This article is focused on the analysis of interim (the Iraqi Governing Council, the Iraqi Interim Government and the Interim National Assembly) and transitional Iraqi institutions (the Transitional National Assembly) as well as other previously established institutions (the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, the Interim Coalition Government). Much attention is given to the level of democracy within these institutions. They are examined applying the model of autonomous democracy that consists of a coherent chain of the main principles of democracy and its criteria. At the same time some additional attention is devoted to the elections to the Transitional National Assembly and these to the permanent National Assembly as well as the referendum concerning the Iraqi Constitution. Consequently, visible signs of the ethno-confessional polarization have become especially significant. Various reasons for this phenomenon which, in turn, has resulted in the political upheaval and the security crisis in Iraq will be discussed in the context of the process of democratization.
This article is focused on the analysis of interim (the Iraqi Governing Council, the Iraqi Interim Government and the Interim National Assembly) and transitional Iraqi institutions (the Transitional National Assembly) as well as other previously established institutions (the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, the Interim Coalition Government). Much attention is given to the level of democracy within these institutions. They are examined applying the model of autonomous democracy that consists of a coherent chain of the main principles of democracy and its criteria. At the same time some additional attention is devoted to the elections to the Transitional National Assembly and these to the permanent National Assembly as well as the referendum concerning the Iraqi Constitution. Consequently, visible signs of the ethno-confessional polarization have become especially significant. Various reasons for this phenomenon which, in turn, has resulted in the political upheaval and the security crisis in Iraq will be discussed in the context of the process of democratization.
This article is focused on the analysis of interim (the Iraqi Governing Council, the Iraqi Interim Government and the Interim National Assembly) and transitional Iraqi institutions (the Transitional National Assembly) as well as other previously established institutions (the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, the Interim Coalition Government). Much attention is given to the level of democracy within these institutions. They are examined applying the model of autonomous democracy that consists of a coherent chain of the main principles of democracy and its criteria. At the same time some additional attention is devoted to the elections to the Transitional National Assembly and these to the permanent National Assembly as well as the referendum concerning the Iraqi Constitution. Consequently, visible signs of the ethno-confessional polarization have become especially significant. Various reasons for this phenomenon which, in turn, has resulted in the political upheaval and the security crisis in Iraq will be discussed in the context of the process of democratization.
The methodology of public governance has only been analysed recently. The methodology of public governance consists of a collection of concepts, ideas, reforms, degrees and other problems of theory. The role of methodology is important in the field as applied, practical and interdisciplinary as public governance. The study analyses how public administration theory developed at the end of the twentieth and at the start of the twenty-first century. The article examines the theories of public sector practice, such as theories on public organization behaviour, public management, and public policy implementation in a global environment. Theories on bureaucratic politics seek to explain how the politics–administration dichotomy is transforming from the traditional theoretical framework to the new democratic systematic framework and to a new understanding of public governance democratization, which is central in today's organizational theory. The primary issue addressed in the article is the development of public administration and governance theory in the period of globalization and modernization, and changes in the definition of the role of theory in public governance. ; Straipsnyje analizuojama šiuolaikinio viešojo valdymo metodologijos galimybės tobulinant viešųjų institucijų veiklą, efektyvinant viešosios politikos ir viešųjų programų bei projektų įgyvendinimą. Daugiausia dėmesio yra skiriama bendrųjų sociologinių ir specifinių viešojo valdymo teorijų vietai ir vaidmeniui demokratizuojant viešąjį valdymą šiuolaikinėmis globalizacijos sąlygomis. Valdymo demokratizavimo metodologijos problema aptariama remiantis visuotinai viešojo valdymo teorijoje priimta nuostata, kad metodologija (Ch. E. Lindblom, J. E. Lane, J. Dewey, D. Easton ir kt.) suprantama kaip mokslinių tyrinėjimų srities tyrimo logika ir kaip organizacijų bei individų praktinės-intelektualinės veiklos logika.
