Suchergebnisse

The legal aspects of regaining independence by Poland in 1918 have been analysed many times in the literature on the subject. In the interwar period, the axis of one of the main disputes in the environment of Polish international lawyers was whether the Second Polish Republic could be treated as a new state or a continuation of the pre-partition state. Until today, a uniform position of the doctrine on this topic, which is also taken up in contemporary publications, has not crystallised. Both sides of the dispute, however, overlook many aspects related to the law of nations concerning the collapse and continuity of states, which has changed throughout history. The aim of this article is to re-analyse the partition and regaining independence by Poland against the background of norms of international law of the time. This will help to systematise the knowledge about the history of Poland and this part of Europe, to resolve a weighty dispute in the history of Polish doctrine of international law, and to point out important aspects related to the struggle of nations still trying to regain independence.

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 term 'hybrid war' has not been defined in the public international law. However, it is commonly used in the media, by politicians and also by academics in scientific discourses.The article raises the question of whether it is justified to use the term ʻhybrid war' in reference to the military conflict in Ukraine. The authors scrutinise to what extent the situation in Ukraine meets the criteria of a ʻhybrid war'. Therefore, they try to define the term and describe its distinctive characteristics. Then, successive developments in Ukraine are analysed and compared with the characteristics. The article focuses on the role of the Dontsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic, and their dependence on the Russian Federation. According to the authors, they are examples of actions conducted by proxies – the so called proxy war. This is the most important proof of the hybrid nature of the conflict in Ukraine. The authors also consider the responsibility of Russia for the actions of these separatist republics and wonder how to prevent the consequences of this conflict.

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.