Suchergebnisse

Große Teile des tschechischen außenpolitischen Establishments sind auf die USA fixiert. Auf das sinkende Interesse der USA an Europa haben diese Kreise keine Antwort. Die Verbesserung der Beziehungen zwischen Washington und Moskau versetzte Prag daher in einen Schock. Ein neues strategisches Konzept gibt es immer noch nicht. Statt dessen suchen die Atlantiker Ersatzthemen, um ihre rhetorischen Positionen zu halten: taktische Nuklearwaffen, Energiesicherheit und die Israelpolitik. (Osteuropa (Berlin) / SWP)

Seit 20 Jahren schwelen in Georgien die Konflikte um die separatistischen Gebiete Abchasien und Südossetien. Nach dem Bürgerkrieg 1990-1995 versuchten die Vereinten Nationen und die OSZE, zwischen den Konfliktparteien zu vermitteln. Die USA wollten Georgien gegenüber Russland stärken. Der Krieg zwischen Georgien und Russland im August 2008 hat die Situation verändert. Die OSZE und die VN mussten ihre Missionen abziehen, die USA schränkten ihr Engagement ein. Dies ist die Stunde der EU. Sie steht als einziger internationaler Vermittler in der Pflicht, eine erneute Eskalation zu verhindern. Sie hat die Chance, wichtige Ziele ihrer Ostpolitik zu verwirklichen. (Osteuropa (Berlin) / SWP)

The present article examines the tumultuous development in the issue of the Third Site (also known as the Third Pillar) of the US Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) that was planned to be hosted by the Czech Republic and Poland. The article analyzes the entire 'life cycle' of the project, from its formal proposal in 2007 by the former U.S. President George W. Bush to its cancellation in 2009 by the current U.S. President Barak Obama. Without any doubts, the Third Site of BMD put Poland and the Czech Republic at the centre of international security politics and as such allows one to see how the two post-communist countries acted and reacted to related international positions, expectations and challenges. A detailed analysis of this issue, nevertheless, does not exhaust aims of this article. Whether brief or detailed, any look at the coverage of the issue reveals that the Czech Republic and Poland have invariably been lumped together through the construction of the imagery of the New Europe as a homogeneous political bloc. It will be argued that such a view is flawed and needs refinement. In order to back the claim, the issue of the Third Site is put into a historical context, revealing that the differences between the Czech and Polish international-security preferences and expectations after the end of the Cold War have been quite stable – including the most recent development after the project has been shelved by the United States, and can thus be conceived of in dialectical terms.

The present article examines the tumultuous development in the issue of the Third Site (also known as the Third Pillar) of the US Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) that was planned to be hosted by the Czech Republic and Poland. The article analyzes the entire 'life cycle' of the project, from its formal proposal in 2007 by the former U.S. President George W. Bush to its cancellation in 2009 by the current U.S. President Barak Obama. Without any doubts, the Third Site of BMD put Poland and the Czech Republic at the centre of international-security politics and as such allows one to see how the two post-communist countries acted and reacted to related international positions, expectations and challenges. A detailed analysis of this issue, nevertheless, does not exhaust aims of this article. Whether brief or detailed, any look at the coverage of the issue reveals that the Czech Republic and Poland have invariably been lumped together through the construction of the imagery of the New Europe as a homogeneous political bloc. It will be argued that such a view is flawed and needs refinement. In order to back the claim, the issue of the Third Site is put into a historical context, revealing that the differences between the Czech and Polish international-security preferences and expectations after the end of the Cold War have been quite stable - including the most recent development after the project has been shelved by the United States, and can thus be conceived of in dialectical terms. [Copyright The Regents of the University of California; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

The article starts with the assessment of Central European 'regionalism'. First of all, the author argues that common regional wisdom has a strong geopolitical background that has also essentially informed Alanticist views of the Central European foreign and security policies. Secondly, the author examines Alanticist perspectives more in detail to identify different shapes and dynamics of this idea. Finally, the article attempts at putting forward an idea that geopolitical discourses heavily burden the Central European states' security identities and clearly complicate and limit strategic moves that would reflect the characteristics of the coming times. The authors concludes that instead of identifying geopolitically-informed threats and an unrealistic searching for ways through which the leading world superpower would provide some extra-guarantees, the countries should with a greater stress identify themselves as firm parts of European projects. Adapted from the source document.