Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Eastern Question
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
This paper attempts to offer a different assessment of Austrian Chancellor Metternich’s role in the Eastern Question as well as the diplomatic concert to the one generally held. Additionally, it refutes the widely held fallacy that at the wellknown meeting in Münchengrätz in September 1833, Metternich acceded to Nicholas I’s interests in the East in return for his support against the revolutions in the West, particularly in the Apennines. The paper tries to prove that Metternich did not fear Russian policy towards the Ottoman Empire in the early 1830s and no Austro-Russian quid pro quo was agreed upon in Münchengrätz because both countries’ interests in the East and West were identical: the maintenance of the Ottoman Empire and the fight against revolutionary movements. Consequently, Austria and Russia supported each other in both these matters because it was in their mutual interest to do so. By providing relevant evidence, the paper also demonstrates that the Eastern Question concerned not only the Balkans, but also other parts of the Ottoman Empire including, for example, Egypt, and this comprised an important agenda within Metternich’s foreign policy.
EN
For centuries, the Balkan Peninsula has been used as the road connecting Eastern Mediterranean and Europe. It is an area of great strategic, economic and cultural signifiance and a place of common interests for all the nations living there for centuries. After their formation as sovereign states (mainly after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and recently after the Breakup of Yugoslavia), the new Balkan States try to find their geopolitical position on the European map. There are many questions which arise when one thinks about the current situation of those states. Is it possible for the Balkan states to successfully cooperate on a political, economic and strategic basis? Is it necessary to create a union of partially sovereign states (i.e. a confederation) or a looser structure (i.e. a commonwealth) is enough? And finally, is this a way to strengthen democracy and security and consolidate these states’ positions in international relations?
PL
Przez wieki Półwysep Bałkański był wykorzystywany jako droga łącząca wschodnią część Morza Śródziemnego i Europę. Jest to obszar o wielkim znaczeniu strategicznym, gospodarczym i kulturalnym, a także miejsce wspólnych interesów dla wszystkich żyjących tam narodów. Po ich utworzeniu, jako suwerenne państwa (głównie po upadku Imperium Osmańskiego, a ostatnio po rozpadzie Jugosławii), nowe państwa bałkańskie próbują znaleźć swoją geopolityczną pozycję na mapie europejskiej. Wiele pytań pojawia się na myśl o obecnej sytuacji tych krajów. Czy państwa bałkańskie mogą skutecznie współpracować na płaszczyźnie politycznej, gospodarczej i strategicznej? Czy konieczne jest stworzenie unii częściowo suwerennych państw, takich jak konfederacja, czy może wystarczy luźniejsza struktura (tj. wspólnota)? I wreszcie czy jest to sposób na wzmocnienie demokracji i bezpieczeństwa oraz konsolidację pozycji tych państw w stosunkach międzynarodowych?
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.