Table Of ContentInstItute of PolItIcal scIence,
slovak academy of scIences
veda, Publishing House of the slovak academy of sciences
Peer reviewed by:
Doc. PhDr. Vladimír Goněc, DrSc.
doc. Phdr. františek Škvrnda, csc.
Juraj Marušiak et al.
IS VISEGRAD STILL
A CENTRAL EUROPEAN
“TRADE MARK”?
Institute of Political science, slovak academy of sciences
veda, Publishing House of the slovak academy of sciences
Bratislava 2013
Coordinating institution:
Institute of Political Science, Slovak Academy of Sciences
Bratislava, Slovakia
Project partners:
Czech Republic
centre of International studies, faculty of International Relations,
university of economics, Prague
Hungary
corvinus university of Budapest, faculty of Public administration, Budapest
Poland
Institute of Political studies, Polish academy of sciences, Warsaw
Acknowledgments
this book is a result of the visegrad strategic Grant nr. 31110009 “visegrad
cooperation and the future of central europe” supported by the International
visegrad fund and project nr. 2/0188/11 “foreign Policy of the slovak Republic
and Perspectives of the Incorporation of the visegrad Group into the Regional
strategy of the eu” funded by the national Grant agency veGa.
© Authors:
Dr. Piotr Bajda; Mgr. Radoslava Brhlíková, PhD.; Ing. Zbyněk Dubský, PhD.;
Dr. habil. Ivan Halász, PhD.; Ing. Jaromír Hladký, CSc.; Dr. Natalia Kutuzova;
Mgr. Juraj M©a rušiak, PhD.; Dr. Iryna Mikheyeva; PhDr. Zuzana Poláčková, CSc.;
Prof. dr. david Reichardt; dr. Pavel usov; Prof. dr. Galyna Zelenko.
translations: Phdr. elena klátiková (chapters 3, 4, 5)
ISBN 978-80-224-1319-0
CONTENT
list of Illustrations ................................................................................................................. 7
Instead of Introduction – How much is visegrad Present in europe?
(Juraj marušiak) ....................................................................................................................... 9
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) ....................................... 28
chapter 2
“success” of v4 countries in european external action service
(Radoslava Brhlíková) .......................................................................................................... 42
chapter 3
Visegrad Cooperation in Military and Security Areas (Zbyněk Dubský) ....... 56
Part II.
Economic, Cultural and Socio-Demographic Challenges to the V4 states
chapter 4
Visegrad Transit – Information and Transport Region (Jaromír Hladký) ..... 74
chapter 5
modern migration and electoral Integration of Immigrants in central
europe (Iván Halász) ............................................................................................................ 87
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) .............................................................. 111
5
Juraj marušiak et al.: Is visegrad still a central european “trade mark”?
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) ................................................................ 124
Part III.
Visegrad and the New Challenges in Eastern Europe
chapter 8
Russian neo-Imperialism: Ideal aspiration or new Geopolitical Reality
(Pavel usov) ............................................................................................................................. 136
chapter 9
ukraine-and the visegrad Group countries: cooperation within
the framework of eastern Partnership and the Political Realities
in ukraine (Galina Zelenko) .............................................................................................. 153
chapter 10
“the Right to freedom of Religion and Belief” Road map for the
Promotion of multi-Religious Belarus in the framework of european
Integrative Projects (natalia kutuzova, Iryna mikheyeva) .................................. 165
conclusions (Juraj marušiak) ........................................................................................... 178
summary ................................................................................................................................... 182
References ................................................................................................................................. 187
authors ....................................................................................................................................... 199
Index ............................................................................................................................................ 200
6
LIST Of ILLUSTRATIONS
Illustrations
figures
4.1 merchandise flows china – europe ..................................................................... 76
4.2 Intercontinental and intracontinental merchandise flows ........................ 79
4.3 key railway corridors from china to europe according
to tRaceca Program ................................................................................................ 84
Tables
2.1 List of 140 EU delegations and offices (except EU member states) ....... 46
2.2 slovakia – eeas staff in headquarters / slovakia – eeas staff
in delegations ................................................................................................................. 50
2.3 the transfer of staff from the council and the commission ...................... 51
2.4 “success” of slovak candidates in selection process in 2011 .................... 53
4.1 annual GdP growths of economically developed countries
(u.s.a., Japan, Germany, uk, france) compared to china (in %) ............. 77
3
8.1 Russian gas supply to europe (billion m ) ........................................................ 151
Charts
1.1 eu member states’ Innovation Performance ................................................... 34
4.1 the development of the GdP of china (1980 – 2011) ................................. 75
4.2 annual GdP growth in china – comparison with the high
developed countries .................................................................................................... 77
4.3 top 20 world ports ...................................................................................................... 80
4.4 top 20 european ports .............................................................................................. 81
7.1 Religious attendances in 10 new eu member countries ........................... 129
7
Instead of IntroductIon –
HOw MUCH IS VISEGRAD PRESENT IN EUROPE?
