We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.
Interviews by Želimir Bojević, with: 1. Halilović, Alija 2. Stojanović, Gordana 3. Spasović, Grujica 4. Lučić , Zoran 5. Matić, Jovanka 6. Pavićević, Borka 7. Karamarković, Leposava 8. Stojadinović, Ljubodrag 9. Suša, Gordana 10. Nenadović, Aleksandar 11. Đorđević, Mirko 12. Mihajlov, Mihajlo 13. Barović, Nikola 14. Stojanović, Lazar 15. Matić, Veran 16. Duve, Freimut 17. Šaponja-Hadžić, Milanka 18. Čupić, Čedomir 19. Trkulja, Jovica 20. Đorđević, Snežana 21. Trebješanin, Žarko 22. Pavlović, Vukašin 23. Milivojević, Snježana
More...
Every Saturday for a period of two months, from the beginning of April till the end of June 1992, sessions organized by the Belgrade Circle were held at the Student Cultural Centre in Belgrade. At these sessions, ten in all, intellectuals, members of the Belgrade Circle and their quest – distinguished writers, scientists, artists, journalists, film and theatre directors, architects, actors, interpreters – expressed their own views of another, radically different Serbia. In times of anguish and affliction, the meetings, attended by a large assembly of listeners experiencing a kind of moral purification, were nonetheless imbued with a frail hope that there still might be a chance for a turn in events. With a desire to present ideas, opinions and sensations shared by the participants of the Belgrade Circle sessions to a much larger audience, the reading public, and to preserve them, because of their merit, in a more lasting form, discussions of over eighty intellectuals were compiled to form this book. In the meantime, the overwhelming disaster has reached its climax: »The Bosnian War«, still raging with no feasible way out as yet, exploded and blazed up like fire. The Belgrade Circle participants, distressed and abashed at the display of all those real or imagined evil deeds, so eagerly reported by the portentous heralds of death voiced hitherto often deeply hidden and silent feelings and thoughts about their burdensome disgust at the plague gripping and afflicting us all. Each participant contributed in his or her own way – rigorous scientific analysis, artistic susceptibility, eyewitness accounts, or simply. A public-minded desperate wail – to the shaping of one new, public opinion, the one that stirred in that sad Spring of ’92 and rebelled against the general fear, animosity, devastation, extermination, ethnic cleansing, forcible population exchanges... All those responsible and public-minded citizens, holding different political opinions, some members of various political parties, with incomparable personal experiences, varied professional interest and often of »objectionable« national origin, showed, however the will to insert tolerance among the basic principles of a humanized way of fife. But, in spite of the pronounced differences, their common aim, discernable in each and every speech imported to the audience, was to finally establish a community based on simple but as yet still unattainable ideals such as peace, freedom, tolerance and justice in place of degrading political, national and religious exclusiveness. Participants focussed their attention on various aspects of the problem: some analysed the roots of hatred and evil; some indicated the disastrous consequences of irresponsible national myth revivals; others warned of menaces yet to come unless we see reason in time. Some were stern, others witty and others still perhaps too prone to pathos, but they were all deeply concerned, and, as it unfortunately turned out, correct in predicting subsequent events. Therefore, individuals who take no notice of current, official policy and who have for a long time now tenaciously refused to render their talent and knowledge to the needs of the authorities, gathered round a project titled »Another Serbia«. Instigating a state of war and providing alleged erudite justification for the necessity of mutual extermination in the name of some noble goals, vague even to the very massacre executors, must not and cannot be the vocation of anyone who considers him or herself an »intellectual«, or earns a living acting as one. Hence, all session participants had but one desire: to mark out a path that may lead into a more promising future, to another, different, better and happier Serbia. »Another Serbia« soon became the synonym of resistance to fabricated lies, nationalistic madness, criminal war, a fascist holocaust, senseless destruction of villages and cities. Thanks are also due to the daily newspaper »Borba« which regularly reported on the Belgrade Circle Saturday sessions, and published a number of contributions presented there... We hope that the Another Serbia we all aspire to be easily discernable in the collection of essays presented in this book. The reader who hopes to find traces of at least some political program will be gravely disappointed. At present, when politics have poisoned the very soul of so many men of letters and