<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>English on Institut české levice</title><link>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/categories/english/</link><description>Recent content in English on Institut české levice</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>cs-CZ</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/categories/english/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The CPC´s 100 Year Endeavour and the Other Meanings</title><link>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/blog/2021/08/03/campbell/</link><pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/blog/2021/08/03/campbell/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;General Trends in Foreign Policy&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;There is evidence that the foreign policy actions are increasingly determined by momentary internal objectives, a rational discussion of a possible detente becomes almost impossible. This primacy of the internal over the external becomes more and more obvious and persistent and it stands for a complex challenge. As the attempts to maintain international dialogue would not stop and we are going to observe two models, known from the recent past. The first one feeds off the legacy of the period immediately after the Cold War. The period characterizes the belief that cooperation is possible only on the basis of a certain set of values, and compliance with them was regarded as a criterion of success. This is primarily the European approach. The second one revives the Cold War approach. Whatever the differences, there is a common responsibility of the USA and the RF for strategic stability and therefore they must find areas for meaningful interactions. The efficacy of the first model is quite obvious. A dialogue on an ideological basis was possible (but not productive) when all of its participants recognized the (human made) universal principles. The problem in the current dialogue between the Russia, the PRC and other states with European partners is that they are following this track by inertia, although no one any longer believes that it will lead somewhere or to a better future. There is no and won&amp;rsquo;t be any other option in the foreseeable future, since the possibility of rethinking in Europe is blocked by the confusion within the EU itself. This explains why there is such an astonishingly scarce variety of policy measures. Threat of sanctions, eventually comes up with purely symbolic measures. They are symbolic because a real confrontation is still problematic due to economic dependence and the lack of consensus within the EU itself. The situation with the second model is slightly more complex. The sober-minded part of the political establishment in the West and the East naturally understands that some topics require a purely practical approach, not an ideological one. In fact, relations in the field of nuclear weapons and other ways of inflicting serious military damages upon each other need a pragmatic approach. The military remains sensible in this respect, but there is no such a guarantee when it comes to politics. Internal political turmoil can intervene at any time. We could observe it by the previous USA administration which held foreign policy hostage to the internal struggle. The present US administration seems to be more traditional in this regard, but the threat of ideological factors spoiling things does not disappear even for a second. The pandemic has reduced personal communication, but when it does happen, one can hardly notice any freshness or pleasure from it. It seems that both the narratives and the tools need to be changed, but no one has the will to do so. The West by introducing its concept of a rules-based world order still aims to divert discussions on key topics into formats convenient for it, where the dissent is not invited.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Introductory remarks</title><link>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/blog/2021/06/29/introduction/</link><pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/blog/2021/06/29/introduction/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Unexpected but at the same time foreseeable circumstances -an extremely busy schedule by the Chairman of the Communist party of Bohemia and Moravia, Mr. Filip and the after vaccine reactions by Mr. Hrubec forced me to offer my humble service and introduce to you and if necessary or appropriate also moderate our webinar, the first official joint action between the Embassy of the PRC and the ICL.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>The CPC´s 100 year Endeavour: Achievements and Experience</title><link>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/blog/2021/06/29/cpc/</link><pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://icl.jakubdigital.cz/blog/2021/06/29/cpc/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;In my address I would not refer to some specific achievements of the CPC I mentioned in my introductory remarks. And also in my recent book - 100 years of CP which seems to find its way step by step to readers who agree, are willing and even able to support the idea of human society and the building of a global community with a shared future for the sake of peace and wellbeing of the people in societies governed by the cognitive capitalism led by a few TNC.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>