Kalba ir etniškumas Vidurio ir Rytų Europoje: kai kurie teoriniai aspektai

This article presents a favourable theoretical analysis of the political problem of high profile which acutely touches Central and Eastern Europe – the ethnic problem. The outstanding role in delimiting ethnic dependence and conditioning ethnic cleavage turns to be devoted to language. The author gives a very persuasive introduction to this problem as well as promotes an exclusive comparison where the Western (arguably – civilly developed cultures) and Central-Eastern European nations, as well as history-influenced modifications to the character of the issue, are paralleled. We are not presented with a narrow and simplistic narration but are rather compelled to thoroughly perceive the multilateral complexity of this problem. Hence the author tries to trace the solutions that entail inter-ethnic tensions, although he primarily identifies the \u27true\u27 causes for such tensions. Schopflin finds it necessary to define what exactly ethnicity is and the reasons why language is enacted to such a salient role in ethnic self-consciousness. He excludes the restrictive assumption that ethnicity has been made political by "artificial" means only, providing evidence of why this approach proves to be not exhaustive. A sharper insight into this problem is introduced. The essential point is that ethnicity operates simultaneously on several planes, only one of which belongs to the political one. The author argues that while in pre-modern societies there was no occurrence of the political system to impinge too directly on cultures, with the coming of modernity, it began to do so. The article foregoes with the clarification that ethnicity is about cultural reproduction, where culture is defined as a system of moral regulation in its deepest sense. Cultural variations which locate distinctions and peculiarities in the questions of political power come to constitute the raw material for ethnic cleavage, because each community is axiomatically convinced of the rightness of its morality and its superiority to all others. The author continues in the depiction of the characteristics which specify the Western cultures and the Eastern nationalisms in which the former proves to be the type of democratic nationalism, the one to nurture loyalties, whenever the latter managed to rear up an all-directing monopolical political elite (the author names them \u27secular intellectuals\u27) who challenged every aspect of the established status quo and saw this as their raison d\u27être. Their vocation was not confined to some relatively confined arena (as in the West) but devoted themselves to nation-wide aspects, as the language might prove. In the face of the deprivation of the Western civic homogenisation, language in Central and Eastern Europe attained a much more effective basis for power than contiguity. Language in the latter became an instrument of popular mobilisation. Intellectuals used and controlled language; it became both instrument and aim; intellectuals consequently acquired paths to moral legislation. The author notices that any efforts to construct political nations on some other principles, namely geographical, in Central and Eastern Europe failed because of the lack of dynamism that derives from an authentically felt sense of community. Whenever the civic dimension of the nationhood devolves its primacy in the West, language demonstrates its primacy in the East. Expressive words of a Hungarian writer Gyula Illyes are put forward: if, he states, there is a language, then its speakers constitute a community; if a community has its own language, it has the right to constitute its own state and become a subject of history. The author concludes that language has played both a symbolic and a functional role in the centralisation of Central and Eastern Europe. It is claimed that though there can be no contingency in the nature of language, no language, with the exception of Polish, has had a continuous high cultural tradition. It is, however, posed that high cultural languages are vital both instrumentally and as legitimation. Nevertheless, motion to modernity distracts Central and Eastern European countries from the wide tolerance to multilingualism, which is understood as weakness that potentially threatens the future of the community. Hence, intolerance and oppression prevailing in the countries is the proof that the modern state has proved to be unable to assimilate ethnic minorities, once they have become conscious of their identity. Only the situation of one having its own language is taken as acceptable. Numerous examples are given to support these arguments. It is concluded that despite the feeling of something being missed, the provided factors constitute an explanatory framework for why it is so extraordinarily difficult to establish linguistic co-existence at the high cultural level in Central and Eastern Europe and why seemingly simple problems acquire an apparently applicable and deep-rooted insolubility.Etniniai konfliktai, teigia straipsnio autorius, atsiranda, bendruomenėms siekiant patvirtinti savo „moraliną vertę" savo bei kitų akyse. Kiekviena bendruomenė turi daug simbolių, nurodančių jos skirtumus nuo kitų bendruomenių, ir vienas svarbiausiųjų yra kalba. Straipsnio autoriaus tvirtinimu, Vidurio ir Rytų Europoje kalbos kaip etninio simbolio vaidmuo buvo ypač ryškus. George\u27as Schiipflinas teigia, kad Vidurio ir Rytų Europoje, kitaip negu Vakaruose, kalba, o ne teritorija buvo veiksmingiausias politikos šaltinis. Kartu kalba tapo ne tik instrumentu, bet ir tikslu - moralinės teisės egzistuoti simboliu

Politinio lyderio įvaizdžio formavimo psichologiniai aspektai

Pranešime nagrinėjama politinio lyderio įvaizdžio formavimo psichologija. Aptariamos visuomenės reakcijos i politinius įvykius ir sprendimus. Analizuojamos politinių lyderių asmenybės bei elgsenos analizės galimybės. Aprašomos įvairios politinių veikėjų savęs pristatymo taktikos

Keičiant legalios migracijos naratyvus: nuo sugrėsminimo iki talentų mainų tarp Lietuvos ir Nigerijos

