Migracje ze wsi do miast w polnocnej Tunezji
In: Kultura i społeczeństwo: kwartalnik, Band 22, Heft 1-2, S. 285-308
ISSN: 0023-5172
In: Kultura i społeczeństwo: kwartalnik, Band 22, Heft 1-2, S. 285-308
ISSN: 0023-5172
A dispute between idealism and realism in International Relations theory is both widely known and still unresolved. Although one can find more arguments in favour of the latter perspective, once in a while the proponents of idealism – backed with solid evidence from international politics – raise justified objections. This phenomenon applies especially to the American foreign policy which provides many examples of the continuous rivalry between both paradigms. The article refers to that discourse and conducts an analysis of the U.S. policy towards the Arab Spring, where noble (and idealistic) values clashed with hard (and realist) interests. While addressing the question – idealism or realism? – the paper offers a slightly different approach to the subject. It distinguishes the "instrumental idealism" (which in fact is a disguised realism) and the "pure idealism" (which truly pursues its goals). Six countries, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain and Syria, serve as case studies for the analysis. The article argues that the U.S. conducted a heterogeneous policy towards the Arab Spring, employing three approaches – realism in Yemen and Bahrain, idealism in Libya, and the combination of both in Tunisia, Egypt and Syria.
BASE
The paper discusses the parliamentary systems of selected Arab and Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa at the turn of the 1960s.The analysis concerns a document drawn up for executives in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in late 1972, with an attachment discussing the parliamentary systems of the countries of primary importance for the goals and interests of Poland. As concerns the Middle East, the parliamentary systems of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Iran and North and South Yemen were described. In North Africa, the analysis encompassed the Maghreb region: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and the Mashrek region: Egypt, Libya and Sudan.The paper concludes with a statement that the document was an accurate and faithful presentation of the parliamentary systems of representative states. Political relations in this region were developing dynamically at that time, military coups and coups d'état occurred, some states were leaning towards socialism, while maintaining their family or religious structures, while others were only just gaining their full sovereignty and independence. The situation of Israel continued to be complicated, as the state remained highly confrontational towards Arab countries. This last issue was the reason for Poland's failing to achieve the strategic goals of its foreign policy in the Middle East and North Africa. Another Israeli-Arab war in October 1973 made Polish decision makers realize how fragile the foundations of states in the region were, preventing Poland from becoming fully involved in Arab and Muslim countries. ; The paper discusses the parliamentary systems of selected Arab and Muslim countries in the Middle East and North Africa at the turn of the 1960s.The analysis concerns a document drawn up for executives in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in late 1972, with an attachment discussing the parliamentary systems of the countries of primary importance for the goals and interests of Poland. As concerns the Middle East, the parliamentary systems of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Iran and North and South Yemen were described. In North Africa, the analysis encompassed the Maghreb region: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and the Mashrek region: Egypt, Libya and Sudan.The paper concludes with a statement that the document was an accurate and faithful presentation of the parliamentary systems of representative states. Political relations in this region were developing dynamically at that time, military coups and coups d'état occurred, some states were leaning towards socialism, while maintaining their family or religious structures, while others were only just gaining their full sovereignty and independence. The situation of Israel continued to be complicated, as the state remained highly confrontational towards Arab countries. This last issue was the reason for Poland's failing to achieve the strategic goals of its foreign policy in the Middle East and North Africa. Another Israeli-Arab war in October 1973 made Polish decision makers realize how fragile the foundations of states in the region were, preventing Poland from becoming fully involved in Arab and Muslim countries.
BASE
Proces zmian w państwach arabskich, którego początek wyznaczyły protesty w Tunezji na przełomie 2010 i 2011 r., stanowił zaskoczenie nie tylko dla szeroko definiowanej społeczności międzynarodowej, ale także dla najważniejszych graczy w regionach Bliskiego Wschodu oraz Afryki Północnej. Bez wątpienia do tej grupy zaliczyć należy Turcję. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest analiza wpływu procesu zmian w państwach arabskich po 2010 r. na politykę zagraniczną Turcji. Szczegółowej analizie zostały poddane przede wszystkim podstawowe założenia polityki zagranicznej Turcji przed 2010 r. oraz ich późniejsza, ewentualna modyfikacja w obliczu zmian politycznych w świecie arabskim. Na podstawie analizy, autor za nieaktualne uznał dwa z regionalnych celów polityki zagranicznej Turcji: eliminację problemów z państwami w regionie oraz niemożność pełnienia funkcji państwa mediatora w regionie. Konflikt wewnętrzny w Syrii stał się bez wątpienia jednym z przykładów niepowodzenia polityki zagranicznej Turcji. Istotną wadą tureckiej polityki zagranicznej po 2002 r. stanowiło oparcie stosunków na bliskich, osobistych relacjach tureckich polityków z niektórymi autorytarnymi przywódcami państw arabskich. Paradoksalnie, wsparcie procesu przemian w Egipcie, może zagrozić regionalnym aspiracjom Turcji. Pytanie dotyczące atrakcyjności tak zwanego modelu tureckiego dla państw arabskich pozostaje pytaniem otwartym. Chociaż można wskazać przykłady nawiązywania do politycznych doświadczeń Turcji w takich państwach jak Tunezja, Maroko czy Egipt, jest to jeszcze zbyt mało, by można mówić o politycznej miękkiej sile Turcji w regionie. ; The process of political changes in the Arab states, which began in Tunisia in 2010, came as a complete surprise not only to international community, but also to all key players in the Middle East and in North Africa. Undoubtedly, Turkey was one of them. The main aim of this article is to analyze influence of the process on the foreign policy of Turkey after 2010. In order to do that, the author analyzes fundamental objectives of the Turkish foreign policy before and after 2010. He argues that two of them, namely zero problems with neighbors policy as well as a role of a mediator in the Middle East, are not valid anymore. Moreover, the internal conflict in Syria became a symbol of a failure of zero problems with neighbors policy. One of the weaknesses of the Turkish foreign policy was its dependence on personal relations between Turkish politicians and authoritarian leaders in the Arab states. Paradoxically, although Turkey supports changes in Egypt, this state can become its biggest regional rival in the nearest future. Last but not least, the author tries to find out whether so-called Turkish political model is attractive to the Arab states. He claims that although we can find some examples how Arab politicians follow the Turkish example in Tunisia, Morocco or Egypt, it is still not enough to assert that these states have already adopted the Turkish model.
