Suchergebnisse

In recent years, we have seen a wide range of forms of armed conflict, varying in scale, intensity, complexity, and duration, blurring the lines between war and peace. These and other conditions were the reason for undertaking research aimed at identifying scenarios for the development of the international security situation and scenarios for the use of the Polish Armed Forces in relation to threats of a military nature in our country's neighbourhood, in the region, and across the world. With this in mind, while conducting research on the above-mentioned issues, the article focused attention on a research problem which took the form of a question: How does the development of military threats and potential armed conflicts, including the one in Ukraine, affect the shaping of state security? The hypothesis took the form of an assumption that military threats and, consequently, armed conflicts are one of the main determinants of shaping state security. In the face of the threat of an armed conflict, states take actions to ensure their security, in particular, political, organisational, and modernisation activities, and above all, to increase their defence potential in view of war. The research was conducted in military universities, and the general population (N) included research and teaching staff. The research tool was a questionnaire posted on the MS Teams online platform, which is also used to educate students at military universities.

The primary purpose of this article is to explain the meaning and consequences of foreign fighters' participation from Western Balkan countries (WB6) in armed conflicts in Syria and Iraq. In the first part, the issue of foreign fighters is discussed in historical terms. The author focuses on the examples of the Soviet inva-sion of Afghanistan and the ethno-religious conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the second part of the text, the definition framework of foreign fighters' concept and its evolution towards foreign terrorist-fighters is dis-cussed. Then, a detailed analysis of the main problem is conducted, and several research questions are an-swered: 1) What is the scale of the phenomenon of Balkan volunteers (e.g., their number, the structure of origin, and others) in comparison to fighters from other regions? 2) What are their motivations and goals, and what are their recruitment process and ways of moving into the war zone? 3) What is the threat posed by returning fight-ers to the security of the Western Balkans, and how do individual states counteract this phenomenon? The au-thor uses mainly the following research methods: critical content analysis (literature, scientific articles, docu-ments, reports, press materials), and historical and comparative analysis. The author's visits to this country in 2018-2020 constituted an essential contribution to the part concerning the case of Kosovo.

The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. 'Hybrid war' is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term 'hybrid war' means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a 'hybrid war' or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this. ; The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. 'Hybrid war' is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term 'hybrid war' means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a 'hybrid war' or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this.

The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. 'Hybrid war' is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term 'hybrid war' means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a 'hybrid war' or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this.

