Volumen 17 (2021): Edición s1 (October 2021)

The current paper analyses the background of the relationship of the Baltic States and Poland with Belarus. The Baltic states together with Poland were advocating a decided foreign policy towards the political system of Alyaksandr Lukashenka in the last fifteen years, which applied through the financial support of political opposition, the support of NGO-s and media outlets, attraction of Belarusian students and qualified workforce and firm political actions. This policy culminated during the latest political crisis, following the presidential elections of August 2020. This paper analyses the historic roots behind the respected countries’ relationship, important domestic factors influencing the decision making, dynamics of migration in the recent years, the geopolitical ambitions of Poland and the strategic factors, perceiving Belarus a security threat for the region.

The migration policies of the V4 countries present many similarities that seem to be the effect of congruent historical and economic determinants. During the migration crisis in 2015–2016, the Visegrad states partially coordinated their political communication using the same communication panels, which strongly impacted domestic political relations. The V4’s approach was a refusal of the open-door policy promoted by Germany and Sweden, and the European Union. Our main findings are that the migration crisis strengthened the cohesion among V4 countries, although the source of this cohesion was clearly a populistic stance toward the possible implications of uncontrolled migration (migrants and refugees). This communication style and the resulting political tensions were reflected in the V4 states’ resentment based on a sense of shared historical experiences rooted in Central European location and shared experience of the repercussions of communism. In this sense, a strong commitment to the idea of a sovereign nation-state, and a reluctance towards postmodern values are also important factors. This study charts the changes in V4 migration policy since 2015, highlighting the crucial developments in V4 countries’ negotiations with the European Union. It also deals with the foreign and domestic effects of the migration crisis and the V4 states’ discourse of migration, which was complemented by a debate on the future of the EU that became especially important in Hungary and Poland.

The author tries to investigate the thoughts and politics in literature about international circular migration in the lights of European Union (EU) initiatives related to Visegrad Four Countries (V4) with special attention to Hungary. The cross-border circular flows have become relatively frequent during life stages of people differentiated by previous migratory experiences, and next aspirations. The popularity of international circular migration erected from the hypothesis of ’triple win solution’ without any empirical verifications. Basically, two sorts of circular migration system exist: homogenous and heterogenous. The homogenous human circular migration system consists of the same kind of moves with similar time rhythm from statistical angles. It seems to us that the practice of life-long international circular migration characterises few long-term circulators. However, the heterogenous circular migration systems combine with other spatial mobility forms function during whole individual life cycle due to one of the symptoms of human beings. The main aim of the contribution is to explore some elements of similar ideas and politics on international circulatory flows interfered between Western and Eastern Europe. Moreover, we propose some old-new innovative solutions for V4 to reform the rigid EU migration policies.

It is very difficult to group countries and state structures according to the extent of their decentralisation or the model they follow in the spatial distribution of power.

The strengthening of local municipalities and the almost continuous evolution of their role reflects the steady downsizing of public services provided by the state and the extension of market circumstances. Until the economic crisis in 2008, the importance of state redistribution increased in almost each of the developed countries, more and more nation state functions were centralised under the authority of international organisations, and the “curtailment” of national governments’ authority occurred in tandem with the strengthening of the local state, i.e. municipalities.

The study exploring the issue of centralisation and decentralisation does not seek to unearth the relationship between the two concepts, but to examine from the point of view of consumer satisfaction how such a hastily implemented reform is able to respond to consumer demands.

It also examines how those concerned by the financial and political changes, i.e. the population perceived this most important structural transformation of the period since the transition in 1989. Can it be verified from the consumers’ point of view that the transformation of the local municipal system improves the quality of service provision? The study reviews the process and social reception of the largest-scale administrative reform in Hungary post-1989 (with a primary focus on public services) using data from an extensive survey (representative of settlement type and sociode-mographic variables).

As a response to the processes of international migration in the Balkans, the Hungarian government in 2015 constructed a technical border defence system on the southern border of Hungary, also assigning manpower to guard the border. As a response to migration, this is not unique in Europe if we also consider previous and subsequent events. Although this topic has already been addressed by several authors from different perspectives, this paper is the first to analyse in detail the construction and characteristics of the technical border defence system, and the structure and operation of the assigned police and military forces. The paper also examines how government policy related to the protection of the southern border and the fence revived the ‘Hungary, the fortress/bastion of (Christian) Europe’ concept, and also how the Hungarian government communicated this in order to achieve its political objectives.

Ever since the 2015 migration and asylum crisis, the legal regulation of this field in the European Union has been debated strongly in almost all its aspects. The member countries of the Visegrád Group (V4) have voiced dissent regarding a number of EU measures in this field, leading to political and legal confrontation. After a brief review of the public law context of EU migration and asylum policy and the general attitude of the V4 towards these regulatory fields, this paper elaborates how the EU and the V4 reacted – in legal terms – to the 2015 migration and asylum crisis and to each other’s measures, focusing on three key V4 policy goals. The paper also analyses the reception of the 2020 proposal on the New Pact on Migration and Asylum and discusses whether it can be seen as the way forward in terms of a more consensual policy approach. The paper finds that although the approach of the V4 has had a perceivable effect on that of the EU, elements of disagreement remain; it further argues that the harmonious elements of the approaches of the EU and the V4 could potentially be built upon to reach a compromise, but maintains that policy-based reluctance cannot have an effect on obligations laid down by EU law.

Hungarian-Serbian relations have never been as cordial as they are now, and this is an opinion shared by the leadership of both countries in spite of the modern history of the two nations. In our paper, we seek explanation for this change and argue that it is a consequence of multiple factors: First, the geopolitical changes in the Western Balkans, which have resulted in a great power competition that has opened up space for small states, like Hungary, to assert their interests. Secondly, the changes in domestic politics in Hungary that have brought national interests into the foreground, resulting, among other outcomes, in more active foreign policy with regard to the Western Balkans region. In this paper, we attempt to give a different, critical view of these relations, discussing migration, economic cooperation and political maneuvers in particular.