O presente trabalho visa analisar a política externa da União das Repúblicas Socialistas Soviéticas (URSS) no período de 1917 a 1985. Até 1953, a política da URSS caracterizou-se como defensiva: buscava, em meio a um período de profunda crise do sistema capitalista, evitar as invasões a seu território, objetivando a modernização acelerada não apenas para integrar o país ao mundo produtivo e industrializado, como para também ter condições materiais de defender-se e de combater os inimigos em caso de guerra. No período posterior a 1953, o status de grande potência e líder do bloco socialista marcou um novo capítulo na história da política externa soviética – isso porque obterá um caráter mais reativo, em decorrência de um novo contexto internacional, que se estruturava na competição intersistêmica do bloco capitalista e socialista, como exposto por Fred Halliday. A URSS atuou no intuito de promover aliados e parcerias, especialmente no Terceiro Mundo. Dessa forma, como um todo, a URSS acabou por também promover uma política de coexistência pacífica contra o imperialismo, impulsionando uma mudança qualitativa nas relações de poder para as relações internacionais. / This study aims to analyze the foreign policy of the USSR in the period from 1917 to 1985. Until 1953, the policy of the USSR was known as defensive, as sought in the midst of a period of profound crisis of the capitalist system, prevent intrusions into its territory, seeking accelerated modernization not only in order to integrate the country into productive and industrialized world, but also to be able to defend material conditions and fight enemies in case of war. After 1953, the status of great power and leader of the socialist bloc marked a new chapter in the history of soviet foreign policy, giving a more reactive perspective to its actions as a result of a new international environment: the intersystem competition among the capitalist bloc and the socialist bloc, as exposed by Fred Halliday. Thus, the USSR acts in order to promote partnerships and allies, especially in the Third World. Thus, as a whole, the USSR also ends up promoting a policy of peaceful coexistence, against imperialism, driving a qualitative shift in power relations to international relations.

O presente trabalho se propõe a refletir acerca da trajetória do pensamento político e econômico de Mikhail Gorbachev durante os anos em que esteve à frente do Partido Comunista da URSS e conduziu as reformas iniciadas em 1985. Não se trata, portando, de um estudo minucioso da perestroika, nem de um trabalho biográfico sobre o último líder máximo soviético. Nosso enfoque se volta para as rupturas e continuidades no entendimento do secretário-geral quanto às políticas adotadas e à própria natureza do regime. O exame crítico pormenorizado das diversas intervenções e publicações de Gorbachev nos permite demonstrar como transitam na sua visão conceitos chaves como a introdução de elementos de mercado na economia, a burocracia partidária e a democratização da sociedade e do sistema político da URSS. Torna-se possível ainda compreender o caminho percorrido na visão do líder quanto à própria ideia de socialismo, que caminha da filiação aos pilares ideológicos oficiais para uma vertente cada vez mais próxima da socialdemocracia, bem como a natureza do regime que conduzia, que ao final seria caracterizado por ele como totalitário. / This paper aims to reflect on the path of political and economic thought of Mikhail Gorbachev during the years he was ahead of the USSR Communist Party and led the reforms initiated in 1985. It is not, in this sense, a detailed study of perestroika or a biographical work on the last Soviet leader. Our focus turns to the ruptures and continuities in understanding the Secretary-General as to the adopted policies and the very nature of the regime. The detailed critical examination of the various interventions and Gorbachev publications allows us to demonstrate how key concepts transiting in his vision as the introduction of market elements in the economy, the party bureaucracy and the democratization of society and the political system of the USSR. It is also possible to understand the path taken in the leader\'s vision about the very idea of socialism, which walks of membership in the official ideological pillars to a shed ever closer to social democracy, and the nature of the regime he led, that in the end he characterized as totalitarian.

