DOCSLIB.ORG

D3134d0804403548b943b943b

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
D3134d0804403548b943b943b „Russia in Europe: Partners or Challengers?“ CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS PRAGUE APRIL 2010 Russia in Europe: Partners or Challengers? Conference Proceedings Christoph Heusgen, Sergey A.Karaganov, Karel Schwarzenberg, Vladimír Dlouhý (ed.) Published by Prague Twenty, non profit organization Tržiště 366/13, 118 00 Praha 1 – Malá Strana IČ:28937503 www.praguetwenty.com Edited by Vladimír Dlouhý First edition, 2/2010 Copyright © 2010 Prague Twenty Print: JPM TISK spol. s r.o. The text has not been edited nor the language corrected. The transcription of the discussion has not been authorised by the speakers. CONTENTS OPENING Jefim Fištejn _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 INTRODUCTION Vladimír Dlouhý _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7 A. Dr. CHRISTOPH HEUSGEN _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 9 Russia in Europe: Partners or Challengers? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _11 B. Prof. SERGEY A. KARAGANOV _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _19 Russia in Europe: Partners or Challengers? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _23 C. KAREL SCHWARZENBERG _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _33 Russia in Europe: Partners or Challengers? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _35 DISCUSSION _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _39 PRAGUE TWENTY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _52 OPENING Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Jefim Fištejn, I am a journalist and the founding member of the foundation Prague Twenty, my role is limited at this gathering, just to introduce our guests and to introduce actually our foundation. Those of you who attended the previous event organized by Prague Twenty probably know it. For those of you who don’t know just few words should be said. It is probably the youngest think tank in Prague established by a group of people with different professional background but united in a feeling that there is still space to have another think tank in the Czech Republic organizing the event like this one on crucial issues for the further development of Europe and at the same time being a vehicle a platform for the truly independent, non-partisan discussion following no partylines and so for this reason the foundation a few month ago, a year ago. And it has already had one such event and today’s event is dedicated exactly to this development of Europe. It is the relationship between the Europe today and the Russian Federation. The name is Partners or Challengers. Let me introduce briefly the speakers. Mr. Christoph Heusgen is the advisor to Chancellor Angela Merkel. He is the advisor on the field of security and foreign relations. Professor Sergey Karaganov is the chairman of the Council for Foreign Security Policy of the Russian Federation. Mr. Karel Schwarzenberg probably does not have to be introduced at all. But anyway, He is the Senator, former Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic and the Chairman of the TOP09 political party. Vladimir Dlouhy is the founding father of the Prague Twenty think tank, so he will be anchoring the event of today. Please, the floor is yours. Jefim Fištejn, journalist, Prague Twenty Prague, Czech Republic April 9, 2010 5 6 INTRODUCTION Thank you very much, Jefim. Ladies and gentlemen, first of all, let me join Jefim in thanking you for coming to this event of Prague Twenty. When selecting the discussion topic for our conference couple of weeks ago, we opted for today’s title because of its obvious importance. What we did not know, however, was that our event will take place almost exactly 24 hours after the signature of a new nuclear disarmament treaty between Russia and US and that this signature will take place exactly in Prague. But it was a good timing, by all means. At the start, I am going to introduce the topic from a Czech, or we may say from Central and East European angle. There is and there always will be a dichotomy inside us when speaking about Russia. On one side, there is an understanding that Russia is a big country, maybe with lower standard of living, but still powerful, rich in energy resources and strong in some selected areas of research, technology and manufacturing. Understanding that Russia should be given a chance and also understanding that the generation of today’s Russians, disregarding whether they consider themselves to be pro- government or among the opposition, were raised and educated with the feeling that they are citizens of one of the true world super-powers. On the other side, there is a great suspicion and fear. And I don’t have to elaborate it much, as we all well understand that this stems from the period of communism that Soviet Union imposed on our region after the Second World War, but also from the history of Russian imperialism. Second, when we shake down the Central and East European Russian trauma and we try to see the problem from European perspective, we should look back. In 1990, we were naïve about Russia. First, we saw it as a loser. Second, we believed that Russia is going to somehow „dissolve“ in our democratic world. Third, economically we treated it from quite a