Suchergebnisse

Region basenu Morza Śródziemnego odgrywa ważną rolę w tworzeniu współczesnej architektury bezpieczeństwa europejskiego. Stabilność Europy wymaga podejmowania działań w skali globalnej, które nie są ograniczone do jednego kontynentu. Wzdłuż Morza Śródziemnego przebiega widoczna granica pomiędzy krajami położonymi na południowym i wschodnim jego wybrzeżu, nękanymi wieloma wewnętrznymi konfl iktami i pozostającymi na niskim poziomie rozwoju gospodarczego, a bogatym północnym wybrzeżem. Ogromne zróżnicowanie tego obszaru ma wpływ na przyszłość nie tylko krajów położonych w jego sąsiedztwie, ale i całego świata. Niniejszy artykuł przedstawia zagrożenia, z którymi mierzy się Europa w związku z bliskością regionu śródziemnomorskiego. Wynikają one przede wszystkim z dysproporcji ekonomicznych, stagnacji gospodarczej, ciągle rosnącego bezrobocia, problemów demografi cznych i nielegalnej migracji. Kraje regionu borykają się także ze wzrostem przestępczości zorganizowanej, niestabilnością polityczną, terroryzmem i konfl iktami o charakterze lokalnym. Najbardziej niepokojący jest fakt, że trwający od ponad pół wieku konfl ikt izraelsko-arabski pozostaje nierozwiązany. Autorka w artykule dokona także oceny dotychczasowych inicjatyw europejskich w zakresie stabilizacji regionu Morza Śródziemnego. ; Mediterranean region play the important role in create structures of present European security. European stability demand taking actions in global scale which are not limited to the one continent. Across the Mediterranean sea is the border between the countries lies on south and west seaside, disturbed by many inner confl icts and stay on the low economic position and the rich north area. Big diversity this spaces infl uence the futures not only countries its neighborhood but the whole world. This article present threats which Europe measure with due to Mediterranean region proximity. This threats are connected with economical disparity and stagnation, rising unemployment, demographical problems and illegal migrations. countries of the region face the increase of organized crime, political instability, terrorism and local confl icts. The more warring fact is lasting trough the half of century not resolved Israeli-Arab confl ict. Author in the article make the estimate of the last European initiatives in sphere Mediterranean region stabilization. ; Регион бассейна Средиземного моря играет большую роль в создании совре- менной архитектуры европейской безопасности. Стабильность Европы требует действий в глобальном масштабе, не ограниченной одним континентом. Вдоль Средиземного моря проходит четкая граница между государствами располо- женными на его южных и восточных берегах, характеризующихся постоянны- ми внутренними конфликтами, низким уровнем экономического развития и бо- гатыми странами северного побережья. Огромное расслоение развития этого региона имеет влияние на будущее не только соседствующих государств, но и всего мира. В статье указаны угрозы, которым подвержена Европа, в связи с близостью средиземноморского региона. Прежде всего, эти угрозы являются следствием экономических диспропорций, экономической стагнации, постоян- но растущей безработицы, демографических проблем и нелегальной миграции. Страны региона борются также с ростом организованной преступности, полити- ческой нестабильностью, терроризмом и местными конфликтами. Беспокойство вызывает факт, что продолжающийся в регионе более полувека израильско- арабский конфликт все еще остается нерешенным. В статье дано также оценку предпринятых до сих пор европейских инициатив касающихся стабилизации региона Средиземного моря.

In some political and science circles (including Poland) there are articulated views on the crucial role of electoral systems in the process of political competition. Therefore they express the opinion about prevalence of certain electoral arrangements in terms of the implementation of certain political preferences. Often hopes for the reform of the political system are associated with the changes of the electoral systems. In the Great Britain (the United Kingdom) and other English-speaking countries citizens have formed community associations whose aim is the change from the majority to the proportional electoral system. In the effect we have more proportional election result and extension of real electoral bid to a larger number of political parties. On the other hand, in Poland, we have seen the opposite trend. Proponents of single-mandate constituencies depreciate the system of proportional representation. They express the belief in the positive effects of the majority system in the parliamentary elections. Radicals endorse the idea that only those electoral solutions are synonymous with electoral democracy and they are a way to reduce the pathologies of political life. In terms of these issues there have arisen many misconceptions and political myths. The main purpose of this article is to pay attention to trends in the areas of electoral reforms in the world. The author tries to answer the following research questions: 1) What electoral systems were popular in the world in individual periods from the 19th to the 21st centuries? 2) What tendencies appear in changes of electoral systems in the recent years? 3) What is the being of popularity phenomenon of mixed-member electoral systems? In the recent years the most popular electoral systems are: proportional representation with open lists and majority rules in single member-districts. ; W niektórych środowiskach politycznych (w tym w Polsce), a także naukowych artykułowane są poglądy o – decydującej w procesie rywalizacji politycznej – roli systemów wyborczych oraz w związku z tym wyrażane jest przekonanie o przewadze niektórych rozwiązań wyborczych w zakresie realizacji określonych preferencji politycznych. Często nadzieje w zakresie reformy systemu politycznego wiąże się ze zmianami systemów wyborczych. W Wielkiej Brytanii i innych krajach anglosaskich powstały stowarzyszenia społeczne, których celem jest zmiana systemu większościowego na proporcjonalny. Jego zwolennicy opowiadają się za proporcjonalnością wyniku wyborczego i rozszerzeniem realnej oferty wyborczej do większej liczby podmiotów partyjnych. Z kolei w Polsce można zauważyć odwrotną tendencję. Zwolennicy jednomandatowych okręgów wyborczych, deprecjonując system proporcjonalnejreprezentacji, wyrażają przekonanie o pozytywnych efektach systemu większościowego w wyborach do Sejmu. W wariancie radykalnym lansowana jest teza, że tylko powyższe rozwiązania wyborcze stanowią synonim demokracji i są sposobem na ograniczenie patologii życia politycznego. Wokół tej problematyki narosło wiele nieporozumień i mitów politycznych. Celem przedstawionego artykułu jest zwrócenie uwagi na tendencje w zakresie polityki reform wyborczych w świecie i odpowiedź na takie pytania badawcze jak: 1) Jakie systemy wyborcze były popularne w świecie w poszczególnych okresach od XIX do XXI wieku?; 2) Jakie są tendencje w zakresie zmian systemów wyborczych w ostatnich latach?; 3) Z czego wynika fenomen popularności mieszanych systemów wyborczych? W ostatnich latach najbardziej popularnymi rozwiązaniami wyborczymi są system proporcjonalny z listami otwartymi oraz system większościowy z jednomandatowymi okręgami wyborczymi.

Latin America has played at all times a significant part in the foreign policy of the United States. Its geographical proximity, colonial descent, as well as common interests of all American countries toward the policy of the European colonial powers - these are historically primordial factors that have determined their relations. In course of time, as USA investments in Latin America grew, and the system of the political-military relations consolidated, also with respect to the USA global policy, the countries of Latin America got interrelated in a peculiar way with their northern neighbour. At present their mutual relations are noticeable at the arena of culture and propaganda. The present work perceives the cultural policy and foreign propaganda pursued by the United States as a broad complex of phenomena involving both the passage of wealth, values, and standars of culture, and the political purposeful persvasive actions, affecting the views, attitudes, and conduct of the pe.ople, as an instrument applied to put into effect the strategical aims of the. USA foreign polioy. At the same time it represents a stable integrator of the western hemisphere. The two decades (1960s and 1970s) of cultural policy and foreign propaganda discussed in the present work are' a period that allows to trace the characteristic manifestations, and to regard the trends appearing as the regularities of this sphere of social activity. The conception of tjie culture and propaganda influence, elaborated in the beginning of the 1960s has been modified in accordance with new occurrences taking place in Latin America, and with their perception by the particular administrations. The political function of this influencing, its aims,¡contents and implementing methods have not undergone any change. The work is composed of three fundamental sections - chapters. The first one "The determinants, and the programmatic directions of the USA culture-propaganda influence in Latin America" attempts to present the foreign policy programmes, and their stageB to define the place and role of the culture-propaganda influence in the USA strategies adopted to Latin America. Chapter two "The organization of the administration machinery" illustrates the extremely complex, multisectorial, and hierarchical system of the state and non-state organizations programming, coordinating, and implementing the actions under discussion. The third chapter "The forms, and techniques of the culture-propaganda influencing" describes the big business activity in Latin America in the field of mass-communication, its dominance at the information market, and its impact on the mass culture and education. Moreover the author discusses the state institutions activity in the field of radio, TV and film propaganda, face-to-face communication, bi-national centres and military schooling stations, as well as public utilities operation. Latin America constitutes too differentiated area to adopt preferential techniques to the entire region. Nevertheless the preference is noticeable. This refers to the radio-TV propaganda, face-to-face communication, bi-national centres operation, and arises from the influencies directing mainly onto middle classes predestinated to adopt foreign standards and values.