knowledge, and when, among the most violent oppressors, in the ranks of all mortal enemy groups, one finds so many proud bearers of scientific degrees, who may actually be designated as men of unmerited and easily squandered reputation, it has become somewhat indecent to praise »intellectual pursuits«. The Belgrade Circle was, however, founded early in 1992 with the aim of retrieving dignity – another dangerous quality! – to public speech and conceived plans of action for the benefit of truth. We do not take an elitist position and stand indifferently above the crowd. On the contrary, being deeply involved and concerned, we place ourselves in its midst. The Association of Independent intellectuals insists upon its main goal, as declared in the program, namely, to bring together »critically oriented public figured who wish to unite their own civil and intellectual engagements with those of other, basically similarly oriented people«. That is why the Belgrade Circle will continue to »promote ideas, deeds and activities that affirm the values of a democratic, civil and plural society...« The Belgrade Circle will »encourage free and critical thought in all spheres of public life. It will support and help institutions and individuals who resist violence and animosity, and who plead for dialogue and for the survival of culture as the only humanly valid way of life«. Fine speeches? Maybe. Nevertheless, the Belgrade Circle has already, and despite many organizational and financial hardships, as well as ugly and unjust abuse from people who should have been, by the very nature of their vocation, in our ranks had they not knuckled under the burden of a more noble – national to be sure – mission, gained an undeniably high reputation. The words uttered with the aim of promoting »Another Serbia« and presented in this book to serve at testimony to the existence of a number of sensible people, shrewd and brave enough to resist suffocation by overwhelming absurdity, were not the only »weapon« used by Belgrade Circle members. They had also an active part in numerous civil and peace movements and events, thus contributing to the establishment of critical public opinion in Belgrade and Serbia: let us recall, for instance, the sad candles and our wake in the park, with souls colder than the Belgrade frost, while one of the past infernal wars – God, which one was it? – was raging out there somewhere; let us recall the »Black Band«, »Yellow Band«, »Student Protest ‘92«, and our endeavours to bring the people of Hrtkovci (»Srbislavci«) to reason; let us recall our guests from Pljevlja, Montenegro, Bosnia... All the time we were just launching our unhappy and, we believe, noble, though perhaps futile venture the very first participant said: let the Belgrade Circle begin it’s work! We hope that by offering this book to the public we have already come a long way.
More...
Celem artykułu jest próba oceny znaczenia uczestnictwa Polski w jednolitym rynku europejskim dla wybranych uwarunkowań mobilności edukacyjnej i zawodowej młodych Polaków. Zasadniczą tezą jest natomiast stwierdzenie, że udział Polski we wspólnotowych programach edukacyjnych zwiększa szanse młodych ludzi na rynku pracy.
More...
Międzynarodowe public relations należy traktować jako dziedzinę powstałą w konsekwencji zmian i wciąż pogłębiających się procesów zachodzących na arenie międzynarodowej. Globalizacja, mediatyzacja i demokratyzacja doprowadziły do powstania nowych aktorów w środowisku międzynarodowym, a także redefinicji roli państw od ośrodków administracyjnych do podmiotów konkurujących ze sobą w zglobalizowanej gospodarce. Umiędzynarodowienie życia gospodarczego wymaga dostosowania się do nowych warunków poprzez wdrażanie pewnych rozwiązań od strony praktycznej oraz pojęć w wymiarze teoretycznym, który ową praktykę stara się opisywać i wyjaśniać. W sytuacji coraz większej roli mediów funkcjonujących w skali międzynarodowej, pogłębiającej się demokratyzacji i globalnej konkurencji umiędzynarodowienie public relations zdaje się nieodzowne. Państwa i nowi aktorzy, do których zalicza się między innymi korporacje czy też organizacje międzyrządowe, konfrontując się z wyzwaniami, jakie stawia przed nimi współczesne życie gospodarcze, muszą podejmować się działań z zakresu międzynarodowych public relations, aby zyskać atrakcyjność i konkurencyjność w środowisku międzynarodowym. Dziedzina ta wykracza poza tradycyjne ujęcie public relations, ponieważ należy w niej uwzględnić różnice językowe, kulturowe i geograficzne. Istotne wydaje się także to, że ta dziedzina odgrywa niezwykle ważną rolę w perspektywie państw i organizacji międzyrządowych. Działania z zakresu międzynarodowych public relations tworzą dodatkową, pozornie nieuchwytną, wartość w postaci reputacji, miękkiej siły i marki kraju, co przekłada się na zaufanie, a w konsekwencji pozwala na wprowadzanie pozytywnych zmian, promowanie wartości, poprawę efektów ekonomicznych i budowanie pozycji podmiotu w środowisku międzynarodowym.
