Following the 1948 Bucarest resolution of the COMINFORM, better known as Information Office (TI) the situation between Yugoslavia and the neighbouring peoples" democracies dramatically worsened. However secret data collection and network organisation between the opposing parties started much earlier. Tito was in an advantageous position concerning intelligence because in the framework of the Allied Control Commission he had a military mission working in Hungary. The representatives of the mission had fruitful relationship with important Hungarian political and military personalities. After the acceptance of the Soviet dictate mapping the foreign relationships, internal situation, industrial capacity, stocks of raw materials, and military preparedness of the country led by Tito the "main evil", the "dog of the imperialists" had an important place in the activities of the secret services of the peace camp.
In South America in the 1960s and 1970s the contradictions of economic, social and political structures were deepening. The excepcional states of the new militarism appeared on the continent. Formally these state systems were set up by the institutional takeover of the armed forces. The military governments strove for the total reorganization and modernization of the societies in their all ‒ economic, political and ideological ‒ territories.The break-down of the military dictatorships in South America, in the one of three semi-peripherical areas of the world, took place in the 1970s and 1980s and 1990s and it was followed by the restoration of the civil governing in the form of hybrid systems. All these processes constituted the parts of the democratization.However in those societies have been present the authoritarian enclaves and the so-called "powers that be" as well as the inherited non-elected system of institutions of the controlled democray endangering the democratic establishment.The study aims at analizing these processes, the governmental and the state structures and the Económic transformations on the ground of the Brazilian experiences.
Considering the recent series of events and intensified diplomatic and economic relations, many experts envisage a new Cold War between the two superpowers of the twenty-first century. Although the Chinese-American relationship over the last half-century has experienced some great moments, it has mostly been characterised by less amicable or even hostile attitudes, as well as economically volatile competition. The pragmatic realist approach and diplomatic appeasement of the 1970s and 1980s served mutual interests for the two countries against their common foe, the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, concerning their political values and visions, the democratic US and the Marxist-Maoist People's Republic of China have proven to be two irreconcilable political and social experiments, worlds apart from each other's spheres and paradigms. Within the context of the drastically altered global political milieu of the new millennium, the two great powers have manoeuvred themselves into heated confrontational positions over the last decade, not even excluding the possibility of a severe clash of interests in the future.
During the Cold War, the Philippines was an indispensable US ally, and this was still basically the case at the turn of the 21st century. However, the inauguration of President Rodrigo Duterte in June 2016 heralded great changes for the international position of the Philippines: a shift towards China and Russia occurred, followed by the emergence of a more balanced foreign policy. The partnership with the US has changed, too: during the Obama administration, the relationship between the two countries became cooler, although the foundations of the alliance were never contested. In the wake of Donald Trump's assumption of office in January 2017, the alliance seems to have become as strong as before, and economic as well as security-military cooperation has continued. The author's aim is to analyze the Philippines' position in the US-led world order from 1945 to the present, as well as the foundations of the United States–Philippines special relationship. After that the main components of Duterte's "independent" foreign policy and the fundamental changes in the Philippines' foreign relations are presented. The analysis focuses on the causes of the conflict at the end of Barack Obama's presidency, followed by the improving partnership during the Trump era and the main geopolitical challenges the alliance has had to face. According to its conclusion the US–Philippines security cooperation will remain strong under Presidents Duterte and Trump due to strategic considerations, which indicate the military alliance is in the interests of both nations.
In the beginning of the year 1837, the hunt started to catch Jóska Sobri, the famous Hungarian outlaw, and his gang. The then palatine ordered military forces to track them down and promised high reward for capturing them. The outlaw gang was hiding in Bakony Forest and had little chance against the soldiers. Not even Sobri and his closest fellow gang members could slip through the territory encircled by the authorities in Tolna County, close to Lápafő, on 17 February 1837. In the gunfight, Sobri has most probably died, but this has never been proven. He disappeared, and the myth was born in outlaw folklore, according to which he is alive even nowadays. Recently, a movie has been produced about his life, and there is also an adventure park in Bakony Forest named after him.