disdainful position. And fourth, we – being a bit intoxicated by the victory of Euro Atlantic world and the famous „end of the history“ – tried to expand and strengthen our economic, military and political positions. We did it, being firmly convinced about our truth and our political very basic principles, but we did it also believing that we bring justice and well being to former Soviet Union after communism. And after all, what was so wrong about it: the winners always try to fix the gains on the account of the loser. And, suffering under communism, at least in our region, we had a right to feel that a battle was won. 7 Today, I believe, that this was wrong. We undermined the position of that time Russian elites who were genuinely ready to join „our world“. Second, we alienated vast part of Russian population, who just did not consider themselves as losers and are very proud about Russia in general. Third, we helped the old structures, especially KGB structures, to make a remarkable comeback. And last, but not least, our own weaknesses struck back – today we see that 1990 was not the end of history, but on the contrary, a new history emerges, where our Euro Atlantic world is in retreat. So today, we have Russia as we have it. But I want to be well understood. I am uneasy about Russia today. Yes, I hate the old clichés about Russian danger. We should see it as a partner – economic, political, cultural – in all aspects of our life. We should understand Russian ambitions and geopolitical concerns. I was always skeptical about the talk of Ukraine or Georgia join NATO, for example. We should first do our own, European homework, to be strong enough (both economically and politically) to be able to deal with the energy security and not to wine all the time about bad and dangerous Russian oligarchs and politician. But on the other hand, Russia must deliver and I am afraid, it is not. Is Russia powerful or just dangerous? Is the recent revitalization of Russian power only a consequence of the lucky development in the energy and raw material prices in recent decade? Probably yes, because the information we have is that, with very few exceptions, the financial windfall from last years was not used for productive investment, even in the most crucial Russian industries as gas and oil. Russia is extremely irritable, peevish, and – with all reservations about President Saakashvili’s policies – the muscle flexing in Georgia has been exercised with such an arrogance that – especially in our region – must have recalled reminiscences about our humiliation during communism. But Russia is also almost ridiculously imperial, overlooking contemptuously not only our region, but also sometimes even Europe. Ladies and gentlemen, I purposely selected my introductory words as a bit provocative. Prague Twenty wants to have open and candid discussions and in a dignified and friendly way to confront even quite opposing views. For this we have here today three well-suited personalities: Christoph Heusgen, Sergey A. Karaganov and Karel Schwarzenberg. Vladimír Dlouhý, Chairman, Management Board, Prague Twenty Prague, Czech Republic April 9, 2010 8 Dr. CHRISTOPH HEUSGEN Background Information Christoph Heusgen was born on 17 March 1955 near Neuss, Germany. After passing his university entrance examination, he read economics at the University of St Gall (Switzerland) and at Georgia Southern College (USA). He then completed postgraduate studies at both St Gall and the Sorbonne in Paris. After obtaining his doctorate at the University of St Gall, he entered the Foreign Service in 1980.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2011 European Values Think-Tank
    ANNUAL REPORT 2011 EUROPEAN VALUES THINK-TANK 1 Dear Reader, you are holding the Annual Report of the European Values Think-tank, in which we would like to present our programs realized in 2011. European Values is a non-governmental, pro-European organization that, through education and research activities, works for the development of civil society and a healthy market environment. From 2005, we continue in our role as a unique educational and research organization and think tank, which contributes to public and professional discussion about social, political and economic development in Europe. In the Czech Republic we point out that, due to our membership – active and constructive – of the European Union we can for the first time in modern history participate in decision- making processes concerning the future of Europe, and ensure that we are no longer just a passive object of desire of large powers in our neighbourhood. With our international program, European Values Network, from 2007, we also contribute to a Europe-wide debate on the challenges that Europe faces today. We believe that the public and politicians do not recognize that the benefits of post-war development on our continent can not be taken for granted, and that there are many global trends that threaten the freedom, security and prosperity of Europe as a whole. We analyze these social, political, security and economic trends, and we offer solutions to problems associated with them. In addition to publishing our own books, publications, studies, recommendations, comments, and media contributions and commentary, we also organize seminars, conferences and training courses for professionals and the wider public.
