Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The year 2005 was unique for Slovakia’s foreign policy. It was the first year of a full fledged membership in the Euro-Atlantic structures. While 2004 was a year of identification of the post-integration foreign policy priorities, the year 2005 can be characterized as the first year of their implementation. The ambition of the Yearbook is – at the appropriate level and with the possibility of identifying perspective trends – to look for the answers to new coherences that, in a broader European context, are most topical for Slovakia. Twelve authors attempted to find the answer to questions how Slovakia implemented its new priorities in the new environment. This edition of the Yearbook focused on five foreign policy issues characterizing the foreign policy development in 2005, such as the EU and NATO membership, Slovakia’s activities within international organizations and concrete implementation of the foreign policy priorities. The first chapter focuses on Slovakia’s membership in the EU. Aneta Világi, the analyst of the European Integration research program at RC SFPA, deals with the topic of discourse on the EU Constitutional Treaty. She concentrates especially on development of the EU Constitutional Treaty ratification process in Slovakia as well as the impact of the unsuccessful ratification in the Netherlands and France on its further development. In conclusion she suggests for the Slovak diplomacy to use the stagnation period to form its own priorities in case the discussion on further development after the unsuccessful ratification is open. Vladimír Bilčík, the Head of the European Integration research program at RC SFPA, examines the official standpoints of Slovakia towards the EU enlargement and focuses on the main points of discussion on further enlargement in 2005, including the issue of absorption capacity. The second chapter is devoted to the security policy. It is open by an article of the analyst of the Center for European and North-Atlantic Affairs Vladimír Tarasovič. He assesses the key events or changes from the point of view of the EU and NATO. Vladimír Tarasovič also analyzed the most significant security policy documents adopted by the Slovak Government in 2005. The reflection of the mentioned document in practice was analyzed by Miroslav Kysel, an analyst from the Slovak Foreign Policy Association. The analysis of Ivo Samson, Head of the International Security research program at RC SFPA, opens the third chapter of the Yearbook. In his analysis, he focuses on the candidacy and preparation of the Slovak Republic for the UN Security Council membership as well as on the fundamentals, principles, priorities and possible dilemmas of Slovakia’s activities in UN SC. Peter Lizák of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic takes a more detailed look at Slovakia’s current performance and the future prospects in OSCE. The issues in Central Europe are analyzed by Tomáš Strážay, Head of the Central and South-eastern Europe research program. He assesses the key points as well as the problematic issues playing a significant role within the Visegrad Four, the Central European Initiative and Regional Partnership. Tomáš Strážay also attempts to determine the fields of cooperation which the individual groupings could realize in the short as well as medium-term perspective. The fourth chapter assesses implementation of the main foreign policy priorities such as Ukraine and the Western Balkans. Alexander Duleba, director of the RC SFPA, focuses on the relations with Ukraine. He considers the years 2004 and 2005 a breakthrough in the approach towards the Ukraine considering the development of Slovak-Ukraine relations. Moreover, he stresses that only in 2005 did the outlines of Slovakia’s post-integration eastern policy meet the interests of Slovakia, which could significantly contribute to the common EU and NATO policies. The contribution of Eliška Sláviková of People in Peril reflects on the base forming the decision to include the Western Balkans into the foreign policy priorities of Slovakia. It also reflects the practical realization of the policy towards the Balkans. She assess Slovak bilateral relations with the individual countries of the Balkans as well as relations at the EU level and attempts to answer the question where Slovakia could see its working space in the Balkans. Slovakia’s Foreign Policy Tools is the name of the last thematic chapter in the Yearbook. Naturally, this chapter begins with the analysis of the Slovak development assistance as the main bilateral tool of Slovakia’s foreign policy. Peter Hulényi of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the SR takes a closer look at the Slovak ODA. He analyzes the 2005 success of the Slovak ODA in more detail and, rather than talking about the failures, he points out the challenges Slovak Aid will face in 2006. Foreign economic policy is reviewed by Tomáš Taraba of Slovak Investment and Trade Development Agency. The public opinion on foreign policy issues is traditionally the field which Oľga Gyárfášová of Institute for Public Affairs covers in the Yearbook. Her research outlines that there was a significant positive change in the public opinion on Slovakia’s performance in the field of foreign policy. Besides these analyses, the Yearbook includes a chronology of the most important events in the Slovak foreign policy in 2005 and selects political documents and other information (e.g. the structure and representatives of the MFA SR, a list of diplomatic missions and representatives of SR abroad, the SR diplomatic bodies, army missions abroad etc.). I strongly believe that all those interested in the foreign policy of Slovakia and its development in 2005 will find this publication useful.