The process of changes in systems of post-secondary education in several West European countries was initiated by the national governments in the 1960s. The task assigned then to the universities, i.e. to provide training conformable to the demands of the labour market and thus to assist with achieving social and economic aims set by the governments, is still valid. This paper presents results of the reforms of educational systems in selected countries. Its first part gives the general background of the reforms. Opinions about the effects of the changes are equivocal. The development of institutions of higher learning, greater accessibility of it and the increase of the number of students are considered as positive. Still, in the assessments of quality the opinion prevails that the changes have brought about mediocre effects as compared with what had been intitially intended. The most frequently cited reason why the governmental projects of reforms failed is the way in which institutions of higher learning respond to external inspirations of changes; it is said that the conservative system of academic education can be reformed only through self-regulation processes. The final effect of reforms is also strongly affected by educational aspirations of young people, which depend neither on the nature of governmental initiatives nor on traditional educational preferences of the universities. The author illustrates the above statements with selected aspects of the reforms of educational systems in Germany and France and with the effects of the introduction of preferential points into the system of new students recruitment in Poland in the 1960s. Her presentation of the problem from one side only is intended to provoke a wider debate. Ewa Chmielecka Catalogue ; Zapoczątkowany w latach sześćdziesiątych proces zmian w systemach kształcenia ponadśredniego wielu krajów Europy Zachodniej został zainicjowany przez rządy tych krajów, a podjęte w tym czasie próby włączenia uniwersytetów do realizacji społecznych, a zwłaszcza ekonomicznych celów polityki rządowej poprzez podporządkowanie kształcenia uniwersyteckiego wymaganiom rynku pracy, trwają w zasadzie do dziś. W licznych opracowaniach, powstałych z inicjatywy znaczących organizacji międzynarodowych, podkreśla się jednakże ograniczoną efektywność dotychczasowych działań w tym zakresie. Ten punkt widzenia przeważa w ocenach dokonywanych w kategoriach jakościowych. Rozwój instytucji wyższego wykształcenia, zwiększenie dostępności studiów i skokowy przyrost liczby studiujących powoduje, że w wielu ocenach przeważają akcenty pozytywne. Zasadniczo odmienny ton w poglądach na temat jakościowych wyników dokonywanych zmian sprawia, że generalnie traktowane są jako "mieszanina sukcesu i niepowodzenia" (Cerych, Sabatier 1986). Główny powód niejednoznaczności ocen wynika stąd, że skutki społeczne - istotny aspekt reform studiów wyższych wielu krajów - nie dają się ująć w kategoriach jakościowych (Husen 1990; Skóldberg 1991). Wśród najczęściej wymienianych powodów niepowodzeń rządowych projektów reform jest sposób reagowania instytucji wyższego wykształcenia na inspiracje dotyczące zmian przychodzących z zewnątrz: system kształcenia akademickiego, jako konserwatywny i z natury niepodatny na wpływy otoczenia, może być reformowalny wyłącznie poprzez procesy samoregulacji (Vught 1989). Istotny wpływ na efekt wdrożeń nowych rozwiązań mają ponadto aspiracje edukacyjne młodzieży, przeważnie niezależne zarówno od charakteru rządowych inicjatyw, jak i od tradycyjnych, edukacyjnych preferencji uczelni. W artykule przedstawiono przykłady, które mogą być poparciem powyższych twierdzeń. Zamierzoną jednostronność spojrzenia na problem traktujemy jako wstęp do szerszej dyskusji.

Przedmiotem artykułu jest ‒ w pierwszej części ‒ próba odpowiedzi na pytanie, w jakim stopniu fakt powoływania sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego przez organ polityczny, tj. Sejm RP, determinuje polityczny charakter samego Trybunału Konstytucyjnego. Autor wskazuje m.in. na podstawie swoich własnych doświadczeń sędziego TK, że poszukiwanie iunctim pomiędzy aktem politycznego wyboru sędziów a ich aktywnością orzeczniczą nie znajduje uzasadnienia, co wyraźnie potwierdzają przykłady konkretnych rozstrzygnięć sądu konstytucyjnego w tzw. hard cases. Sędziowie wyposażeni w bardzo silne gwarancje niezawisłości potrafią zachować obiektywizm ocen i niezależność także od swoich własnych przekonań politycznych. Prawdziwym zagrożeniem niezależności Trybunału Konstytucyjnego jest natomiast presja polityczna wywierana przez rządzących, której przejawem jest np. bezpośrednia personalna krytyka sędziów TK lub odmowa wykonywania orzeczeń sądu konstytucyjnego. Szczególnie niebezpiecznym instrumentem jest próba ingerowania ustawodawcy w sprawy wewnętrznej autonomii proceduralnej TK, zmierzająca m.in. do narzucenia kolejności rozpatrywanych spraw, wprowadzenia większości kwalifikowanej 2/3 przy podejmowaniu orzeczeń w pełnym składzie czy określenia quorum na takim poziomie, który może paraliżować funkcjonowanie sądu konstytucyjnego. W drugiej części artykułu podjęto próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy Trybunał może zbadać konstytucyjność procedur wprowadzonych nową ustawą o TK, zanim przystąpi do stosowania tych procedur. Autor udziela odpowiedzi twierdzącej na to pytanie, przytaczając argumenty na rzecz bezpośredniego stosowania Konstytucji, która w takich wypadkach staje się jedynym punktem odniesienia oceny nowych regulacji proceduralnych. ; In the first part of this paper an attempt is made to answer the question to what extent the fact that judges of the Constitutional Tribunal are appointed by a political organ (the Seym of the Republic of Poland) determines the political character of the Tribunal itself. Based, among otherthings, on his own experience, the author, a retired judge of the Constitutional Tribunal, states that the search for a iunctim between the political appointment of constitutional judges and their adjudicating activity is unjustified, as can be seen from the example of particular judgments delivered by the Constitutional Tribunal in what might be termed hard cases. Judges endowed with very strong guarantees of independence are capable of remaining impartial in their judgments and making decisions independently of their personal beliefs. The real threat to the independenceof the Constitutional Tribunal is political pressure exercised by government, which manifests itself in, for example, direct and personal criticism of Constitutional Tribunal judges or a refusal to implement judicial decisions issued by the Constitutional Tribunal. A particularly dangerous situation arises when a legislator attempts to intervene in the internal procedural autonomy of the Constitutional Tribunal with a view to determining the order in which the matters before the Tribunal should be dealt with, setting a 2/3 qualified majority for decisions 'when sitting as a full court' or determining the required quorum at a level which may paralyse the work of the Constitutional Tribunal altogether. In the second part of the paper the question is asked whether the Constitutional Tribunal may examine the constitutionality of the procedures being introduced by a new law on the Constitutional Tribunal before it proceeds to apply them. The answer to this question is in the affirmative, followed by arguments calling for the direct application of the Constitution which in such cases becomes the only point of reference when new procedural regulations are to be evaluated.