    [Show full text]
  • The Czech President Miloš Zeman's Populist Perception Of
    Journal of Nationalism, Memory & Language Politics Volume 12 Issue 2 DOI 10.2478/jnmlp-2018-0008 “This is a Controlled Invasion”: The Czech President Miloš Zeman’s Populist Perception of Islam and Immigration as Security Threats Vladimír Naxera and Petr Krčál University of West Bohemia in Pilsen Abstract This paper is a contribution to the academic debate on populism and Islamophobia in contemporary Europe. Its goal is to analyze Czech President Miloš Zeman’s strategy in using the term “security” in his first term of office. Methodologically speaking, the text is established as a computer-assisted qualitative data analysis (CAQDAS) of a data set created from all of Zeman’s speeches, interviews, statements, and so on, which were processed using MAXQDA11+. This paper shows that the dominant treatment of the phenomenon of security expressed by the President is primarily linked to the creation of the vision of Islam and immigration as the absolute largest threat to contemporary Europe. Another important finding lies in the fact that Zeman instrumentally utilizes rhetoric such as “not Russia, but Islam”, which stems from Zeman’s relationship to Putin’s authoritarian regime. Zeman’s conceptualization of Islam and migration follows the typical principles of contemporary right-wing populism in Europe. Keywords populism; Miloš Zeman; security; Islam; Islamophobia; immigration; threat “It is said that several million people are prepared to migrate to Europe. Because they are primarily Muslims, whose culture is incompatible with European culture, I do not believe in their ability to assimilate” (Miloš Zeman).1 Introduction The issue of populism is presently one of the crucial political science topics on the levels of both political theory and empirical research.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in CZECH REPUBLIC 25Th and 26Th January 2013 (2Nd Round)
    PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN CZECH REPUBLIC 25th and 26th January 2013 (2nd round) European Elections monitor Milos Zeman, the new President of the Czech Republic Corinne Deloy Translated by Helen Levy Milos Zeman, former Social Democratic Prime Minister, (1998-2002), honorary chair of the Citizens’ Rights Party (SPO), which he created in 2010, was elected on 26th January President of the Czech Republic with 54.8% of the vote in the country’s first presidential election by direct universal suf- frage. He drew ahead of Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg (Tradition, Responsibility, Prosperity Results 09, TOP09), who won 45.19% of the vote. (2nd round) Milos Zeman rallied the votes of the left and enjoyed Prime Minister called for the support of the Communist strong support on the part of voters in the provinces, Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM) between the two whilst Karel Schwarzenberg won Prague and several rounds of the election and received the support of ou- major towns (Brno, Plzen, Liberec, Ceske Budejovice, tgoing President Vaclav Klaus, who explained that he Hradec Kralove, Karlovy Vary and Zlin). The former wanted the head of State to be a citizen who had lived Prime Minister did not receive the support of the official his entire life in the Czech Republic – “in the good and candidate of the biggest left wing party, the Social De- bad times”. Karel Schwarzenberg’s family fled the com- mocratic Party’s (CSSD), Jirí Dienstbier (16.12% of the munist regime that was established in the former Cze- vote in the first round), who refused to give any voting choslovakia in 1948; the Foreign Minister lived in exile advice for the second round, qualifying both candidates for 41 years, notably in Austria, Germany and in Swit- as being “fundamentally on the right” and accused Milos zerland, before returning to his homeland.
