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.
The general task of the project ‘Russia’s (Dis)Information Activities Against the Nordic-Baltic Region’ is to provide an assessment of Russia’s influence on the information environment of the Nordic-Baltic countries (NB8). An analysis of the information environment requires a comprehensive understanding of the major elements of Russia’s grand strategy and their impact on the region, because the information environment reflects all major spheres of interaction between the NB8 countries and Russia. For the purpose of this study, the grand strategy is defined as the integrated use of all military and non-military means to pursue the interests of the state in the international system.4 What are Russia’s interests, and what implications do they have for the NB8 region in general—and for its information environment in particular? How do these interests translate into narratives promoted by Russia? To answer these questions, an analysis of the following documents has been conducted: Russia’s Concept of Foreign Policy (2016), Russia’s Military Doctrine (2014), Russia’s National Security Strategy (2015), and Russia’s Information Security Doctrine (2016). To understand the meaning of the documents, they are viewed in the context of actual events, research data, and the rhetoric of Russia’s top officials. The study is structured around four dimensions of analysis: political, military, economic, and informational. These dimensions cover all major power instruments that states use to advance their national interests. The political dimension includes such areas of influence as diplomacy, geopolitics, and involvement in the domestic policies of foreign states.
More...
The article discusses the evolution and functioning of the Common Security andDefence Policy of the EU in 2018. The authors start with an analysis of externaland internal determinants of cooperation within CSDP, with particular attention tothe impact of transatlantic relations and US approach to the European initiativesas well as of internal tensions in the EU. Then they discuss the implementation ofthe decisions from December 2017 on the initiation of PESCO, which constitutesthe central topic of the paper. The functioning of European Defence Fund is alsoanalyzed, as well as the essence and implications of the French proposal of EuropeanIntervention Initiative (E2I). In the last part of the article, operational engagementof the EU is briefly presented, including a discussion of modifications of CSDPand ways of implementing them, namely Civilian CSDP Compact (CCC), and thedebates over the future of maritime activities of the EU in the Mediterranean. Theauthors conclude with an assessment of the results of the development of PESCOand EDF in the last year and of the perspectives of future cooperation.
More...
The article presents the activities of the UN Security Council in 2018 in lightof the Secretary General’s statements concerning the state of the world. The firstpart is devoted to drafts of resolutions on the Middle East, which were vetoed bypermanent members of the Security Council. The second one is focused on decisionsconcerning African states such as the Republic of Central Africa, Sudan, SouthSudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, and Somalia; as well as on thematicresolutions concerning peacebuilding, protection of civilians and children in armedconflicts, the role of youths for peace and security. In the third part, basic data on peacekeeping are presented and some violations of peacekeeping rules described.A separate part is devoted to Poland’s activities within the SC and in particular itsengagement in promoting international law.
More...
The aim of the article is to present the major armed conflicts – the wars in threeMiddle East countries: Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The selection criteria includenot only geographic factors, but also the nature of the conflicts, i.e. they are allcivil wars and have become internationalized as a result of involvement of externalpowers, i.e. the military forces of several countries. In Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan the enemy has been the so called Islamic State; in Syria it was the main enemy. Thethree countries were the most impacted by terrorism.
More...
After several years in which the reports from the Middle East were dominated bynews on the fight against the Islamic State, in 2018 there was a significant change.A series of failures of IS in 2016-2017 led to the situation in which the basic questionconcerning the Middle East focussed not so much on the way to overcome theorganization, but rather on the essence of the new international order, shaped asa result of clashing interests of different states and political forces. In Syria, plungedinto civil war since 2011, the scale of victory clearly shifted to the side of the forcesfaithful to President Bashar al-Assad. In Iraq, after a period of cooperation of differentpolitical forces faced with IS expansion, ethnic and confessional divisions revivedagain. At the same time, mechanisms for seeking effective ways to eliminate threatsto the stability of the country have been introduced. Conflicts in Libya and Yemenare still far from settled. Both countries have no governments that can effectivelycontrol the situation in their territories and external actors get involved to furthertheir particular interests. Local conflicts thus become a playing field for competingregional and global powers, hindering stabilization processes.
More...
Based on the archival materials of Catholic Church and those of Serbian occupation forces, the author presents circumstances and sequence of the demolition of the Catholic church of St. John of Nepomuk in Glina, performed by the Serbian military forces and Serbian occupation civil authorities of Glina from 1991 to the end of 1994.
More...
