In the twentieth century, two world wars and mass genocides, committed by totalitarian regimes, destroyed natural human rights and suppressed people’s personalities, becoming a self-contradiction of civilization. These pan-European processes left their mark on local processes which derived from them. The diffi cult Russian-Polish neighborhood is nothing else but a local manifestation of the pan-European history of the twentieth century.
The situation was diff erent in the Renaissance and Baroque periods. It was then, in the seventeenth century, that Poland gained a predominant role as a mediator in Russia’s attempts to bring its protracted era of Middle Ages to an end. The essence of this phenomenon was embedded in the fact that for Russianness, Polishness was a mirror of contemporary Europeanism, and, at the same time, a model of its adjustment to the culture of their Slavic neighbor. In the eighteenth century, as a result of levelling out the high Russian and Polish culture, the role of the latter as a mediator and a model ceased to give way to equal partnership. The implementation of universal ideas of the Enlightenment era and Poles’ desire to regain independence were understandable and close to the hearts of representatives of the Russian civil society. This very kind of Europeanism connected Russians and Poles in the sphere of culture, and, subsequently, the politics as its derivative.

In Cyprus historiography there are very few academic and objective studies dealing with the political role of the autocephalous Cypriot Orthodox Church during the Ottoman period (1571–1878) and at the beginning of the British rule (1878–1900).
The beginnings of christianity in Cyprus go back to the Apostolic times. After the Third Crusade, orthodox Cyprus started to be reigned by Roman Catholic Lusignans and later by Venice, until in 1571 it was conquered by the Ottomans. The arrival of the Ottomans meant the rebirth of the Orthodox Church and the increasing infl uence of her bishops and clergy. The article discusses especially the fast growing power and political infl uence of the bishops and archbishops, who became the ethnarchs of the Cypriots, being their sole represenatives at the Porte. For the ethnarchs, who derived their power from the Ottoman imperial centre, cooperation (or, indeed, collaboration) with the Porte and its offi cers in Cyprus (namely, the muhassil and the dragoman) was the only strategy possible to maintain their political, social and economic power in the island.
The identities and the political activity of particular archbishops are presented, with special emphasis on Philoteos (1734–1759), during whose reign the infl uence of the ethnarch started to increase rapidly, Kyprianos I (1810–1821), under whom the infl uence reached its peak but after the tragic events of 1821 disappeared almost completely, and Sophronios III (1865–1900), the fi rst archbishop of the British period, when the position and the political infl uence of the ethnarch was seriously questioned.

The aim of the paper is to outline the characteristic features of religious polemics, held during the Hussite era, i.e. in the years 1419–1471. The forms of polemics, from direct correspondence to treaties, were presented in the article. Special attention was devoted to the specifi c motives that weren’t the direct object of the polemics, but shaped their rhetoric and determined the fi eld of interpretation. They include the attitude towards cultural and ecclesial tradition, the concept of the Antichrist etc. Finally, examples of manipulation of quotes that were used in the argumentation, from taking words out of context to forgery, were presented.

This article focuses on the fi gure and the political leadership of Nikola Pašić, the greatest Serbian politician and the leader of the National Radical Party. He had a signifi cant impact on the politics of Serbia during the period of 40 years at the turn of the 20th and 21st century, as he repeatedly held the position of a minister and Prime Minister of Serbia, and subsequently, Prime Minister of the first Yugoslavia. Being a graduate of ETH Zurich, in politics, he represented extreme conservatism, which was essentially at odds with the name of the radical movement, headed by him. In politics, he proclaimed collectivism, rather than individualism. His political philosophy was based on the recognition of the special role of the Serbian peasantry as the creators of the Serbian state and the main political actors in the country. In foreign policy, in turn, he attributed a special role to Russia, a country with which he was hoping to create the Slavic Orthodox civilization.

The presentation focuses on federalist project and plans, political initiatives and addressing officials, (some of the) reactions of the Romanian intellectual and political elites to these projects, as well as their interpretations proposed by the Romanian historiography. Let us begin by stating that the Romanian culture is a distinctive example of the Central-European perception of being “in-between”, along with its possible conceptualizations, being mitigated by the deeply rooted conviction of the “enclave-like” character of this culture. The historic Habsburg heritage is presented exclusively negatively, and a number of historical fi gures, including both politicians and artists, are criticized for their “pro-Habsburg” or “pro-German” agitation, which is considered anti-national.