More...
Podejmując problem granic polityczno-gospodarczej działalności państwa rozumianej jako dopuszczalny zakres publiczno-prawnej ingerencji w stosunki gospodarcze, podkreślić należy konieczność analizy uwarunkowań ustrojowych. W przypadku Polski wynikają one z krajowych regulacji konstytucyjnych i z praw podstawowych oraz zasad ustroju gospodarczego Unii Europejskiej. Wpływ na organizację gospodarki unijnej i krajowej mają również pozaprawne regulacje zachowań gospodarczych, czyli polityka gospodarczo-społeczna prowadzona przez instytucje unijne oraz krajowe organy władzy publicznej. Autorka prezentuje szczególnie formułę społecznej gospodarki rynkowej, a także aksjologiczne podstawy publicznoprawnej ingerencji w gospodarkę w obszarze rozwoju i spójności.
More...
Since the beginning of the 1990s, the West was obliged to deal with several crises in the Balkans and pledged to a complete reconstruction of the post-war situation in the region. During this demanding process, the Western countries however maximised their traditional stereotyped attitudes towards the Balkan countries. Both the European Union and the United States have typecast the Balkan states according to the extent of the internal problems of these states, and according to their own ability to deal with such issues. Despite the good intentions behind the acting of the West, this process resulted in a mixture of shambolic strategies that have made the Western presence in the region very complicated. The West has been gradually loosing its military and managing respect, given its reluctance to pursue the proclaimed objectives. Such disinclination to act has played into the hands of the local bosses, who very soon found out how the system can be abused in order to satisfy both their electorate and the Western custodians. Nowadays, it is clear that such a hesitant attitude of the West towards the Balkans is no longer sustainable. A significant change in the Western strategy towards the Balkan countries is required, should the integration of the Balkans into the Western structures (i.e. NATO, EU) be successful.
More...
Since the Cold War period the importance of the importance of verifying the treaty obligations, which is one of the main parts of the strengthening of the common trust, has been continuing until the present. At the same time, in the areas of arms-control and international security, the role of nuclear transparency, with the verification of provided data and treaty obligations as its integral part, has been increasing. The necessity of maintaining predictability, mainly between both of the nuclear superpowers (the US and the RF), which possess about 90% of all nuclear weapons in the world, is connected with the need to maintain the arms-control process and an effective verification procedure in cases of other negotiated treaty instruments being concluded. Nuclear disarmament verification procedures should above all take into consideration political and technical challenges connected with the current decreasing numbers of nuclear weapons while taking into account the protection of sensitive data as well. At all relevant security forums, especially at the 10th NPT Review Conference in 2020, the Czech Republic should support the EU initiatives and all other initiatives in favour of maintaining the US-Russia arms-control architecture, especially the proposed extension of the New START Treaty’s validity and verification mechanism in 2021. The possible participation of Czech experts in various verification initiatives would be highly welcomed as well.
More...
