Suchergebnisse

Název článku věrně vystihuje jeho podstatu – jde o bilancování práve ukončené politické kariéry jeho autora, poslance slovenského parlamentu a dvojnásobného předsedy environmentálního výboru. Dozvíme se, jak proběhl loňský rok 2015, a především, co se v něm dělo za parlamentními zdmi. Text je tak vhledem do způsobu vládnutí (nejen) na Slovensku (a nejen) v uplynulém období – ukazuje, jak rozumné přístupy a řešení vždy podléhají politickému kalkulu. Nejpoctivěji vyznívá osobní krédo Mikuláše Huby, které by se dalo shrnout jako: Pracovat a nebát se, stát si za svým. ; The title of this article precisely captures its essence – it is a review of the political career of its author, member of the Slovak Parliament and twice-chairman of the environmental committee. We learn about last year's events, and especially what was happening inside the walls of the Parliament. The text is also an insight into governance (not exclusively) in the Slovak Republic (and not only) in the recent period – it shows how reasonable approaches and solutions are always subject to political calculus. The honest-sounding personal credo of Mikuláš Huba can be summarized as: To work and not be afraid, to stand up for yourself.

The aim of this article is an analysis of the Iranian policy towards the region of Western Balkans, mainly the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, since the early 1990s until present days. The security and political dimensions of mutual relation between Iran and Bosnia and Herzegovina are examined. This country has been on the focus of Iranian foreign policy for decades. The article maps Iranian political, religious and cultural activities in the country during and after the civil war. One of the main outcomes of the text is the analysis of stagnation, and we might say even fall of Iranian influence in the region caused by changing of the international atmosphere, Iranian regime itself and the decline of Iranian money flow to Bosnia and Herzegovina caused by problematic economic situation in the Islamic Republic suffering the lack of sources.

"Bringing space back" into comparative politics is a difficult task, perhaps inevitably accompanied by various substantive and methodological problems. This paper introduces the concepts of "territorial homogeneity" (of D. Caramani) and "party nationalization" (of M. Jones and S. Mainwaring), both of them dealing with political parties as actors and territorial space as an environment in which they operate. Our aim is to identify some of the typical issues/ matters (selection of cases, elaboration of relationships among variables) any researcher who would try to conceptualize the relationships between political parties and territorial units has to cope with. In respect of issues in question the solutions offered by Caramani and Jones&Mainwaring often seem neither intercompatible nor fully satisfactory. This may raise the question about inevitably ethnocentristic nature of the "homogeneity concepts". We further extend our methodological note, limiting -rather than delineating- the areas of possible use of the homogeneity concept for the post-communist countries, arguing that sensible comparisons would require much better control for intervening institutional variables- a task which is almost impossible to achieve with such a heterogeneous sample. ; "Bringing space back" into comparative politics is a difficult task, perhaps inevitably accompanied by various substantive and methodological problems. This paper introduces the concepts of "territorial homogeneity" (of D. Caramani) and "party nationalization" (of M. Jones and S. Mainwaring), both of them dealing with political parties as actors and territorial space as an environment in which they operate. Our aim is to identify some of the typical issues/ matters (selection of cases, elaboration of relationships among variables) any researcher who would try to conceptualize the relationships between political parties and territorial units has to cope with. In respect of issues in question the solutions offered by Caramani and Jones&Mainwaring often seem ...

This study is an attempt to deliver a comprehensive (geo)political analysis of the evolution of transit routes to supply Caspian oil and natural gas reserves to world markets using the territory of the South Caucasus. In the initial part of the study, a series of transit options prevailing in the two decades up to 2005 is scrutinized; in 2005, the highly debated Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline was eventually built marking the shift in interest from oil transit to natural gas transit. Emphasizing the peculiarities of geopolitical competition for the strategically important area of the post-Soviet South Caucasus that has been continuing between Russia, the United States, and to a certain extent also Iran and Turkey, the article seeks to explore the close interconnection of politics and economics, and on some key occasions also the prevalence of the former over the latter, reaching in this regard beyond Caspian projects.

The Moravist parties are an interesting subject of study for two principal aspects: that of an experiment involving different party and political identities and forms of organisation in the period of transition to pluralist democracy in a post-communist environment, and that of a link between ethno-regional political actors and identitary mobilisation, or a stimulator of a potential nation-building process. Unfortunately, this topic has not yet been given much attention (cf. Musil, Rabušic, Mareš 1991; Daněk 1993; Pernes 1996; Dallago 1999). The purpose of this article is to at least partially fill the gap. Brief as it is, the article cannot cover the problem in its complexity, but to give an overview of the evolution of Moravist parties between 1990 and 1999/2000, to elaborate on some hypotheses explaining the reasons of the spectacular electoral success of the Moravist movement at the beginning, and the fall of its electoral and political potential today. I have based my approach to the above phenomena on the following premises: 1. The Moravist movement has been a legitimate actor on the Czechoslovak and, eventually, Czech political scene, drawing upon sources of political legitimacy which were not better or worse than the sources used by other actors. A different issue is, however, the successful effort of other competitors to delegitimatise the movement. 2. The initial success of the Moravist movement was a product of an extraordinary and unrepeatable combination of heterogeneous factors and issues, with a prevailing role of conjunctural factors. That is the reason why the chance for the Moravist movement to remain a genuine major political actor in the medium and long term was quite minimal, irrespective of the strategy invented and pursued by its leaders. 3. The chance of the Moravist movement to remain a minor, but relevant regional actor in Czech party politics was quite bigger, though. In this respect, the fall of Moravist parties should be explained as a result – even though not exclusively – of ...