In the 19th century, the period of dynamic development in Central Europe, several nations stood out due to their nationalism which became the most important principle of political, cultural and social life. At the same time, Germany’s attempts to gain total control of the region were particularly apparent. According to contemporary views, prevailing among the supporters of the ‘Greater German’ solution for the future of Central Europe, the fi ght for the “imperial position of the uniform German Reich in the world” meant, primarily, a campaign against the Slavs. This was due to the fact that the Slavs represented the majority among the nations which were a part of the Habsburg monarchy, whose closer links with Germany were an indispensable condition for survival.
However, the ruling circles in Berlin increasingly raised doubts as to whether keeping alive the decaying Habsburg monarchy is reasonable. A question was asked whether it would be a better solution to rather incorporate Cisleithania, including the Czech countries, directly into Germany. The breakthrough in the development of Central Europe was the First World War. Germany also justifi ed the unleashing of the war as a necessity for the survival of Austro-Hungary. The main opponent of German plans for the governance over Central and Eastern Europe was Russia. Therefore, following the defeat of the Russian army on the Eastern Front in May 1915 and moving of the troops of the Central Powers towards the East with the subsequent occupation of the Russian annexed part of the original Kingdom of Poland, also known as Congress Poland, the future of Poland and, at the same time, of the Habsburg Monarchy, along with the prospects of potential reconstruction of the Austro- Hungarian monarchy into a trialistic state, became a burning issue. In addition to the external pressure, Vienna also felt the internal pressure from supporters of close ties between the Habsburg Monarchy and Germany. In its quest for a total subjugation of Central Europe, Berlin attracted supporters with crystallized views in the very Austro Hungary, primarily, among Greater German nationalists in Cisleithania who fully identifi ed themselves with imperialistic plans of the German Empire. At the same time, they also hoped to push through their own imperialistic claims in the Habsburg Monarchy, by introducing an unconditional German hegemony in Cisleithania. However, the defeat of the German army on the Western Front in August 1918 forced Berlin to strongly reevaluate its initial, somewhat excessive, imperialistic ambitions. Although Germany’s former imperialistic aspirations were irretrievably lost, Berlin was not going to accept the fact that the war (although lost) would not bring any benefi t. Therefore, it focused its attention on its neighbour and ally, and considered the ‘Anschluss’, i.e. the acquisition of certain parts of the crumbling Habsburg monarchy. To this end, it intended to use, in particular, the Greater German tendencies in Cisleithania. The eff orts to maintain the German hegemony over Central Europe, and stressing the need of protection against ‘the danger of Bolshevism’ from the East in the post-war period became some of the most important tools of foreign policy, and, subsequently, led to the renewal of Germany’s imperial ambitions. They also included conscious striving for the original Greater German solution for the future of Central Europe, although adapted to the contemporary ideological situation of the empire, due to the unleashing of World War II.

During the Second World War and in the early post-war years, one of the most important centers of Polish Emigration of Independence was formed in Tel Aviv. In January 1945, 2291 Polish civil refugees resided in the city (with the total of 6718 Poles throughout all of Palestine). Among them, there were numerous representatives of the pre-war elite from the world of science, culture and politics. Poles developed a rich socio-cultural activity. Tel Aviv became home to a number of Polish organizations and schools; in the city, Polish newspapers and books were issued, and the health care system and Polish church ministry was also organized. A kind of national life abroad was success fully created. However, the situation of refugees changed in July 1945, when Great Britain and the United States annulled the recognition of the Polish Government in Exile.
This brought about the gradual liquidation of institutions associated with the government. In 1946, the responsibility for refugees was assumed by the UNRRA. A vast majority of Poles remained loyal to the Polish government in London and decided not to return to their homeland where the Communists took over the government of the state. Soldiers and their family members were evacuated to Great Britain. The IRO took care of others, transporting them to temporary camps in Europe. The Arab-Jewish confl ict wasn’t conducive to a prolonged stay of Poles in Palestine. In 1948, the Polish Emigration of Independence in Tel Aviv gradually disappeared.

