Suchergebnisse

This paper aims to analyse the military-industrial aspects of Turkish defence policy. A sophisticated and profitable defence industry is a useful tool for a state's foreign and security policy. It not only supplies the armed forces with the necessary weapons and military equipment, but can also bring political influence on the international arena through arms transfers and military-industrial cooperation. These realities are not lost on Turkish decision makers. That is why they have made the nurturing of an indigenous defence-industrial base a distinct state policy. In this paper, the defence industry's functions in the framework of Turkish defence and security policy are defined, the condition and structure of Turkish defence and aerospace sector is analysed and conclusions regarding its future prospects are presented. This provides the basis for a wider analysis of the defence-industrial aspects of Turkish defence and security policy. ; This paper aims to analyse the military-industrial aspects of Turkish defence policy. A sophisticated and profitable defence industry is a useful tool for a state's foreign and security policy. It not only supplies the armed forces with the necessary weapons and military equipment, but can also bring political influence on the international arena through arms transfers and military-industrial cooperation. These realities are not lost on Turkish decision makers. That is why they have made the nurturing of an indigenous defence-industrial base a distinct state policy. In this paper, the defence industry's functions in the framework of Turkish defence and security policy are defined, the condition and structure of Turkish defence and aerospace sector is analysed and conclusions regarding its future prospects are presented. This provides the basis for a wider analysis of the defence-industrial aspects of Turkish defence and security policy.

A military presence on the territory of the Republic of Belarus is highly significant for the Russian Federation geopolitically. Russia is very particular about having buffer zones, client and neighbouring states with limited sovereignty on its borders. The aim of this article is to analyse the specificity of the Russian Federation's military presence in Belarus. In the following article, two hypotheses have been verified using factor analysis. Firstly, sustaining control over the territory of Belarus is of particular importance for the military safety of Russia, while at the same time, it detrimentally affects the stability of the Central and Eastern Europe countries. Secondly, the Russian Federation does not have a permanent military base within Belarusian territory and its military presence is solely confined to the use of military and transport infrastructure, which is indispensable for rapid accommodation and deployment of the Armed Force formations as well as for the rotation of strike forces. Due to political reasons, a permanent military presence enables Russia to keep Belarus within its area of influence. Nevertheless, in military terms, the utilisation of military and transport infrastructure in order to rapidly deploy strike forces within the territory of the Republic is far more important.

Importance of military power has been limited after the cold-war. Range of military instrument underwent gradual broadening. Significant influence on this situation has been exerted by both new technology and new armament systems but also by the growth of non-state actors.The latest actors are more threat to the societies than to states. This problem has affected a form of utilization of military instrument in foreign policy of states.The article includes analysis of notion "military instrument". Forms of implementation of military instruments in foreign policy of states has been characterized also. Two hypotheses are subject of verification. The first, forms of implementation of military instruments of foreign policies of states are dynamic process and they undergo gradual widening. The second, although indirect forms of implementation of military instruments predominate, however, it appear new possibilities of direct use of military instruments in low intensity conflicts, i.e. below threshold of war. ; Znaczenie siły militarnej po zakończeniu zimnej wojny zostało ograniczone. Jednocześnie zakres instrumentów militarnych ulegał stopniowemu rozszerzeniu. Znaczący wpływ na zaistniałą sytuację wywarł rozwój technologiczny i wprowadzanie nowych systemów uzbrojenia oraz wzrost znaczenia podmiotów niepaństwowych, które stanowią zagrożenie, w większym stopniu dla społeczeństw, niż samych państw. Kwestia ta przełożyła się na formę wykorzystania instrumentu militarnego w polityce zagranicznej państw.Niniejszy artykuł zawiera analizę pojęcia "instrument militarny". Scharakteryzowane zostaną także formy wykorzystania instrumentu militarnego w polityce zagranicznej państwa. W niniejszym artykule poddano weryfikacji dwie hipotezy. Po pierwsze, formy wykorzystania instrumentu militarnego polityki zagranicznej państwa są dynamicznym procesem i ulegają stopniowemu poszerzeniu. Po drugie, mimo iż dominują pośrednie formy wykorzystania instrumentu militarnego, to jednak pojawiają się nowe możliwości, w tym związane z bezpośrednim użyciem sił zbrojnych o niskiej intensywności, tj. poniżej progu wojny.