The European Union is a space o f continuous negotiations and an arena hosting the clashes of diverse integration options and concepts represented by EU member states and institutions. Furthermore, the disintegration of the EU (which dates back to the Maastricht Treaty) is becoming more and more visible. It is reflected directly by the presence in the European debate concerning multi-speed Europe and the current actions taken by the Eurozone states aimed at escalating the integration among selected states. Poland is also taking part in the debate concerning the future o f the European Union. The author of this paper attempted to examine Poland's place in the political and economic space o f the European Union by referring to the theory of integration. The research objective o f the paper is to analyse the Polish integration policy between late 1989 and 2012 within the context o f the international and European integration theory. The advanced research reflection in this scope in relation to Poland as the selected and important EU member state fits into the debate on the relevance of the European Union uniting concepts. The author posed the following research hypotheses in the dissertation: 1 .Considering the current stage o f development of the European Union, the Polish integration policy does not firmly support strictly one international or European integration concept. The Polish integration policy does not have a cohesive and stable integration policy concept and it is largely dependent on the policy and objectives of the current government (this is not only typical o f Poland) and the integration level. 2.Poland is strongly fixed in western structures, which makes the integration policy a vital component of development. What is more, the outlook on the European Union continues to evolve in the Polish political and social space. Poland sees the European Union as the main point o f reference in many political, economic, and social areas. 3.The organisation of the European Union does not only see Poland affect the form of the integration process, but also sees member states and EU organisations affect the functioning of Poland. The influence of a given state on the form o f the European Union mostly depends on the state's strength and significance in the EU community. This premise sees the place o f a given state in the system conditioned by the current factors, for example the European Union expansion process. Therefore, the interests o f Poland do not always correspond to the interests of the European Union, and the other way around. This deepens the EU's intergovernmental dimension. 4.Member states constitute the most important element o f the European Union. It is a union of states and nations supported by community institutions. This structure covers the convergence o f its methods, theories, and areas. This makes it impossible to profile the structure only from the perspective of the specified international integration theory. 5.The current stage o f the European Union's development, its challenges, and its problems show that the integration process continues to evolve and its result is impossible to foresee. 6.The current economic crisis influences the perception and management o f the European Union. The expectations include the intensification of intergovemmentalism and the establishment of multi-speed Union. If Poland remains outside of the Eurozone, it will find itself on the periphery o f the integration process, which is rather far from its very centre. Based on these research findings, Polish politics with regard to and, later, as part o f the EU can be divided into several principal periods. Period 1: (1989-1997) a time of consolidating Polish independence and security. This time was associated with the choice of a principal direction of the Polish foreign policy after 1989, i.e. Western Europe and declaration of Poland's will to take part in the process of its integration, without having any concrete vision for further course of those processes. This approach was often marked by a claiming attitude, both among political elites (marked by high instability) and the society (a simplified attitude, no social debate or knowledge about integration processes). During that period, Polish politics with regard to the EU cannot be ascribed to any specific model, since that policy was in statu nascendi at the time and was targeted at the EU membership, an objective in its own right. Period 2: (1998-2004) a time of negotiating Poland's accession to the EU, and the candidate's becoming accustomed to the rules o f EU's workings. There was still no vision o f integration processes from the Polish perspective and related opinions were expressed in a very cautious way. The primary aim was membership in the EU, such that was available at a given moment. At the same time, we should stress an important moment in the process of changes: the breakthrough o f the years 1999/2000. The interest in issues related to Poland's integration with the EU grew more intense then. The Polish government began to address this issue not only from the local perspective (a balance o f benefits and losses), but also expressed opinions on the reformation of the EU as a whole. Poland came as a difficult candidate for an EU member state (Polish support for US activities in Iraq and Afghanistan). This "difficulty" also emerged in the government's seeking to secure Poland's financial interests in connection with the accession. It was a period of preparations for membership, marked by a high level o f uncertainty (no clear vision, conflicting views: strong Union or preservation of independence, Common Foreign and Security Policy or working with the USA). Period 3: (2005-2007) a process aimed at building a vision of "Europe of Solidary Nations" in the EU by the government o f K. Marcinkiewicz and J. Kaczyński. Decisive, though not quite stable, support for international liberalism in the Polish integration policy. This manifested itself in reinforcing the Euro-realistic stance, both within Poland and abroad, by many considered, in fact, Eurosceptic. Period 4: (since 2008 to this day) a period of an integration vision being developed by D. Tusk's government, especially the Minister o f Foreign Affairs, R. Sikorski. It is a time of big changes and evolution in the Polish integration policy. An important issue at this time was a real sense of benefits coming from Poland's integration with the EU and the Polish government's pro-European attitude. The integration policy being developed shows a more flexible approach to the concept of independence (emergence o f collective independence) and thinking about the Polish foreign policy from the EU perspective. Additionally, we observed a return to constructing strategic partnership between Poland and Germany, rationalisation of partnership with the USA, Poland's active contribution to solving EU problems (e.g. the economic crisis), working towards a better "Eastern policy" as part of the EU. R. Sikorski was the first Polish Minister o f Foreign Affairs to have officially used the concept of federalism and vow his support for it in integration processes, mindful of Polish experiences and historical heritage in this respect. The Polish government expresses a firm objection to the idea of "multi-speed" Europe and builds an image o f Poland as an active member state (presidency at the EU Council), enjoying a good economic situation and having a society with an enthusiastic approach to the integration processes and strong Europe, and seeking to be as close to the "epicentre" o f countries behind this process.The analysis o f the integrative concepts presented in this paper shows that the different periods of the Polish integration policy (establishment and execution) saw and continue to see various levels in the majority of the international integration theory elements (of course, this is not just a Polish characteristic in the European Union, but rather a predominant trend in the Union's integration process). This has been and continues to be conditioned in large part by the foreign policy objectives of the given government, as well as by the current challenges and problems Poland is facing. In the case of the Polish integration policy, as in most other EU member states, we can observe an aggregation of interests, concepts and attitudes. This research project seeks to systematise them.

Po zakończeniu zimnej wojny wydawało się, że świat na trwałe wchodzi w okres stabilizacji, pokoju i współpracy. Szybko jednak okazało się, że świat narastającej globalizacji ma różne oblicza, także negatywne, co rzutuje na każdą sferę życia, także na bezpieczeństwo. Spadło co prawda zagrożenie wojną nuklearną, ale pojawiły się nowe zagrożenia oraz nasiliły te, które przedtem były przesłonięte rywalizacją Wschód - Zachód. Chodzi głównie o konflikty etniczno-religijne, kulturowe i cywilizacyjne, w tym rozlewające się konflikty wewnętrzne w państwach słabych i upadłych, proliferacja broni masowego rażenia, niebezpieczne ambicje państw dyktatorskich i autorytarnych. Ogromny wpływ na bezpieczeństwo międzynarodowe miały zamachy 11 września 2001. Zmieniły one percepcję zagrożeń dla bezpieczeństwa, a ogłoszona przez prezydenta Busha wojna z terroryzmem doprowadziła USA i prawie cały Zachód do zaangażowania w dwie wojny: w Iraku i Afganistanie. Sytuacja w Afganistanie i odpowiedzialność NATO za bezpieczeństwo tego kraju nadal budzi ogromne zaniepokojenie przywódców państw zachodnich, rzutuje na stan bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego. Dotyczy to szczególnie regionu Bliskiego i Środkowego Wschodu, gdzie coraz większą rolę odgrywa rywalizacja między Indiami, Pakistanem i Iranem. Rosnący niepokój budzą ambicje nuklearne Iranu, a także otwarte wyzwania, jakie kraj ten rzuca społeczności międzynarodowej, podobnie jak w innej części świata polityka Korei Północnej. Coraz większe ambicje w polityce międzynarodowej mają Chiny i dążąca do odzyskania mocarstwowej pozycji Rosja. Jednocześnie wbrew programom i zapowiedziom proces osiągania przez Unię Europejską pozycji gracza globalnego nie materializuje się. Postępuje proces odwrotny: komplikuje się sytuacja finansowa w strefie euro, a kryzys ten oddziałuje na całą Unię. Postrzegana jako oaza gospodarczej stabilizacji UE stała się w ostatnich latach źródłem dodatkowych perturbacji w gospodarce światowej. Zachodzące w niej procesy, takie jak gwałtowne wzrosty cen surowców, rozchwianie rynków finansowych, pogłębiające się dysproporcje między bogatymi i biednymi, rosnące obszary głodu, daleko idąca deregulacja i kryzysogenne praktyki inżynierii finansowej, problem światowego zadłużenia, stają się czynnikiem globalnej destabilizacji i zagrożeń także dla bezpieczeństwa. ; Twenty years after the end of the Cold War the world still undergoes the process of deep changes. The collapse of communism and disintegration of the Soviet Union put an end to a bipolar system and the new era begun in international politics. Many state controlled economies, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, became democratic and market oriented countries. Through over one decade the United States was recognized as a unique superpower. Rapidly spreading globalization has made countries strictly interdependent, especially in economy, but also mutual dependence in the field of security has substantially increased. It happened so because of new threats for security, like international terrorism, WMD proliferation, growing number of ethnic-cultural conflicts. There is no threat in the world of global nuclear war or big state to state aggression on a large scale, but new threats, especially terrorism and cyber-attacks , are becoming very probable. In the contemporary world, with all economic freedom, especially international production factors movement, there are good as well as weak points which make international economy and the economy of different countries very vulnerable to crises, as we could see in 2008-2009 period. It is so because of uncontrolled activity of so called non-state actors, as for instance international financial corporations. Also European integration, especially in the Euro-zone, because of the world financial crisis impact, rising public debt and imperfect euro-mechanisms, is in trouble. Under such conditions, economic security is becoming so crucial that together with many other aspects of security [terrorism, cyber-attacks, impact of climate changes] it forms a new picture of the world security - a new paradigm. The article addresses the major international and regional security problems, the position of the USA in more and more multi-polar system, rising ambitions and roles of China and Russia. The approach of the author to the presented problems is interdisciplinary. ; После окончания холодной войны казалось, что мир на долго входит в период стабилизации и сотрудничества. Однако вскоре оказалось, что мир растущей глобализации имеет разные стороны, в том числе также отрицательные, что отражается в каждой сфере жизни, в том числе и на безопасности. Хотя и уменьшилась угроза ядерной войны, однако появились новые угрозы и усилились те, которые раньше, в связи с противостоянием Восток - Запад, находились на втором плане. Прежде всего здесь идёт речь о этническо-религиозных, культурных и цивилизационных конфликтах, в том числе и разрастающихся внутренних конфликтах в слаборазвитых государствах, распространении оружия массового уничтожения, опасных амбициях диктаторских и авторитарных государств. Огромное влияние на международную безопасность оказали события 11 сентября 2001 г. Эти террористические акты изменили восприятие угроз безопасности, а провозглашенная президентом Бушем война с терроризмом вынудила США и почти весь Запад к ведению двух войн: в Ираке и Афганистане. Ситуация в Афганистане и ответственность НАТО за безопасность этой страны, по-прежнему вызывает огромное беспокойство лидеров западных государств, отражается на состоянии международной безопасности. Прежде всего это касается района Ближнего и Среднего Востока, в котором большую роль играет также соперничество между Индией, Пакистаном и Ираном. Растущее беспокойство вызывают ядерные планы Ирана, а также открытый вызов, который эта страна бросает международному сообществу. Такую же политику в другой части света проводит Северная Корея. Большие амбиции в международной политике имеет также Китай и стремящаяся восстановить позиции сверхдержавы Россия. На ряду с этим, вопреки принятым программам и заявлениям политиков, процесс становления Европейского Союза в роли мирового игрока остается только проектом. Более того, в связи с усложняющейся экономической ситуацией в еврозоне, в Евросоюзе сегодня имеют место противоположные процессы. ЕС, который рассматривался как экономической оазис хозяйственной стабилизации, в последние годы стал источником дополнительных проблем в мировой экономике. Происходящие в мировой экономике процессы, напр. быстрый рост цен на сырье, нестабильность финансовых рынков, углубляющиеся диспропорции между богатыми и бедными, проблемы голода, далеко идущая дерегуляция и кризисные практики финансовой инженерии, проблема мировой задолженности, становятся фактором мировой дестабилизации и несут угрозы безопасности.

