Visegrad cooperation

Political Systems of Visegrad Group Countries. Editor Wojciech Gizicki. Trnava - Lublin : University of Ss Cyril and Methodius in Trnava in international cooperation with The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin 2012.



Juraj Marušiak. The Political System in the Slovak Republic, p. 107-148

This chapter explores how the EU–V4 relations have changed through the course of transformation from an external, regional domain to an internal partnership. Keeping in mind the fact that the V4 has become an integral part of the European Union, the analysis clearly necessitates slight modifications, compared to other case studies of the book. Thus the chapter is constructed as follows. The first part will start with the V4’s historical background between 1991 and 2004. It proceeds with the introduction of institutional relations, which in this special case will mostly focus on the V4’s institutional positions within the European Union. The ­second part of the study will demonstrate the challenges and opportunities ahead the EU–V4 relations. One the one hand, it will focus on the role of the “Visegrád brand”, and highlight its importance for the Group, while it will also introduce the added value of the V4 to the EU’s external relations. On the other hand, the analysis will also highlight political, social and economic challenges of the Visegrád Group, to point out some problems which could fundamentally undermine sustained effective cooperation among the V4. The chapter concludes, based on V4 voting patterns in the Council of the Ministers of the EU, as well as demographic and economic challenges, that internal division in the V4 prevents greater long-term cooperation.

The concept of “multispeed integration”is a re-occurring theme, evoked periodically by both supporters and opponents of deeper integration, when the consensus on the speed and direction of the integration was weak. This also leads to a vagueness of the concept – especially when similar concepts, with partly overlapping meanings, are simultaneously
used in the discussion.
This paper discusses the perception of multispeed integration” in Visegrad countries. It does not have an ambition to provide comprehensive definitions, nor detailed description of the history
of this concept. Instead, it focuses on the current debate on the future of
the European integration, framed by the years 2014-2019.

The aim of the publication is to analyze whether there is any Visegrad commonly shared identity or not and what could be the integrative factor of the Visegrad Group. The authors of the publication cover the following topics – historical identities; historical memory; economic cohesion and the level of
economic cooperation of the V4 states; the role of the Visegrad topics in the university education and the political culture of the V4 states.

The publication shows that the Visegrad cooperation is still based on the interests rather than on the commonly shared identity. However, the citizens of V4 countries already perceive Visegrad as a relevant and meaningful regional group. The fact that Visegrad is considered by the domestic political
elites as well as by the political elites abroad as a “brand” or “mark” has a significant contribution to the construction of the regional identity. However, still the motivation of the political leaders to develop the Visegrad cooperation is more pragmatic than based on the awareness of belonging together. The
external factors (the EU, gas crisis between Russia and Ukraine in January 2009) and their demand for response still have more efficient impact on the strengthening of V4 cooperation compared to the pressure from inside.
V4 could be regarded as more successful project of transition and integration compared to the rest of post-communist states in Central and East Europe both from political and economic perspective. However, there are still substantial differences in the level of economic development, impact of crisis
on the V4 states economies, in the living standards, as well as in the political cultures and patterns of political behaviour of citizens. The region of Central and East Europe, including Visegrad, still remains a periphery of the EU, although the EU membership of V4 countries and generally the EU presence in the entire region acts as a factor of stability and contributes to its de-peripheralization. The significant trend for the Visegrad societies is the decreasing level of democracy and growing support of authoritarianism in the region. The de-democratization is not purely the result of sophisticated political programs of certain parts of Visegrad political elites, but it is a result of subconscious practice and pragmatically formulated short-term political targets. However, Visegrad is still a zone of stability, compared to South, South East and East Europe, in part because of the more successful reforms in 1990s and higher efficiency of governance. The peripheralization and marginalization still remains a certain threat for the V4 and Central Europe in general. Such threats are not only the results of the economic or political infrastructure inherited from the Communist past, but their sources consist in some domestic policies implemented since the political changes at the turn of 1980s and 1990s. The improvement of the efficiency of the government’s engagement in the economy is highly recommended. The changes are required in the regional policy as well in order to push the subnational territorial units to formulate their own autonomous approaches to regional development in order to overcome the regional disparities. A significant gap still persists between the “old EU members” and Central European states, including V4, in the financing of the education, science and welfare system. The underdevelopment of these branches could have a negative impact on the future of democracy in the entire region of Central and East Europe.