In contemporary international relations, the ideas of the New World Order and global governance in the field of peace have led to significant political implications in the sphere of collective security of the United Nations. New security challenges, manifested through frequent violations of the rules prohibiting the use of force and the threat, have caused irregular or "quasi-legal" situations. Thus, in the decades after the end of the Cold War, it happened that force was used for the purpose of prevention, and on the basis of the right to self-defense when the threat was not serious and immanent. Then, force was used preventively when the threat potentially or actually existed, but outside the borders of the state territory. Finally, force was also used within the borders of national territories when serious internal conflicts occurred. Although there was no specific legal basis for the aforementioned cases in the United Nations Charter or in general international law, the cases were often covered by Security Council resolutions in order to justify the impact of effectiveness, i.e. the created factual situation, on the positive international legal order. In the context of the changed political circumstances in the international community, a re-examination of the rules on the use of force and the threat of force in the United Nations order therefore seems quite understandable, since the proper management of the collective security system requires an interpretation consistent with the objectives of the United Nations, among which the protection of world peace and security is a fundamental basis for the survival of humanity.
More...
When speaking of force in international relations and international law, it is mainly about what takes place in relations between states and consists of the use of armed force, or rather the threat that it will be used. However, force in international relations can be viewed from other angles, in relation to other subjects. In order to approach the problem he deals with, the author first points out some of the possible classifications of the use of force that are of importance for international relations, and then specifies that the subject of his presentation is force that: 1) is illegal, 2) is carried out in peace, 3) is carried out by states, 4) is carried out as part of some state policy, 5) is carried out against individuals, and 6) has a certain international significance. After that, relying on numerous concrete examples from practice, he gives an overview of some of the forms of such force, such as kidnappings, imprisonment without a court decision, holding in secret prisons, torture, enforced disappearances and, in particular, targeted killings. As part of the concluding considerations, the author points out the most important real and legal consequences of targeted killings and other considered forms of force against individuals. Among other things, it states that much is already covered by international legal norms, but that here too the law lags behind, and that there is a need to precisely regulate a number of issues such as targeted killings, especially those carried out by drones. Some of the open problems are how to achieve effective international control over the various forms of violence against individuals mentioned in the paper; how to ensure that the same approach is applied to all states; how to prevent and effectively sanction unlawful violence against individuals that can be attributed to international structures (e.g. international peacekeeping forces), etc.
More...
The right of a state to self-defense is one of the two, indisputably permitted ways of using force in international relations. In Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, this right is defined as an "innate right of states", which implies that it existed as such even before the Charter and that the content of this right is largely determined, not only by codified, but also by customary rules of international law. The inclusion of customary rules of international law as rules that, at least partially, determine the content of a state's right to self-defense necessarily raises a number of open questions. This is due to the uncertainty and specificity of international custom as a rule whose existence must be proven in each specific case. This again leads us into the field of numerous argumentative debates in which, not only do there be disagreements regarding the meaning and content of the right to self-defense, but also regarding the conditions that must be met in order for the exercise of this right to be in accordance with international law. In practice, this situation leads to the abuse of the right of a state to self-defense, which has far-reaching consequences for international relations. In this regard, we consider it extremely important not only to point out this problem, but also, to the extent possible, to try to contribute to its further clarification.
More...
The unilateral use of force by NATO member states against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 has made obvious the flaws of the United Nations system of collective security and has demonstrated the unenforceability of the ban on the use of force in contemporary international law. The concept of “humanitarian intervention” has been proven to be legally invalid, essentially serving as an ideological tool to justify acts for which it is impossible to obtain the Security Council authorization. The dysfunctionality of the Council in the Yugoslavia/Kosovo conflict was further aggravated by a systemic flaw in the UN Charter, namely the provisions of Article 27(3) allowing a permanent member to act as judex in causa sua/ “judge in his own cause,” and to block any collective enforcement action against its own acts of aggression. In terms of international criminal law, the NATO war of 1999 has further exposed the problems of judicial procedures based on Chapter VII resolutions of the Security Council. The (legally invalid) creation of an ad hoc court by virtue of a coercive measure of the Council has meant the politicization of proceedings and a practice of double standards, effectively determined by the most powerful states in the Council at the time. No investigation was ever opened over the war crimes committed by NATO forces in the course of the 1999 war (over which the Yugoslavia Tribunal of the Security Council clearly had jurisdiction). In regard to (state) accountability for acts of aggression as well as (personal) responsibility for the commission of international crimes, the lesson from the NATO war of 1999 is twofold: (a) that international law under the UN system of collective security is impotent, and (b) a unipolar power constellation frequently invites acts of self-help and encourages a policy of faits accomplis. This can only be challenged if a credible balance of power emerges at the global level.