e.roszkowska@uwb.edu.pl ; Adamus-Matuszyńska A., Współczesne teorie konfliktu społecznego, AE w Katowicach, Katowice 1998. ; Aumann R. J., Hart S. (eds.), Handbook of game theory with economic applications, Tom I, II, Elsevier, Amsterdam 1994. ; Albrecht K., Albrecht S., Added Value Negotiating. The Breakthrough Method for Building Balanced Deals, Business One, Irwin, Homewood, III, 1993. ; Baran K. W., Zbiorowe prawo pracy, Universitas, Kraków 2002. ; Bargiel-Matusiewicz K., Negocjacje i mediacje, PWE, Warszawa 2007. ; Baron D. P., Ferejohn J. A., Legislatures, American Political Science Review, 1989. ; Bartos O. J., Process and Outcome of Negotiation, Columbia University Press, New York 1974. ; Bartos O. J. , Simple Model of Negotiation, [in:] I. W. Zartman (ed.), Negotiation Process: Theories and Applications, Sage, Beverly HillsCA 1978. ; Bazerman M. H., Neale M. A., Negocjując racjonalne, Polskie Towarzystwo Psychologiczne, Olsztyn 1997. ; Bednarek A., Kraszewska H., Budowanie zgody. Mediacje jako sposób zapanowania nad konfliktem", Personel, 23(92), 2000. ; Bell D., Raiffa H., Tversky A., Decision Making. Descriptive, Normative and Prescriptive Interactions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1988. ; Kulpa A., Dwa oblicza konfliktu. Funkcjonalna teoria konfliktu Lewisa A. Cosera a współczesne koncepcje zarządzania konfliktami, Organizacja i Kierowanie, Nr 1(107), 2002. ; Lax D. L., Sebenius J. K., Negocjacje w trzech wymiarach. Jak wygrać najważniejsze gry negocjacyjne, MT Biznes, Warszawa 2007. ; Lemmerman H., Komunikacja werbalna. Szkoła dyskutowania, Wydawnictwo Astrum, Wrocław 1994. ; Lendzion J.P., Stankiewicz-Mróz. A., Wprowadzenie do organizacji i zarządzania, Oficyna Ekonomiczna, Kraków 2005. ; Lewicka-Strzałecka A., Etyka biznesu jako dyscyplina naukowa, [w:] J. Dietl, W. Gasparski (red.), Etyka biznesu, PWN, Warszawa 2000. ; Lewicki R. J., Robinson R. J., Ethical and unethical bargaining tactics: An empirical study, "Journal of Business Ethics", 17(6), 1998. ; Lewicki R.J., Weiss S.E., Lewin D., Models of conflict, negotiation and third party intervention: A review and synthesis, ,,Journal of Organizational Behaviour", Vol. 13, 1992. ; Lissowski G. (red.), Elementy teorii wyboru społecznego, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa 2001. ; Luce R., Raiffa H. , Games and Decisions. Introduction and Critical Survey, Jon Wiley, New York 1958; polskie wydanie: Gry i decyzje, PWN, Warszawa 1964. ; Luecke R., Negocjacje. Sztuka zawierania dobrych kontaktów, Harward Business Essentials, Warszawa 2008. ; Binmore K., Fun and Games. A text on Game theory, D.C. Heath and Company Lexington 1992. ; Malawski M., Wieczorek A. , Sosnowska H., Konkurencja i kooperacja. Teoria gier w ekonomii i naukach społecznych, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa 1997. ; March G., Simon A., Teoria organizacji, PWN, Warszawa 1964. ; Masewicz W., Rokowania oraz spory zbiorowe pracy, Biblioteczka Pracownicza, Warszawa 1993. ; Mastenbroek W., Negocjowanie, PWN, Warszawa 1997. ; Mayer B., The dynamics of conflict resolution. A practitioner's guide, Jossey-Brass, A Wiley Company, San Francisco 2000. ; Mc Clintock C., Game Behavior and Social Motivation in Interpersonal Settings, [in:] Experimental Social Psychology, Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York. ; Mc Gregor D. F., The Human Side of Enterprise, McGraw-Hill, New York 1985. ; Mesjasz C., Mediacje w konflikcie, ,,Przegląd Organizacji", 9(92). ; Mesjasz C., Założenia analizy negocjacji, ,,Organizacja i Kierowanie", nr 3(85), 1996. ; Mesjasz C., Determinanty i modele procesów negocjacji kredytowych pomiędzy bankiem a przedsiębiorstwem, Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie, Kraków 2000. ; Binmore K., Osborne M. J., Rubinstein A., Noncooperative models of bargaining, [in:] Aumann R. J., Hart S. (eds.), Handbook of game theory with economic applications, Tom I, Elsevier 1994. ; Mikuła G., Wenzel M., Justice and Social Conflict, ,,International Journal of Psychology", 35(2), 2000. ; Modzelewski W., Wprowadzenie do socjologii, "Śląsk" Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Katowice 1999. ; Moore Ch. W., The Mediation Process. Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, Londyn 1986. ; Morrow J. D., Game Theory for Political Scientists, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1994. ; Mucha J., Konflikt i społeczeństwo, PWN, Warszawa 1978. ; Mulholan J., The Language of Negotiation: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Improving Communication, Routledge, London 1991. ; Murnighan J. K., Bargaining games. A new approach to strategic thinking in negotiations, William Morrow and Company, Inc. New York 1992. ; Myerson R. B., Game theory. Analysis of conflict, Harvard University Press, Harvard 1991. ; Myśliwiec G ., Techniki i triki negocjacyjne, EFEKT, Warszawa 1999. ; Nahotko S., Negocjacje biznesowe w zarządzaniu przedsiębiorstwem. Aspekt ekonomiczny, Biblioteka Menadżera Służby Pracowniczej, Zeszyt 192, OPO, Bydgoszcz 2001. ; Birkenbihl V., Komunikacja werbalna. Psychologia prowadzenia negocjacji, Astrum, Wrocław 1997. ; Najowska M., Problemy badania wpływu kapitału ludzkiego na zachowanie przedsiębiorcze, [w:] M. Juchnowicz (red.), Kapitał ludzki a kształtowanie przedsiębiorczości, Poltext, Warszawa 2004. ; Nierenberg G.I., Sztuka negocjacji, Studio Emka, Warszawa 1997. ; Nash J., Equilibrium Points in n-Person Games, "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (US)", No. 36, 1950. ; Nash J., Non-cooperative games, "Annals of Mathematics", Vol. 54, 1951. ; Nash J., The bargaining problem, "Econometrica" , No. 18, 1950. ; Nash J., Two–Persons Cooperative Games, "Econometrica", No. 21, 1953. ; Nęcki Z., Negocjacje w biznesie, Profesjonalna Szkoła Biznesu, Kraków 1991. ; Nęcki Z., Komunikacja międzyludzka, Wydawnictwo Aktywa, Kraków 2000. ; Nierenberg G. I., Sztuka negocjacji jako metoda osiągania celu, Wydawnictwo Studio Emka, Warszawa 1994. ; Nogalski B., Jarocki P., Komunikacja niewerbalna w negocjacjach międzynarodowych, TNOiK, Bydgoszcz 1998. ; Blake R., Molton J., The management by grid principles or intuitionalism: Which?, "Group and Organization Studies", No. 6, 1981. ; Obłój K., Mikroszkółka zarządzania, PWE, Warszawa 1994. ; Ordeshook P.C., Game Theory and Political Theory, Cambridge University, Cambridge 1986. ; Osborne M.J., Rubinstein A., Bargaining and Markets, Academic Press, Inc, San Diego, CA 1990. ; Owen G., Teoria gier, PWN, Warszawa 1975. ; Pawlak Z., Systemy informatyczne, PWN, Warszawa 1983. ; Parsons T., The social systems, Routledge, London 1951. ; Perrotin R., Heusschen P., Kupić z zyskiem. Negocjacje handlowe, Poltext, Warszawa 1994. ; Pietras C., Decydowanie polityczne, PWN, Warszawa 1998. ; Pietrzak M. (red.), Metody i techniki menadżerskie, Wydawnictwo SGGW, Warszawa 2007. ; Pruitt D. G., Negotiator Behaviour, Academic Press, Orlando, Fla. 1981. ; Borkowska S., Negocjacje zbiorowe, PWE, Warszawa 1997. ; Putman L. L., Roloff M.E. (eds.), Communication and Negotiation, Sage, Newbury Park 1992. ; Pruitt D. G., Carnevale P. J., Negotiation in social conflict, Open University Press, Buckingham 1993. ; Pszczółkowski T., Umiejętność przekonywania i dyskusji, Warszawa 1995. ; Rahim M. A., A measures of styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict, ,,Academy of Management Journal", 26(2), 1983. ; Rahim M. A., Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict, ,,The International Journal of Conflict Management", Vol. 13, No. 3, 2002. ; Raiffa H. , The Art and the Science of Negotiation, Harvard University Press, Harvard 1982. ; Rapoport A., Guyer M.,Gordon D., The 2x2 Games, Ann Arbor, 1976. ; Reiter R., A logic for default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence, No. 13, 1980. ; Robbins S. P., Zachowania w organizacji, PWE, Warszawa 1998. ; Roszkowska E., Etyka a negocjacje, [w:] Ekonomia. Polityka. Etyka, (red.) A. F. Bocian, Uniwersytet w Białymstoku, Białystok 2003. ; Borkowski J., Dyrda M., Kanarski L., Rokicki B., Wybrane problemy psychologii organizacji. O konflikcie i negocjacjach, Wyższa Szkoła Informatyki Stosowanej i Zarządzania, Warszawa 2000. ; Roszkowska E., Proces negocjacji w ujęciu teorii kompleksów reguł, "Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne", nr 2(10), 2001. ; Roszkowska E., Modelowanie procesów decyzyjnych oraz negocjacji za pomocą kompleksów reguł, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku, Białystok 2007. ; Roszkowska