This article seeks to answer how civil society actors co-opt and navigate external migration governance agendas and vocabularies. Reassessing the so-called liberal migration governance paradox, it presents a case study of the “Digital Explorers” pilot initiative, aimed at fostering legal migration between the European Union and West Africa. By using publicly available and internal project documentation, the article investigates how the project consortium, led by civil society actors, deployed evolving strategies to advocate for migration openness between Lithuania and Nigeria. The study concludes by presenting a taxonomy of rhetorical frames and reflects on its implications for future research on legal migration frameworks between West Africa and EU-13 countries.Šiame straipsnyje siekiama atsakyti į klausimą, kaip pilietinės visuomenės organizacijos įsitraukia į migracijos politikos darbotvarkes bei diskursus ir juos keičia. Iš naujo įvertindamas liberalios migracijos politikos paradoksą, straipsnis pristato „Digital Explorers“ bandomojo projekto atvejo analizę. Remiantis viešai prieinamais ir vidiniais projekto dokumentais, straipsnyje analizuojama, kaip pilietinės visuomenės veikėjų įgyvendintas projektas taikė kintančias strategijas, siekdamas propaguoti migracijos atvirumą tarp Lietuvos ir Nigerijos. Straipsnis baigiamas retorinių rėmų taksonomijos pristatymu ir svarstymais apie jos reikšmę būsimiems tyrimams, susijusiems su teisėta migracija tarp Vakarų Afrikos ir ES-13 šalių

Alexis\u27o de Tocqueville\u27o knygos vertimas

Tocqueville A. de. Apie demokratiją Amerikoje. - Vilnius: Amžius. - 1996. - 793 p. - Iš prancūzų kalbos vertė Valdas Petrauskas

JAV dėmesys kaip Lietuvos ontolo­ginio saugumo šaltinis: Kinijos atžvilgiu vykdomos vertybinės užsienio politikos analizė

Why did Lithuania, as a small state and in a clearly asymmetric power relationship, decide to pursue a values-based foreign policy towards a great power China? The research suggests that Lithuania’s status as a “good friend of Americans” provides ontological security to decision makers, reinforcing its position in the Western social hierarchy. The research follows the methodological principles of modern constructivist research, utilising discourse analysis and process tracing. The discourse analysis highlights the significance of the status category “good friend of Americans” in the Lithuanian biographical narrative. This is followed by testing a causal mechanism of ontological insecurity constructed from ontological security and social identity theories in the case of 2020–2022. The study contributes to the literature on small states’ behaviour by delving into status-seeking routines to which small states may attach themselves. It also provides new insights into the interaction between small states and great powers.Kodėl Lietuva, kaip mažoji valstybė, susidarius ryškiai asimetriniam pajėgumų santykiui, nusprendė vykdyti vertybinę užsienio politiką didžiosios galios Kinijos kryptimi? Tyrime manoma, kad atsakyti į šį klausimą gali padėti gilinimasis į ontologinio saugumo ir socialinės tapatybės teorijas, dėmesį kreipiant į darbe identifikuojamą „buvimo gerais amerikiečių draugais“ statuso reikšmę, suteikiančią Lietuvos sprendimų priėmėjams ontologinį saugumą. Todėl straipsnyje teigiama, kad Lietuvos sprendimų priėmėjai, siekdami ontologinio saugumo, vykdo vertybinę užsienio politiką, kad pritrauktų JAV dėmesį. Tyrimas atliekamas pagal modernistinio konstruktyvizmo tyrimo metodologinius reikalavimus, derinant diskurso analizės ir proceso sekimo metodikas. Taikant diskurso analizę, išnagrinėta „buvimo gerais amerikiečių draugais“ statuso reikšmė Lietuvos biografiniame naratyve. Paskui, pasitelkus 2020–2022 m. atvejį, testuojamas iš ontologinio saugumo ir socialinės tapatybės teorinių prielaidų sudarytas priežastinis ontologinio nesaugumo mechanizmas. Atliktas tyrimas papildo mažųjų valstybių elgesį nagrinėjančią literatūrą atskleisdamas statuso siekimo rutinas, su kuriomis gali susisaistyti mažosios valstybės, ir suteikia naujų įžvalgų aiškindamas mažųjų valstybių ir didžiųjų galių sąveiką