More...
The NATO Pact’s aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999 is a school example of serious violations of all relevant norms of international law. This article indicates important violations of the international law of armed conflicts that were carried out by the NATO Pact during aggression. A significant number of the ius cogens norms has been violated. Especially, NATO forces use prohibited methods during executions of war operations. NATO forces committ war crimes during air attacks. Besides this, NATO committed a crime against peace and a crime against humanity. The rules of protection of civilians and civilian objects guaranteed by the 1949 Geneva Conventions (the Fourth Geneva Convention) and almost all rules of the international law of armed conflicts guaranteed by international conventions and customary international law were grossly violated during this agression. First of all, protection of journalists, women, children, civilian objects, objects of which depends the survival of the civilian population, facilities that international law guarantees protection, etc., have been grossly violated. Hospitals and hospital transport were attacked. A number of human rights rules have been violated, such as the right to life, the right to free development and the management of natural resources, freedom of movement, the children’s rights, etc. The use of weapons with depleted uranium and the bombardment of civilian objects which contain dangerous forces has caused the effect of using chemical weapons (Pancevo Refinery, etc.). This has led to the endangering of human rights of the third generation, such as the right to a healthy environment. The huge destruction of the infrastructure made enormous material damage. The consequences of aggression and all this violations of international humanitarian law are still unimaginable and the question is whether they will ever been.
More...
Despite the often quoted allegations that the intervention was provoked by the bloodshed and ethnic cleansing of thousands of Albanians driving them into exile in neighboring countries, and the potential of this situation to destabilize the region, the authors of this article tried to analyze the geopolitical and foreign policy indicators to identify the real causes of the NATO aggression on the FR Yugoslavia. The work consists of four parts. The first part is devoted to the development of the Kosovo crisis and the possibility of its solution during 1998-1999. The second part describes the facts that have preceded the decision of the NATO Council to intervene. The reasons for the decision to bomb Yugoslavia are analyzed in the third section. The fourth part is dedicated to the final considerations. In this article, the authors come to the conclusion that NATO had seven reasons to start a campaign in the spring 1999: first, to save its own credibility and celebrate fifty years of its existence; second, to accelerate the overthrow of Milosevic from power and put the entire post-Yugoslav space under the umbrella of NATO; third, the geopolitical reasons - to oust Russian influence; fourth, to bypass the UN and minimize the role of this international organization in world politics; fifth, to correct the mistakes made after the Second World War; sixth, the interests of the American military-industrial complex; and seventh - to improve the image of the United States in the Islamic world.
More...
How NATO found its new raison d’être after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in the Yugoslav crisis? Why Serbia and the Serbs were designated as bad guys? How the initial NATO and USA policy determined the sides in the war, and how it affected the U.S. policy in Europe are the questions raised and answered in this article. The author starts with the historical introduction of the Yugoslav crisis and wars in the territory of the dissolved nation. He presents the main differing views on these processes among scholars and explains how their attachment to governmental policies affects their portrayal of events. Afterward, the author examines the European and global context in which the crisis and the subsequent aggression of the NATO Alliance on a small Balkan state occurred. Different interests in Berlin, Washington, London and the Vatican led to common action against a pariah state of the 1990s. What prevailed is the Anglo Saxon influence in the Balkans and in the EU.
More...
The author of this paper will present the circumstances of the NATO attack on Yugoslavia in 1999. The main goal of this address will be to show historical conditions of the Serbian-Albanian conflict over Kosovo, which led to the escalation of violence in this Serbian province. Moreover, the proofs will be shown that information about ethnic cleansing allegedly perpetrated by the Serbs in Kosovo were fabricated and they were the main cause of a decision made by NATO about the attack. NATO intervention was described in the subject literature in the West as a military operation and the “first war in history for the rights of man”. The author of this paper shall present an analysis exposing this thesis, showing the terrorist character of the actions of the Kosovo Liberation Army and presenting the participation of “big players” in the Serbian-Albanian conflict who fight for their influences in the Balkans.
More...