E., Style negocjacji-analiza zagadnienia, ,,Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne", nr 4(20), 2003. ; Rubin J. Z., Brown B. R., The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation, Academic Press, Orlando, Fla. 1975. ; Rumel-Syska Z., Konflikty organizacyjne. Ujęcie mikrospołeczne, PWN, Warszawa 1990. ; Rusinowska A., Przetarg, [w:] Grupowe podejmowanie decyzji. Elementy teorii. Przykłady zastosowań, (red.) H. Sosnowska, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa 1999. ; Rusinowska A., Zagadnienie przetargowe ze zmiennymi w czasie preferencjami graczy, "Roczniki Kolegium Analiz Ekonomicznych", Zeszyt 6, 1998. ; Rządca R., Negocjacje w interesach, PWE, Warszawa 2003. ; Rządca R. A., Wujec P., Negocjacje, PWE , Warszawa 1998. ; Sajkiewicz A. (red.), Zasoby ludzkie w firmie. Organizacja, kierowanie, ekonomika, Poltext, Warszawa 1999. ; Błaut R., Skuteczne negocjacje, CIM , Warszawa 1994. ; Salacuse J., Salacuse J. W., Negocjacje na rynkach międzynarodowych, PWE, Warszawa 1994. ; Schelling T. C., Arms and the influence, Yale University Press, New Haven 1966. ; Schelling T. C., The strategy of conflict, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 1960. ; Sebenius J. K., Negotiation Analysis: A Characterization and Review, ,,Management Science", Vol. 38, No. 1, 1992. ; Shubik M., Game Theory in Social Sciences. Concepts and solutions, The MIT Press, Cambridge 1982. ; Sikora J., Zarządzanie konfliktem w zakładzie pracy, TNOIK, Bydgoszcz 1998. ; Smith W. H., "Conflict", ,,Management Reviev", 1974; Omówienie [w:] ,,Organizacja i Kierowanie", nr 4, 1975. ; Sosnowska H., (red.), Grupowe podejmowanie decyzji, Scholar, Warszawa 2005. ; Spector B., Negotiation as a Psychological Process, [in:] I. W. Zartman (ed.), Negotiation Process: Theories and Applications, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, 1978. ; Stelmaszczyk M., Negocjowanie kontraktów handlowych. Poradnik dla eksporterów i importerów, CDKHZ, Warszawa 1992. ; Brdulak H., Brdulak J., Negocjacje handlowe, PWE, Warszawa 2000. ; Stępniewski J., Metoda negocjacji. Przygotowanie – techniki – sytuacje, AE we Wrocławiu, Wrocław 2001. ; Stoner J. A. F., Freeman R. E., Gilbert D. R., Kierowanie, PWE, Warszawa 2001. ; Stoner J. A. F., Wankel Ch., Kierowanie, PWE, Warszawa 1994. ; Straffin P., Teoria gier, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa 2000. ; Szaban J., Negocjacje jako jedna z technik zarządzania, Doskonalenie Kadr Kierowniczych, nr 2, 1986. ; Szapiro T., Co decyduje o decyzji, PWN, Warszawa 1993. ; Szapiro T., Podejście interaktywne we wspomaganiu podejmowania decyzji, ,,Monografie i Opracowania", nr 338, SGPIS, Warszawa 1991. ; Szostak A., Zarządzanie konfliktem, ,,Personel", nr 4, 1996. ; Szczepański J., Elementarne pojęcia socjologii, PWN, Warszawa 1969. ; Sztumski J., Konflikty społeczne i negocjacje jako metody ich przezwyciężania, Wydawnictwo Wydziału Zarządzania Politechniki Częstochowskiej, Częstochowa 2000. ; Brdulak H., Brdulak J., Sztuka i technika negocjacji handlowych, Wyd. Bizant, Warszawa 1996. ; Thomas K., Conflict and conflict management, [in:] Dunette M. D (ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago 1976. ; Thompson L., The mind and heart of the negotiator, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 2001. ; Thompson V., Modern organizations, Knopf, New York 1961. ; Thompson T. D., Organizations in action, McGraw-Hill, New York 1967 ; Thompson W., A class of solutions to bargaining Problems, "Journal of Economic Theory", Vol. 25, 1981. ; Thompson W., Cooperative models of bargaining, [in:] R. J. Aumann, S. Hart, (ed.), Handbook of game theory with economic applications, t. II, Elsevier 1994. ; Uniszewski Z., Konflikty i negocjacje, Prószyński i S-ka, Poznań 2000. ; Ury W., Odchodząc od nie. Negocjowanie od konfrontacji do kooperacji, PWE, Warszawa 1995. ; Wachowicz T., E-negocjacje. Modelowanie, analiza i wspomaganie, Wydawnictwo AE w Katowicach, Katowice 2006. ; Walas J., Konflikt na cenzurowanym, "Personel", 1996. ; Burns T., Caldas J. C., Roszkowska E., Generalized Game Theory's Contribution to Multi-agent Modelling Addressing Problems of Social Regulation, Social Order, and Effective Security, [in:] B. Dunin-Keplicz. A. Jankowski, A. Skowron, M. A. Szczuka (eds.), Monitoring, Security and Rescue Techniques in Multiagent Systems, Springer, Verlag 2005. ; Wall J. A., Stark J. B., Standifer R. L., Mediation. A current review and theory development, ,,Journal of Conflict Resolution", Vol. 45 (3), 2001. ; Watkins M., Sztuka negocjacji w biznesie. Innowacyjne podejścia prowadzące do przełomu, Wydawnictwo ONE Press, Warszawa 2005. ; Walton R. E., McKersie R. B., A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations, ILR Press, Ithaca, New York 1993. ; Watson J., Strategia, Wprowadzenie do teorii gier, WNT, Warszawa 2005. ; Warschow T. A., Winning by Negotiation, McGraw Hill Book, New York 1990. ; Watson J. , Strategia. Wprowadzenie do teorii gier, WNT, Warszawa 2005. ; Weber R. A., Zasady zarządzania organizacjami, PWE, Warszawa 1990. ; Winch A., Winch S., Lepiej sprzedać, lepiej kupić. Taktyki perswazyjne w negocjacjach, ,,Personel", nr 13/14 (82/83), 2000. ; Winch S., Mity negocjacji, "Organizacja i Kierowanie", nr 2(112), 2003. ; Winch A., Winch S., Negocjacje. Jednostka, organizacja, kultura, Difin, Warszawa 2005. ; Burns T., Meeker L., Structural Properties and Resolutions of the Prisonier's Dilemma Game, [in:] A. Rapoport (eds.), Game Theory as the Conflict Resolution, Dordrecht-Holland, Reidel 1974. ; Von Neumann J., Morgenstern O., Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1972. ; Vliert E., Van de Prein E., The difference In the meaning of forcing In the conflict management of actors and observers, Referat na I Miedzynarodową Konferencję Grupy Kierowania Konfliktami, Fairfax, Wirginia 1987. ; Van de Vliert E., Kabanoff B., Toward Theory-Based Measures of Conflict Management, "The Academy of Management Journal", Vol. 33 (1). ; Zartman W. I. (ed.), International Multilateral Negotiation, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco 1994. ; Zbiegień-Maciąg L., Negocjowanie i negocjacje. Sposób na konflikty, Centrum Kreowania Liderów, Kłudzienko 1994. ; Zbiegień-Maciąg L., Taktyki i techniki negocjacyjne, Uczelniane Wydawnictwa Naukowo-Dydaktyczne, Kraków 2001. ; Zbiegiem Maciąg L., Zarządzanie personelem w firmie, Wydawnictwo AGH, Kraków 1995. ; Zarman I. W., Berman M., The Practical Negotiator, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connn. 1982. ; Burns T. Roszkowska E., Generalized Game Theory: Assumptions, Principles, and Elaborations Grounded in Social Theory, In Search of Social Order, Series. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 2005, 8(21). ; Burns T., Roszkowska E., Economic and Social Equilibria: The Perspective of Generalized Game Theory, "Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne", Nr 3(31), 2006. ; Burns T., Roszkowska E., Fuzzy Game Theory: The Perspective of the General Theory of Games on Nash and Normative Equilibria, [in:] S. K. Pal, L. Polkowski, A. Skowron (eds.), Rough-Neural Computing: Techniques for Computing with Words, Springer, Verlag 2003. ; Boulding K. E., Conflict and defense, Harper, New York 1962. ; Caderman L., Unpacking the National Interest: An Analysis of Preference Aggregation in Ordinal Games, [in:] Game Theory and International Relations. Candidate Images in Presidential Elections, Westport-London 1995. ; Carnevale P.J., Pruitt D.G., Negotiation and mediation, "Annu. Rev. Psychol.", No. 43, 1992. ; Casse P., Jak negocjować, Zysk i S-ka, Poznań 1996. ; Cenker E. M., Negocjacje, Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Komunikacji i Zarządzania w Poznaniu, Poznań 2002. ; Chełpa S., Witkowski T., Paradoks zgody, czyli zarządzanie w sytuacjach konfliktowych i zarządzanie przez konflikt, "Personel" 10(67) 1999. ; Chełpa S., Witkowski J., Psychologia konfliktów, Wydawnictwo Szkolne i Pedagogiczne, Warszawa 1995. ; Christopher E. M., Umiejętność negocjowania w biznesie, ZYSK i S-KA, Poznań 1998. ; Coddington A. J., Theories of the Bargaining Process, Aldine, Chicago 1968. ; Collins A., Mowa ciała, Oficyna Wydawnicza Rytm, Warszawa 2002. ; Colman A., Game Theory and Experimental Games: The Study of Strategic Interaction, Oxford-New York, Toronto-Sydney-Paris-Frankfurt 1982. ; Coser L. A., Funkcjonalna teoria konfliktu, [w:] J. Turner, Struktura teorii socjologicznej, PWN, Warszawa 1985. ; Cross J. G., Negotiation as a Learning