Foreign relations administration.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

V uplynulom roku sa opäť po chvíli relatívneho pokoja otvorila Pandorina skrinka medzinárodných vzťahov. To, čo sa dialo, deje a bude diať v blízkej budúcnosti u nášho východného suseda, bolo bez akýchkoľvek pochybností udalosťou roka číslo jeden. Nielen v našom regióne. Počas uplynulých 12 mesiacov roku 2014 sme v Európe nemali v politickej debate komplikovanejšiu tému. Všetko ostatné ostalo v tieni bojov na Ukrajine, resp. sme sa na to „ostatné“ dívali cez prizmu situácie na Ukrajine. Pripomenutie si 100. výročia od začiatku prvej svetovej vojny či 70 rokov od vylodenia v Normandii, alebo nášho slovenského povstania v druhej svetovej vojne tak malo trpkú príchuť. Podobne aj oslavy desiatich rokov Slovenska v Európskej únii a NATO mali v ukrajinskom kontexte inú dimenziu. Konflikt na Ukrajine či anexia Krymu, ale aj pomerne rozpačité reakcie toho, čomu hovoríme trochu vágne medzinárodné spoločenstvo, ukázali, že medzinárodný systém a pravidlá, na ktorom stojí, resp. chce stáť, majú veľmi krehké základy. Pre Slovensko, ktoré je dlhodobým podporovateľom integračných ambícií Ukrajiny (bez ohľadu na to, čo hovorí premiér) a zároveň susedom, je tento vojenský konflikt Ukrajiny s Ruskom ešte osobitejší. Po dlhom čase bola zahraničnopolitická téma intenzívnou a pravidelnou témou vnútropolitickej debaty, zasiahla aj ako jediná takáto téma do predvolebnej kampane pred prezidentskými voľbami, rozdelila nielen vládu a opozíciu pri interpretácii toho, čo sa deje, ale charakterizovala ju kakofónia úradu vlády a ministerstva zahraničných vecí, ktorého práca bola touto situáciou poznačená azda na každom kroku. Bohužiaľ, až „vďaka“ Ukrajine sme si (nielen v SR, ale aj na medzinárodnej úrovni) uvedomili, že je potrebné reštartovať v desiatom roku nášho členstva v Aliancii a EÚ upadajúcu debatu o bezpečnosti, o budúcnosti spoločnej zahraničnej politiky EÚ a úlohe Únie vo svete, o budúcnosti Východného partnerstva (a rozširovania vo všeobecnosti). Nielen pre vojnu medzi Ukrajinou a Ruskom, ale aj v jej dôsledku sme sa posunuli vpred i v téme energetickej bezpečnosti, keď Slovensko v septembri spustilo reverzný tok plynu na Ukrajinu. Ukrajina bola aj témou nášho predsedníctva vo V4, počas ktorého sme koordinovali humanitárnu pomoc (a sčasti aj rozvojové aktivity) pre Ukrajinu. Okrem Ukrajiny nám oči pootvorili (pevne v to verím) aj voľby do Európskeho parlamentu. Účasť 13 %, jedna z úplne najnižších v EÚ, len potvrdila to, čomu hovoríme slovenský paradox. Aj to nás čiastočne prebudilo a donútilo (aspoň vo forme vyjadrení plánov a potreby sebareflexie) bilancovať a predefinovať priority. Uvidíme, ako sa s týmito výzvami, ktoré sme v roku 2014 ešte nechali „odležať“, popasuje naša domáca i zahraničná politika v roku 2015. Rok 2014 bol pre zahraničnú politiku bez akéhokoľvek preháňania veľmi ťažký a úvod roka 2015 naznačil (veľmi priamo a bez pretvárky), že nebude o nič jednoduchší. Napokon, odráža sa to aj v nasledujúcich textoch už 16. ročenky. Bohužiaľ, z rozličných dôvodov nie je možné vyskladať publikáciu, ktorá by rok 2014 zhodnotila komplexnejšie, ale snahou bolo poskytnúť priestor témam, ktoré sme spolu s edičnou radou považovali v uplynulom roku za tie najpodstatnejšie (a nie náhodou takmer všetky reflektovali problémy súvisiace so situáciou na Ukrajine). Cieľom bolo, aby autori udalosti nielen opísali, resp. odprezentovali, ale poskytli aj svoju analýzu, videnie či odporúčania. I preto sa do výberu dostali autori s istou mierou odstupu, t. j. z mimovládneho či akademického prostredia, a mali tak prednosť pred úradníckym vnímaním problému. Napokon, pohľad na zahraničnú politiku tu za realizátorov zahraničnej politiky poskytol minister zahraničných vecí a európskych záležitostí. Ten vo svojom texte prezentuje problémy a aspekty slovenskej zahraničnej politiky z pohľadu inštitúcie zodpovednej za výkon zahraničnej a európskej politiky. Expertná