As part of a political agreement regulating Poland's relations with the Ukrainian People's Republic signed in Warsaw on April 21, 1920, the Polish side officially recognized the UPR's government with Simon Petlura at its head and committed itself to help the UPR form Ukrainian troops on the Polish territory. The paper discusses the details of the concluded agreement and the manner and conditions of its subsequent implementation. ; As part of a political agreement regulating Poland's relations with the Ukrainian People's Republic signed in Warsaw on April 21, 1920, the Polish side officially recognized the UPR's government with Simon Petlura at its head and committed itself to help the UPR form Ukrainian troops on the Polish territory. The paper discusses the details of the concluded agreement and the manner and conditions of its subsequent implementation.

As part of a political agreement regulating Poland's relations with the Ukrainian People's Republic signed in Warsaw on April 21, 1920, the Polish side officially recognized the UPR's government with Simon Petlura at its head and committed itself to help the UPR form Ukrainian troops on the Polish territory. The paper discusses the details of the concluded agreement and the manner and conditions of its subsequent implementation. ; As part of a political agreement regulating Poland's relations with the Ukrainian People's Republic signed in Warsaw on April 21, 1920, the Polish side officially recognized the UPR's government with Simon Petlura at its head and committed itself to help the UPR form Ukrainian troops on the Polish territory. The paper discusses the details of the concluded agreement and the manner and conditions of its subsequent implementation.

As part of a political agreement regulating Poland's relations with the Ukrainian People's Republic signed in Warsaw on April 21, 1920, the Polish side officially recognized the UPR's government with Simon Petlura at its head and committed itself to help the UPR form Ukrainian troops on the Polish territory. The paper discusses the details of the concluded agreement and the manner and conditions of its subsequent implementation. ; As part of a political agreement regulating Poland's relations with the Ukrainian People's Republic signed in Warsaw on April 21, 1920, the Polish side officially recognized the UPR's government with Simon Petlura at its head and committed itself to help the UPR form Ukrainian troops on the Polish territory. The paper discusses the details of the concluded agreement and the manner and conditions of its subsequent implementation.

The paper provides reflections on NATO's London Summit held on 3 and 4 December 2019 in the context of Poland's military security. The paper is divided into an introduction, six sections, and a conclusion. The first section is devoted to issues of formation, functioning, and disintegration of alliances from the perspective of the theory of defensive structural realism and explains the methodological assumptions of the paper. The second section presents the atmosphere as prevailed before and during the Summit, which significantly impacted its process. The following sections are devoted to the main problems raised during the Summit from the perspective of Poland's military security. The first involved the approval of Poland and the Baltic states' defense plans together with a discussion on the danger of their blocking by the Turkish delegation. Another issue was the symbolic and practical confirmation of Article 5 of the Washington Treaty's significance in the perspective of the approach to Russia's threat. The next two problems concerned the level of Member States' defense spending and the vision of strengthening the EU's defense potential. The paper's main thesis is that the decisions of the NATO Summit in London have had a positive impact on Poland's military security. However, the climate and discussions that accompanied the Summit also brought a great deal of uncertainty and revealed a growing gap between allies concerning various issues.