    [Show full text]
  • Czech Elections: How a Billionaire Populist Upstaged Established Parties Written by Sean Hanley
    Czech Elections: How a Billionaire Populist Upstaged Established Parties Written by Sean Hanley This PDF is auto-generated for reference only. As such, it may contain some conversion errors and/or missing information. For all formal use please refer to the official version on the website, as linked below. Czech Elections: How a Billionaire Populist Upstaged Established Parties https://www.e-ir.info/2013/11/09/czech-elections-how-a-billionaire-populist-upstaged-established-parties/ SEAN HANLEY, NOV 9 2013 Voters in the Czech Republic went to the polls in early legislative elections on 25-26 October. The elections followed the collapse in June, amid personal and political scandal, of the minority centre-right government of Petr Nečas and the subsequent failure of a technocrat administration imposed by President Miloš Zeman to win a parliamentary vote of confidence. As in the previous May 2010 elections, the result saw losses for established parties and breakthroughs by new anti- establishment groupings campaigning on platforms of fighting corruption, renewing politics and making government work better. However, the 2013 results represent a decisive breach in the Czech Republic’s previously stable pattern of party politics party whose four main pillars – pro-market conservatives, Social Democrats, Christian Democrats and Communists – made it arguably Central and Eastern Europe’s best approximation to a West European style party system. The new political landscape that has emerged is both fluid and highly fragmented, with no fewer than seven parties now represented in the Chamber of Deputies. Seats held by parties following Czech parliamentary elections of 25-26 October.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Article
    5 Comment & Analysis CE JISS 2008 Czech Presidential Elections: A Commentary Petr Just Again after fi ve years, the attention of the Czech public and politicians was focused on the Presidential elections, one of the most important milestones of 2008 in terms of Czech political developments. The outcome of the last elections in 2003 was a little surprising as the candidate of the Civic Democratic Party (ODS), Václav Klaus, represented the opposition party without the necessary majority in both houses of Parliament. Instead, the ruling coalition of the Czech Social Democratic Party (ČSSD), the Christian-Democratic Union – Czecho- slovak Peoples Party (KDU-ČSL), and the Union of Freedom – Democratic Union (US-DEU), accompanied by some independent and small party Senators was able – just mathematically – to elect its own candidate. However, a split in the major coalition party ČSSD, and support given to Klaus by the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSČM), brought the Honorary Chairman of the ODS, Václav Klaus, to the Presidential offi ce. In February 2007, on the day of the forth anniversary of his fi rst elec- tion, Klaus announced that he would seek reelection in 2008. His party, the ODS, later formally approved his nomination and fi led his candidacy later in 2007. Klaus succeeded in his reelection attempt, but the way to defending the Presidency was long and complicated. In 2003 members of both houses of Parliament, who – according to the Constitution of the Czech Republic – elect the President at the Joint Session, had to meet three times before they elected the President, and each attempt took three rounds.
    [Show full text]
  • The Monkey Cage "Democracy Is the Art of Running the Circus from the Monkey Cage." -- H.L
    11/5/13 The Czech paradox: Did the winner lose and the losers win? Sign In SUBSCRIBE: Home Delivery Digital Real Estate Rentals Cars Today's Paper Going Out Guide Find&Save Service Alley PostT V Politics Opinions Local Sports National World Business Tech Lifestyle Entertainment Jobs More The Monkey Cage "Democracy is the art of running the circus from the monkey cage." -- H.L. Mencken What's The Monkey Cage? Archives Follow : The Monkey Cage The Czech paradox: Did the winner lose and the losers win? BY TIM HAUGHTON, TEREZA NOVOTNA AND KEVIN DEEGAN-KRAUSE October 30 at 5:45 am More 3 Comments Also on The Monkey Cage Is the nonproliferation agenda stuck in the Cold War? Make-up artists prepare the Czech Social Democrat (CSSD) chairman Bohuslav Sobotka for his TV appearance after early parliamentary elections finished, in Prague, on Saturday, Oct. 26, 2013. (CTK, Michal Kamaryt/ Associated Press) [Joshua Tucker: Continuing our series of Election Reports, we are pleased to welcome the following post-election report on the Oct. 25-26 Czech parliamentary elections from political scientists Tim Haughton (University of Birmingham, UK), Tereza Novotna (Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium) and Kevin Deegan-Krause, (Wayne State University), who blogs about East European politics at the excellent Pozorblog. Deegan-Krause's pre-election report is available here.] ***** Czech party politics used to be boring. The 2013 parliamentary election, however, highlights the transformation of the party system, the arrival of new entrants and the woes faced by the long-established parties. The Czech Social Democratic Party (CSSD) won the election, but the margin of victory was slender.
