. Izlaz iz začaranog kruga: znanost o politici, u plodnoj i nezamjenjivoj dvojini metodički osloniti na novo načelo konstitucije zajednice, koje je imanentna kritika i prevladavanje moderne demokratske države i građanskog društva. Time se osnažuje i shvaćanje političke znanosti kao "znanosti o općenitosti". Znanost o općenitosti kao znanost o političkome tvori se u autonomiji (ali i komplementarnosti) spram znanosti o "općosti" (filozofije, etike i prava) i spram znanosti o posebnosti (posebnih sektora političkoga i društvenog bitka). Općenito je zbiljsko samo u odnosu spram općega, kao oposebljenje općega, i u odnosu spram posebnoga, kao poopćavanje posebnoga. Čime se suzbija opasnost od prividne općenitosti, kao bahate pretenzije ...

Članak problematizira demokratski karakter Države Izrael i uspoređuje ga sa stvarnim stanjem stvari. Proturječnost određenja Izraela kao "židovske i demokratske" države već je u samom začetku stvaranja prouzročila određene karakteristike koje su teško usporedive sa zapadnim liberalnim demokracijama. Izrael se takvim pokušava prikazati usprkos očiglednom nepovoljnom položaju arapske manjine koja danas čini približno 20 posto stanovništva. Taj se položaj izraelskih Arapa odražava ne samo na status manjine u Izraelu već i na geopolitičku situaciju na prostoru Izraela i Zapadne Obale. Status Palestinaca može se iščitati iz svakodnevne političke prakse, ali i iz temeljnih dokumenata i zakonodavstva Države Izrael. Segregacija stanovništva prema vjerskom određenju čini nevidljivi zid unutar samog izraelskog društva. ; The article deals with the declared democratic character of the State of Israel and compares it with the real state of affairs. The contradiction present in the definition of Israel as "Jewish and democratic" has from its very beginning created certain characteristics of the State that are hardly comparable with western liberal democracy. Israel is striving to present itself as such despite the obvious adverse position of the Arab minority, comprising around 20 per cent of the population. This position of the Israeli Arabs reflects itself not only on the status of the minority, but also on the entire geopolitical situation in Israel and the West Bank as well. The status of the Palestinians in Israel can be deducted from the everyday political practice as well as from the fundamental documents and legislation of the State of Israel. The segregation of population according to religion makes for an invisible wall within the Israeli society.

Terorizam je pojava poznata stoljećima. Borba protiv terorizma stara je koliko i sam terorizam. U novije vrijeme ona dobiva i novu dimenziju, ali još uvijek nema uspješne rezultate. Razlog za to može se tražiti i u nemogućnosti postizanja konsenzusa oko defi niranja što je to terorizam i tko su teroristi. Sama se percepcija terorizma promijenila nakon napada na WTC, a time i organi-zacija borbe protiv terorizma. Ta borba danas, u nastojanjima da pobijedi terorističke organizacije, ostavlja dubok trag na institucije i procese u liberalno- -demokratskim državama. Pojedinac je na Zapadu žrtva terorističkih napada, ali istovremeno i žrtva sve veće kontrole i "oslobađanja od slobode" koju provode, u borbi protiv terorizma, legitimno izabrane političke vlasti. Danas postoji velika opasnost od toga da liberalno demokratske države, u interesu obrane od terorizma, počnu provoditi državni terorizam nad svojim slobodnim građanima, a sve u svrhu sigurnosti. ; Terrorism is a phenomenon that has been present for many centuries. The fight against terrorism is as old as terrorism itself. In the new era it takes on a new dimension but still with no successful results. The reason for that can be found in the impossibility of forming a consensus on what terrorism is and who terrorists are. The perception of terrorism has changed after the attack on the WTC and within the organisation of the fight against terrorism. That struggle today, in its efforts to win against terrorist organisations, leaves a deep mark on the institutions and processes in a liberal democratic society. A person in the West can be a victim of terrorist attacks but also a victim of control and deprivation of freedom, which is implemented by legitimate elected political governance, in the fight against terrorism. Today there is a significant danger that a liberal democratic state will become a state of terrorism and take terrorist actions on its citizens and all in the name of security.

