Suchergebnisse

Political parties are an indispensable factor in any modern parliamentary democracy. It would be impossible to parliamentary democracy to function properly without them. Political parties are a constitutional category and they have to act in accordance with constitution, but due to their importance it is already observed that sometimes they go beyond constitution. Each country should find its own way in order to face that challenge. Germany is a good example for that, by giving political parties the freedom to act on the basis of the provisions of the Basic Law, but with the care that the entire system does not endanger itself. That could be seen in three examples. First example is the relationship between the parliamentary group as the emanation of political parties in parliament and deputies. Second example is banning of anti-constitutional political parties. Third example is the election process of judges of the Constitutional Court. The paper concludes that it is necessary to find an ideal formula for the freedom of their actions, according to which political parties are allowed to perform any action that is beneficial to the constitutional order, while not all of them are forbidden, but only the actions that have a devastating effect on the system as a whole.

This paper analyses the connection of interests and corruption, especially corruption and political interests. It first considers the notion of interest, i.e. its meanings and significance, both for an individual and for a society. It presents the classification if interests by Albion Woodbury Small. A special emphasis is given to the encounter of different interests as the beginning of clash between humans. The paper analyses individual, special and general interests, as well as their relations. The paper also analyses two levels of conflict of interest: the conflict between public and private interest and the conflict between interests within the public offices. The relation of interests in society and politics is solved in the best way by adopting laws, i.e. by introducing the rule of law into political order. Without that the interest orientation of politicians can easily end up in abuse and illegality. In turn, abuses and illegalities open the possibilities for various kinds of corruptive acts.

More than one decade Serbia has been passing through the process of market reforms. Establishing of market economy institution had to allow the country one stabile economic development in the light of EU accession. That is, by the way, the same strategy of the most countries of Western Balkan. Actual economic crisis showed the other side of the result of previous changes, and of the realized growth and development. That were the consequences on macro economic and financial instability and structure of the economy. Many circumstances showed that in the Serbian real and normative economic system there were numerous controversies stopping or slowing EU accession and basic re forms process. European economic system is based on institutions. In spite of many bureaucratic obstacles of this system institutions are the main guarantee of the system surviving. The institutions in Serbia were not established in desirable way. The government, the parliament and courts are continually in conflicts, based on formalization of institutions. Regulatory bodies are very week and under pressure of parties power control, as well as corruption and institution formalizing. All those facts have negative influence on the process of EU accession and market reforms. Serbia need to accept lawful state and institution strengthening in order to catch a connection for advanced economies in reform. Most important conditions are not only better laws, but better education. .

In this paper author analyzes the attitude towards the Serbian identity by the former ruling structures of Montenegro led by the DPS. As a theoretical framework the paper uses the theory of securitization which is an adequate analytical and research concept to explain how and in what way the Serbian identity in Montenegro is marked as an existential threat and danger to the independence, sovereignty and modern character of the Montenegrin state. Although the differentiation between the ethno-national Montenegrin and Serbian identities within Montenegro is a process that began even before the declaration of independence in 2006, the author primarily focuses on the securitization processes that marked the previous two years. By analyzing the contemporary public discourse the author notices securitizing moves that fit into the "grammar of security" and identifies the main factors of the securitization process in Montenegro that seek to maintain the same social and political narrative which is dominated by the division between Montenegrin and Serbian identity and thus labeling the latter as a security threat to the state.

The author analyses the role of religion in the formation of national identities in Central and Eastern Europe on the example of the Catholic Church in Poland in the 2Oth century. In Poland, like in most Central-European and Eastern-European societies, national identity developed against the state and was founded on certain elements of ethnic culture and tradition, the central position belonging to the Church. During communism, the Polish Catholic Church had the leading position in defending national identity, which identified Polishness with Catholicism. The Church also had a crucial role in the destruction of the communist system. However, it has found increasingly difficult to adapt to the new political conditions. As has been shown through the debates on abortion and religious education in state schools, the attempt by the Church to achieve the status of moral arbiter, above all democratic institutions, has resulted in new divisions. (SOI : PM: S. 143)