    [Show full text]
  • The Czech Republic's Foreign Policy in 2011: a Brief Overview
    The Czech Republic’s Foreign Policy in 2011: A Brief Overview This document is part of an established series of annual reports on the Czech Republic’s foreign policy published by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic. Please note that this is the first time the document is available only on the Internet. Due to overwhelming preference among our readers for web-based information resources, we have decided to dispense with paper and CD-based copies. Our regular readers will certainly appreciate that the document has been shortened and restructured to better serve their needs. Every care was taken to keep the text short, clear and fact-based. This also explains why we present the document not as a “report” but as a “brief overview”. Finally, we hope that our readers will recognize that foreign policy is a long-distance run and that most of its processes cannot fairly be assessed on a yearly basis. Working towards your goal by diplomatic means is like planting an orchard and watching it grow - it takes much time and patience before you can reap the fruits. However, even within the timeframe of one year, some events stand out. In terms of the overall coordination and consistency of the Czech Republic’s external action, the turning point in 2011 was the introduction of two new policy documents: the Foreign Policy Concept of the Czech Republic and the Security Strategy of the Czech Republic. 1 The Czech Republic’s Foreign Policy Concept A fundamental review of the principles underlying Czech foreign policy was a priority for the Czech Government formed after the June 2010 elections.
    [Show full text]
  • Petr Nečas Zum Premierminister Ernannt
    LÄNDERBERICHT Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V. TSCHECHIEN DR. HUBERT GEHRING TOMISLAV DELINIC Mitte-Rechts-Koalition steht - MAREN HACHMEISTER Petr Nečas zum Premierminister 30. Juni 2010 ernannt www.kas.de MITTE-RECHTS-PARTEIEN EINIGEN SICH www.kas.de/tschechien Vorbereitung des Staatshaushaltes be- nächsten Jahr auf Steuermehreinnahmen schleunigt Verhandlungen von weiteren 30 Mrd. CZK (1,2 Mrd. €). Die Europäische Kommission bezeichnet Die Koalitionsverhandlungen der drei Mit- die tschechischen Sparmaßnahmen der te-Rechts-Parteien ODS, TOP 09 und VV Regierung Fischer unterdessen schon als wurden nach den tschechischen Parla- „ausreichend“, um die Haushaltsziele mentswahlen Ende Mai mit Hochdruck 2010 zu erreichen. Die Neuverschuldung vorangetrieben. Staatspräsident Václav wird voraussichtlich mit 5,7% des BIP Klaus ernannte Petr Nečas am 28. Juni noch über den 3% der EU- zum Premierminister. Am 29 Juni wurde Konvergenzkriterien liegen. schließlich auch die Regierung zusam- mengestellt. Dem Premierminister und Zunächst überschattete die Wahl des Par- ODS-Vorsitzenden Nečas gelang es so- lamentsvorsitzenden die neue Dreieinig- mit, die Koalitionsverhandlungen noch keit der Mitte-Rechts-Koalition – dem vor Beginn der Haushaltsverhandlungen Gewohnheitsrecht folgend beanspruchte am 07. Juli erfolgreich zu einem Ende zu nämlich die nach den Wahlen stimmen- bringen. stärkste Partei, die Sozialdemokraten (ČSSD), diesen Posten für sich. Sie konn- Koalitionsvereinbarung mit härtestem ten mit ihrem Kandidaten Lubomír Zaorá- Sparpaket der tschechischen Geschich- lek schließlich nur den stellvertretenden te Parlamentsvorsitz ergattern, da die künf- tige Koalition Miroslava Němcová (ODS) Die Koalitionsvereinbarung der Mitte- durchsetzte. Rechts-Koalition enthält sieben Kapitel. Nach den anfänglichen Forderungen der Auch die Frage der Ministerienverteilung Partei VV zur Kürzung des Verteidigungs- brachte harte Verhandlungen mit sich.