The text is an attempt to analyze the international political situation in the security sector in the context of the crisis which has arisen as a result of the aggressive actions of the Russian Federation in relation to Ukraine: in particular the forcible annexation of the sovereign territory of Ukraine in violation of all the principles and norms of international law and the inspiration of the armed conflict in the eastern regions of Ukraine. For the first time after the end of the World War II aggression has become a fact of reality in European politics. Pan-European and transatlantic security institution – the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe – was not sufficiently effective mechanism for crisis management. In two years, the conflict in eastern Ukraine killed about 10 thousand men. The conflict in Eastern Ukraine has radically changed the perception of security in Europe. The problem is that Ukraine, like most of the "new democracies" of Eastern Europe as a result of the transformation processes of the early 90th appeared in a "gray zone" of security. Most of the Eastern European countries overcame the security gap by joining NATO/EU. At the same time, Ukraine remained in the buffer zone and became an object of intense economic, political, informational and military pressure from the Russian Federation. As a result, Ukraine is forced to rely primarily on their own capabilities and the military-industrial potential (not being part of the European collective defense/security), on the other – the international political, economic, informational support from the international community plays a key role in the possibility of Ukraine resist aggression. However, the crisis has led to a certain re-evaluation of existing regional security system: 1) The failure of attempts to build a pan-European security system became obvious; 2) The OSCE in Ukrainian crisis has created a platform for the negotiations and the peace process, but did not provide, at least until now, the mechanism of a real resolution to the crisis; 3) The question of inefficiency, lack of prospects and obsolescence of NATO as a collective security organization may be withdrawn from the agenda; 4) There is an activization of existing and search for new formats of cooperation between European countries in the development and improvement of the international security system in Europe. ; W artykule podjęto próbę analizy bezpieczeństwa w wymiarze polityczno-międzynarodowym w kontekście kryzysu wywołanego agresywnymi działaniami Federacji Rosyjskiej wobec Ukrainy – w szczególności aneksji części terytorium Ukrainy przy użyciu siły z pogwałceniem wszelkich norm prawa międzynarodowego oraz "instalacji" konfliktu zbrojnego we wschodnich obwodach państwa ukraińskiego. Po raz pierwszy od zakończenia II wojny światowej agresja stała się rzeczywistością polityki europejskiej. Ponadto ogólnoeuropejskie i transatlantyckie struktury bezpieczeństwa – Organizacja Bezpieczeństwa i Współpracy w Europie – nie jest zbyt efektywnym mechanizmem zarządzania kryzysowego. W ciągu dwóch lat konfliktu zginęło ok. 10 tys. osób. Konflikt na wschodzie Ukrainy radykalnie zmienił postrzeganie bezpieczeństwa na kontynencie europejskim. Problemem jest to, że Ukraina jak większość "nowych demokracji" Europy Wschodniej w wyniku procesów transformacyjnych znalazła się w szarej strefie bezpieczeństwa. Większość wschodnioeuropejskich państw rozwiązało problem security gap, wstępując do NATO i UE, podczas gdy Ukraina pozostała w szarej strefie, stając się celem ekonomicznych, politycznych, informacyjnych i wojskowych nacisków ze strony Federacji Rosyjskiej. Po pierwsze, w wyniku rozwoju kryzysu Ukraina jest zmuszona w pierwszej kolejności liczyć na własne możliwości i potencjał wojskowo-przemysłowy (nie będąc częścią europejskiego systemu bezpieczeństwa kolektywnego/obronnego). Po drugie, wsparcie polityczne, ekonomiczne i informacyjne ze strony społeczności międzynarodowej odgrywa kluczowe znaczenie w kontekście przeciwstawienia się Ukrainy rosyjskiej agresji. Razem z tym kryzys doprowadził do przewartościowań w zakresie istniejących w regionie systemów bezpieczeństwa: 1) możemy konstatować nieudane próby wybudowania ogólnoeuropejskich mechanizmów zagwarantowania bezpieczeństwa; 2) OBWE stworzyło platformę rozmów w ramach pokojowego rozwiązania konfliktu, ale nie wybudowała do tej pory realnego mechanizmu rozwiązania konfliktu; 3) NATO jako system bezpieczeństwa kolektywnego nie powinno być traktowane w kategoriach nieefektywności, archaiczności i braku perspektyw; 4) pojawiły się formy aktywizacji istniejących i poszukiwanie nowych form współpracy pomiędzy państwami europejskimi w celu rozwoju i doskonalenia systemów bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego w Europie. ; Текст является попыткой анализа международно-политической ситуации в секторе безопасности в контексте кризиса, возникшего в результате агрессивных действий Российской Федерации по отношению к Украине: в частности насильственная аннексия части суверенной территории Украины в нарушение всех принципов и норм международного права и инспирирования вооруженного конфликта в восточных областях украинского государства. Впервые после завершения Второй мировой войны агрессия стала фактом действительности европейской политики. При этом общеевропейская и трансатлантическая структура безопасности – Организация по безопасности и сотрудничеству в Европе – оказалась не достаточно эффективным механизмом кризисного урегулирования. За два года конфликта погибло около 10 тыс. человек. Конфликт на востоке Украины радикально изменил восприятие безопасности на европейском континенте. Проблемой стало то, что Украина, как и большинство «новых демократий» Восточной Европы в результате трансформационных процессов начала 90-х гг. оказались в «серой зоне» безопасности». Большинство восточно-европейских государств решило проблему security gap путем присоединения к НАТО/ЕС. В то же время Украина остались в этой «зоне» и стала объектом интенсивного экономического, политического, информационного и военного давления со стороны Российской Федерации. В результате развития кризиса с одной стороны Украина вынуждена полагаться в первую очередь на свои собственные возможности и военно-промышленный потенциал (не будучи частью европейской системы коллективной обороны/безопасности), с другой – международно-политическая, экономическая, информационная поддержка со стороны международного сообщества играет ключевую роль в возможности Украины противостоять агрессии. Вместе с тем, кризис привел к определенной переоценке существующих в регионе систем безопасности: 1) Можно засвидетельствовать провал попыток выстроить общеевропейские механиз- мы обеспечения безопасности; 2) ОБСЕ создала платформу для переговоров и мирного процесса, но не обеспечила, по крайней мере, до сих пор, механизма реального урегулирования кризиса; 3) Вопрос о неэффективности, бесперспективности и устарелости НАТО как организации коллективной безопасности может быть снят с повестки дня; 4) Происходить активизация существующих и поиск новых форматов сотрудничества между европейскими государствами в целях развития и усовершенствования системы международной безопасности в Европе.