The Turkish foreign policy towards the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia was carried out in cooperation with its Western allies. However, as different from its policy during the Bosnian War, Turkey assumed a more careful attitude with regard to the Kosovo issue. During the Kosovo War, Turkey did not undertake any guardianship role for the Kosovo Albanians to the extent that it had done for the Bosniaks during the Bosnian War. Different dynamics had an impact on Turkey’s Kosovo policy, its internal problems, the Cyprus issue, Balkan diaspora in Turkey and the presence of the Turkish minority in Kosovo. The presentation will provide an analytical overview of Turkey’s approach towards Kosovo based on the proceedings of the Turkish Grand National Assembly. During that period Turkey was mostly governed by coalition governments. How the governing parties and opposition parties reacted to events in Kosovo during the parliamentary sessions will be analysed through conceptual frameworks. The perceived Ottoman history, the existence of “relative communities” and the Turkish minority, and the fear of the spread of the Kosovo issue to neighbouring countries became important factors affecting the construction of the Turkish foreign policy. The presentation will examine the proceedings of the Parliament in 1998-1999 focusing on concepts like “Ottoman legacy”, “identity”, “interest”. It will analyse how Turkey’s commitments to the Western alliance, how its identity construction as a regional power and how its political, economic and cultural interests became effective in the formulation of Turkey’s attitude towards the conflict in Kosovo.
More...
In the 21st century, the formation of a multipolar world is apparent, with Russia and China as key players.The cooperation between Russia and China has been strengthening year by year: bilateral trade in the expansion, major agreements signed in the strategic areas of energy and security, joint military exercises. One turning point was the joint declaration “World Order in the 21st Century”, signed in Moscow in July 2005, during the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II. The cited declaration warned of Moscow and Beijing rejection at any attempt of intervention by “foreign forces” in their regions and opposed any endeavor to impose “political and social models of development” coming from outside. It is not difficult to see that, besides defining a new level of the relations between China and Russia, the intention was to respond to the US-led interventions which started with the 1999 NATO bombing campaignin the former Yugoslavia and increased after the 9/11 attack in 2001. The chapter will analyze the intensification of cooperation between China and Russia, in particular, and the role of the two countries in the promotion of other initiatives – like BRICS, the “One Belt, One Road” (OBOR), also known as the New Silk Road; the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), called the “NATO of the East” in Western media outlets, etc. – in the context of a geopolitical reply to the 1999 military campaign and its consequences for global security.
More...
NATO’s political and - above all – military participation in secessionmotivated conflicts in the former Yugoslavia (1990-1995), will be remembered as a clear example of demonstration of power, intentions and (in)capability of the victor in a decades-long global “cold war“ between the “freedom-loving” West and “totalitarian East”. Regardless of the expectations of liberal theoreticians and the majority of public opinion, it was soon revealed that the victory was not the “triumph of freedom” and even less “the end of history”. On the contrary, as historically typical, it was only an unstable resultant of relations between the major actors in the modern global theater, who strive to legitimize their need for domination with varying success and vocabulary. Hence, the lessons to be learned from the final act of destruction of Yugoslavia (several months of the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999) have the expected tone of banality: absolute might strives for absolute power (which remains unattainable in principle); “the mighty oppress” is true always and in any place (but with a time limit); and, finally, what everyone knows but does not (or is unable or refuses) say aloud: the only true alternative to military threat and/or aggression of a single political actor is an equally valid (military) threat/aggression by another one. We are tempted to conclude that, despite the ideological ardor of NGO activists, the political correctness of theoreticians and the rhetorical figures of speech of politicians, the “banalities” remain valid as the only certainties, i.e., regularities in the unpredictable currents of relations between states.
More...
During his presidential campaign in 2016 Donald J. Trump argued that NATO was ‘obsolete’. Once elected president, Trump retreated and accepted that the alliance is here to stay, but as became clear at the Brussels Summit in July 2018, he adopted a much more transactional view of the alliance. This paper will put recent debates on the future of NATO in the context of the Second Cold War. What is the purpose of maintaining a security alliance in an era when the circumstances that prompted its creation have changed so dramatically? Does the Atlantic power system come into contradiction with the aspirations of the end of the Cold War creating a ‘common European home’ and a ‘Europe whole and free’? More disturbingly, does the very continued existence of NATO create security dilemmas that justify its existence? The nature and purpose of the Atlantic Alliance will be examined, reviewing its development since 1989 and the consequences of its actions. The persistence of an anachronistic institutional and ideational security order in Europe contributes to the emergence of an anti-hegemonic alignment at the global level, where Russia, China and other partners are gradually creating an alternative global architecture intended not so much to challenge the historical West as to create a non-hierarchical and pluralist post-western alternative order.
More...