    [Show full text]
  • Karel Schwarzenberg Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic Presidency of the European Union Brussels, 15 April 2009 Ref: B856
    Karel Schwarzenberg Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic Presidency of the European Union Brussels, 15 April 2009 Ref: B856 Dear Mr Schwarzenberg, Subject: Accountability for violations committed during the Gaza conflict In view of the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 27/28 April 2009, Amnesty International once again calls on the EU to consistently apply its own Guidelines by adopting clear conclusions in favour of full investigation and accountability for violations of international law, including war crimes, committed by both parties in the recent conflict in Gaza and southern Israel. The EU should use this opportunity to send a strong signal of support to the UN Human Rights Council- mandated independent international fact-finding mission, recently established under the chairmanship of Justice Goldstone. Both Justice Goldstone and the President of the Human Rights Council have stated that the mission will only be able to credibly fulfil its mandate if it examines violations of international law committed by Israeli forces and those committed by Palestinian armed groups. This clearly addresses the initial concern of the EU that the investigation would be biased and would specifically exclude Palestinian abuses. We therefore also urge the EU and EU members of the UN Security Council to issue a demand for the cooperation of all parties with the fact-finding mission. In addition, we call on the EU and EU members of the UN Security Council to request that the UN Secretary-General makes public the findings and recommendations of the report of the Board of Inquiry, investigating attacks on UN personnel and facilities in Gaza.
    [Show full text]
  • The Slavkov Triangle: a Rival to the Visegrad Group? Dariusz Kałan
    No. 19 (751), 16 February 2015 © PISM Editors: Marcin Zaborowski (Editor-in-Chief) . Katarzyna Staniewska (Managing Editor) Jarosław Ćwiek-Karpowicz . Aleksandra Gawlikowska-Fyk . Artur Gradziuk Piotr Kościński . Sebastian Płóciennik . Patrycja Sasnal . Marcin Terlikowski The Slavkov Triangle: A Rival to the Visegrad Group? Dariusz Kałan The format and objectives of the so-called Slavkov Triangle, which was established at the end of January, have not yet been clearly defined by the signatory states, Austria, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. The initiative could evolve in the direction of a local platform aimed at improving energy and infrastructure relations, a project for the implementation of leftist economic doctrine in the EU, or a pro-Russian avant-garde. Regardless of the final alignment of the triangle, its creation is troublesome for the Visegrad Group. Its declared range of activities, including the idea consultations before the European Council, is so wide that it could duplicate some of the V4 projects. On 29 January, at the Baroque palace in Slavkov (hist. Austerlitz) in southeastern Bohemia, the prime ministers of three countries—Austria, the Czech Republic and Slovakia—signed a declaration on establishing a new regional platform, the so-called Slavkov Triangle. Among the areas of interest mentioned for 2015 were transport infrastructure, energy security, youth employment, cross-border relations, the social dimension of European integration, and the neighbouring countries of the EU. It was decided that the heads of government will meet in such a format every year, with the next summit to be held in, 2016 in Slovakia. The daily work will be coordinated by a tripartite working group, probably at the level of deputy foreign ministers.
    [Show full text]
  • Příloha 2 Seznam Poslanců Působících V PS V Průběhu Let 1996–2016
    Příloha 2 Seznam poslanců působících v PS v průběhu let 1996–2016 Volební Volební Číslo Politická Navrhující Jméno, příjmení, titul Bydliště Od Do kraj strana na KL příslušnost strana 1996–1998 PRA ČSSD 1 JUDr. Petra Buzková Praha 4 ČSSD ČSSD 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ČSSD 2 František Čech Praha 12 ČSSD ČSSD 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ČSSD 3 Petr Hulinský Praha 10 ČSSD ČSSD 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ČSSD 4 Jaroslav Bašta Praha 6 ČSSD ČSSD 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ČSSD 5 Ing. Květoslava Kořínková, CSc. Praha 5 ČSSD ČSSD 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 1 Ing. Josef Zieleniec* Praha 4 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 29.8.1997 PRA ODS 2 JUDr. Hana Marvanová Praha 2 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 3 Ing. Miroslav Tyl Praha 10 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 4 JUDr. Ondřej Zemina* Praha 3 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 16.1.1997 PRA ODS 5 Petr Koháček Praha 9 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 6 RNDr. Tomáš Páv Praha 5 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 7 MUDr. Milena Kolářová Praha 9 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 8 MUDr. Eduard Bureš Praha 1 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 9 PhDr. Ivana Plechatá Praha 6 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 10 RNDr. Jiří Payne Praha 2 ODS ODS 1.6.1996 19.6.1998 PRA ODS 11 Mgr.
    [Show full text]