The Republic of Kosovo was created several years after the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Its problems were visible during Josip Broz Tito's presidency. Over the last ten years Kosovo has had two female presidents. The question is, what is the position of women on the Kosovan political scene? This phenomenon is particularly significant from the point of view of the post-conflict reconstruction of the state. The aim of this article is to analyse the evolution of the role of Kosovo Albanian women in the politics of Kosovo at the central level. For this reason, the article includes women involved in the armed conflict in Kosovo, especially in the activities of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA, alb. Ushtria Çlirimtare e Kosovës, UÇK). The author also presents the role of women in the Kosovan political arena since 1999, with particular emphasis on changes that took place after the declaration of independence of Kosovo. Furthermore, the author examines the profiles of selected female politicians. The article is based on an analysis of primary and secondary sources, the comparative and historical method, and an analysis of statistical data.

Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law. ; Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.

Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.

The transformation of the Russian foreign and security policy based on a more courageous use of military potential is a fact. Over the past several years, Russia has moved from articulating its interests to their enforcement with the use of military force. This article focuses on analyzing this process and identifying its potential consequences for global security. The conclusions drawn by the author, based on the conducted research, allow to state that the armed forces are and will be an important instrument of the Russian foreign and security policy. This does not mean, however, that the Russian Federation will strive for an armed conflict posing a threat to international security.

The Ukraine crisis, which started at the end of November 2013 and in April 2015 turned into armed conflict in the east of Ukraine, had a negative impact on the geopolitical situation of Poland; it compromised Poland's security and impaired the perception of security among the majority of Polish society. This article's objective is to outline the direct implications of the crisis and conflict in Ukraine for the security of Poland. These implications include: destabilization of the international security with serious consequences for the security of Poland; an increased sense of threat from Russia in Polish society; increased efforts of Polish foreign and security policy-makers to strengthen military defense potential; reinforcement of NATO's cohesion and its more active involvement in Polish and Central European security; enhanced cooperation between Poland and the United States in the field of military defense; and increased threats to the economic stability of Poland. Key words: security of Poland, Ukraine conflict, Poland-Russia relations, Poland-Ukraine relations, implications of the Ukraine conflict for the security of Poland

The purpose of this article is to analyse the dynamics and variability of the conflict between the Russian Federation and Ukraine. As noted in the introduction, the term "conflict" refers to the state of bilateral relations between the two countries since 2014, nevertheless, for the analysis of the current state of the conflict, the key date is 24 February 2022. Since the start of the invasion, described by the Russians as a "special military operation", we have seen an increase in the dynamics and intensity of the conflict at all levels. The intensification of military operations has also affected the political, economic, and social spheres. Just when it seemed that the so-called "annexation referenda" would mark a new phase in the course of the conflict, and the scenario of a "Ukrainian version" of a low-intensity conflict would become more feasible, it turned out that the counteroffensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine changed not only the situation on the frontline but also dynamized the other levels on which the conflict is taking place. This forced the author to update the analysed phenomenon. The article concludes with the constatation that we are in a "period of transition", and the coming winter may once again change the situation of both sides in the ongoing war. Celem artykułu jest analiza zmienności i dynamiki konfliktu pomiędzy Federacją Rosyjską i Ukrainą. Jak zaznaczono we wstępie, termin "konflikt" odnosi się do stanu stosunków dwustronnych pomiędzy tymi państwami od 2014 roku, niemniej jednak, dla analizy obecnego stanu konfliktu, kluczową datą jest 24 luty 2022 roku. Od rozpoczęcia inwazji określanej przez Rosjan "specjalną operacją militarną" obserwujemy wzrost dynamiki i intensywności konfliktu na wszystkich poziomach. Intensyfikacja działań militarnych wpłynęła także na sferę polityczną, ekonomiczną i społeczną. W momencie kiedy wydawało się, że tzw. "referenda aneksyjne" wyznaczą nową fazę przebiegu konfliktu i bardziej realny stanie się scenariusz "ukraińskiej wersji" konfliktu niskiej intensywności, okazało się, że kontrofensywa Sił Zbrojnych Ukrainy zmieniła nie tylko sytuację na froncie, ale też zdynamizowała pozostałe poziomy, na których ten konflikt się rozgrywa. Wymusiło to na autorze zaktualizowanie analizowanego zjawiska. Artykuł kończy się konstatacją stwierdzającą, iż znajdujemy się w "okresie przejściowym", a nadchodząca zima może po raz kolejny zmienić sytuację obu stron w toczącej się wojnie.