Democratisation and Europeanisation of Post-socialist states can be regarded as long-lasting and complex processes. Mainly because of fragmented development of statehood and subordination to external states with distinct nature, post-communist states face transformations which are marked with much wider capacity than classical transitologists expected them to be. According to the emerged situation, it enforces to take more accurate glance at the very specific nature of the post-communist state. The case of Moldova democratisation and europeanization perfectly suits these analytical aspirations. First of all, very weak background of Moldovan state determines emergence of distinct opinions about particular historical-cultural artifacts, statehood and possible trajectories of further state development. Division of opinions not only fragments approach towards national identity, but also exacerbates democratisation and europeanisation processes. Secondly, Moldova lacks not only the experience with statehood, but also faces political and normative heritage of ancient regimes. Because of that there are certain problems of implementing democratic values in Moldova. It means struggle with widespread corruption, as well as with the Soviet-style methods and practices. Namely the legacy of the Soviet system, such as a politically passive and apathetic population, authoritarian political aspirations shading with the formal mechanisms of democracy, the weak and poor democratic political culture - all of this undermines the country's democratisation and its European ambitions. Thirdly, Moldova is small post-soviet country, which geopolitically stands in the core of intersection between European Union and Russian interests. Because of that Moldova has to balance between two structural powers and respectively to design its further development path. Thus, the development of Moldova's democratisation and europeanisation is crucially dependent on two competing subjects, namely European Union and Russia, and their capacity to influence Moldova's political processes. In the context of transitology approach case study of Moldova reveals that internal design and external orientation of post-soviet state strongly depends on both, internal and external dynamics. Thus, post-communist transition can be regarded as much more complicated comparing with scholarly efforts to conceptualize transition processes that took place in Latin America or Southern Europe.
Democratization and liberalization are very elaborate processes. This is very obvious in the region of Central Asia. Just after collapse of USSR countries like Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan had to create new or completely modify old constitutions and electoral laws. Officially both countries had chosen democratic systems. That is also marked in the first articles of their constitutions. However real politics in these countries is based on their leaders, "clans" and separate regions preferences. De jure and de facto democracies are accomplished in many different ways. Traditionally democratic freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of association – while provided for in the constitutions - are suppressed and/or severely limited. Several democratic transition theories and their adoption in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan will be presented in this study. It will be overviewed not only their development but also marked different classification. Most of the study will be concentrated into electoral systems development and development of each country's constitutions after collapse of USSR. It will be marked different types of ruling systems, which have provided each electoral law or constitution amendments.
Democratization and liberalization are very elaborate processes. This is very obvious in the region of Central Asia. Just after collapse of USSR countries like Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan had to create new or completely modify old constitutions and electoral laws. Officially both countries had chosen democratic systems. That is also marked in the first articles of their constitutions. However real politics in these countries is based on their leaders, "clans" and separate regions preferences. De jure and de facto democracies are accomplished in many different ways. Traditionally democratic freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of association – while provided for in the constitutions - are suppressed and/or severely limited. Several democratic transition theories and their adoption in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan will be presented in this study. It will be overviewed not only their development but also marked different classification. Most of the study will be concentrated into electoral systems development and development of each country's constitutions after collapse of USSR. It will be marked different types of ruling systems, which have provided each electoral law or constitution amendments.
Democratization and liberalization are very elaborate processes. This is very obvious in the region of Central Asia. Just after collapse of USSR countries like Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan had to create new or completely modify old constitutions and electoral laws. Officially both countries had chosen democratic systems. That is also marked in the first articles of their constitutions. However real politics in these countries is based on their leaders, "clans" and separate regions preferences. De jure and de facto democracies are accomplished in many different ways. Traditionally democratic freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and freedom of association – while provided for in the constitutions - are suppressed and/or severely limited. Several democratic transition theories and their adoption in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan will be presented in this study. It will be overviewed not only their development but also marked different classification. Most of the study will be concentrated into electoral systems development and development of each country's constitutions after collapse of USSR. It will be marked different types of ruling systems, which have provided each electoral law or constitution amendments.
The paper deals with democratization of Iraq which was started to implement by the United States and its allies in March, 2003. The military operation was designed to find and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, overthrow the authoritarian regime of S. Hussein and install democratic institutions. Neoconservatives who were the authors and advocates of the idea of democratic Iraq believed that with the start in Iraq democracy gradually will spill over to the whole Middle East. And this process would guarantee the security of the United States and the whole world what is its' national interest. Although Iraq has conducted free and fair elections and has established the main democratic institutions, today five years since the outset of the operation it is still not considered a stable democratic country. So the discrepancy between the factual and institutional democracy in Iraq is the main problem of this paper. This problem raises the principal research question: what causes the failure of democratization in Iraq? So according to the theoretical-methodological research concept the main question sounds as such: where the advocates of the intervention in Iraq have made the crucial mistake: whether the democratization of Iraq is theoretically impossible (ideological analysis level), maybe the failure of the project was determined by unsuitable democratization methods (especially the quick democratization) or maybe the misfortune lies in the domestic features of Iraq (practical analysis level). So the research method is the case study and the object – democracy in Iraq in institutional and social level. The analysis is divided into two levels: ideological and practical. The ideological level involves the analysis of neoconservatism (to reveal the genesis of the democratization idea) and the overview of the Muslim societies' political experience and their attitude to the principles of democracy (to answer the question, whether Iraq democratization is theoretically possible). Practical level involves the investigation of the process of political system transformation, the evaluation of the current situation and the analysis whether and why Iraq matches the consolidated democracy criteria indicated by J. Linz and A. Stepan and suits the democratization conditions indicated by S. M. Lipset. This will help to find out what determines the failure of democracy in Iraq. The analysis of intervention in Iraq and its' democratization process is quite a popular field of academic research and publications nowadays. Despite this, it should be noticed that the majority of investigations concentrates on the practical analysis of coalition forces actions and concrete problems of Iraq usually in order to give recommendations to G. W. Bush administration. This paper looks at the issue differently – from the perspective of democratization theories. Thus, the investigation results revealed that the failure to install a stable democratic political system in Iraq lies in practical level. The process is blocked by the domestic features of the country (it is fractured, antagonistic, based on "primordial allegiances", has no national leaders, no future visions and overall is not prepared to govern itself independently) and unsuitable democratization methods (the process was initiated and conducted by foreign powers, without an adequate plan and preparation of the society). So the simple installation of democratic institutions does not guarantee a stable democracy. Whereas the ideological level (the influence of Islam) was not the main force which complicated the democratization, because Muslim societies in principle could live in states which are ruled by democratically. Moreover, according to the research results, the democratization of Iraq as the main reason for military intervention is also questionable. So other reasons for intervention which were not officially declared by US could be the topic of further studies.
