A reply to Jan Keller (2007), Jaroslaw Kilias (2006), & Johann Arnason (2007) as critical reviewers of Machonin's Ceska spolecnost a sociologicke poznani. Problemy spolecenske transformace a modernizace od poloviny sedesatych let 20. stoleti do soucasnosti ([The Czech Society and Sociological Knowledge. Problems of Social Transformation and Modernization from the Mid 1960s to the Present] Prague: ISV, 2005). Keller's critique is found to be fed by his personal, 'hyperskeptical' & overly pessimistic, view of modernization. Kilias misreads the book in the context of his own theoretical-methodological conceptions. Arnason's criticism is discussed in more detail, addressing the following issues: (1) the variety & diversity of epistemological approaches in sociological research, (2) the liberal thought in classical Marxism & the notions of social liberalism & democratic socialism, (3) the theory of multiple modernities, & (4) the concept & term 'state socialism' & the question whether state socialism, as practiced in the Soviet bloc countries, qualifies as a special type of modernity.
Samoobrona (Self-Defense) and League of Polish Families (LPR) won the seats in the Sejm in the parliamentary elections in September 2001. Both parties represent radical opposition in the Polish parliament. They critisize Poland´s accession to the EU and the situation in the country after 1989 in general. The following text describes the history of both parties and the cardinal points of their policies. ; Samoobrona (Self-Defense) and League of Polish Families (LPR) won the seats in the Sejm in the parliamentary elections in September 2001. Both parties represent radical opposition in the Polish parliament. They critisize Poland´s accession to the EU and the situation in the country after 1989 in general. The following text describes the history of both parties and the cardinal points of their policies.
The article outlines the main theoretical models of nuclear proliferation and the motives that are driving states to obtain nuclear weapons. It also focuses on theoretical concepts dealing with variants and alternatives of the future fate of nuclear arsenals and roles played by nuclear weapons. Attention is also paid to the roles of nuclear weapons in the past views of Great Britain and France. The article analyses their motives for joining the nuclear club and also the reasons that led them to keep their nuclear arsenals in the second nuclear age. The authors conclude that these two countries were driven to cross the nuclear threshold not just by security motives, but by other motives as well. Because of the fact that some such motives remain relevant even today, it is rather unlikely to presume that the two states would be willing to abolish their nuclear arsenals in the foreseeable future. Adapted from the source document.
The article deals with the former US President Bush's plan for the so-called third pillar of the American missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic in the context of American-Iranian and American-Russian relations. We assess the explanatory power of different but interconnected (neo)realist conceptualizations of security dilemma and deterrence. Specifically, the study evaluates the relative importance of classical security dilemma versus imperialist security dilemma and the explanatory power of three different modalities of deterrence. The paper further shows how Iran and Russia balanced the United States. We also argue that the American missile defense system was not primarily motivated by defensive realist worries about security, but rather by an offensive realist struggle for power and gains at the expense of others. Adapted from the source document.
The article looks into Austrian attitude to security co-operation in Central Europe. Austria has arrived at a very flexible definition of its neutrality concept. The recent security & defense doctrine (2001) describes Austria not as a neutral but as a "non-allied state." In has introduced the principle of "European solidarity" in the Austrian security policy. The neutrality, however, remains to be a sensitive political issue, which splits the Austrian society. The regional partnership has created a new regional platform, which has produced positive results in several policy sectors. At the same time, the real political potential of the co-operation has yet to be seen, mainly in the course of the EU-enlargement. The security dimension of regional co-operation has developed with some dynamism. It testified willingness & ability of the military & experts to work with regional partners. Nonetheless, the co-operation has remained largely low-key. The reasons are, firstly, that the prioritizing of the orientation of Austria to the West prevented Vienna from an active regional policy for most of the 1990s. Secondly, & in the long run even more crucially, the non-allied status of Austria hampers the security co-operation in the most crucial areas: defense, sharing of sensitive information, sharing & thus cutting the costs of rearmament & modernization of the armed forces & of the defense infrastructure. References. Adapted from the source document.