Content

Introduction (Juraj Marušiak)

Chapter 1
Historical Dimension of Mutual Relationships of Visegrad Members (Zdeněk Veselý)

Chapter 2
Regional Trajectories and Regional Policies in V4 Region: Consequences of Scalar
Restructuring of Neoliberal Globalization (Pavel Šuška)

Chapter 3
Economic Legitimacy of Visegrad Group (Franjo Štiblar)

Chapter 4
Precipices beneath Summits? The Visegrad Cooperation Seen from Middle Policy Levels (Artur Wołek)

Chapter 5
Mental Map of the V4 Group or How Do We Perceive Each Other? (Oľga Gyárfášová)

Chapter 6
The Visegrad Topic in University Education (Andor Mészáros)

Chapter 7
V4 at a Crossroad? (Svetozár Krno)

Chapter 8
Visegrad Group - an Unstable Periphery of the European Union? (Juraj Marušiak)

Concluding Remarks (Juraj Marušiak)

The topic of this publication is the influence of nationalism in Central Europe. Developments in the region since 1989 have confirmed that expectations of the time in which the spirit of social solidarity and ideals of civic equality would weaken the effectiveness of nationalism as a constructive principle of the functioning of political communities and countries have been less than accurate. Immediately
after the fall of the communist regimes, the perceived broader region of Central and Eastern Europe was undergoing a reconfiguration that resulted in a significant change in its map. But nationalism repeatedly confirmed its power and ability to establish emotional ties and relationships of solidarity across social, ideological and often even the ethnic and cultural fractioning of the society. Nationalism or its absence in the form of an integrating state idea, stood at the fall of multinational federal states in Central and Eastern Europe but at the same time nationalism has shown its integrative function in the newly-established countries.
This publication consists of five chapters.
1) Central Europe and the Issue of the Right of Nations for Self-Determination (Stredná Európa a problematika práva národov na sebaurčenie), by Juraj Marušiak
2) National and State Symbols in Countries of Central Europe after 1989 (Národné a štátne symboly v krajinách strednej Európy po roku 1989), by Ivan Halász
3) The Issue of the Right of Minorities in Central Europe. Comments on the History and Current Status of the Minority Issue in the Region (Problematika práv menšín v strednej Európe. Poznámky k dejinám a súčasnosti menšinovej problematiky v regióne), by Ivan Halász
4) Historical Memory and Polish Foreign Political Thought after 1989 (Historická pamäť a poľské zahraničnopolitické myslenie po roku 1989), by Mateusz Gniazdowski
5) Central Europe in Polish Foreign Policy (Stredná Európa v zahraničnej politike Poľska), by Mateusz Gniazdowski.