Javne su politike, kao višedimenzionalan i izrazito kompleksan fenomen, nužno multidisciplinaran predmet istraživanja. Cilj je rada istražiti što je specifično politološko znanje o javnim politikama, odnosno koji je jedinstveni doprinos politologa izučavanju i upravljanju javnim politikama u svrhe profiliranja te mlade politološke discipline u Jugoistočnoj Europi. Rad je nastao kao rezultat pregleda temeljnih udžbenika javnih politika u svijetu i regiji, te literature o metodologiji i pristupima istraživanju u društvenim znanostima i politologiji. Kreće se od određivanja što su javne politike i što je politički aspekt javnih politika. Propituju se pristupi istraživanju javnih politika (policy studije). Zatim se identificiraju vrste profesionalne uporabe tih istraživanja (policy analize). Ključna je pretpostavka kako je politologija prvenstveno kompetentna za analizu aktera stvaranja politika. Osnovni je nalaz da temelj profesionalnog profiliranja politologa u javnim politikama, s obzirom da jedini rabe istraživačku perspektivu usmjerenu na aktere, reprezentativnost i legitimnost stvaranja politika, može biti jedan oblik participatorne policy analize. ; Public policies, as a multi-dimensional and highly complex phenomenon, necessarily make a multidisciplinary research subject. The aim of this paper is to examine what is specific political science knowledge about public policy, and what is the unique contribution of political scientists to policy research and governance to enhance consolidating this young discipline in Southeastern Europe. This paper is a result of a review of policy textbooks in Southeastern Europe and worldwide, and literature on approaches and methodologies in social sciences and political science. It starts with determining public polices and their political aspect. Then it explores approaches of policy studies. Finally, it identifies types of professional policy research or policy analysis. The key assumption is that political science is primarily competent to analyze policy actors. The main finding of the paper is that the basis of political scientist professionalization in policy research, given that they are best in actor-centered research, and issues of representativeness and legitimacy of policy-making, can be a form of participatory policy analysis.

Vrijeme kada nisu postojali odnosi između politike i sporta, bilo da se radi o svakodnevnoj praksi ili znanstvenoistraživačkim pristupima povezanosti tih dvaju pojmova, ako ga je ikada i bilo, svakako je odavno iza nas. Usprkos tome danas se čini da se, osobito u znanstvenoistraživačkom radu na području nekadašnjih sportskih socijalističkih velesila, tim odnosima ne posvećuje odgovarajuća pozornost i da se oni često a priori negiraju i smatraju nevažnima. Zbog toga je glavni cilj ovoga članka potaknuti raspravu o važnosti i smislu istraživanja odnosa između politike i sporta gledano iz dvije perspektive – s obzirom na iskustva znanstvenika iz cijeloga svijeta te s obzirom na dosad provedena istraživanja znanstvenika iz bivše Jugoslavije. Stoga smo u ovome članku najprije teoretski odredili kontekst odnosa politike i sporta, a zatim smo analizom postojeće svjetske literature i radova znanstvenika s prostora bivše Jugoslavije analizirali međusobnu povezanost sporta i politike. Na temelju dobivenih rezultata, koji potvrđuju stalnu i čvrstu povezanost, ali ujedno i suviše apstraktno i paušalno razumijevanje odnosa sporta i politike, nudimo politološki relevantnu tipologiju odnosa između politike i sporta. Smatramo da razlike između odnosa politike kao borbe za vlast, institucionalne strukture te koncepta javnointeresnog djelovanja i sporta presudno utječu na buduća obilježja odnosa sporta i politike. ; Times when relations between politics and sports did not exist – be it in everyday practices or within scientific research – is definitely long gone, if they ever even existed. Nevertheless, it seems today that, especially within scientific research, these relations do not receive appropriate attention in the territories of former socialist sports superpowers, being a priori denied and considered as unimportant. That is why the key motive of this article is to initiate a discussion about the relevance of knowledge and research of the relations between politics and sport from two perspectives – the existing world-wide political science research experiences gained so far and already conducted researches in the territory of former Yugoslavia. In doing so, we first theoretically define the context of sports and politics, and then with the use of the literature review method analyse their mutual connectivity in the world and, more narrowly, within the work of the scientific community in the region of former Yugoslavia. Based on the gained conclusions which confirm a tight and constant, but also often abstract and flat-rate understood interplay between both analysed phenomena, a special typology for their in-depth and political-science-focused study is delivered. It is believed that distinctions between political, polity and policy approaches to sport decisively influence the mode of their future interplay.

The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one. ; The post-communist NATO member states from Central and South-Eastern Europe (CSEE) comprise a group of 11 NATO/EU member states, from the Baltic to the Adriatic and Black Sea. The twelfth and thirteenth NATO member states from the region are Albania and Montenegro. The afore-mentioned NATO/EU member states have mostly shown a similar stance towards the Eastern Partnership Policy. However, since 2014, these states have shown more diverse stances, albeit declaratively supporting the anti-Russian sanctions. Due to the difference in stances towards Russia, the "New Cold Warriors" (Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania) and the "Pragmatics" (Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia and Bulgaria), will maintain a mostly common course towards Russia and the Eastern Partnership states because they have to. The Czech Republic, although hosting a part of the US anti-ballistic missile shield, is not a genuine "New Cold Warrior", while in 2016 Croatia effectively became one.