Finnish-Russian relations after the end of Cold war are considered to be a unique form of cooperation between countries of different ideological backgrounds. This thesis focuses on the analysis of mutual historical relations of Finland and Russia, which overlap to the time after the end of the Cold war; these are deep rooted in Finland's primary endeavor to keep its status of neutrality. The main aim of this thesis is the evaluation of Finnish postneutrality as an effective tool of foreign policy against Russia with respect to the historical reflection of both countries with most regard to the social and cultural differences in the society. The base theory for determinating mutual sociocultural distinction is social constructivism from which the national identities are defined. These are essential for the enemy image provision and above all for the evaluation of the Finnish foreign policy and Finnish political behavior towards Russia. The changes and transformation of the concept of postneutrality follows in regard to the integration process in Europe with the emphasis on the security keeping possibilities related to the potential accession to NATO.

Even though the Cold War ended almost 30 years ago, it has been one the most discussed phenomenon not only among IR scholars but also within the public. The whole Cold War discourse addresses many controversial question and who ended the Cold War is one of these questions. Basically, there are two schools of thought, one of which gives the credit to General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev and his reform policies. The second one perceives the US President Ronald Reagan and his unapologetic foreign policy as the most decisive factor in the End of the Cold War. By employing the methodology of analysis, this thesis aims to assess the impact of Ronald Reagan and his foreign policy on the End of the Cold War. This thesis tests the hypothesis that Ronald Reagan and his foreign policy were the most decisive factor in the End of the Cold War.

The topic of this thesis is the question of EU's involvement in the resolution of the Middle East conflict (in a narrower sense the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians) and the survey of common positions and differences of the EU and other significant participants (especially the USA and the USSR/Russia). The ultimate objective is to assess the contribution and role of the EU in the whole process based on its analysis. The first part of the thesis outlines the evolution of the Middle East conflict from the creation of the State of Israel up to the present (May 2008), the second part deals with the analysis of West European states' and EU's approach towards the Peace Process and the the third part contains a comparison of the EU's positions with selected key participants (the USA and the USSR/Russia).

Loss of Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia at the End of World War 2 David Hubený Czechoslovakia came by Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia completely unexpectedly after World War 1. The Republic tried with dedication to help the Slavonic population of the region, hardly aware of their nationality, get rid of poverty and ignorance. Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia, however, did not fit into the concept of Czechoslovak statehood. Some Czechoslovak politicians (e.g. Karel Kramář) only perceived the mission of the Republic at Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia as the role of a "faithful trustee" that should hand Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia over to Russia when the right time comes. On the other hand, Czechoslovak Communists called the region Trans-Carpathian Ukraine as early as 1920s and alleged that the local Slavonic population are Ukrainians. The Republic did not want to get involved in the ethnic development. At the time of the "Second Republic", power in Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia was seized by Ukrainian Nationalists, who colluded with Nazis. The former saw Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia as kind of Ukrainian Piemont, which would unite all Ukrainians in one state, while the latter found it a perfect tool to destabilize the USSR by opening up the hot Ukrainian issue. Relations of Czechoslovak security services to Ukrainian Nationalists were really bad. Ukrainian...

The work deals with thieves in law as chiefs of Russian-language criminal organizations. On the basis of an analysis of available sources, and their historical, criminologically focused processing, there is examined a hypothesis that criminality represented by the thieves in law creates in its fight against the society a specific form of self-defence. Part of the work being also an answer to a question to what extent today's division into old and new vors is topical, and whether this world has modernized in permanent relation to the environment surrounding it. The author proceeds in his analysis from the role of the thief in law as the individuality acting in constant tension with the society to the characterization of the thieves in law and to relations by which they are connected. He also focuses on power structures to which the thieves in law are subordinated. Thus, the author pursues an overall picture of chiefs of the Vor world and its possible modernization. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

No description available.