BASE
In February 2011, inspired by the events in Tunisia and Egypt, Libyans started the revolt, which resulted in the overthrow of the regime of Colonel Muammar Qaddafi. The revolt lasted eight months and was supported by the international military intervention, which was crucial to the success of the insurgents. However, the international support for the uprising would not have been possible without the diplomatic efforts of the quickly formed Libyan Transitional National Council, which represented the opposition forces against Col. Qaddafi. The consolidation of both the Libyan opposition and international military operation in Libya were the key factors of the socalled Libyan Arab Spring. The first chapter of the article presents the significant developments of the Libyan revolt from the beginning of the protests until the death of Col. Qaddafi and formation of a first government. The uprising and military intervention led to the change of the political system of the state. It has caused numerous damages and brought many challenges threats to the new Libyan authorities, not only economic, but also social, political and military. The second part of the article addresses these challenges and threats, as they have been determining the shape and structure of the new Libya. This section presents the relevant factors such as the tribal ties, the country's partition into the center and periphery, the role of religion in social and political life, which will have a huge impact on the Libyan society, the future structure of the state, the political scene of the country and relations with regional and global actors. The last part of the article analyses the Libyan uprising and the impact of international military intervention on the situation in Libya. It is an attempt to draw scenarios of the future of Libya and its impact on the security situation in the Mediterranean region, in Africa and in the Arab world. It shows both the possible advantages of the regime change in Libya and the threats for the stabilization of the country and neighbouring regions.
BASE
This article addresses relations between Europe and the countries of the Middle East and the implications of these relationships over the past two decades, through an examination of the events of the 'Arab Spring.' The Arab Spring refers to a chain of events that swept through the Arab countries from late 2010, characterized by demonstrations, violence, and civil war. This was sparked by resistance to tyrannical regimes and led to the fall of the rulers of Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya. However, Islamists were able to utilize the protesters, who sought democracy, an equal economy, and the elimination of governmental corruption, to further their ambitions. At that time, it was not clear what the new regimes would look like, but it was widely expected that Islamist elements would gain power. Europe responded positively to these events, in terms of declarations, policy, and physical involvement, from the fear that Islamist forces would take advantage of the outcomes of the protests, despite the fact that, for decades, there had been collaboration and friendly relations between Western nations and many of the overthrown tyrants. This policy of turning a blind eye to the lack of democracy and human rights violations in these countries, however, had been perceived by many as contrary to European values. On May 25, 2011, the European Union published a document admitting their failure to achieve political reforms in the neighboring Arab countries. Following the events of the Arab Spring, a new approach to strengthening the partnership between Europe and the Arab world was needed. The objectives of European policy towards the Muslim world include halting massive Muslim migration, reducing the influence of fundamentalist and radical Islam in the Middle East and among Muslims in Europe, and ensuring a supply of energy resources obtained from these countries. Meeting these challenges will be a significant step in the right direction. ; Artykuł omawia stosunki między Europą i krajami Bliskiego Wschodu oraz konsekwencje tych relacji w ciągu ostatnich dwóch dekad, poprzez analizę "arabskiej wiosny". Określenie "arabska wiosna" odnosi się do serii wydarzeń obejmujących demonstracje, przemoc i wojnę domową, które przetoczyły się przez kraje arabskie od końca 2010 r. Wywołane przez siły oporu wobec autorytarnych reżimów doprowadziły do upadku przywódców Egiptu, Tunezji i Libii. Protesty zwolenników demokracji, zrównoważonej gospodarki i likwidacji korupcji rządowej udało się jednak wykorzystać do swoich celów islamistom. Wprawdzie nie było wówczas jasne, jakie nowe reżimy przejmą władzę, ale powszechnie oczekiwano, że będą to siły islamistyczne. W kategoriach deklaracji, polityki i zaangażowania fizycznego Europa zareagowała na wydarzenia arabskiej wiosny pozytywnie w obawie, że wyniki protestów mogą zostać wykorzystane przez siły islamistyczne, mimo że przez dziesięciolecia państwa Zachodu łączyła z wieloma obalonymi tyranami współpraca i przyjazne stosunki. Polityka przymykania oka na brak demokracji i łamanie praw człowieka w tych krajach była jednak często postrzegana jako sprzeczna z wartościami europejskimi. W dniu 25 maja 2011 r. Unia Europejska opublikowała dokument przyznający, że nie udało jej się przeprowadzić reform politycznych w sąsiednich krajach arabskich. Po wydarzeniach arabskiej wiosny konieczne było wypracowanie nowego podejścia do wzmocnienia partnerstwa między Europą a światem arabskim. Cele europejskiej polityki wobec świata muzułmańskiego obejmują powstrzymanie masowej migracji muzułmańskiej, zmniejszenie wpływu fundamentalistycznego i radykalnego islamu na Bliskim Wschodzie, a także wśród muzułmanów w Europie, oraz zapewnienie dostaw surowców energetycznych z tych krajów. Sprostanie tym wyzwaniom będzie znaczącym krokiem we właściwym kierunku.
BASE