The paper deals with democratization of Iraq which was started to implement by the United States and its allies in March, 2003. The military operation was designed to find and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, overthrow the authoritarian regime of S. Hussein and install democratic institutions. Neoconservatives who were the authors and advocates of the idea of democratic Iraq believed that with the start in Iraq democracy gradually will spill over to the whole Middle East. And this process would guarantee the security of the United States and the whole world what is its' national interest. Although Iraq has conducted free and fair elections and has established the main democratic institutions, today five years since the outset of the operation it is still not considered a stable democratic country. So the discrepancy between the factual and institutional democracy in Iraq is the main problem of this paper. This problem raises the principal research question: what causes the failure of democratization in Iraq? So according to the theoretical-methodological research concept the main question sounds as such: where the advocates of the intervention in Iraq have made the crucial mistake: whether the democratization of Iraq is theoretically impossible (ideological analysis level), maybe the failure of the project was determined by unsuitable democratization methods (especially the quick democratization) or maybe the misfortune lies in the domestic features of Iraq (practical analysis level). So the research method is the case study and the object – democracy in Iraq in institutional and social level. The analysis is divided into two levels: ideological and practical. The ideological level involves the analysis of neoconservatism (to reveal the genesis of the democratization idea) and the overview of the Muslim societies' political experience and their attitude to the principles of democracy (to answer the question, whether Iraq democratization is theoretically possible). Practical level involves the investigation of the process of political system transformation, the evaluation of the current situation and the analysis whether and why Iraq matches the consolidated democracy criteria indicated by J. Linz and A. Stepan and suits the democratization conditions indicated by S. M. Lipset. This will help to find out what determines the failure of democracy in Iraq. The analysis of intervention in Iraq and its' democratization process is quite a popular field of academic research and publications nowadays. Despite this, it should be noticed that the majority of investigations concentrates on the practical analysis of coalition forces actions and concrete problems of Iraq usually in order to give recommendations to G. W. Bush administration. This paper looks at the issue differently – from the perspective of democratization theories. Thus, the investigation results revealed that the failure to install a stable democratic political system in Iraq lies in practical level. The process is blocked by the domestic features of the country (it is fractured, antagonistic, based on "primordial allegiances", has no national leaders, no future visions and overall is not prepared to govern itself independently) and unsuitable democratization methods (the process was initiated and conducted by foreign powers, without an adequate plan and preparation of the society). So the simple installation of democratic institutions does not guarantee a stable democracy. Whereas the ideological level (the influence of Islam) was not the main force which complicated the democratization, because Muslim societies in principle could live in states which are ruled by democratically. Moreover, according to the research results, the democratization of Iraq as the main reason for military intervention is also questionable. So other reasons for intervention which were not officially declared by US could be the topic of further studies.
The collapse of communist rule in Central Europe (CE) and the third wave of democratization gave a significant impulse for development of theory of political sciences. Though the democratization process in CE is analyzed from various perspectives, key attention is paid for procedural aspects of regime transformation: institutional reforms, the creation of market economy, consolidation of democracy, CE integration to the European Union are the most attractive topics for researches of political sciences. Still there is a lack of theoretical approach towards systemic transformation that includes not only political or economical, but also cultural factors. Therefore it is worth to complement this gap of theoretical literature by focusing on aspects of the cultural transformation in the postcommunist region. The main purpose of the master dissertation is to analyze the dynamics of cultural transformation in four CE countries: Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia. The results of research of cultural cleavages in CE countries shows that the cultural transformation in each country does not depend particulary on radical political and economical reforms. Culture developes according its own logic, and non of the theories is adequate to explain cultural transformation. Research shows that some cultural elements (trust, tolerance) are not in the phase of transformation at all: they are stagnant, not reactive to reforms. Therefore, the communist legacies have still strong roots in every society, and the possibilities of consolidation of democracy of CE region in nearest future are limited.