Energy security and stability has become a major issue over the last few years in the whole world's economic and social development. Despite its high development and evolution of its approach to the issue of energy security, the European Union is also facing the problem of decreasing its role in reducing human impact on the climate. Energy is of essential importance for the development of any country, including Bosnia and Herzegovina. Without adequate policies in the energy sector bussines, industrial and economic progress is not possible either. However, regardless of how energy is important for the development, it is still only a mechanism for achieving an ultimate goal – sustainable economy, clean environment, high living standards, prosperity and population health. According to the official data, Bosnia and Herzegovina produces annually about 13.600 GWh (data from 2010), out of which 7.950 GWh in thermal power plants and 5.650 GWh in hydro power plants. Basic domestic energy sources in Bosnia and Herzegovina include coal and hydropower, while gas and oil are imported. This paper gives an overview of future of the European Union energy policy by 2020, together with the situation and outlooks for Bosnia and Herzegovina renewable energy sources: hydropower, wind power, solar energy, biomass and geothermal energy. The legislation of renewable sources in the Federation of BIH, as well as the European Union's legislative framework, are also presented. ; Energy security and stability has become a major issue over the last few years in the whole world's economic and social development. Despite its high development and evolution of its approach to the issue of energy security, the European Union is also facing the problem of decreasing its role in reducing human impact on the climate. Energy is of essential importance for the development of any country, including Bosnia and Herzegovina. Without adequate policies in the energy sector bussines, industrial and economic progress is not possible either. However, regardless of how energy is important for the development, it is still only a mechanism for achieving an ultimate goal – sustainable economy, clean environment, high living standards, prosperity and population health. According to the official data, Bosnia and Herzegovina produces annually about 13.600 GWh (data from 2010), out of which 7.950 GWh in thermal power plants and 5.650 GWh in hydro power plants. Basic domestic energy sources in Bosnia and Herzegovina include coal and hydropower, while gas and oil are imported. This paper gives an overview of future of the European Union energy policy by 2020, together with the situation and outlooks for Bosnia and Herzegovina renewable energy sources: hydropower, wind power, solar energy, biomass and geothermal energy. The legislation of renewable sources in the Federation of BIH, as well as the European Union's legislative framework, are also presented.

In this article Dr Pribicevic analyses the impact of Kosovo crises on Serbian EU integrations and shaping of political scene of Serbia. Dr Pribicevic pointed out how crises started in spring 2011 when idea of split of Kosovo appeared again in Serbia and then continued with the clashes between KFOR and Serbs from north of Kosovo in order to get the control of administrative crossing Jarinje and Brnjak. During the summer 2011 German chancellor Merkel visited Serbia and asked government in Belgrade to normalize its relations with Kosovo and dissolve "parallel institutions" of Serbs in the north of Kosovo. Following this visit Serbian government continue its negotiations with Pristina and find out solutions for administrative crossings. On the other side, Belgrade and Pristina didn't find solution for the problem of presentation of Kosovo on the regional gatherings after what European council, under the German influence, decided to postpone the decision to give Serbia the status of candidate for the EU. Therefore, Serbia remains without EU candidaturein December 2011 in spite of the fact that government in Belgrade handedover general Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic to Hague Tribunal as well as conducted a number of successful reforms which got very high marks from EU commission. In this article Dr Pribicevic is trying to answer several questions. Why Washington and Berlin imposed such a strong pressure on Serbia in this moment? Is split of Kosovo possible solution? Could Serbian government continue with current politics of EU and Kosovo or it should take one of these politics as a priority? How Kosovo crises influenced Serbian political scene? At the end, Kosovo crises opened the crucial question: could Serbia enter EU without "recognition of territorial integrity of Kosovo"as described by German foreign minister Westervele. Having in mind forthcoming elections in spring time 2012 author thinks that ruling Democratic Party as well as leading opposition party Sebian Progresive Party will continue with current politics "both EU and Kosovo". Such politics will be in accordance with the public mood in Serbia which shows that support for EU integrations is declining with the growing pressure of US and Germany on Serbian Kosovo's politics. On the other side, Serbian politics "both EU and Kosovo" is not sustainable on the long run and Serbia has to face difficult decisions in future. Also, according to the author opinion Kosovo crises showed weakness of Serbian international position. It is without important allies among key Western powers which has dominant influence in this part of Europe. Serbia has support of Russia but key influence on Kosovo has US, GB, France and Germany. These powers connected Serbia's further progress towards EU with normalization its relations with Kosovo, knowing in advance that the time when Serbia is seeking for the EU candidature is the best time to ask Belgrade to make concessions in its Kosovo's politics. Western powers do not expect Serbia to recognize Kosovo but they expect Serbia to accept " territorial integrity of Kosovo", including its north part. Why Kosovo become so important for leading Western powers? Author thinks that several reasons influenced such tough behavior of Western power towards Serbia. First, after helping them to create an independent state, US perceived Albanians as the most reliable ally in this part of Europe. Second, Germany and other big powers in Europe wants to prevent creation of new frozen conflict in Europe similar to Cyprus one, Third, all big Western powers has reserves towards Serbian foreign policy and its orientation on EU but as well as on Russia, nonalignment world, China which quite often is described in the West as sitting on the two chairs, Last but not the least, Germany as well as France is not very eager of politics of enlargement of EU in the eve of forthcoming elections in these countries scheduled for 2012 and 2013. Therefore its hesitation in this moment towards further enlargement with US pro Albanian politics creates tough dillemas for Serbian politics in foreseeable future.

