Suchergebnisse

Tokom trideset godina nakon raspada socijalističke Jugoslavije, Srbija i Hrvatska su kao postjugoslovenske male države ipak drugačije osmišljavale svoje mesto u regionalnom i globalnom kontekstu. O tome svedoči i njihov različit odnos prema međunarodnim organizacijama poput Evropske unije (EU), NATO ili Ujedinjenih nacija. Ovaj članak u središte svog interesovanja uzima UN kao multilateralni forum ili arenu u kojoj se bitno predstavljaju i oblikuju spoljnopolitičke uloge i identiteti malih država. Oslanjajući se na konstruktivističku analizu spoljne politike i teoriju uloga, autor se fokusirao na glavne deonice u razvoju spoljnopolitičkih narativa Srbije i Hrvatske kao aktivnih malih država članica u Ujedinjenim nacijama. Iako obe države vide sebe kao aktivne, ta aktivnost bi trebalo da bude u funkciji dve različite, teorijski profilisane, strategije malih država. Obrazlaže se sledeći argument: dok Srbija zbog složenosti kosovskog pitanja vodi uglavnom defanzivno autonomnu strategiju u skladu sa proklamovanom vojnom neutralnošću, dotle je Hrvatska kao mala članica EU i NATO priklonjena traganju za integracionističkim uticajem u konstelaciji sa evroatlantskim partnerima. Analizom zvaničnih diskursa dveju zemalja u Generalnoj skupštini UN, između 2000. i 2020. godine, pokazano je na koji način, i u kojoj meri se njihovi diskursi o regionalnoj, evropskoj i svetskoj politici približavaju ili udaljavaju, i razmatra se šta to znači za njihova mesta u svetu. ; In 30 years after the breakup of the socialist Yugoslavia, Serbia and Croatia as small states differently envisaged their place in regional and global context. Such difference is demonstrated by their different relationships toward international organizations such as the European Union, NATO or the United Nations. This article, as its central interest takes the United Nations as a multilateral forum or an arena where small states importantly represent and shape their foreign policy identities and roles. Relying on the constructivist foreign policy analysis and ...

Активност Југословенске радикалне заједнице, чији је програм крајем 1930-их година подразумевао поштовање и равноправност три национална идентитета (српског, хрватског и словеначког), битно је утицао на идеју интегралног југословенства у Краљевини Југославији. Часопис XX век, спонзорисан од стране поменуте партије, неретко је кроз филозофско- естетичке и уметничко-културолошке теме имплицирао актуелне друштвено-политичке промене. У раду се сагледава филозофско-естетичко промишљање српског естетичара Бранка Лазаревића, чији су текстови о умeтности (објављивани у часопису XX век) бивали политизовани и инструментализовани за форсирање једне у основи политичке идеје кроз поље уметности. На тај начин, овај часопис деловао је као вид алтернативног уметничког образовања народних маса, те је новопробуђене националне идеје промовисао, тобоже, као идеје за уметничку слободу и уметнички прогрес – пласирајући их метафорички кроз естетичке ставове Бранка Лазаревића. ; During the late 1930s, the Yugoslav Radical Community initiated very important changes in the political regime of The Kingdom of Yugoslavia. One of the principle of this party was affirmation of equality of three differеnt national identity – Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian. The 20th Century Journal, which was sponsored by Yugoslav Radical Community, has implicated actual social-political changes through its articles about philosophy, aesthetics arts and culture. The paper deals with the philosophical and aesthetic observations of the Serbian aesthetist Branko Lazarević, whose articles about art (published in the 20th Century Journal) were politicized and instrumentalized for the promotion of the political ideas through the field of art. In this way, the 20th Century Journal acted as an medium for the alternative artistic education of the masses. This journal has promoted new political ideas as ideas for artistic freedom and artistic progress, by placing them metaphorically through the aesthetic reflections of Branko Lazarević. ; Реализацију научног скупа и штампање зборника радова подржало је Министарство просвете, науке и технолошког развоја, решењем број 451-03-469/2018-14.