The article describes the political initiatives which have launched their operation in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia in recent years. They include the following groups: ‘Ano’ and ‘Úsvit Přímé Demokracie‘ in the Czech Republic, Slovakia’s ‘OL’aNO’, and Poland’s ‘Kukiz’15’. A distinctive feature of these groups is their nonpartisan nature, which is important in light of the fact that the organizations are involved in political activities and participate in elections. Another important element of the activity of the aforementioned actors is calling for a mass civic engagement and emphasizing the need for the widespread use of direct democracy mechanisms. The functioning of the described subjects was analysed in light of the growing criticism of the functioning of political parties. Attention was drawn to the fact that, in their present form, these initiatives cannot be considered as potentially eff ective carriers of changes in the fi eld of party politics in the named countries. Despite some sort of radicalism, presented by them, as well as anti-partisanship and calling for civic engagement, these organizations bring to mind the type of parties known as corporation-like political parties, or parties headed by entrepreneurs, i.e. parties that, despite some specifi c features, are still political parties and cannot constitute an alternative for people who have been disillusioned with the activities of parties as such.

Within the period of Macedonian language codifi cation two tendencies emerged: one language majority headed by Venko Markovski and another one preceded by Blaže Koneski. The language differences among the language majority and minority were a matter of crucial fact. The language minority, with the help of the Macedonian and Yugoslav political nomenclature defeated the language majority and imposed their own language views.

Przedmiotem artykułu jest ukazanie roli, jaką spełniają mniejszości – z jednej strony grecka, żyjąca w Albanii, z drugiej zaś albańska – w Grecji, w generowaniu konfl iktów lub ich wyciszaniu, czyli zobrazowanie ich wpływu na wzajemne relacje między Atenami i Tiraną. W tym celu wykorzystano teorię instrumentalnego ujęcia konfl iktów na tle narodowym i religijnym, które tacy uczeni jak: A. Cohen, Anthony D. Smith, Stephan Cornell i Dauglas Hartmann1 uważają w obecnej dobie za najistotniejszą kwestię dla badań nad antagonizmami. Uznają oni bowiem, że spory powstające na tle etnicznym i religijnym są w dużej mierze kreowane przez elity polityczne, liderów politycznych, którzy wskazują na odmienną tożsamość kulturową, religijną, narodową – czyli specyfi kę poszczególnych grup, których świadomość wspólnotowa jest niezaprzeczalna2. Podstawowym celem nie jest zatem odpowiedź na pytanie, jak dalece różnorodność poszczególnych regionów (zwłaszcza pogranicza) i wspólnot jest czynnikiem wystarczającym, by do konfl iktów dochodziło, ale w jakim stopniu polityka poszczególnych państw ma wpływ na łagodzenie, a nawet zapobieganie, czy też odwrotnie, celowe podtrzymywanie konfl iktów czy wręcz ich kreowanie. Niezbędnym instrumentem w realizacji tych procesów jest odwoływanie się władzy, elit politycznych czy też ich liderów do „zbiorowej nazwy własnej, wspólnego pochodzenia, kultywowania pamięci historycznej, jednego lub wielu elementów wspólnej kultury, do związków z określoną ‘ojczyzną’ i do pewnego stopnia solidarności”3. Najważniejszym zadaniem będzie wykazanie, że tak w Grecji, jak i w Albanii doszło do wyraźnego uzależnienia polityki mniejszościowej od historii, a także jej wykorzystania w bieżącej polityce zagranicznej obydwóch państw. 

The concept of ethnic policy has become the subject of studies by political scientists only relatively recently, while the phenomena associated with ethno-politics, according to the defi nitions given by researchers, have been an area of research within various disciplines since the development of social sciences. The subject of minorities in Serbia (in the area of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, Sandžak, the Preševa Valley and the neighbouring communities) is the subject, raised by Polish researchers, and the scope of their research covers the period of the fi rst decade of the 21st century. The Republic of Serbia is a country, in which relations between minorities evolve not only on the formal and institutional level, but also in real life. The text aims to present the ethnic policy of Serbia in several theoretical aspects, towards selected minority groups, which are representative from the point of view of the presentation of the minority problem in the country.

The article raises the issue of the functioning of those political parties which aspire to the role of the representatives of minorities in Bulgaria and in the Republic of Macedonia. In particular, whether the functioning of these parties is conducive to the eff ective integration of these groups into public life has been examined. The research showed that the role and the importance of a minority group in the system of state institutions is primarily determined by its size. Consequently, the issues related to the fi ght for the interests of minorities are fully monopolized by the parties of the Albanians (in Macedonia) and the representative of the Turkish community (in Bulgaria). This situation can cause tensions between the minorities.