The author discusses the basic structure of Mancur Olson's political economy. He highlights three concepts on which it is based - public goods, interest groups, and selective incentives. The last concept represents Olson's innovation in contemporary political science. The author's central methodical assumption is based on the insight that Olson's key theory is linked with the so-called public goods paradox. Unlike private goods, public goods are non-competitive and non-exclusive, which means that it is not possible to bar those who do not share the costs of their production from using them. On the basis of this, Olson has developed the original theory of interest groups. By looking into the costs of organizing along interest lines as a collective activity whose result is a public good, he distinguishes between large, heterogeneous, and small, homogeneous groups. Besides, he has shown that, regarding public goods, individuals tend to behave as free riders, defaulters who try to avoid the costs of securing these goods. The author shows that Olson has, notwithstanding certain flimsiness of his reductionist methodology, significantly revamped political science. (SOI : PM: S. 202)

The relations with Russia rank among the most important and most complex issues in the US and UK foreign policy. The years after the Second World War have been marked by an exhausting arms race between the Western and Eastern bloc that ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall, the break-up of the Soviet Union and the victory of the United States and its Western allies. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the relations between the US and the United Kingdom on the one hand, and Russia, on the other, during the mandate of President Trump and after Brexit and point to possible directions that these relations may take in the aftermath of Biden's victory in the 2020 US Presidential elections. The author proceeds from a hypothesis that the efforts of President Trump, who, contrary to his predecessors, felt that the relations with Russia should be based on interests rather than ideology, have failed. He has not been successful primarily due to the huge resistance mounted by the state structures, mainstream media and anti-Russian coalition forged by the Republican and Democratic parties. The relations between the UK and Russia remain cold after Brexit as well due to the severe problems between the two countries. The first part will deal with the strained relations between the United States and Russia following the West's victory in the Cold War, the efforts of President Trump to improve these relations and his failure to do so. The second part of the paper will address the relationship between the United Kingdom and Russia, which is in many respects even more complicated than that between Russia and the US. After Brexit, the relations between the two countries continue to be plagued by the activities of the Russian agents in Great Britain, the crisis in Ukraine and different views on the war in Syria. In the third part, the concluding part of the paper, the author tried to answer the question of how the relations between the US and Russia will develop after Joseph Biden won the 2020 US Presidential elections. According to him, the new President will continue to pursue the traditional policy towards Russia agreed upon by both US parties. It can be expected that Biden will, despite the policy of sanctions pursued by his predecessors, Obama and Trump, engage more in supporting the opposition and civilian sector in Russia. Given the cold and strained relations between these two states, it may be assumed that Great Britain will readily follow a new, tougher course of action pursued by President Biden towards Russia and Putin. It is especially important for UK politics that Biden returns to the ideas of liberalism because, as we have seen on previous pages, in London, in addition to the actions of Russian agents on the UK territory, Putin is most resented precisely for his activities to overthrow the ruling liberal order. Despite the good ties between Prime Minister Johnson and the former US President who supported Brexit, Biden's victory will bring relief to the UK because of his commitment, as opposed to Trump, to bring back America to the world political stage, where London is likely to expect to find space for its new global role after leaving the EU. On the other hand, Moscow will probably continue with its past foreign policy strategy in anticipation of the moves to be taken by the new US President without high expectations regarding the future relations between the two countries. Russia has even fewer expectations when it comes to relations with the UK, given the gravity of the problems that burden the relations between the two countries.

Harmonisation of the foreign policies of the Western Balkan states with the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) within the Charter 31 of the pre-accession negotiations will be a significant obligation and challenge for most of them. Within this context, the author takes as a starting point the regular annual reports on the progress achieved by the states in the region. They show the degree of harmonisation of their foreign policies with this Union's mechanism (within four years in the 2011-2014 period). The author of the article particularly points to the real and substantial discrepancy between the normative framework of the EU CFSP and the specific activities taken by the Western Balkan states in the part concerning their position to the current crisis in Ukraine which, in a way, 'reflects' the geo-strategic interests of the 'West', on one hand, and those of the Russian Federation, on the other. At the same time, he points to the membership in the North Atlantic Alliance as a favourable framework for the acceleration of harmonisation of a country's foreign policy with the EU CFSP.

In his main oeuvre from the field of political philosophy ('Basic Traits of the Philosophy of Right'), Hegel wished to reconcile civil society with state. Civil society is for Hegel the way of abstract notion of property concretization. Subjective form of property is evolutioning into objective relationships among title holders. It is in the state where the will is set free from its particular interests and is becoming free in the widest sense of the word. Since civil society is established as per marketing principles, it is subject to inequalities. Since inequalities bear destructive effect on the life in community, civic particularism may be overcome only in institutional way. That institution is the state as the 'seriousness of the spirit', and the essence of civil society. Civil society is a liberal one, and the state is based on liberal principles. For Hegel, contrary to Hobbes and Locke, liberal society is not a social contract among individuals who possessed some natural rights (property), but reciproque and equal agreement among citizens and states which wish to recognize themselves mutually. It is not an own interest, but searching for rational recognition. The same as citizens, states also wish to reconcile themselves mutually, what in the situation in Kosovo and Metohia alike gets the original form.