Suchergebnisse

Political developments in three contemporary Central & Eastern European states -- the Czech Republic, Hungary, & Poland -- are analyzed to ascertain whether an enlarged North Atlantic Treaty Organization is actually beneficial for the international alliance. Several characteristics of the aforementioned countries that have produced questionable benefits for the Organizations are identified, eg, the Central & Eastern European states are receiving few external pressures to modernize their military forces. The damaging effects of these nations inadequate military contributions to both their own national security & to the Organizations ability to respond to crises & maintain political cohesiveness are then considered. It is subsequently asserted that the Organizations addition of Central & Eastern European countries was an effective short-term approach to consolidating regional loyalty but will produce long-term consequences due to those nations military incompetence. The implications of the Organizations possible dissolution for Central & Eastern European members are also pondered. Tables. J. W. Parker

Das Papier thematisiert den augenblicklichen Stand zur Osterweiterung der EU. Ausgehend von der Metapher des Querfeldeinrennens betont der Verfasser vier grundlegende Aspekte. Erstens: die Mittel- und Osteuropäischen Staaten laufen in Konkurrenz, kämpfen aber auch um das Erreichen der Ziellinie. Zwar haben die Teilnehmer freiwillig beschlossen, am Rennen teilzunehmen, sie bestimmen aber nicht dessen Regeln. Zweitens, erweist sich der Weg nach Europa länger als erwartet. Für viele MOE-Staaten erwies es sich als schwierig, jene Akteure zu schaffen, die überhaupt erst die neuen Gesetze umzusetzen vermögen. Drittens: die Teilnehmer erwarten unvorhergesehene Hindernisse, insbesondere mit Blick auf den acquis communautaire. Viertens: die Belohnung für das Erreichen der Ziellinie fällt geringer aus als erwartet. Daraus folgt eine zunehmende Ermüdung und Frustration der Beitragskandidaten. (WSI-Mitteilungen / FUB)

In the past decade, political elites in Central and Eastern Europe have often sought to imitate Western organizational and institutional models, while organizations like the EU and NATO have often acted as "institutional tutors" in the region. Using evidence from Hungary and the Czech Republic, this paper demonstrates why imitating Western structures has been both administratively expedient and useful in building political coalitions. It also stresses that the short‐term benefits of doing so are followed by longer‐term costs. The paper answers four questions: How have certain models been held up to CEE elites? Why might some such models be targets for elites to imitate? How does such imitation occur? And what results from imitation? Contrary to expectations that institutional modeling would be merely technocratic and used only yearly in the transformation, the paper's threefold heuristic of templates, thresholds, and adjustments shows that the process is both politically contentious and sustained.

This article examines the proposition that there is a trade-off between imitation and innovation when state elites try to "borrow" institutional designs from other polities. After synthesizing theoretical propositions both for and against a trade-off, the article develops evidence from case studies of two periods in which such institutional borrowing was widely practiced: the post-World War II American occupation of Germany and German reunification after 1989. It concludes that imitation sparked innovation in both periods, although for two very different reasons. The article emphasizes the relation of the research findings to theories of institutional creation and change.