časť ročenky je, ako už býva zvykom, rozdelená do štyroch blokov. Prvý bilancuje a hodnotí slovenské pôsobenie a úspechy pri presadzovaní našich záujmov v medzinárodnom prostredí, druhý analyzuje našu politiku v prioritných oblastiach, resp. regiónoch a tretí diskutuje o kvalite a efektivite nástrojov na realizáciu zahraničnej a európskej politiky SR. Ani v tomto roku nechýba časť pripomínajúca si významné výročia súvisiace s dôležitými osobnosťami alebo udalosťami slovenskej zahraničnej politiky. Prvá časť sa začína príspevkom Zuzany Gabrižovej, šéfredaktorky informačného portálu EurActiv.sk, ktorý analyzuje podstatné udalosti v európskej politike Slovenska počas roka 2014, keď sme oslávili 10 rokov nášho členstva v Únii. Martin Vlachynský, analytik Inštitútu ekonomických a spoločenských analýz (INESS), analyzoval situáciu v eurozóne, jej pozitíva, no aj výzvy, resp. riziká, ktoré na EÚ a eurozónu čakajú. Slovenskú energetickú politiku v kontexte globálnych a regionálnych udalostí s minimálne strednodobým dosahom na SR poskytuje analytik RC SFPA Karel Hirman. Ten za najvýraznejšie udalosti považuje sprevádzkovanie reverzného toku plynu, znižovanie dodávok plynu Gazpromom pre SPP, ako aj situáciu okolo Slovenských elektrární. Svoj pohľad na bezpečnostnú a obrannú politiku Slovenska v roku 2014, ktorý uzatvára časť o pôsobení SR v medzinárodnom prostredí, spracoval Róbert Ondrejcsák, riaditeľ Centra pre európske a severoatlantické vzťahy. Podľa neho rok 2014 znamenal renesanciu diskusií o bezpečnostnej politike na Slovensku. Druhú časť ročenky, ktorá sa venuje prioritným oblastiam našej zahraničnej politiky, otvára príspevok Tomáša Strážaya, vedúceho výskumného programu Stredná a juhovýchodná Európa v RC SFPA, ktorý analyzuje stredoeurópsku spoluprácu v roku 2014. Aj v jeho článku je prierezovou témou situácia na Ukrajine. Riaditeľ RC SFPA a vedúci výskumného programu Východná Európa Alexander Duleba sa sústredí hlavne na zmapovanie politiky SR voči Ukrajine a Rusku, vrátane postojov oficiálnych predstaviteľov SR, parlamentných strán a slovenskej verejnosti k hodnoteniu príčin a priebehu rusko-ukrajinskej krízy, ktorá trvá od konca februára 2014. Slovenské aktivity na západnom Balkáne, kde majú naše aktivity i diplomacia dlhodobo vysokú kvalitu, už tradične hodnotil nezávislý novinár Július Lőrincz. Tretia časť hodnotí fungovanie a efektivitu slovenskej rozvojovej spolupráce. Autori textu Nora Beňáková z občianskeho združenia Človek v ohrození a Peter Brezáni z RC SFPA svoju pozornosť upriamili na hodnotenie uskutočňovania cieľov nastavených v strednodobej stratégii ODA na roky 2014 – 2018, snažili sa poskytnúť sumár aktivít slovenskej rozvojovej pomoci a v záujme skvalitnenia a zefektívnenia ODA predložili niekoľko návrhov a odporúčaní. Naďalej pokračujeme v rubrike Z histórie slovenskej zahraničnej politiky. Keďže v roku 2014 oslávila Slovenská republika desať rokov svojho členstva v Európskej únii a NATO, do tejto edície bola zaradená krátka, ale obsažná analýza trendov v postojoch verejnosti k NATO a EÚ, ako aj vnímania členstva Slovenska v oboch zoskupeniach, ktorú spracovala analytička Inštitútu pre verejné otázky Oľga Gyárfášová. Expertnú časť tradične dopĺňajú prílohy – chronológia dôležitých zahraničnopolitických udalostí, zoznam medzinárodných zmlúv, informácie o štruktúre a predstaviteľoch orgánov štátnej správy pôsobiacich v zahraničnej politike, zoznam diplomatických misií a predstaviteľov SR v zahraničí, diplomatického zboru v SR, informácie o vojenských misiách v zahraničí a podobne. Pevne verím, že aj táto ročenka si nájde cestu k čitateľom a poslúži všetkým, ktorí sa zaujímajú o minulosť, prítomnosť i budúcnosť Slovenska a jeho zahraničnej politiky. Na záver by som sa rád poďakoval Ministerstvu zahraničných vecí a európskych záležitostí SR za spoluprácu na tomto projekte a za to, že vďaka ich podpore sme v budovaní tejto veľmi potrebnej tradície mohli aspoň v tomto skromnom formáte pokračovať.