Process, "Journal of Conflict Resolution", Vol. 21, 1977. ; Cyret R, March G., A behavioral theory of the firm, Oxford University Press, London 1963. ; Dana D., Rozwiązywanie konfliktów, PWE, Warszawa 1993. ; Dąbrowski P., Praktyczna teoria negocjacji, Sorbog, Warszawa 1991. ; Deutsch M., The resolution of conflict. Constructive and destructive process, Yale Univ. Pr., New Haven, New Haven 1973. ; Deutsch M., Cooperation and conflict: a personal perspective on the history of the social psychological study of conflict resolution West, M.A, [in:] D. J. Tjosvold, G. H. Smith (eds.), International handbook of organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working, Wiley&Sons 2003. ; Domański S. R., Kapitał ludzki a wzrost gospodarczy, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa 1993. ; Drabik E., Elementy teorii gier dla ekonomistów, Wydawnictwo UwB, Białystok 1998. ; Drucker P. F., Praktyka zarządzania, Czytelnik, Kraków, 1994. ; Druckman D., Boundary Role Conflict: Negotiation as Dual Responsiveness, "Journal of Conflict Resolution", 1977, Vol. 21. ; Eisenhardt K. M., Kahwajy J. I., Bourgeois L. J. III, How Management Teams Can Have o Good Fight, Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1997. ; Fisburn P. C., Rubinstein A., Time preference, International Economic Review, (23) 1982. ; Fiszer R., Ury W., Patton B., Dochodząc do Tak. Negocjowanie bez poddawania się, PWE, Warszawa 1996. ; Flower A., Jak skutecznie negocjować, Petit, Warszawa 1991. ; Friedman W. J., Game theory with applications to economics, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1990. ; Galas Z., Nykowski I., Żółkiewski Z., Programowanie wielokryterialne, PWE, Warszawa 1987. ; Gasparski W., Etyka biznesu, PWN, Warszawa 2000. ; Gesteland R. F., Różnice kulturowe a zachowania w biznesie, PWN, Warszawa 2000. ; Gomolińska A., Rule Complexes for Representing Social Actors and Interactions, "Studies in Logic Grammar, and Rhetoric", No. 3(16), 1999. ; Gonciarski W., Konflikt niejedno ma imię (1), "Personel", 4(7), 1995. ; Gonciarski W., Konflikt niejedno ma imię (2), "Personel", 5(8), 1995. ; Gonciarski W., Konflikt niejedno ma imię (3), "Personel", 6(9), 1995. ; Goncarski W., Jak kierować konfliktami? (cz. I), "Personel", 7(10), 1995. ; Goncarski W., Jak kierować konfliktami? (cz II), "Personel", 8(11), 1995. ; Graham J., Vis-a-vis. International business negotiation, [in:] P. Ghauri, J.C. Claude Usunier (eds.), International Business Negotiations, Pergamon 1996. ; Griffin R., Podstawy zarządzania organizacjami, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa 2007. ; Gulliver P. H., Disputes and Negotiations: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, Academic Press, Orlando 1979. ; Hamman J., Demokracja, decyzje, wybory, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa 2004. ; Harsany J. C., Approaches to the bargaining problem before and after the theory of games: a critical discussion of Zeuthen's, Hick's and Nash's theories, "Econometrica", (24) 1956. ; Harsany J., Game Theory and the Analysis of International Conflict, [in:] James S. Rosenau (ed.), International Politics and Foreign Policy, Free Press, New York 1969. ; Harsanyi J. C., Selten J., A Generalized Nash Solution for Two-person Bargaining Games with Incomplete Information, ,,Management Science", No. 18, 1972. ; Hawes L., Smith D., A critique of the assumption underlying the study of communication in conflict, ,,Speech Monographs", T.59, No. 4, 1973. ; Hawkins L., Hundson M., Cornall R., Prawnik jako negocjator, "ABC", Warszawa 1994. ; Houba H., Sneek K., Vardy F., Can Negotiations Prevent Fish Wars?, Tinbergen Institute, Discussion Paper 1996. ; Morrow J. D., Game Theory for Political Scientists, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1994. ; Jankowski W. B. , Sankowski T. P., Jak negocjować, CIM, Warszawa 1995. ; Jastrzębska-Smolaga H. (red.), Ekonomiczne podstawy negocjacji. Pomiędzy prawem a moralnością, Difin, Warszawa 2007. ; Juchnowicz M. (red.), Elastyczne zarządzanie kapitałem ludzkim w organizacji wiedzy, Difin, Warszawa 2007. ; Kowalczyk-Grzenkiewicz J., Arcimowicz J., Jermakow P., Rozwiązywanie konfliktów, sztuka negocjacji i komunikacji, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Warszawskiej, Warszawa 2003. ; Kalai E., Proportional solutions to bargaining Situations: Interpersonal Utility Comparisons, ,,Econometrica", (45) 1977. ; Kalai E., Smorodinsky M., Other solutions to Nash's Bargaining Problem, ,,Econometrica", No. 43, 1975. ; Kałążna-Drewińska U., Negocjacje w biznesie. Kluczowe problemy, Wydawnictwo AE we Wrocławiu, Wrocław 2006. ; Kamiński J., Negocjowanie techniki rozwiązywania konfliktów, Poltext, Warszawa 2003. ; Kamiński J., Modele procesów negocjacji, "Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne", nr 1(5), 2000. ; Kamiński J., Negocjacje w biznesie jako przedmiot zainteresowania nauk ekonomicznych, "Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne", nr 4(24), 2002. ; Kamiński J. Negocjacje w działalności marketingowej przedsiębiorstw, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku, Białystok 2006. ; Karrass G., Dobić targu, Wydawnictwo Businessman, Sopot 1991. ; Kennedy G., Negocjacje doskonałe, Dom Wydawniczy REBIS, Poznań 1999. ; Kerstern G. E., Szapiro T., Generalized Approach to Modeling Negotiations, "European Journal of Operational Reseach", Vol. 26, 1986. ; Kersten G. E., Szapiro T., Generalized Approach to Modelling Negotiations, "European Journal of Operational Reseach", Vol. 35, No. 1, 1986. ; Kipnis D., Smith S. M., An influence Perspective on Bargaining within Organizations, "Research on Negotiation in Organizations", Vol. 1, 1983. ; Kowalczyk-Grzenkowicz J., Arcimowicz J., Jermakowicz P., Rozwiązywanie konfliktów, sztuka negocjacji i komunikacji, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Warszawskiej, Warszawa 2003. ; Kowalczyk E., Psychologiczne uwarunkowania negocjacji gospodarczych, Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej w Poznaniu, Poznań 2001. ; Kozielecki J., Konflikt, teoria gier i psychologia, PWN, Warszawa 1970. ; Kozioł L., Tyrańska M., Bińczycki B. , Metody analizy strategicznej w obszarze zarządzania zasobami ludzkimi, AE w Krakowie, Zeszyty Naukowe Nr 603, 2002. ; Kozina A., Style negocjowania-analiza porównawcza, Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Ekonomicznej w Krakowie, Nr 561, 2001. ; Koźmiński A. K., Piotrowski W. (red.), Zarządzanie. Teoria i praktyka, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa 1998. ; Kreps D., Game Theory and Economic Modelling, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1990. ; Kreps D., A Course in Microeconomics Theory, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1990. ; Kreps D. M., Wilson R., Sequential equilibria, "Econometrica", No. 50, 1982. ; Kruś L., Bronisz P., Łopuch B., MCBARG System Supporting Multicriteria Bargaining, "Control and Cybernetics", Vol. 22, No. 4, 1993. ; Krzymieniewska G., Od walki do współpracy. Negocjacyjna sztuka zawierania porozumień, TNOIK, Bydgoszcz 1998. ; Kuc B. R., Moczydłowska J. M., Zachowania organizacyjne, Difin, Warszawa 2009.

Poland towards Russia between 1992 and 2015 and outline their specifics. The author attempted at a synthesis of major manifestations of Polish-Russian cooperation and most sticking points in the intergovernmental (international) relations during that period. An important objective was to show the sources and examples of a divergence of interests, and point to the goals, which were based on these premises, established by the foreign policy-makers in Poland and Russia and pursued in mutual relations and international affairs. Between 1992 and 2015, in Poland's foreign policy towards the East and national security policy, the relations with Russia and the Ukraine were of utmost importance. On the economic level, considering the volume of mutual trade turnover, Poland's main partner in the East was the Russian Federation, whereas on the political level, the Ukraine was seen as a strategic partner. Along with the Ukraine, Russia played a key role in Poland's security policy in the discussed period. It should be emphasized that Polish-Russian and Polish-Ukrainian relations were very closely linked, and so was Poland's policy towards Russia and the Ukraine. In Poland's foreign policy towards Russia, or in broader terms, in Polish-Russian relations between 1992 and 2015, seven stages can be distinguished; each having their own characteristic. Despite some