在李鴻章的外交生涯中，聯俄政策為最主要部分，也最為後人所詬病。因此 本文以 李鴻章的聯俄外交為研究主題，藉以說明李氏對清季外交問題的體認，以及中俄同盟 的成立及影響。全文包括導論及結論共計五章。正文大要如下： 第二章討論甲午戰前李鴻章對以夷制夷策略的運用，以及和戎的外交主張，藉此探討 李氏早期的外交治術。至於甲午戰前對俄國態度，本章亦專節論述，以說明在确立聯 俄方針前對俄國的認識。 在甲午戰爭爆發，李鴻章一直有引俄介入的想法，直到俄國干涉還遼，朝野形成了一 股聯俄熱，終而有中俄密約簽訂，這是清季聯俄外交的一個關鍵時期，李鴻章一直扮 演相當重要的角色。第三章中將討論這些問題。 從德國佔據膠州灣以後，俄國對華的陰謀已經暴露無遺，但直到庚子事變俄國藉機佔 據東北，李鴻章仍深信俄國的「友誼」，終因俄國藉撤兵多方要挾，聯俄政策乃告徹 底失敗。從此清廷也未再有聯俄之議。第四章主要在探討中俄密約所造成的影響，以 及俄國毀約後中國朝野的態度。 本文在資料運用方面，除了一般所較熟悉的中、英、日文資料外，並儘量顧及俄文史 料，以深入了解俄國在某些問題的立場。另大陸方面陸續整理出版的《李鴻章全集》 ，收集了一部分李氏未曾公開的史料，對本文的撰寫提供了不少意見。

Depuis sa fondation en 1794 par Catherine II, Odessa, cité portuaire de la mer Noire, ne laisse personne indifférent. Conçue pour devenir une utopie urbaine au sein d’une Russie très contraignante, la ville nouvelle – libre de servage, tolérante et entreprenante – attire des populations venues des quatre coins de l’Europe. Les premiers migrants sont en majorité des déshérités, des infortunés et des Juifs persécutés de l’Empire en quête d’un refuge. La société juive naissante éprise de liberté saisit sa chance en s’impliquant activement dans la réalisation de ce chantier ambitieux. Dès les années 1860, premiers frémissements d’un « bonheur juif », des banquiers, des négociants, des intellectuels, des artistes, des bandits et des « Juifs ordinaires » écrivent pareillement le « modernisme » et les légendes colorées d’Odessa la Juive. Le XXe siècle pris entre guerres et révolutions, sonne le glas de l’âge d’or des Juifs d’Odessa avec le retour des pogromes et des massacres de masse. Bon nombre d’entre eux repartent sur les routes de l’exil à la recherche de ports d’attache : onze villes nord-américaines portent le nom d’Odessa. Les Odessites vouent à leur ancienne terre d’adoption un véritable culte, sous des formes plurielles, œuvres littéraires, musicales, picturales et cinématographiques. A la lumière de l’Histoire et de la micro-histoire, l’enjeu de cette recherche sur la communauté juive odessite est d’identifier l’« espace de vérité » de la ville d’Odessa entre mythe et réalité. / Since its creation by Catherine the IInd in 1794, Odessa, a harbour on the Black Sea, leaves no one indifferent. Designed to become an urban utopia within a very compelling Russia, the new town – tolerant, enterprising, and from its origins free from serfdom – has attracted populations from across Europe. The first migrants were mainly poor, hapless people and persecuted Jews from the Empire in search of a refuge. The emerging Jewish society, freedom-loving, seized the opportunity to build an ideal city, culminating in the birth of a “Jewish happiness”. From 1860 onwards, great bankers, merchants, intellectuals, artists, gangsters and labourers all contributed to the “modernism” and the colourful history of the Jewish Odessa. Caught between wars and revolutions, the 20th Century sounded the knell of the golden age for Odessa Jews, with the return of pogroms and mass slaughters. A number of Jews went back to the roads of exile, looking for a new home: eleven North American towns have taken the name of Odessa. “Odessity” worship Odessa-mama: music works, paintings and movies aim at celebrating the glory of the homeland. Considering both the historical and micro-historical legacy, the challenge of this research on the Jewish community from Odessa aims to identify and establish a “truth space” between the real and the imaginary city.