Foreign relations administration.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The Czechoslovak attempt for reform of Socialism in 1968 has, without any hesitation, become one of the most important events in the history of the common state of Slovaks and Czechs. Its birth, the gradual maturation and hopes for a better future were interrupted by the brutal invasion of five Warsaw Pact armies, and of course subjected to the wings of the Soviet Union in August 1968. Moscow, with help of tanks, regained control over the industrially mostly developed country of its Eastern Bloc. Czechoslovakia would ounce again become the example of an ideal satellite. The Czechoslovak attempt for reform of Socialism started during the time when the great powers, the Soviet Union and the United States of America, were trying to come to an agreement in détente politics. It proved to be unequivocal that this policy preserved the state from the Cold War. One of its main features was the mutual acceptance of the status quo by the great powers, whereas both great powers, Moscow and Washington, avoided interfering in the internal affairs of the Blocs. At first Moscow blessed the effort of the Czechoslovak revival, but as soon as Moscow evaluated this situation as the one that could violate the unity of its empire, it has decided to put an end of this process. Even if it might have initially seemed that Moscow hesitated to use its armed forces, well aware of the idleness and the lack of interest of the United States, Moscow finally did commit its armed forces, airplanes and tanks together with Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and East Germany. Its one and only task was to change Czechoslovakia to become an obedient foot-soldier and a strong component of the Eastern Bloc. Many books on Czechoslovak - or better to say Dubãek’s “Socialism with a human face” have been written. These books focuses mainly on internal development and attitudes of the Soviet Union and its European satellites. The Slovak, Czech and also foreign historiography have achieved quite amazing results regarding this topic. There are also many documents published in book form. Without any doubt, memories of the participants of that period have appeared in Slovakia and the Czech Republic after the “Velvet Revolution” from the beginning of 1990s. The purpose of this paper was not to provide a revision or summary of up-to-present available literature, but rather provide the attitude from a certain point of view. It is obvious from the title of the book that the main focus of this essay is the attitude of the United States of America, but also those of the West and the United Nations Organization. In reality there has not been such a compiled publication on the market until now. The attitude of the United States towards the Czechoslovak reform and towards its violent termination was influenced by several external factors. The most dominant ones were, for example, the Vietnam War, the effort to achieve the bipolar détente politics, and also the unimportance of a small Socialist country (Czechoslovakia) in the horizon of the American interest. When mentioned factors are taken into consideration, it is no wonder that the American attitude towards Czechoslovakia and its development after the year 1968 was as it was. Simply put, it was passive, unenthusiastic and uninterested. However, the American Administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson verbally accepted the Czechoslovak liberalism; but on the other hand, it did not help it at all. The United States publicly deplored the August invasion and the subsequent occupation of Czechoslovakia, but otherwise it did not interfere within the affairs. The United Sates evaluated the situation as the affair of the Eastern Bloc, which was not focused against the interests of the United States and the Soviet Union. However, the American attitude was well known as early as the invasion had been planned. This was also the reason why the Soviet Union acted as it did. The Soviet Union knew for sure that nobody would interfere in its policy of how to solve its internal problem. A similar reaction came also from the countries of the West. The verbal disagreement with the aggression was perceived more as a “good point” for the evaluation of the events in the future. The attitude of nonintervention is also not surprising, because of the fact that the structures of armed forces arrangement of the Atlantic Pact were only the “extended” hand of the main power, The United States of America. What was the role of the United Nations Organization? Actually, it declared its weakness, “toothlessness” and inability to retrieve injustice of the military conflict. There were no proposed resolutions of the Security Council approved in consequence of the Soviet veto, which should have deplored the invasion of Czechoslovakia at least by declaratory means. Though Czechoslovakia strongly protested via the “mouth” of its Minister of Foreign affairs in the United Nations in New York and asked for immediate troop withdrawal from its territory, Czechoslovakia alone backed out of the public forum very quickly after the strong pressure from Moscow. When investigating this issue, many questions emerge. One of these questions is: Whether Dubãek’s mission of “the human face” could have been successful? When the context of that period, the world politics of the Soviet Union and other external factors are being taken into consideration, the answer is no. Other generations of Slovaks and Czechs would later pay for that.