Russia is waging a political war campaign of active measures intended to divide, distract, and dismay European states, not as a prelude to any direct military aggression but as a substitute. The institutions of the European Union have made very patchy and often reluctant responses to this campaign, in part as a result of a lack of consensus among member states, in part because the necessary measures – which often focus on cohesion, legitimacy, and more effective counter-intelligence activity – are controversial, complex, long-term and expensive. A primary issue, though, is the dramatically different strategic cultures and operational codes of the EU and Russia. Moscow subscribes to an essentially confrontation, zero-sum perspective that at best interprets the EU’s more inclusive approach as naive, at worse as a pose, concealing malign intent. The EU and member states need to appreciate and understand the nature, scale and objectives of Russia’s political war, and specifically the lack of any set doctrine or “playbook.” This will require deeper investment in expertise within the institutions of the Commission, as well as broadening European understandings of “security.” Addressing issues of corruption, institutional legitimacy, social cohesion and governance is a crucial security concern. Countries at most risk from the ‘legitimacy gap’ are more vulnerable to Russian interference and subversion. The EU must appreciate that as an alliance, weaknesses in the counter-intelligence capacities of one state is a vulnerability for all. There needs to be greater effort on this, and a consensus on the minimum level of acceptable spending on this. The immediate challenge is to act more decisively and collectively to reduce the effectiveness of the instruments used by Moscow in its political war, especially those not simply operating on direct instructions but “adhocrats” seeking to please Moscow. This requires more detailed intelligence gathering, analysis and sharing, which could fall within the remit of INTCEN.
More...
As a follow-up up to the military involvement of the Czech Republic in the region since 2013 and the consequent rural development projects there, the whole-of-government strategy towards the Sahel (G5) is an expression of responsibility and responsiveness to the related security challenges for the European Union and its African partners. By subscribing to the security-development nexus, Czechia recently reinforced its diplomatic presence in the Sahel and spread its activities to the areas of health, migration and civil society. To make its contribution to the Coalition for the Sahel sustainable and complementary to the EU’s efforts, Czechia should update its national strategy to build the Sahel’s forward resilience, expand the governance and development pillars and mainstream human rights and gender. It should also improve the financial planning and mainstream the Sahel in the current budget lines to mobilise domestic expertise, gain public support for the Strategy’s long-term implementation and give credence to the Sahel as a priority during the upcoming Czech presidency of the EU in 2022.
More...
Since February 24 of this year, as Russia invaded Ukraine, the economic and political stability in Europe has been disturbed. The continued destruction of Ukraineʼs economy and infrastructure is exacerbating the world crisis and putting parts of the world on the brink of a food crisis. The Ukrainian Recovery Plan presented in Lugano proposes the reconstruction of Ukraine. Since receiving a candidate status, Ukraine is also one step further on its course to membership in the European Union. All this places the EU into the role of the main guardian of the countryʼs post-war reconstruction. This paper recommendsthat the EU and, in particular, the Czech Presidency should organize a comprehensive assistance in this regard and identifies its main priorities. First, besides assisting in upgrading the institutional capacities and efficiency of the central government, the EU should support the local actors and civil society partners in the post-war governance. Second, the post-war recovery should connect Ukraineʼs immediate reconstruction and reform needs and the EUʼs long-term digital and green priorities rather than prioritizing one over the other.
More...
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has disrupted the world’s energy system. The most urgent need was to phase out the EU’s dependence on Russian energy imports and find a quick replacement. In this joint paper, we approach the issue from two different perspectives of the Czech Republic and Norway, looking for intersections and identifying opportunities to strengthen cooperation and facilitate the accelerated energy transition and diversification. We conclude that both countries have taken immediate action in addressing the most pressing energy-related risks. The potential for closer cooperation is obvious. Both countries should maximise the level of collaboration by taking advantage of existing institutional frameworks (NATO and EU/EEA). In the energy dimension, the key to cooperation in the short term is gas (investment in production in Norway, development of export pipelines or protecting critical sub-sea infrastructure). In the longer term, both countries should jointly cooperate on developing of hydrogen market, including production and transportation.
More...
On May 8, 2018, US President Donald Trump went through with his threat and, this time, has not submitted his certification of the implementation of the Iranian nuclear agreement to the US Congress for approval. According to Trump, the document is the “worst deal” of Obama Democratic administration. He made his negative decision despite Iranʼs positive performance in the inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
More...