Przez dwadzieścia pięć lat międzynarodowe środowisko Polski uważane było za stabilne i wolne od bezpośrednich zagrożeń militarnych. Kryzys na Ukrainie i interwencja zbrojna Rosji na Krymie podważyły to przekonanie. Naruszenie integralności Ukrainy przez Rosję winno spotkać się ze zdecydowaną reakcją społeczności międzynarodowej. Szczególnie zobligowane do działania wydają się być jednak Stany Zjednoczone i Wielka Brytania, które - wraz z Rosją - są od 1994 r. gwarantami bezpieczeństwa, integralności terytorialnej i niezależności Ukrainy. Do¬trzymanie przez nie złożonych obietnic można traktować jako probierz dotrzymania innych zobowiązań, w tym także tych, które wynikają z układów sojuszniczych. Międzynarodowe reperkusje zbrojnego konfliktu na Ukrainie mogą więc dotyczyć nie tylko przyszłego statusu Krymu i Ukrainy, ale także wiarygodności NATO, Unii Europejskiej (w tym Wielkiej Brytanii) oraz Stanów Zjednoczonych. W tym kontekście konflikt na Ukrainie może stać się powodem wymuszającym przegląd oraz - być może - redefinicję założeń polskiej polityki bezpieczeństwa. Bezpieczeństwo Polski zostało bowiem oparte na trzech filarach: członkostwie w NATO oraz Unii Europejskiej i partnerstwie ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi. Spoiwem tych filarów jest przekonanie o dotrzymaniu zobowiązań sojuszniczych przez USA oraz partnerów z UE i NATO. Artykuł traktuje o ewolucji polskiej polityki bezpieczeństwa. Autorka skupia się na ocenie wagi przykładanej przez Polskę do związków sojuszniczych z NATO, Unią Europejską i Stanami Zjednoczonymi i zastanawia się nad wpływem, jaki mogą na nie wywrzeć naruszenie integralności terytorialnej Ukrainy przez Rosję oraz reakcja głównych aktorów stosunków międzynarodowych regionu euroatlantyckiego na ten fakt. ; For twenty-five years Poland's international environment had been considered stable and free from direct military threats. The crisis in Ukraine and Russia's military intervention in the Crimea undermined this belief. Russia's violation of the Ukrainian integrity should meet with an overwhelming response of the international community, especially United States and United Kingdom, who are - together with Russia - the guarantors of Ukraine's security, territorial integ¬rity and independence. The fulfillment of promises US and UK were given to Ukraine could be nowadays regarded as a test, which can assess ability to meet other obligations given by these two states, including those arising from allied systems. International repercussions of armed conflict in Ukraine may therefore affect not only the future status of Crimea and Ukraine, but also the credibility of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union (including the UK) and the United States. In this context the conflict in Ukraine can become a reason for forcing the review and possibly redefinition of the assumptions of Poland's security policy. That is be¬cause security of Poland was based on three pillars: the NATO and EU membership, and the part¬nership with the United States. The binder of these pillars is the convince of keeping alliance commitment by the U.S. and partners from EU and NATO. The article discusses the evolution of Poland's security policy. The article focuses on assessing the weight given by Poland to the com¬pounds allied with NATO, the European Union and the United States and asks how the violation of the Ukrainian territorial integrity and the response to this delict given by the main actors of transatlantic relations can influence on Poland's security policy