The presented article aims to analyze & compare military peace support operations conducted by the EU (PSO EU). These operations are treated as the benchmark test of the implementation capability of the European Security & Defense Policy project, a project which is limited by the member states' capacities & their political will. Also the relationship between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization & the European Union must be analyzed & the unsettled state of the European allies' capabilities, as well as the crucial role of NATO to ensure a common defense must be further looked into. Nevertheless, one should still keep in mind that no effective military action could be taken without disposable well-equipped, tailored & trained operational capabilities. Concerning the European Union & its member states, this finding has still not been sufficiently put into practice. Adapted from the source document.
This article summarizes the basic theoretical approaches to the study of intelligence & intelligence control in the new Central European democracies. The existing theories are applied to the case of intelligence transformation in the Czech Republic. The Czech intelligence came through a reform similar to that of the intelligence services in neighboring countries, but with some significant exceptions. The Czech Republic's intelligence community consists of three organizations: the Security Information Service, the Office for Foreign Relations & Information, & the Military intelligence (Military intelligence has two relatively independent parts: Military Defense Intelligence & Military Intelligence Service). Only the Security Information Service & the Military Defense Intelligence are under the control of special parliamentary bodies, though at present there are two suggestions about a legislative reform. The article summarizes both of these suggestions, makes critical notes, & presents the author's own suggestion on how to improve democratic control of the Czech intelligence services. References. Adapted from the source document.
The presented analysis deals with the issue area of missile defense (MD) from the perspective of strategic studies. There are several objectives set for the text, & these in turn shape its structure. First, the analysis investigates the relationship between deterrence & MD. It debunks the myth claiming that the former is replaced by the latter; instead, their juxtaposition is acknowledged & demonstrated. This is made possible by a nuanced discussion of deterrence that goes beyond its flawed identification with the MAD logic. Subsequently, the Third Pillar of the US MD project is examined. It is investigated both within a wider discussion of bilateral US-Russian relations & in the context of the accompanying multilateral processes in NATO. The last tackled issue is a future link between the Third Site & the Sino-US strategic dynamics. The argument is summarized in the conclusion. Adapted from the source document.
This text is a polemical contribution to the debate on positivism & postpositivism in the study of international relations. It focuses on four aspects rendering Louzek's defense of positivism rather flimsy: first, the untenability of the positivism-normativism dichotomy. Second, a more detailed analysis of theories incorrectly grouped with normativism. Third is an analogous analysis of positivistic theories, & particularly their claims to an epistemologically neutral access to reality, & fourth, we discuss Louzek's ambivalent attitude to modernity, particularly to the notion of progress. Adapted from the source document.
After the 9/11 attacks & the subsequent military action in Afghanistan & Iraq, is the transatlantic community headed towards a divorce of Europe & the United States? Or, quite the opposite, are we witnessing a dawn of a new, revitalized, globally active western community? The article focuses on possible evolution of the transatlantic community, & aims at judging various future arrangements of security & defense area against the background of realist approach of international relations. The analysis proceeds in four steps. First of all, the realist theoretical background is laid down, as compared to other possible approaches, including the one of Robert Kagan. Self-interest & the crucial importance of security of an international actor are presented as basic principles. Secondly, the military capabilities of the United States of America & Europe are compared, as the gap between them justifies the concept of strong America & weak Europe. The third part presents four possible scenarios of future transatlantic relations. Since the position of the United States is to be considered constant for foreseeable future, the article closely examines the relationship between NATO & the EU. The structure on which the scenarios are based com-bines two processes: the process of European integration in security & defense, & the evolution of transatlantic cohesion. Military capabilities, effectiveness of political leadership, & a capacity for global action are considered to be the substantial aspects for the evaluation of the balance of power. Finally, the scenarios are compared with the assumptions of the realist theory. The results differ substantially from Kagan's who claims that the strengthening of Europe will result in a closer transatlantic community. The realist approach foresees either a close alliance based on subordination of Europe to the United States in case of substantial external threat, or a strong Europe opposing the power of the United States. Adapted from the source document.