Somewhat surprisingly, in a relatively short time interval, approximately over the course of one month in the middle of this year, two important meetings of the American President Donald Trump were held with the highest representatives of two countries which pose long-term security problems to the USA: the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (hereinafter the DPRK) and the Russian Federation (hereinafter the RF). The meeting with the North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un was held on June 12, 2018 in Singapore, and that with the Russian President Vladimir Putin on July 16, 2018 in Helsinki.
More...
Will the U.S. unilateral withdrawal from the American-Soviet INF Treaty of 1987 become a possible reality? The Treaty prohibits ground-launched shorter and the middle-range missiles (500–5,500 kms) with nuclear or conventional warheads. The Treaty´s security significance and its main parameters, the legal framework of the withdrawal and the reasons of both parties for accusing each other of violating the Treaty, are discussed in the article as well. In its conclusion the article, among other things, explains the context of the possible termination of the Treaty, and its consequences for the U.S.-Russia arms-control architecture.
More...
Nuclear weapons are an existential threat to humanity, as are the increasingly intense manifestation of climate change. The Reflection describes more broadly the main risk factors of this threat, including artificial intelligence (AI). In this context, it highlights the impasse which the US-Russian arms control process and strategic dialogue have reached as a result of their strained relations and the ongoing war in Ukraine. It also analyses the expected developments in the nuclear weapon field, taking into account the US Pentagon’s warning about the possible growth of China’s nuclear arsenal. In particular, it concludes by noting the main dilemmas for further development in this area: either the initiation of arms control and risk reduction negotiations by the major nuclear powers or the growing spiral of a costly and security-risk-laden nuclear arms race. The possibility of an ethical and moral commitment by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, the so-called P5 (the US, Russia, China, France and the UK), to “responsible nuclear behaviour“, which is promoted by the US administration, appears as a temporary solution to this security crisis.
More...
The document discusses the complexity of the global security environment and the emergence of hyper-risks due to interconnected anthropogenic systems. It suggests increasing resilience against hyper-risks by dividing existing systems into smaller units and creating circuit breakers to prevent cascading global reactions. The publication explores creative thinking about the future without precise probabilistic predictions, acknowledging the sudden and unexpected nature of significant events in complex systems, famously termed "black swans" by Nassim Taleb. It also examines geopolitical risks, the relative decline of US power, and the potential for a G-zero World scenario. The project's methodology is based on the complexity of the security environment, rejecting precise probabilistic forecasts and instead offering internally consistent hypotheses about future developments to aid in strategic thinking.
More...
Držíte v rukou závěrečnou studii vznikající v rámci projektu TA ČR Scénáře mezinárodního bezpečnostního prostředí. Uzavírá se jí tříletý cyklus kolektivních spekulací týmu soustředěného v Ústavu mezinárodních vztahů o možnostech vývoje tohoto prostředí. Projekce, které vznikly jako výstupy těchto spekulací, nemají ambici být přesnými předpověďmi. Vysoká komplexita mezinárodního bezpečnostního prostředí jako systému, kde dochází k dynamické interakci množství předem daných skutečností, hybných sil a kritických neznámých, možnost takové předpovědi téměř vylučuje. Naše scénáře sledují jiný cíl: kombinací prediktivního (jaká budoucnost bude) a explorativního (jaká budoucnost může být) přístupu a záměrnou vícečetností podobně pravděpodobných projekcí vývoje v každém sektoru bezpečnostního prostředí být nástroji tvořivého promýšlení možných budoucností, rozšiřování horizontu úvah o tom, jak přispět k naplňování jejich z hlediska české zahraniční politiky nejvýhodnějších variant a zkoušení zažitých předpokladů o tom, co bezpečnostním prostředím, ve kterém se Česká republika nachází, hýbe.
More...
It was indeed cynical and out-of-touch for the EU (Parliament) to suddenly blame, after 80 years, the Soviet Union for triggering WWII. It is unwise (to say least) to resurrect the arguments surrounding the circumstances of the start of World War II. The historians have agreed, the history has been written and well documented, and is in our books already for many decades. There is no point in contemporary politicians of eastern flank of the EU (with a striking but complicit silence from the central Europe) pushing up the facts regarding who was to blame. There are neither mandated, nor qualified or even expected to do so.
More...