new specifics in each particular stage, they all shared an element of continuity. The constant theme was a great divergence of interests between Poland and Russia, particularly with regard to the European security system, and the role of NATO in shaping this security, as well as further stages of the alliance's enlargement, especially by countries of the post-Soviet area; energy security and Poland's strive for diversification of fuels supplies faced with Russia's actions aimed at the diversification of routes of sending its gas and crude oil to Western Europe bypassing the Ukraine and Poland; a historic dispute, in which a thorough, satisfying for the Poles, explanation of the Katyn Forest massacre was particularly high on the agenda among other issues; opposing visions of building an order in Eastern Europe, and first and foremost, in the Ukraine. With the passing of time, especially after Poland's NATO and the EU accession, the future of Eastern European countries, particularly the Ukraine and Belarus, has become a fundamental issue in Polish-Russian relations. Both Russia and Poland treated Eastern European countries as a sort of a safety buffer. However, the two countries had entirely different visions of how this buffer ought to be shaped. The political leadership in Poland saw the strenghtening of national security in the strenghtening of the Ukrainian buffer through the Ukraine's membership in NATO and the EU, whereas for the political leadership in Russia, the strenghtening of national security through Ukrainian buffer meant preserving its outside NATO status, or incorporating it in the the security system built under the aegis of Russia on the area of CIS. A characteristic of the Polish-Russian relations in that period was a great imbalance to Poland's disadvantage, resulting from the differences in broadly understood physical potential of the two countries and, consequently, their international roles (Poland being a medium-size country situated in Central Europe and Russia being a superpower in Central Eurasia). The capacities of Poland to shape the situation in Eastern Europe on its own were incomparably lower than Russia's. Therefore, Poland was trying to make use of European and Euro-Atlantic multirateral structures, mainly through the Eastern Dimension realized by the EU and NATO, to have as much influence as possible, on the desired developments in Eastern Europe. The eastern policy under successive RP governments was characterized by their overrating, frequently, of their own capacities, lack of objectivity in assessment of the situation across our eastern border, and application of double standards, particularly in the policy towards Russia. Polish-Russian political relations throughout the post-Cold War period were critical, and improvements were relatively short-lasting. Not only Russia, but also Poland is to blame for such a state of events. The Polish side, due to historical reasons and imbalance of potential, expected Russia to take more initiative in coming to an agreement with Poland. However, it has to be admitted that in many activities undertaken by Poland with regard to European security, in particular Eastern European subregion, the interests of Russia were completly disregarded, although they did not have to be accepted fully. An example of this was Polish diplomacy in the second half of 2013 intended not to allow Russia to be included in the negotiations on the EU association agreement with the Ukraine about issues that had economic implications for Russia's interests. In their policy towards Russia, foreign policy-makers in Poland, forgot, all too often, or, were unwilling to remember, about the principle that in order to meet the security needs of one's own country, one should also consider the security needs of other countries, the neighbouring ones in the first place. Analyzing the policies under succesive III RP governments on European security and relations with the post-Soviet countries, it is hard to share the view prevailing in our country that Poland did its best to develop partnership and good neighbourly relations with Russia. Among politicians, publicists and the Polish society, there was a large group of people who took a stance, though it was not always formally articulated, that Poland has a right, or even a duty to remain hostile towards Russia. On the other hand, Russia should not act unfavourably towards Poland, regardless of Poland's anti-Russian policy, although, obviously, it was declared otherwise. One of the few stages showing a distinct improvement in Poland's policy towards Russia and a mutual willingness to normalize our political relations, was the one between 2008 and 2010, when an unsuccesful attempt was made at pragmatizing foreign policy towards Russia. Since the end of 2007, this new foreign policy, gradually encompassing other areas, led to a greater or lesser modification of the policy to date towards Russia, the Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia by basing it on the so-called positive realism. These new trends increased cooperation between Poland and Russia and, eventually, a considerable progress was achieved in normalizing our relations. Between 2008 and 2010, Polish policy towards the East not only changed in practice, it was also a conceptual change. The crash of the presidential plane at Smoleńsk (April 10th, 2010), in which 96 peple were killed, including President of RP Lech Kaczyński and His Spouse, was a major, if not primary reason why the normalization process (2008–2010) was seriously hampered to the point of a standstill between 2011 and 2013. The Smoleńsk air disaster, and conflicting stands over its causes in particular, exacerbated divisions in the Polish society and strenghtened reluctance, if not hostility, towards Russia. A large part of the Polish political class and society did not accept a version of an inadvertent air disaster (plane crash), whose causes, like not following correct procedures, lay on both Poles and Russians. The surveys conducted during the years following the Smoleńsk air disaster showed that over 30% of the Polish society were convinced that it had been an attempt on the life of the Polish delegation en route to a commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the Katyn Forrest massacre, and that the Russian government and secret services had been involved. After the Smoleńsk air disaster, foreign policy towards Russia and Polish-Russian relations became a ground for political struggle in our country. For many politicians and conservatist right-wing journalists, a demonstrated degree of anti-Russian sentiment became the main criterion of patriotism. In a large part of the Polish society, a belief was strenghtened that actions should be taken to weaken and isolate Russia, and to minimize, rather than increase cooperation between the two countries. This meant that internal conditions within our country, which could possibly motivate the foreign policy-makers to stop viewing Russia as the main threat and encourage a breakthrough in thinking about that issue, deteriorated markedly. Consequently, Polish-Russian relations between 2011 and 2013 remained in a state of deadlock. In the foreign policy of Poland between 1992 and 2015, Russia played the leading role. This, however, stemmed from Russia being perceived by the policy-makers as the main threat to our national security, not a recognized partner in pursuing this security. Throughout that period, in all successive stages of Polish security policy, Russia was regarded as the main threat. Each political leadership in Poland, especially since the mid 1990s, treated Russia in this way, and these were not merely anti-Russian declarations, but a guiding principle of the foreign policy. Behind it, was a conviction that Russian imperialism was timeless and Russia would never accept the sovereignty of Poland. It was an obvious reference to the classical Polish geopolitical thought about Russia posing main threats to our national security. During the crisis and conflict in eastern Ukraine, between 2014 and 2015, the foreign policymakers in Poland revived the stance of a military threat on the part of Russia. For the first time since the end of the Cold War, such loud voices were heard about a possible military attack on Poland. Unlike the earlier periods, when there was an informal presumption that Russia was a threat to the security of Poland, in 2014, for the first time, in III RP's security policy, Russia was formally