Foreign relations administration.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Myšlienka vydávať Ročenku zahraničnej politiky Slovenskej republiky vznikla v obnovenom Slovenskom inštitúte medzinárodných štúdií na základe diskusií s pra covníkmi Inštitútu a nezávislými expertmi ešte v prípravnej fáze zriaďovania Inštitú tu v roku 1998. Spoločenská objednávka pravidelne vydávať zborník názorov a hod notení zahraničnej politiky štátu vyplynula z potreby registrovať vo forme dostupnej odbornej verejnosti vývoj v oblasti zahraničnej politiky v kľúčovom období zrodu štátu. Ročenka ako dobový zdroj informácií a hodnotení zahraničnej politiky zo stra ny rozhodujúcich aktérov spolu s priebežnou chronológiou zahraničnopolitických udalostí a ďalšou faktografiou je v tej či onej podobe štandardným výstupom vo väč šine vyspelých krajín. Na Slovensku je potreba vydávania Ročenky ešte umocnená dvoma faktormi: prílišnou závislosťou trendov zahraničnej politiky od aktuálnej vládnej garnitúry a z toho vyplývajúcim nedostatkom kontinuity v dlhšom časovom hori zonte, ako aj neexistenciou oficiálneho zborníka dokumentov zahraničnej politiky. Preto sa stáva, že už niekoľko mesiacov po zmene vlády je veľmi ťažké získať akýkoľ vek dobový dokument, či vyjadrenie ku kľúčovým zahraničnopolitickým momentom ovplyvňujúcim postavenie Slovenska na roky, možno aj desaťročia. Z tohto hľadiska je škoda, že prvý ročník Ročenky vychádza až v ôsmom roku existencie Slovenskej republiky, zostáva nám iba utešiť sa povestným - lepšie neskoro ako vôbec. Zvolanie Hodnotiacej konferencie zahraničnej politiky Slovenskej republiky 1999 bolo prvotne zamýšľané ako impulz pre ústavných činiteľov a iné významné osob nosti z oblasti zahraničnej politiky a medzinárodných vzťahov k príprave príspevkov do Ročenky. Už prvý ročník konferencie však preukázal na slovenské pomery nezvy čajný záujem jednotlivých aktérov o vystúpenie a prezentovanie svojho pohľadu na mnohé záležitosti v kompetencii ministerstva zahraničných vecí, v oblasti zahranič nej politiky Slovenska i širších medzinárodných vzťahov. Najvyššia úroveň politic kých predstaviteľov spolu s účasťou zástupcov mimovládnych organizácií a vysokých úradníkov ministerstva zahraničných vecí, ako aj samotný obsah pritiahol veľký záu jem médií a diplomatického zboru v Bratislave. Niektoré vystúpenia na konferencii boli následne živo diskutované, čo potvrdilo všeobecný záujem o dianie na konferen cii. Je evidentné, že hodnotiaca konferencia vo svojom prvom ročníku úspešne otvo rila tradíciu verejných diskusií a prezentácií k otázkam zahraničnej politiky na Slovensku na najvyššej možnej úrovni. Ročenka i konferencia by sa nemohli uskutočniť bez vypätia a nadšenia zainteresovaných ľudí a sponzorskej finančnej podpory Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Na tomto mieste by som chcel poďakovať predovšetkým PhDr. Alene Kotvanovej zo Slovenské- ho inštitútu medzinárodných štúdií, ktorá vykonala leví podiel práce na organizácii konferencie a zostavení Ročenky, ďalej JUDr. Štefanovi Šebestovi z Ústavu štátu a prá- va Slovenskej akadémie vied za poskytnutie cenných rád a lektorovanie ročenky a v neposlednom rade Frankovi Spenglerovi a Agáte Peškovej z Konrad Adenauer Stiftung za finančnú podporu pri realizácii projektu. Verím, že v roku 2001 sa Slovenskému inštitútu medzinárodných štúdií podarí zorganizovať konferenciu ešte lepšie a vydať ročenku v kratšom čase ako pri tomto úvodnom pokuse.