A magyar politikai és katonai vezetés és 1920-ban még reális lehetőséget látott az békefeltételek, módosítására. Az elképzelés részben a csehszlovák állam komoly belső problémáira épített. Másrészt szovjet-orosz Vörös Hadsereg Közép-Európát veszélyeztető sikerei teremthettek a régióban válsághelyzetet. Mindkét esetben számítani lehetetett arra, hogy a nyugati hatalmak kedvezően fogadnák a Magyar Nemzeti Hadsereg fellépését, a szovjetek által fenyegetett Lengyelország megsegítésére, a térség stabilizálására, a bolsevik veszély elhárítására. Ehhez azonban a magyar csapatoknak be kellett volna vonulniuk a Felvidékre. A magyar kormány titkos tárgyalásokat folytatott francia személyiségekkel, melyek hajlottak volna arra, hogy a magyar segítségért cserébe Felvidék, vagy annak legalább a keleti része ismét magyar fennhatóság alá kerülhessen. A katonai tervek (Ébredés, Pirkadás, Árpád) végül a politikai feltételek hiánya miatt nem valósulhattak meg. A szovjet előretörést a lengyelek megállították, Csehszlovákiában pedig nem került sor bolsevik fordulatra. In 1920, the Hungarian political and military leadership still saw a realistic opportunity to modify the peace conditions. The idea was partly built on the serious interior problems of the Czecho-Slovakian. On the other hand, a crisis situation might have been created in the region by the success of the Soviet-Russian Red Army that was pushing forward towards the West. In both cases, it could have been possible to count on the Western powers' favourable receipt of the act of the Hungarian National Army in order to help Poland that was threatened by the Soviets, to stabilise the region, and to eliminate Bolshevik threat. However, in order to do that, the Hungarian troops had had to march in the Highlands. The Hungarian Government held confidential negotiations with French personalities who would have propended to accept that in turn of Hungarian help, Highland or at least its Eastern part could belong again under Hungarian control. Eventually, the military plans (Awakening, Dawn, Arpad) could not be implemented because of the lack of political conditions. The Polish stopped the Soviets' sudden attack, while in Czecho-Slovakia no Bolshevik turn took place.
This paper explores how Britain's and Colombia's privileged relations with the United States (U.S.) influenced their journey through the European Community (EC) and the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR). The Anglo–American Special Relationship (AASR) was compatible with British participation in the European Single Market, but not with adherence to creating the EC's common currency, nor with leadership in building a European defence structure autonomous from NATO. Thus, since the start of the Iraq war, Britain played a rather obstructive role in what later was called European Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The US–Colombia Partnership (USCP), based on a longstanding military association reinforced under Plan Colombia, naturally discouraged any meaningful Colombian participation in UNASUR's South American Security Council (CDS), a regional cooperative security project, promoted by Brazil. Cherished projects of the liberal CAP – such as triangular cooperation (to export Colombian security expertise to Central America with U.S. co-financing and oversight) and NATO partnership – also distracted Colombia's interest from UNASUR, diminishing the latter's relevance collaterally. A role for UNASUR – alongside the Organization of American States (OAS) – in South American security management was compatible with the liberal CAP, but not with the neoconservative CAP. Even a lopsided complementation – such as the one between NATO and the CSDP – proved unviable between the OAS and UNASUR.
The Treaty of Trianon, signed on June 4, 1920, affected Hungary is several ways. The country lost almost two-thirds of its population and territory. The peace treaty not only had territorial, national, economic and military consequences, but several Hungarian higher education institutions were also affected disadvantageously. After 1919 there was no education at most Hungarian universities and as a result of the new borders, the country's network of higher education institutions changed significantly. Universities in the detached territories were forced to leave. The study presents the operating conditions of the universities (Kolozsvári Magyar Királyi Ferenc József Tudományegyetem, Magyar Királyi Erzsébet Tudományegyetem, Bányászati és Erdészeti Főiskola) and certain faculties involved following the Trianon Peace Treaty. The study also shows how the Treaty changed the Hungarian higher education, and how it changed the Hungarian higher education map. Kuno Klebelsberg realised that the cultural differences caused by the change in the landscape of higher education couldn't be sustained for a long time, so he implemented a number of actions in order to lessen the predominance of Budapest. The study covers the most important actions in the field of higher education. It examines the change in the number of students as well as the rate of those with university degree after the new borders were defined. Changes in the institutional network and the history of the universities are based on secondary literature analysis. The presentation of the student statistics is based on the analysis of data published in the Statistical Yearbooks of the Hungarian Central Statistical Office. Az 1920. június 4-én aláírt trianoni békeszerződés több szempontból is sújtotta hazánkat. Az ország elvesztette lakosságának és területének csaknem kétharmadát. A békeszerződésnek nemcsak területi, nemzetiségi, gazdasági és katonai hatásai voltak, hanem számos magyar felsőoktatási intézményt is hátrányosan érintett. 1919-től már a legtöbb hazai egyetemen nem folyt oktatás, és a történelmi Magyarország összeomlásának következményeként az ország felsőoktatási intézményhálózata is számottevően megváltozott. Az elcsatolt részeken ragadt egyetemek többségének nem volt maradása. A tanulmány bemutatja a trianoni békeszerződést követően az érintett egyetemeknek (Kolozsvári Magyar Királyi Ferenc József Tudományegyetem, pozsonyi Erzsébet Tudományegyetem és selmecbányai Bányászati és Erdészeti Főiskola) és egyes egyetemi karoknak a működési feltételét. Értékeli továbbá, hogy a békekötés következtében a magyar felsőoktatás milyen intézményhálózati változáson ment keresztül, és hogyan változott meg az ország felsőoktatási intézménytérképe. Klebelsberg Kunó felismerte, hogy a felsőoktatási térszerkezet változása miatt kialakult kulturális egyenlőtlenség nem tartható fent sokáig ezért számos olyan intézkedést hozott, amely Budapest túlsúlyát próbálta enyhíteni. A tanulmány a legfontosabb, felsőoktatást érintő intézkedésekre is kitér. Megvizsgálja, hogy milyen mértékben változott meg a hallgatók száma, illetve a felsőfokú végzettségűek aránya az új országhatárok kijelölését követően. Az intézményhálózati változások, illetve az egyetemek történeténetek bemutatása szakirodalmi másodelemzés alapján készült. A hallgatói statisztikák bemutatása a Központi Statisztikai Hivatal által kiadott Statisztikai Évkönyvekben közölt adatok elemzésén alapul.