The author has tried to prove that interethnic relations in democracy cannot be handled solely by means of legal, economic and institutional means; political culture, i.e. civic democratic political culture can have a significant role. The analysis has shown that there is room for the build-up of a trans-national democratic citizenry, free from all ascriptive criteria and identities such as religion, ethnicity, etc. It has also revealed how classic liberalism neglects various identities (ethnic, national etc.) while communitarian liberalism overlooks the excluding force of various identities. It has also demonstrated that there are several concepts of civic identities (liberal, communitarian and social/group) and that each of these concepts can exert profound influence on the relationship between citizens and their political community. And finally, the relation between patriotism and inter-ethnic relations in democracy are reviewed. Patriotism, in the circumstances of growing social pluralisation, and despite a plethora of political integrations, can play a prominent role in bridging the political and cultural atomisations and conflicts in society. It can undertake this role only if constituted in th civic and not the crude (fixed) ethnic sense - though the national defines the limits and the meaning of this constitution - provided it evolves into the loyalty to one's homeland and going hand in hand with the development of democracy and human rights. In short, the purpose of this paper is to provide evidence that it is necessary to expand democratic political culture which might aid in resolving intricate and sensitive relations among various ethnic and cultural communities. Patriotism can assume a decisive role in this. It lays down the limits and legitimacy to each meaningful political discourse and to each genuine political subject. (SOI : PM: S. 49)

When researching multiculturalism and the process of Europeanisation in Serbia and countries of the region, one must first examine the status of multiculturality and multiculturalism, from the normative framework to states' policies which decidedly determine the nature and functioning of a political community. Starting from the fact that the context, nature and structure of a political community determines the essence of rights and freedoms stipulated by the constitution and laws, as well as that a synergy of good laws and sound policies enables an effective policy of multiculturality, integration and interlacing of cultures of diverse national communities in a society, the proclaimed multiculturalism was studied in this paper, with a view to ascertain whether such constitutional and legislative framework and policies exist, and if they did, whether there was concerted action between them. The key finding was that the states of the region support a civil state in principle, that they are exclusively or predominantly nationally legitimised by the highest legislative acts and that the factual state is marked by various national cultural identities that are not integrated into the model of plural citizenship. The paper shows that there is a lack of political will to transform the declared support for a pluralistic civil state into public policies affirming the values of multiculturalism, as well as that there is a lack of strong institutions to support such policy. Creating civil awareness, strengthening civil values and virtues are not priorities for state institutions or media controlled by governments. Rather than that, their priority is to strengthen national identities. Hence, based on the above, we can affirm that civil states, civil values and civil identities are only at initial stages, i.e. that they are still, only occasionally, at the level of general programme orientation and set aims. The necessary ingredient for their firm establishment is a consolidated democracy and acceptance of universal values of developed democracies, such as the rule of law and protection of human rights and freedoms.

The paper analyzes military capabilities of the European Union, as an important element of the credibility of the EU Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP). It discusses the development of these capabilities, and main problems that go along with the operationalization of these capabilities, as well as the prospects of their further development. Is the intergovernmental approach to the area of the EU security and defense policy a barrier to the development of EU military capabilities? What is the extent of the harmonization between 'military' competences of the EU and national specificities? The paper aims to provide answers to these questions. The first section analyzes the institutionalization of the EU security and defense policy, which includes both the establishment of special political and military structures responsible for the decision-making process within the framework of this policy, and the adoption of specific goals for the development of EU military capabilities. The second section analyzes the main difficulties met in the operationalization of EU military capabilities, concerning the efficiency of decision-making procedures, lack of strategic capabilities, the discord of national reforms regarding the modernization of the armed forces, and duplication of national programs covering the military equipment. The third section discusses the prospects of the development of EU military capabilities in the light of EU member states' military budget cuts. It concludes that the gradual evolution of the EU security and defense policy can be seen as an incentive for coordinating the efforts of the member states in the development of EU military capabilities.

In this paper, populism is regarded as a kind of ideological map that facilitates to the citizens their coping in the political space, as well as a "thin-centered ideology" which has at his center the idea that politics should be a reflection of the will of the people, the idea that a clean and moral nation confronts a corrupt elite and "out groups", "out groups" which actions endanger or impair the rights and values of the nation. The paper focuses on some fundamental theoretical considerations on populism and empirical determination of the elements of populism in the public opinion in Serbia. Based on opinion polls in Serbia it has been shown what is the relationship of citizens to the people, political elites, democracy and its institutions, as well as the attitude towards "out groups". Empirical research conducted in Serbia in 2017 confirms the hypothesis that the gap between citizens and their elected representatives is deep, and it marks also that conventional politics increasingly faces the difficulties to reach citizens, and that lack of trust in political parties is generated in all spheres of representative democracy. In the political life, "out groups" are instrumentally ranked by political actors according to the necessities of the moment, and the empirical research of attitudes shows that they are in the same way as "out groups experienced by the citizens.