Foreign relations administration.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This is only for the second time in the history of this edition, that the Yearbook assesses a year which saw a complete political power shift and thus an exchange of those who make and decide on foreign policy. It was an election year, a year of foreign policy accent shift, and a year of institutional and personnel changes (not only) at the Foreign Ministry. For the first time, the leader of the strongest coalition party became the Foreign Minister; a person with the real political power to move our foreign policy (and not only in the institutional or financial sense) a step (leap) forward. One can only hope that the current Government will also have the political will to do so. The first few post-election months have, however, already provided some indications. First of all, the integration of the diplomatic service, discussed often since 1993, became reality in 2010 and represents an important milestone in the future realization of our foreign policy. Progress was also achieved in strained neighborhood relations. Despite a complicated bilateral agenda, many open issues and rather different approaches, an open confrontation with Hungary was replaced with an unemotional and calm (sometimes even too calm) dialogue supplemented by European solutions. Slovakia’s new “leadership” also changed its stance toward our only neighbor being in a different international regime. It is very positive that our Government came to the understanding that irrespective of the political leadership, supporting the integration process of Ukraine into the EU is a part of our own policy of overcoming regional disparities within Slovakia and thus it is in our state’s interest. Progress was also made in regional cooperation in the field of natural gas supply security (sadly, once again we only resolved to risk-prevention measures after it had happened, but better late than never). It is a new and positive phenomenon in our cooperation with V4 partners and Austria. From Slovakia’s perspective, regional cooperation in energy mainly solves our problem. The loan to Greece along with the European Financial Stability Mechanism, were important issues before as well as after the elections. As of yet, we do not know the answers to gradually emerging questions, but we know that it is in our interest to have a stable currency and a stable euro zone with satisfied citizens. It is therefore crucial to answer the following question first: “Which decisions will contribute to the long-term stability of our currency, the euro.” A significant improvement was also achieved under the former leadership in relations between NGOs and the Ministry, when the NGDO Platform chair and the Foreign Minister signed a Memorandum of understanding in May 2010. It is only good that continuity is clearly visible in this direction after the elections. A positive signal was sent – not only to Europe, but to the entire world – by the determination of our representatives not to celebrate the anniversaries of totalitarian/ authoritarian regimes which violate basic human rights. We must also appreciate the principal position of our diplomacy on awarding the Nobel Prize to a Chinese dissident, on the release of Myanmar’s political prisoners, and the clear position on the Belarusian regime’s repression of its own citizens. These (and many other) events of the (entire) year 2010 are addressed in what is now the 12th Yearbook – whether in an assessment of our performance and promotion of our goals or interests in the international environment, an analysis of the realization of priority foreign policy goals, or in an evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of instruments for their realization. Obviously, the book only offers an analytical assessment within the natural limits of the publication of this kind, covering not all the fields and regions in which our foreign policy was visible or active. Slovakia’s President is the first to assess the year 2010 in this year’s edition. Even though the Yearbook is primarily meant for analytical assessments, the editorial board considers an opening address and position of the only supreme official to be in office for all of 2010 to be a positive contribution. Traditionally, the views and opinions of the Foreign Minister are present in the Yearbook. In his contribution, he presents and assesses the issues and aspects of Slovakia’s foreign policy, which are thoroughly examined by other authors in the book, as well as his opinions on the future of our foreign policy under the new leadership. Both texts give the reader a unique opportunity of seeing the same issue from different (this time also politically) angles in one publication. The expert section is opened by the evaluation of Slovakia’s operation in the international environment. The contribution of Vladimír Bilčík from the Research Center of the Slovak Foreign Policy Association (RC SFPA) assessing Slovakia’s performance within the EU is, as always, the introductory text of this section. He addresses issues related to the practical implementation of the Lisbon Treaty and the consequences of the financial and economic crises. He also analyzes how the election campaign prior to the June 2011 parliamentary elections in Slovakia influenced the positions of Slovakia’s politicians in the EU, i.e. the loan to Greece issue, the creation of the European