pointed to as a direct military threat. It was articulated in official state documents, including Strategia Bezpieczeństwa Narodowego Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej from November, 2014, and in addresses delivered by the Polish government officials (for instance in exposé of Foreign Minister R. Sikorski and his follower G. Schetyna). The crisis and conflict in south-eastern Ukraine did not substantially change Poland's policy towards Russia. What did change between 2014 and 2015, however, was that much more emphasis than ever was placed on Russia being a threat to our national security, and there being a serious risk of a Russian direct invasion of Poland. During 2014 and 2015, the process of politicizing fear (policy of fear) of Russia was at its height. For Poland, a major outcome of the Ukrainian conflict and crisis was decreased national security and growing fears, among them the fear of Russian invasion, which does not mean that such a threat was real. During the years 2014 and 2015, Polish-Russian political relations at the highest level came almost to the point of being frozen. Important direct implications of the Ukrainian conflict for Poland's security were, apart from a growing fear of Russia, increased desires towards strenghtening its own defense capability, strenghtening NATO cohesion, increased involvement of NATO in our sub-region's security and closer bilateral Polish-American cooperation regarding military security. Resolving the conflict in eastern Ukraine as quickly as possible was in the interests of Poland. However, Polish diplomacy did not engage much in the conflict deescalation. They were very sceptical about the successive agreements aimed at ending the military operations negotiated within the frames of the so-called Normandy format (Mińsk I and Mińsk II). It seems that, considering the geopolitical situation in the Ukraine and divisions of the Ukrainian society, this country should remain a buffer state. Alternatively, coming out of this role should occur gradually, through a simultaneous Europeization of the Ukraine and Russia. Poland should not be interested in the "revolutionary" speeding up of the processes occuring in the Ukrainian society. Responsible politicians willing to serve the best interests of their nation should be aware of the limitations in pursuing even the most support worthy goals. The policy of every country, the foreign policy of Poland and the Ukraine included, should be founded on a realistic assessment of one's own capabilities so that aspirations would not outgrow the real possibilities of their attainment. Poland, aspiring to the role of the EU main expert in Russian and the post-Soviet area affairs, through insisting in the EU on the earliest possible Ukraine association with the EU, contributed in a way to the situation when the Ukraine had to choose between the EU and Russia. Polish politicians did not anticpate the negative outcomes of such acceleration for the Ukraine itself (including the loss of Crimea and strong separatist tendencies in the East of the Ukraine), as well as for Russian- Ukrainian relations and the security of Poland. Therefore, the firm support and involvement of the Polish political class in the so-called democratic revolution in the Ukraine during 2013 and 2014, can hardly be regarded as a succcess. Polish policy towards the East ended in yet another failure, which was shown as confirmation when Poland was not included in the talks aimed at resolving the Ukrainian crisis, which were held by officials from the Ukraine, Russia, Germany and France since the middle of 2014. The Ukrainian crisis and conflict was a turning point in Polish security policy and Polish-Russian relations. The Polish government officially began to treat Russia as the largest threat to the national and international security. A considerable part of the political elites in Poland did not see the threat in excessive dependence of Polish economy on Russian energy resources or other economic threats, but in a direct military attack. Generally speaking, it is unknown to what extent the Ukrainian crisis and conflict will, in the long run, have an impact on changes in Polish policy towards the East, particularly towards Russia and the Ukraine. It exposed the ineffectiveness of our foreign policy to date towards the East. In this context, a question arises: What will be mid- and long-term implications of the Ukrainian conflict for the modification or a radical alteration to Polish foreign policy towards the East? Another fundamental question pertains to Polish-Russian relations: What policy should Poland pursue towards Russia now and in the future? Will the foreign policy and security policy be directed, like in 2014 and 2015, at instransigence and confrontation, or will the normalization tendency prevail as regards Russia, and will the relations with the Ukraine be redefined? However, at the end of 2015, nothing implied that the foreign and security policy-makers intended to transform in any way the policy towards Russia and the Ukraine to date. It does not mean that changes will not be implemented in the years to come. It will be closely connected with the impact of the Ukrainian conflict on the modification of the policy of Germany and the entire European Union as well as the policy of the United States on the post-Soviet area. The crisis and conflict in eastern Ukraine strenghtened the legitimacy of argumentation that the main player in the post-Soviet area is Russia. None of the serious problems in this area can be resolved without the participation of Russia, and all the more, against Russia, which obviously, does not mean that the proponents of this stance overrate the capabilities of Russia in terms of shaping the closer and farther international environment. On this account, Polish policy will be hardly effective if at least some of Russia's interests in the post-Soviet area, especially in Eastern Europe, are taken into consideration, as was proven to date. Bearing in mind long-term consquences, the strategic conceptions of the Polish policy towards the East, should opt for the closest possible ties of Russia with political and economic structures of the EU and Euro-Atlantic structures (Europeization of Russia). This, in turn, should result in the evolution of the economic-political system of Russia into liberal democracy. The Ukrainian crisis and conflict classified the effectiveness of the Polish conception aimed at occidentalizing the Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova without simultaneously occidentalizing Russia. As was indicated by the proponents of this conception, its implementation assumed an inevitable cost such as a political conflict with Russia. The crisis and conflict in the Ukraine between 2014 and 2015 should be a good reason to change this stance. The biggest price for its implementation was paid by the Ukraininas themselves. Therefore, in the context of these experiences, Poland should suport not in opposition to Russia, but together with Russia, which does not imply that this process has to be fully synchronized. The direction of actions in this matter is of key importance. Despite the many contentious issues in Polish-Russian relations and different historical memory of Poles and Russians, in the long-term interests of Poland's security, lies implementing a cooperative and integrating, not a confrontational conception. For the normalization of Polish-Russian relations, it is essential that the successive governemnets of Poland and Russia should have a political will to a less confrontational approach towards disputable issues and resolve emerging problems in a compromising way, which is one of the "scarcest commodities" in the Polish-Russian relations. A compromise should not be treated as a failure, as is often believed, also by the Poles. It also requires changes in mutual perception. A true normalization of mutual relations between Poland and Russia will not be possible if the majority of political elites, media and society in both countries will see the other not even as a difficult partner of rival, but an enemy. The divergence of interests does not have to lead to hostility. The governing groups in Poland and Russia face a challenge in improving Polish-Russian relations. They can either attempt to broaden the area of common interests or to highlight the discrepancies and divergence of interests, and thus strenghten social attitudes prone to either cooperation or confrontation.