MEĐUNARODNI PROBLEMI

Abstract ▼

In an increasingly multipolar international system, small states like Serbia exert complex strategic dilemmas in navigating great power competition. This paper investigates Serbia\'s hedging strategy between its two main poles of foreign policy preference—China and the European Union—by integrating political, security, and economic insights. The authors assess three possible strategic orientations: Serbia\'s China-bound hedging approach, a de-hedging shift toward bandwagoning with the EU, and a “win-win” strategy that seeks to synergize the interests of both powers. Using a mixed-methods approach, we employ quantitative analysis based on the COMPASS Dataset alongside qualitative assessments of key contingency scenarios to evaluate Serbia\'s strategic calculus during 2024. Our findings show that risk-prone contingencies have an important impact on both hedging and de-hedging policies. They highlight the importance of adaptive, multipolar foreign policies in maintaining strategic autonomy while maximizing economic and security benefits. The analysis presented herein underscores that Serbia\'s hedging strategy is a delicate and complex approach to navigating the contemporary geopolitical landscape, implicating leveraging economic opportunities, security demands and political changes.

Abstract ▼

This article explores the political philosophy of the French Fifth Republic through an analysis of its institutional architecture, ideological foundations, and specific model of power organization. Established in 1958 as a response to the instability of previous republican regimes, the Fifth Republic relied on strong presidential leadership and a majoritarian electoral system to ensure long-term political stability. However, over the course of its history, this model has faced internal contradictions, oscillating between the ideal of popular sovereignty and the Bonapartist personalization of power. The article examines the key institutional mechanisms of the Fifth Republic and their connections to both the republican tradition and Bonapartist elements, shedding light on how executive and legislative power are constituted and redefined. Special emphasis is placed on a theoretical reflection on institutions as arenas of struggle for legitimacy and the redistribution of political power, drawing on the sociological and institutional theories of Pierre Bourdieu, Claude Lefort, and Pierre Rosanvallon. The central hypothesis of this study is that the current political crisis of the Fifth Republic is intrinsically linked to an institutional model that no longer corresponds to the evolving socio-political dynamics. Through a historical-sociological and institutional analysis, the article investigates both the structural factors that have sustained the longevity of this regime and those that have led to its gradual dysfunction.

Abstract ▼

This paper focuses on the disputes between Greece and Turkey following the Greek military dictatorship and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974 in the Aegean/Eastern Mediterranean. These disputes involve sensitive issues of sovereignty over territorial waters and sovereign rights in the exclusive economic zone/epicontinental shelf. The research question seeks to explain how these crises, including their outbreak, course, and resolution, can be understood? Through an analysis of parliamentary minutes, documents, scientific literature and media reports in Greek and English, the argument is made that previous crises within these disputes, which have not escalated to war, are best explained by the specific foreign policies crafted by both countries. Rather than relying on “grand” theories of international relations, the complex process of formulating foreign policies plays a crucial role in shaping the development and resolution of these crises. This process in influenced by three key factors: 1) the perception of the state leadership in Greece and Turkey regarding their proximity to the USA/EU, 2) political dynamics including tension between opposition and government, coalition parties, factions within ruling parties, leadership qualities and styles, and the influence of state apparatus such as the military 3) miscommunications between states and random events that can impact the course of these disputes.

Abstract ▼

This paper offers a comparative analysis of the ideational pursuits of two thinkers—Giulio Alberoni and Robert Schuman—regarding pan-European political cooperation and reconciliation. The central research question is whether their ideas, despite differing approaches, were directed toward achieving the same goal — lasting peace in Europe. Using content analysis of Alberoni’s “Scheme“ as well as two speeches Schuman gave at the United Nations and his 1950 Declaration, the paper explores Alberoni’s concept of European unification through military alliances and territorial redistribution, contrasted with Schuman’s economic integration model based on shared interests. Despite the considerable historical and contextual distance between the two political thinkers — which prevents drawing absolute parallels — this comparison is academically relevant in light of their views on overcoming conflict through European integration, political cooperation, and ideological ties such as the influence of religion on politics. The findings show that both models had a peacebuilding character, but that modern European integration was primarily achieved through economic mechanisms rather than military-political dominance. Furthermore, Christian influence is evident in both visions, though more explicit and dominant in Alberoni’s ideas — shaped by his era and framed within the notion of Europe as a Christian continent. The paper concludes that Schuman’s vision represents a realized model of European unity through institutionalized cooperation, while Alberoni’s academically underexplored plan remains a historical example of early geopolitical thought about a united Europe.