Financial Stability Mechanism, as well as changes in the competences of individual governmental departments. Security and defense policy, or an analysis of our capacities and capabilities to participate on international security respectively, is offered by Ivo Samson, head of the International Security research program at the RC SFPA. He analyzes it through the prism of three key events of 2010: parliamentary elections in Slovakia, the new NATO Strategic Concept, and Slovakia’s strategic review of defense policy process. The ever more serious and urgent issue of climate change is addressed in the text of Juraj Mesík, an independent analyst. He takes a detailed look at developments between the Copenhagen and Cancun summits, including the summit conclusions, and maps the main climate events of 2010 – both in the global perspective and from Slovakia’s point of view – while outlining what the population will have to face in the future. The part focusing on Slovakia’s operation in the international environment concludes with the text of Irina Mattová, from the University of Prešov, characterizing global governance, mapping the agenda of non-formal groups (G8, G20), and indicating the driving forces that will determine the future agenda of these groups in relation to Slovakia. The second part of the Yearbook, focused on the priorities of our foreign policy, is opened by the article of Juraj Marušiak, from the Institute of Political Science of the Slovak Academy of Sciences. He analyzes the issue being rich for developments every year – Slovak–Hungarian relations. Relations with Hungary represented a specific problem encompassing both a foreign and a domestic policy dimension. The domestic policy dimension not only concerned ethnical cleavages on Slovakia’s political scene but also relations between “Slovak” and “Hungarian” political parties within Slovakia respectively. Tomáš Strážay, head of the RC SFPA Central and Southeastern Europe research program, analyzes Slovakia’s Central European activities. Due to the Visegrad 2010 jubilees his analysis is split into two parts: an outline of the key factors that characterized Visegrad cooperation throughout the years and an analysis of V4 priorities in 2010 with an emphasis on the preparation and realization of Slovakia’s V4 Presidency. Director and head of the RC SFPA Eastern Europe research program, Alexander Duleba, gives an analytical “picture” of Slovakia’s relations with both, EU Eastern Partnership countries and Russia, while comparing the policies toward individual countries under the governments of Robert Fico and Iveta Radičová. Slovak activities in the Western Balkans which still belong to the regional priorities of Slovakia’s foreign policy and being a region where Slovakia has a good reputation and trustworthy political positions, were assessed by an independent journalist, Július Lőrincz. The third part of the book, devoted to the foreign policy instruments, is opened by a text from Nora Beňáková, Chairman of the NGDO Platform, Ján Mihálik, from PDCS, and Peter Brezáni, from RC SFPA, who focus their attention on the functioning of our most visible bilateral foreign policy tool – development cooperation. The authors evaluate the practical fulfillment of goals set in documents and attempt to provide an overview of Slovakia’s development assistance activities in 2010. The article offers a set of proposals and recommendations to improve the ODA quality and efficiency. The section dedicated to foreign policy instruments closes with a text by Ondrej Gažovič, from the Institute of European Studies and International Relations of the Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences at the Comenius University in Bratislava, who assesses the changes in Slovakia’s public diplomacy in 2010. He also offers an overview of the practical activities of this policy, the opportunities that were seized and squandered, and a reflection on the future perspective of public diplomacy in the context of Slovakia’s foreign policy. The expert section is concluded with another new thing, the regularly irregular section: The history of Slovak foreign policy. Its inclusion will be conditioned by the commemoration of a significant anniversary related either to an important person or event in Slovak foreign policy. Since 2010 we commemorated the 130th anniversary of the birth of a prominent Slovak diplomat – Milan Rastislav Štefánik, we decided to begin with a study on his diplomatic and strategic successes written by the experienced diplomat and historian, Miroslav Musil. The expert section is traditionally supplemented by annexes, such as the chronology of the most important foreign policy events, a list of international treaties, information on the structure and representatives of state administrative bodies operating in foreign policy, a list of diplomatic missions and representatives of the SR abroad, the diplomatic corps of the SR, information on military missions abroad etc. We firmly believe that this Yearbook will once again find its readers and serve all those who are interested in the past, present, and future of Slovakia and her foreign policy. In conclusion, we would like to thank the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic for its cooperation in this project and its support, and for the fact that thanks to this cooperation we are able to continue building this much needed tradition.

Foreign relations administration.