Lietuvos integracija į Europą: alternatyvos ir pasirinkimai

In the beginning of the article, the author postulates: "Lithuania\u27s belonging to Europe is unquestionable". Thus, the main prospects for satisfying the national interests - namely, national security, economic welfare of the citizens, and maintenance of national identity - of Lithuania are tightly bound with the appertainance and further integration into the aforementioned area. However, G. Vitkus notifies, that in spite of the expressed wish of Lithuania saying that the country seeks entrance into European political, economic, and security organisations, in 1997, and particularly in summer 1997 in Madrid and in December in Luxembourg, it has finally become apparent that the delineated goals are not to be implemented easily. Nevertheless, the author claims that such a make-up of events is not to be viewed as a defeat. He says: "Postponement of the EU perspective, on the one hand, and ambiguity of the NATO perspective, on the other, have not only provided us with a chance to re-contemplate the vitality of our strategic choice, but has made us alert that Lithuania\u27s integration into Europe cannot limit and confine itself to integration into these two structures. <...> Moreover, NATO and the EU membership ought to be taken not so much as goals but as a means in order to achieve higher goals - the implementation of Lithuania\u27s national interests." The author argues that Lithuania, which pursues the goals of deepening integration with Europe, intensifying its security, and managing the economic welfare of the citizens, must take advantage of "all the remaining" opportunities the contemporary situation sets forth. Thus, in this article, Gediminas Vitkus analyses these opportunities in detail. In the first section, "The integration of Lithuania into Europe and the national security," the author aims at discussing the alternative opportunities for attesting Lithuania\u27s national security. With respect to NATO, the main possible guarantor of security, the author enumerates three main obstacles which vex this "hardly believable" - however strategic - entrance into NATO. According to G. Vitkus, the main of these is the geopolitical location of Lithuania. Further on, by reason of these obstacles, the author propounds five alternative opportunities to NATO. The most viable of these are the first three: first, further participation in the Partnership for Peace with NATO and the non-NATO states; second, membership in the EU; and third, regional co-operation with the Nordic and the Baltic States. The remaining two, Polish and Lithuanian strategic partnership and the lobby activities in Russia, in the author\u27s opinion, can contend with neither membership in NATO nor participation in the North-Baltic security community. G. Vitkus emphasises that both intense and intimate partnership and co-operation with Poland and a lobby in Russia ought not to be abandoned and, especially Poland, should be viewed as a possible precious factor in intensifying Lithuania\u27s security. Having discussed the character of these five propositions, the author proceeds, "as to remember," the nature of Lithuania\u27s relations with Russia and the other CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) countries. The author argues "that it is Russia\u27s instability and the possible emergence of the revanchist power groups in the government which serve the role of the chief threat to Lithuania\u27s and the region\u27s security". In brief, G. Vitkus concludes the following: "as we may have seen, in the contemporary international situation, in Lithuania and on the regional level, there appear quite a number of tendencies which seem positive to Lithuania\u27s overall security." The next section deals with an aspect of economic integration and the economic welfare of the state. The author claims that "the integration of Lithuania into the European economic realm is primarily related with its membership in the European Union". However, according to the author, these wishes were overturned by the European Commission in July 1997. Although the opinion of the European Commission deliberating whether to start negotiations with the applicant countries could be influenced by political considerations and the internal problems of the EU, it nevertheless can be stated that the opinion of the Commission concerning the rank of Lithuanian economy is fundamental enough. Therefore, with respect to membership in the EU, the author discusses the problem of economic costs and the benefits of this membership. Before proceeding to the table where arguments "pro" and "contra" of economic integration are enumerated, the author discusses the pillars and goals of intra-EU economic integration and common politics (e.g., agricultural, structural policy) which have been attained by the EU member-states so far. In conclusion, the author postulates that "the fact that Lithuanian government \u27thirsts\u27 for the membership in the EU not so much due to economic, but political, reasons, is very detrimental. At the first sight, it may seem that several Lithuanian politicians have not yet understood the full complexity of the problem. But this is what the author points with respect to Lithuanian political realities. In general, from security and economic perspective, there are no alternatives to Lithuania\u27s membership in the EU, membership which would not only correspond to demands for guaranteeing the national security. From the standpoint of long-term economic development and state modernisation, this would be a progressive step as well. At last, the author advises: "Before passing the decision, it is essential to first identify and, from the economic standpoint, analyse different pre-access strategies and alternative tactics. Only this would help avoid the above-mentioned tendencies when the pre-access preparation was nearly becoming a technic-bureaucratic demand, but would first of all reflect the demands of the national economic development."Straipsnyje nagrinėjami svarbiausi Lietuvos integracijos į Europą aspektai - saugumas ir ekonominė gerovė. Šalies narystė NATO pripažįstama pačia parankiausiu saugumo problemos sprendimo galimybe, tačiau drauge pabrėžiama, kad jos įgyvendinimas kol kas atrodo mažai tikėtinas. Nepaisant to, dabartinėje situacijoje ir Lietuvoje, ir aplink ją reiškiasi nemažai palankių bendros saugumo situacijos tendencijų, kurios ir dabar teikia pakankamai daug galimybių racionaliai saugumo politikai.Tuo tarpu neigiama Komisijos nuomonė dėl lietuvos paraiškų stoti į ES skatina dar kartą atsigręžti į narystės ES ekonominės naudos ir kaštų problemą. Atlikta analizė rodo, kad stojimo į ES/EB naudos ir kaštų balansas nėra vienareikšmis. Įsijungimas į Europos bendrąją rinką atneštų neabejotinus prisitaikymo kaštus, bet ir atvertų daug didesnių galimybių. Todėl nors ir galima sutikti su teiginiu, kad nėra alternatyvų Lietuvos narystei ES, tačiau prieš priimant sprendimus turėtų būti identifikuotos ir išanalizuotos įvairios stojimo į ES strategijos