Juraj marušiak
In June 2000 Slovak historian and political analyst Pavol Lukáč designed
the schemes of potential cooperation between visegrad Group and Weimar
triangle. according to him networking in the framework of both cooperation
structures would allow central european countries to participate actively in the
shaping of European politics (Lukáč, 2000). Just a few days after the approval
1
of the treaty of nice by the european council in december 2000, the Prime
minister of slovakia mikuláš dzurinda, during the meeting of the heads of gov-
ernments of visegrad Group stTaAteSsR with the Prime minister of netherlands Wim
kok, hyperbolically pronounced the expectations that “the visegrad Group and
Benelux will rule in the eu” ( , december 20, 2000). there were grounds
for such optimistic expressions as the visegrad Group states received together
58 votes within the framework of weighting of votes, i.e. equal number to that
of both Germany with france.
the conception of the alliance of the small states did not meet expecta-
tions. this fact already became apparent during the negotiations on the eu
Constitutional Treaty when not only the small states were not able to find
a common position, but even the position of the visegrad countries was not
unanimous. Poland’s idea to build the alliance of the small eu-members un-
der Polish leadership within the convention on the future of europe was not
successful either (marušiak, 2005). the participating states of the visegrad
Group (slovakia, czech Republic, Poland and Hungary, so called v4) adopted
the “Kroměříž Declaration” on May 12, 2004 where they proclaimed their aim
to strengthen the identity of the central european region. they expressed
their determination to jointly contribute to the “fulfilment of the European
union’s common goals and objectives and to the successful continuation of
1
see tOreffaictiya ol Jfo nuircnea al mC e0n8d0 i,n 1g0 t/h0e3 /t2re0a0t1y P o. n0 0e0u1r o–p 0e0a8n7 .u Anviaoinla, bthlee attr: eaties establishing the eu-
ropean communities and certain related acts, signed at nice, 26 february 2001. 12001c/
tXt. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/
lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=celeX:12001c/tXt:en:Html
9
Juraj marušiak et al.: Is visegrad still a central european “trade mark”?
2
european integration” . The “Kroměříž Declaration” was focused mainly on
the external dimension of the visegrad cooperation; its crucial topics were
the cooperation in specific areas of common interest with countries within
the wider region, and support and assistance to the countries aspiring to
become the new eu members with the territorial priorities in eastern and
southeastern europe. the Prime ministers of the visegrad Group countries
declared their will to cooperate with other regional groupings in europe as
well as with third countries and international organizations.
External Activities of the Visegrad Group in the Post-Accession Period
the priorities of the visegrad Group have been elaborated in a detailed way
3
in the “Guidelines for the future areas of visegrad cooperation” . although the
cooperation within the V4 area was put in the first place, Visegrad leaders pro-
claimed an ambitious vision of cooperation within the EU, mostly in the field
of common foreign and security Policy (with respect to the program Wider
europe – new neighbourhood and eu strategy towards Western Balkans), but
also the issues of Justice and Home affairs, schengen cooperation, visa policy
etc. were mentioned as areas of further cooperation. the following priority was
an active participation in the development of the european security and de-
fence Policy and contribution to the strengthening of relations between the eu
and nato.
among the potential partners of the visegrad Group are those of the other
interested central european countries, the eu and nato candidate and aspir-
ing countries, other regional structures and other interested countries and or-
ganizations. cooperation within nato, the osce and other international orga-
4
nizations was mentioned among the priorities of visegrad cooperation as well .
the setbacks during the negotiations on the constitutional treaty caused
that “Kroměříž Declaration” as well as Guidelines... not to mention the ambi-
tions to create the formal or even institutionalized alliance within the eu; both
documents are rather focused on the definition of certain common priorities of
visegrad countries.
2
Visegrad Declaration 2004. Kroměříž: Visegrad Group, May 12, 2004. Available at: http://
3 www.visegradgroup.eu/documents/visegrad-declarations/visegrad-declaration-110412-1
Guidelines for the Future Areas of Visegrad Cooperation. Kroměříž: Visegrad Group, May 12, 2004.
4 available at: http://www.visegradgroup.eu/cooperation/guidelines-on-the-future-110412
Ibid.
10