A 20. század második felének bipoláris hatalma struktúráját (Amerikai Egyesült Államok versus Szovjetunió) követően a 21.században a két hagyományos nagyhatalom mellett egy újabb globális geopolitikai és geoökonómiai nagyhatalom is megjelent Kína gazdasági és katonai előtörésével. Az Amerikai Egyesült Államok vezető szerepe ugyanakkor (egyelőre) megkérdőjelezhetetlen, de Kína gazdaságilag tíz éven belül beérheti, Oroszország ásványkincs vagyona (földgáz, kőolaj) pedig függőségét jelent számos gazdasági hatalom számára. A három globális geopolitikai hatalom egymás közötti, bilaterális gazdasági és kereskedelmi kapcsolatai az elmúlt évtizedben nagyon heterogén módon alakultak: az amerikai-orosz relációban lineárisan csökkenő, az amerikai-kínai relációban jelentősen növekvő, majd a kereskedelmi háborúnak köszönhetően (talán átmenetileg) megtorpanó és csökkenő, az orosz-kínai relációban pedig folyamatosan növekvő trend figyelhető meg az elmúlt évtizedben. Az Oroszország által életre hívott gazdasági és kereskedelmi kezdeményezés a Szovjetunió felbomlását követő integrációs törekvések folytatása, az Eurázsiai Gazdasági Unió az elmúlt öt évben sikereket tud felmutatni, azonban már rövid távon is jelentős kihívásokkal néz szembe és kérdéses a további fejlődése. Előre tekintve új globális kockázati tényezők jelentek meg, melyek közül a legaktuálisabb és legnagyobb hatású a koronavírus járvány világszintű megjelenése és elterjedése. A globális szereplők egészségügyi és gazdasági járvány adott válasz lépései mind sebességet, mind mélységet tekintve heterogén képet mutatnak. Kérdés, hogy a jelenleg még mélyülő globális gazdasági válság a nemzetállamok szerepét fogja-e felerősíteni vagy új szövetségek jönnek létre a világban. Izgalmas, fordulatokkal teli évek következnek a globális geopolitikai színtéren, ahol a status quo megváltozása várható, új hatalmi központok jöhetnek létre, régi szövetségi rendszerek szűnhetnek meg illetve újak alakulhatnak ki, melyek a jelenlegi tripoláris világrendet alapjaiban változtathatják meg. Following the structure of bipolar power in the second half of the 20th century (United States versus the Soviet Union), in the 21st century, in addition to the two traditional superpowers, another global geopolitical and geoeconomic superpower emerged with the economic and military outbreak of China. At the same time, the leadership of the United States of America (for the time being) is unquestionable, but China can reach the nominal GDP of the US within ten years and still many economic powers depend on Russia's mineral wealth (natural gas, oil). Bilateral economic and trade relations between the three global geopolitical powers have evolved in a very heterogeneous manner over the last decade: linearly declining in the US-Russian relationship, significantly increasing in the US-China relationship, and then (possibly temporarily) due to the trade war stagnant and declining, and the Russian-Chinese relationship has been steadily increasing over the last decade. The economic and trade initiative launched by Russia is a continuation of the integration efforts following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and the Eurasian Economic Union has been successful over the last five years, but it faces significant challenges in the short term and its further development is questionable. Looking ahead, new global risk factors have emerged, the most relevant and influential of which is the global emergence and spread of the coronavirus epidemic. The response of global actors to the health and economic epidemic shows a heterogeneous picture in terms of both speed and depth. The question is whether the global economic crisis, which is currently deepening, will strengthen the role of nation-states or create new alliances in the world. Exciting, turbulent years will follow on the global geopolitical scene, where the status quo is expected to change, new centers of power may emerge, old federal systems may disband, and new ones may be formed that can fundamentally change the current tripolar world order.