The setbacks of the Visegrad Group on the level of end-game negotiation as well as its absence in EU macro-regional strategy projects show that the mechanism of the “hard power”, such as economic potential or number of votes in the EU institutions are not sufficient to enforce the interests of the V4 or its member states on the European level. On the other hand the Visegrad Group and the V4+ format is an attractive and respected negotiation platform both within the EU as well as between the V4 and the “third states”.
Therefore the main hypothesis of the presented publication is that one of the main sources of attractiveness and tools of the influence of the Visegrad Group on the decision making process in the EU, on the Central European EU members, existing or potential EU-candidates and the “third states” is the “soft power” of the Group, i.e. its ability to achieve preferable outcomes in world politics because other states want to follow it or have agreed to a situation that produces such effects” (Nye, 1990, 166). Subsequently the research question is what the content of the Visegrad Group soft power could be and if V4 has remained the “trade mark” of Central European states, the content of which could be a trade mark now in the post-accession period?Authors cover the following aspects of the Visegrad cooperation: cooperation of the V4 states and the presence of the V4 within the framework of EU; cooperation in military and security areas;; opportunities for the transit between the East and West; V4 as the target region for the
immigrants from „third countries“; the level of religiosity and secularization in Central Europe as a part of Visegrad´s soft power; threats and opportunities for V4 within the framework of EU Eastern Partnership Program. According to the authors of the publication Visegrad remains the most viable and most functioning regional initiative in Central Europe and the V4 + format allowed to transform this group to the specific centre of gravity for the wider region of Central and East-Central Europe. The main findings of the presented publications are that the role of the Visegrad Group in Europe is increasing. Its success is conditioned by the awareness of the V4 states of the need for cooperation as well as by their willingness to continue in the process of modernization. We have to correct our initial hypothesis, according to
which the main tool of the strengthening of the V4 position in Europe is the soft power. V4 could play the role of the European security and economic actor; however the main condition of the economic success of the Visegrad sub-region will be investment in education and infrastructure. Nevertheless, the crucial prerequisite of the success of the Visegrad Group and cooperation in the Central European area will be the success of the European Union and its ability to overcome the current economic and financial crisis. The success of European integration will also have a decisive impact on the future development of the domestic and foreign policy of the East European states.

Content


Instead of Introduction - how much is Visegrad Present in Europe? (Juraj Marušiak)
Part I.
Visegrad in the EU and NATO

Chapter 1
The Visegrad Group between the Trade-mark and the Political Organization of the Peripheral Countries (Piotr Bajda)

Chapter 2
“Success” of V4 Countries in European External Action Service (Radoslava Brhlíková)

Chapter 3
Visegrad cooperation in military and security areas (Zbyněk Dubský)

Part II.
Economic, Cultural and Socio-Demographic Challenges to the V4 states

Chapter 4
Visegrad Transit – Information and Transport Region (Jaromír Hladký)

Chapter 5
Modern Migration and Electoral Integration of Immigrants in Central Europe (Iván Halász)

Chapter 6
Policy towards Ethnic Minorities in Slovakia and in the V4 Countries in the Context of the European Union. Three Possible Scenarios of Future Development (Zuzana Poláčková)

Chapter 7
Is a “Christian Center” in Central-Eastern Europe Emerging? Comparison of the Level of Religiosity and Secularization in Central Europe in the European Context (David Reichardt)

Part III.
Visegrad and the New Challenges in the Eastern Europe

Chapter 8
Russian Neo-Imperialism: Ideal Aspiration or New Geopolitical Reality (Pavel Usov)

Chapter 9
Ukraine and the Visegrad Group Countries: Cooperation within the Framework of Eastern Partnership and the Political Realities in Ukraine (Galina Zelenko)

Chapter 10
"The Right for Freedom to Religion and Belief" Road Map for the Promotion of MultiReligious Belarus in the Framework of the European Integrative Projects (Natalia Kutuzova, Iryna Mikheyeva)

Conclusions (Juraj Marušiak)

This collected volume presents research focusing on the interaction of domestic, foreign, and transnational actors in the process of the construction of national interests. The contributors concentrate on the extent to which the role of non-state actors has strengthened the formulating of national interests of the Slovak Republic in the post-integration period. The authors elaborated on the working hypotheses that basic foreign policy preferences of the Slovak Republic are, to a certain extent, defined by political elites and that the actors of the civic society remain predominantly passive on this issue.

Editor: Radoslava Brhlíková
Authors: Juraj Marušiak, László Öllös, Radoslava Brhlíková, Norbert Kmeť, Radoslav Štefančík, Dirk Dalberg, Tibor Szentandrási, David Reichardt

ISBN: 9783838214177

The aim of this  report is  to  assess  the  first half of  the Czech V4 presidency and to suggest key  recommendations for  the remaining time of  the presidency. The assessment is based
on  the Presidency’s  own priorities,  but also on the overall context in which the Presidency  is  taking place .The report is  based on  individual  opinions of  the  authors above and also, partly, on existing analyses provided by  Think Visegrad throughout the year 2015