The collapse of communist rule in Central Europe (CE) and the third wave of democratization gave a significant impulse for development of theory of political sciences. Though the democratization process in CE is analyzed from various perspectives, key attention is paid for procedural aspects of regime transformation: institutional reforms, the creation of market economy, consolidation of democracy, CE integration to the European Union are the most attractive topics for researches of political sciences. Still there is a lack of theoretical approach towards systemic transformation that includes not only political or economical, but also cultural factors. Therefore it is worth to complement this gap of theoretical literature by focusing on aspects of the cultural transformation in the postcommunist region. The main purpose of the master dissertation is to analyze the dynamics of cultural transformation in four CE countries: Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia. The results of research of cultural cleavages in CE countries shows that the cultural transformation in each country does not depend particulary on radical political and economical reforms. Culture developes according its own logic, and non of the theories is adequate to explain cultural transformation. Research shows that some cultural elements (trust, tolerance) are not in the phase of transformation at all: they are stagnant, not reactive to reforms. Therefore, the communist legacies have still strong roots in every society, and the possibilities of consolidation of democracy of CE region in nearest future are limited.
Egypt is one of the most important Middle East countries for the USA in a strategic sense. This article deals with the USA-Egypt relations and the USA democracy promotion in Egypt during the Arab Spring (2011) with an emphasis on interaction of pragmatic interests and idealistic aspirations. The aim is to reveal the influence of the USA on ongoing change of Egypt's regime. Revolution in Egypt gives the USA a reason for concern because their interests could be no more guaranteed because of the instability in Egypt, which may be very harmful to bilateral relations of the United States and Egypt. The main interest of the USA is the stability of Egypt. The USA is also interested in the Middle East conflict settlement, cooperation in counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation, projects of infrastructure, secure military and commercial transport transit through the Suez Canal, continuous transit of oil and gas. With reference to the democratic peace theory, establishment of democracy in Egypt can be considered a long-term interest of the United States, but the promotion of democracy has been often overshadowed by short-term and medium-term interests. In the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the USA relied on the moderate rhetoric rather than concrete actions. The USA still strongly supports the Egyptian army, which should ensure the governance of the state in the period of transition to democratic governance. B. Obama has been highly criticized for cutting funding for. [to full text]
Egypt is one of the most important Middle East countries for the USA in a strategic sense. This article deals with the USA-Egypt relations and the USA democracy promotion in Egypt during the Arab Spring (2011) with an emphasis on interaction of pragmatic interests and idealistic aspirations. The aim is to reveal the influence of the USA on ongoing change of Egypt's regime. Revolution in Egypt gives the USA a reason for concern because their interests could be no more guaranteed because of the instability in Egypt, which may be very harmful to bilateral relations of the United States and Egypt. The main interest of the USA is the stability of Egypt. The USA is also interested in the Middle East conflict settlement, cooperation in counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation, projects of infrastructure, secure military and commercial transport transit through the Suez Canal, continuous transit of oil and gas. With reference to the democratic peace theory, establishment of democracy in Egypt can be considered a long-term interest of the United States, but the promotion of democracy has been often overshadowed by short-term and medium-term interests. In the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the USA relied on the moderate rhetoric rather than concrete actions. The USA still strongly supports the Egyptian army, which should ensure the governance of the state in the period of transition to democratic governance. B. Obama has been highly criticized for cutting funding for. [to full text]
Egypt is one of the most important Middle East countries for the USA in a strategic sense. This article deals with the USA-Egypt relations and the USA democracy promotion in Egypt during the Arab Spring (2011) with an emphasis on interaction of pragmatic interests and idealistic aspirations. The aim is to reveal the influence of the USA on ongoing change of Egypt's regime. Revolution in Egypt gives the USA a reason for concern because their interests could be no more guaranteed because of the instability in Egypt, which may be very harmful to bilateral relations of the United States and Egypt. The main interest of the USA is the stability of Egypt. The USA is also interested in the Middle East conflict settlement, cooperation in counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation, projects of infrastructure, secure military and commercial transport transit through the Suez Canal, continuous transit of oil and gas. With reference to the democratic peace theory, establishment of democracy in Egypt can be considered a long-term interest of the United States, but the promotion of democracy has been often overshadowed by short-term and medium-term interests. In the beginning of the Arab Spring in Egypt, the USA relied on the moderate rhetoric rather than concrete actions. The USA still strongly supports the Egyptian army, which should ensure the governance of the state in the period of transition to democratic governance. B. Obama has been highly criticized for cutting funding for. [to full text]