For twenty-five years Poland's international environment had been considered stable and free from direct military threats. The crisis in Ukraine and Russia's military intervention in the Crimea undermined this belief. Russia's violation of the Ukrainian integrity should meet with an overwhelming response of the international community, especially United States and United Kingdom, who are – together with Russia – the guarantors of Ukraine's security, territorial integrity and independence. The fulfillment of promises US and UK were given to Ukraine could be nowadays regarded as a test, which can assess ability to meet other obligations given by these two states, including those arising from allied systems. International repercussions of armed conflict in Ukraine may therefore affect not only the future status of Crimea and Ukraine, but also the credibility of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union (including the UK) and the United States. In this context the conflict in Ukraine can become a reason for forcing the review and possibly redefinition of the assumptions of Poland's security policy. That is because security of Poland was based on three pillars: the NATO and EU membership, and the partnership with the United States. The binder of these pillars is the convince of keeping alliance commitment by the U.S. and partners from EU and NATO. The article discusses the evolution of Poland's security policy. The article focuses on assessing the weight given by Poland to the compounds allied with NATO, the European Union and the United States and asks how the violation of the Ukrainian territorial integrity and the response to this delict given by the main actors of transatlantic relations can influence on Poland's security policy. ; Przez dwadzieścia pięć lat międzynarodowe środowisko Polski uważane było za stabilne i wolne od bezpoœrednich zagrożeń militarnych. Kryzys na Ukrainie i interwencja zbrojna Rosji na Krymie podważyły to przekonanie. Naruszenie integralnoœci Ukrainy przez Rosję winno spotkać się ze zdecydowaną reakcją społeczności międzynarodowej. Szczególnie zobligowane do działania wydają się być jednak Stany Zjednoczone i Wielka Brytania, które – wraz z Rosją – są od 1994 r. gwarantami bezpieczeństwa, integralności terytorialnej i niezależności Ukrainy. Dotrzymanie przez nie złożonych obietnic można traktować jako probierz dotrzymania innych zobowiązań, w tym takze tych, które wynikają z układów sojuszniczych. Miedzynarodowe reperkusje zbrojnego konfliktu na Ukrainie moga więc dotyczyć nie tylko przyszłego statusu Krymu i Ukrainy, ale tak¿e wiarygodności NATO, Unii Europejskiej (w tym Wielkiej Brytanii) oraz Stanów Zjednoczonych. W tym kontekście konflikt na Ukrainie może stać się powodem wymuszającym przeglad oraz – być może – redefinicję założeń polskiej polityki bezpieczeństwa. Bezpieczeństwo Polski zostało bowiem oparte na trzech filarach: członkostwie w NATO oraz Unii Europejskiej i partnerstwie ze Stanami Zjednoczonymi. Spoiwem tych filarów jest przekonanie o dotrzymaniu zobowiązań sojuszniczych przez USA oraz partnerów z UE i NATO. Artykuł traktuje o ewolucji polskiej polityki bezpieczeñstwa. Autorka skupia się na ocenie wagi przykładanej przez Polskę do związków sojuszniczych z NATO, Unią Europejską i Stanami Zjednoczonymi i zastanawia się nad wpływem, jaki mogą na nie wywrzeć naruszenie integralności terytorialnej Ukrainy przez Rosję oraz reakcja głównych aktorów stosunków międzynarodowych regionu euroatlantyckiego na ten fakt.

Celem globalnej polityki rozwojowej jest likwidacja ubóstwa. Badacze nie mają wątpliwości, że jedną z kluczowych barier w skutecznej walce z ubóstwem są wojny i konflikty zbrojne. Pokój i bezpieczeństwo są ważne zarówno dla państw rozwijających się, jak i dla państw świadczących pomoc rozwojową. UE i jej państwa członkowskie są największymi dawcami pomocy na świecie, a Afryka Subsaharyjska (SSA) regionem o największym zapotrzebowaniu na pomoc rozwojową. Tekst analizuje jakie miejsce w europejskiej polityce rozwojowej wobec Afryki zajmuje kwestia pokoju i stabilizacji? Drugim obszarem analizy jest próba odpowiedzi na dylemat w jaki sposób pokój i stabilizacja lub ich brak wpływają na rozwój Afryki Subsaharyjskiej? Z analizy sytuacji państw SSA wynika, że trwały, zrównoważony rozwój w warunkach wojny czy innych konfliktów zbrojnych nie jest możliwy. Budowanie trwałego rozwoju musi być poprzedzone skutecznym zakończeniem konfliktów oraz wyeliminowaniem lub radykalnym ograniczeniem ich przyczyn. Pomoc z zewnątrz, w tym pomoc UE, ma w tych krajach – przede wszystkim – charakter pomocy humanitarnej. Jest ona potrzebna i ratuje ludzkie życie. Sama w sobie nie likwiduje jednak przyczyn konfliktów, ani nie jest w stanie zapewnić trwałego rozwoju. ; The aim of the global development policy is to eradicate poverty. Scholars are in no doubt that wars and armed conflicts are among the key obstacles to the effective struggle against poverty. Peace and security are as important for developing countries as for those that offer development aid. The EU and its member states are the greatest global providers of aid and Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is the region with the highest demand for developmental aid. This article analyzes the position of peace and stability in European development policy towards Africa. Another issue is the attempt to answer the question of the influence peace and stability, or their lack, have on the development of SSA. The analysis of the situation in SSA states demonstrates that consistent and sustainable development is not feasible during warfare and other armed conflicts. Ensuring permanent development has to be preceded by an effective conclusion of conflicts and the eradication or dramatic suppression of the causes of such conflicts. The aid from outside, including that provided by the EU, is first and foremost humanitarian. While such aid is necessary and helps save human lives, it neither eliminates the reasons for conflicts, nor is it able to ensure permanent development.