The author discusses EU military missions in Africa carried out within the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Making reference to five African missions he analyzes the experience generated by these operations and tries to explain to what extent they might have been conducive to further commitment of the EU in crisis management in Africa. In his opinion, in the future the EU will continue to be present in Africa, yet it is hardly to be expected that its missions will qualitatively differ from present operations. ; The author discusses EU military missions in Africa carried out within the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. Making reference to five African missions he analyzes the experience generated by these operations and tries to explain to what extent they might have been conducive to further commitment of the EU in crisis management in Africa. In his opinion, in the future the EU will continue to be present in Africa, yet it is hardly to be expected that its missions will qualitatively differ from present operations.

The initiative to establish the Military Housing Fund (Fundusz Kwaterunku Wojskowego, FKW) was launched in 1925 in the Polish Senate, which, during considering the draft Act on accommodation for the army in peacetime adopted by the Polish Sejm opposed the possibility provided for by the draft law (causing social unrest) to seize (for a compensation) private premises for permanent accommodation for officers and married non-commissioned officers, in a situation where other (specified in the Act) methods of acquiring housing for this purpose did not bring the expected results. The Senate voted in favour of the construction and maintenance of residential buildings intended as permanent housing for the military by a specially established FKW. A fundamental role in the structure of its financing (as non-returnable income) was played by the accommodation tax. However, it covered the same premises and the same people who were already burdened with the municipal tax on premises and the state tax on premises. The situation in which the same premises and the same individuals were burdened, according to the same rules, with three taxes (in the total amount of up to 15% of rent), changed on 2 August 1926 with the enactment of the Act on the tax on premises, which replaced the previous ones and the new tax was to be collected starting from 1 August 1926, also for the purposes of the FKW (a total of 114,174,379 Polish zlotys was paid to the FKW account by the end of 1938). This solution, combined with the authorisation of the FKW to take out (with the guarantee of the Government) a loan of up to 140 million zlotys, allowed the FKW to pursue a quite broad construction activity, which resulted (in the period 1927–1937) in 7,334 dwellings for officers and married non-commissioned officers (in 1938 a total of 1,577 dwellings were under construction). ; Inicjatywa odnośnie do utworzenia Funduszu Kwaterunku Wojskowego (FKW) narodziła się w 1925 r. w Senacie, który rozpatrując uchwalony przez Sejm projekt ustawy o zakwaterowaniu wojska w czasie pokoju, sprzeciwił się przewidzianej przezeń (i wywołującej niepokoje społeczne) możliwości zajmowania (za wynagrodzeniem) pomieszczeń prywatnych na kwatery stałe dla oficerów i żonatych podoficerów zawodowych w sytuacji, gdy inne (wskazane w ustawie) sposoby pozyskania pomieszczeń na ten cel nie przyniosły oczekiwanych rezultatów. Senat opowiedział się za wznoszeniem, utrzymaniem i konserwacją budynków mieszkalnych przeznaczonych na kwatery stałe dla wojska przez specjalnie utworzony w tym celu FKW. W strukturze jego dochodów zasadniczą rolę (wśród dochodów bezzwrotnych) odgrywał podatek kwaterunkowy. Podlegały mu jednak te same lokale i te same osoby, które już były obciążone komunalnym podatkiem od lokali oraz państwowym podatkiem od lokali. Sytuacja, w której te same lokale i te same osoby obciążone były, według tych samych zasad, trzema podatkami (w łącznej wysokości do 15% komornego), zmieniła się wraz z uchwaleniem w dniu 2 sierpnia 1926 r. ustawy o podatku od lokali, który (zastępując dotychczasowe) miał być pobierany od 1 sierpnia 1926 r., m.in. na rzecz FKW (do końca 1938 r. na konto FKW wpłynęło 114 174 379 zł). Rozwiązanie to, w połączeniu z upoważnieniem FKW do zaciągnięcia (za poręką Rządu) pożyczki do wysokości 140 mln zł, pozwoliło FKW rozwinąć stosunkowo szeroko zakrojoną działalność budowlaną, która zaowocowała (w latach 1927–1937) 7334 mieszkaniami dla oficerów i żonatych podoficerów (w 1938 r. pozostawało w budowie 1577 mieszkań).