The Visegrad Dimension of the Czech Republic’s Foreign Policy By Vladislav Strnad Submitted to Central European University Department of Political Science In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Supervisor: Borbála Kovács CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary (2016) Abstract This thesis deals with the importance of the Visegrad relations for the Czech foreign policy (FP). Relations between the Czech Republic (CZ) and the Visegrad countries take place at three main levels: bilateral, regional, and multilateral. These three levels of relations reciprocally interact and complement each other, moreover they form the Visegrad dimension of the CZ’s FP. In this work, the Visegrad policy is examined from the perspective of the Czech interest in this policy. The research is based on the concept of national interest by Kratochvíl (2010). In parallel with the analysis which defines the Visegrad interest as the Czech national interest, this thesis also seeks to specify the content, structure, and the chronology of the changes of Czech interests regarding this policy. The presented analysis confirms that the topic of “Visegrad” is a long-discussed and advocated policy which has been continuously present throughout the entire existence of the independent Czech state. The Visegrad policy affects the process of transformation and integration of the CZ within the region and also in Europe. Moreover, this policy has the support of the Czech policy makers, it is acceptable for the Visegrad states and it is compatible with the national interests of other democratic partners in the European and Euro-Atlantic area. The Czech Visegrad policy corresponds to the Czech national interest, therefore, it is a part of the overall national interest which is the basis for the positionalization of the CZ in the international environment. The formation of the Czech national interest in the Visegrad dimension of the Czech foreign policy is a process that, based on the changes of the domestic and European environment, changes its intensity, content and CEU eTD Collection structure. The analysis also demonstrates a link between the interest of the CZ in the Visegrad dimension of the Czech FP and the behaviour of the Czech Republic, both in the region but also in Europe. Therefore, the Czech Visegrad policy corresponds with the overall positionalization and integration of the CZ in the European environment as well as with the efforts of the CZ to play a role of an important political player in Central Europe. i Acknowledgments Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor Borbála Kovács for her patience and advice during the writing process. Moreover, I would like to thank to the PolSci department which provided me with a chance to study at this wonderful university. Furthermore, I am grateful to the International Visegrad Fund which supported me through two “Intra-Visegrad” Scholarships which allowed me to study at CEU. CEU eTD Collection ii Table of Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures and Tables ....................................................................................................................................... v List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................. vi Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review ................................................................................................................................ 10 2.1 Visegrad Dimension in the Czech Foreign Policy research ....................................................................... 11 2.1.1 Early research on Czech FP and interests ........................................................................................... 11 2.1.2 Czech FP and interests after the entry to the EU and NATO.............................................................. 12 2.1.3 Comprehensive and long term evaluation of the Czech FP ................................................................ 15 2.2 Czech interest and non-interest .................................................................................................................. 17 Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework ....................................................................................................................... 20 3.1 Conceptualization of national interests by Kratochvíl ................................................................................ 21 3.1.1 The Criterion of Relevance ................................................................................................................. 22 3.1.2 The Criterion of Consensus ................................................................................................................ 23 3.1.3 The Criterion of Acceptability ............................................................................................................ 23 3.2 Application of Kratochvíl’s framework (see Figure 1) .............................................................................. 24 Chapter 4: Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 28 4.1 Research Design ......................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2 Data Sources ............................................................................................................................................... 29 4.2.1 The Criterion of Relevance ................................................................................................................. 29 4.2.2 The Criterion of Consensus ................................................................................................................ 30 4.2.3 The Criterion of Acceptability ............................................................................................................ 34 4.3 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................................. 36 Chapter 5: Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 38 5.1 Criterion of Relevance ................................................................................................................................ 38 5.1.1 Bilateral Level of Neighbourhood Relations ...................................................................................... 38 5.1.2 Regional Level of Relations ............................................................................................................... 43 5.1.3 Multilateral Level of Relations ........................................................................................................... 46 5.1.4 Conclusion – Criterion of Relevance .................................................................................................. 49 CEU eTD Collection 5.2 Criterion of Consensus ............................................................................................................................... 50 5.2.1 Consensus at the level of Government ............................................................................................... 51 5.2.2 Consensus at the level of parliamentary political parties .................................................................... 58 5.2.3 Consensus at the level of the Heads of State ...................................................................................... 62 5.2.4 Consensus - Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 70 5.3 Criterion of Acceptability ........................................................................................................................... 72 5.3.1 External Acceptability – the Visegrad countries ................................................................................ 72 iii 5.3.2 External Acceptability – Other countries ............................................................................................ 80 5.3.3 External Acceptability – Conclusion .................................................................................................. 86 Chapter 6: Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 87 Appendix A ........................................................................................................................................................... 95 Appendix B ........................................................................................................................................................... 96