«И доконцавъ с нимъ миръ до своего живота»: on the Question of the Context of the Opava Meeting in 1289, its Participants and the “Eternal” Czech-Galician Union

The article covers the circumstances of the meeting that took place in Opava in 1289 with the participation of the Czech king Wenceslaus II Přemyslid, Galician-Volynian suzerain Lev Danylovych and some Polish princes. As the Polish participants in the meeting are not named in the sources, there are still doubts in historiography as to who they were. An attempt was made to substantiate the version that one of the unnamed Polish participants in the meeting was Prince Władysław I Łokietek of Piast dynasty. This assumption is based on an analysis of the eventful context of the Opava meeting, which was part of the struggle for the Cracow heritage, as well as the matrimonial and dynastic ties that played a very important role in medieval international communication. It is noted that the union of Wenceslaus II, Lev Danylovych and Władysław I Łokietek repeatedly manifested itself shortly after the meeting in Opava and was based on existing dynastic ties and the conclusion of new marriage agreements. At the same time, the assumption that Prince Henryk IV Probus of Silesia may also have been present at the talks cannot be completely ruled out, although this hypothesis is currently less plausible. Lack of sources does not allow to definitively refute any of the versions. It is concluded that the Opava meeting was one of the key episodes of the Galician-Czech political union of the late XIIIth century and clearly demonstrated how relevant international communication was in the struggle for the Kraków throne. Lev Danilovych’s participation in the vicissitudes of the struggle for the Kraków throne is considered to be inextricably linked with the orientation towards an alliance with the Czech king and is connected with the importance of an ally of the Galician-Volynian ruler ruling in Kraków

INFORMATION OF TURKISH-SPEAKING SOURCES ABOUT RELATIONS OF THE CENTRAL ASIAN KHUNST AND THE OTTOMAN STATE

The article analyzes the political and diplomatic relations of the Ottoman Empire and the Central Asian khanates on the basis of documents from Turkic-language sources introduced into scientific circulation for the first time. An analysis of the Ottoman and Central Asian documents, identified by us in the Turkic-speaking sources, led to the conclusion that initially the ideas of a political union and unification with the Ottoman Empire on the basis of a single religion came from the Central Asian rulers. The revealed materials allow shedding light on the history of relations between the Ottoman Empire and the Central Asian khanates in the first half of the 19th -early 20th centuries. On the basis of previously unknown documents, the course and chronology of relations between the Central Asian states and the Ottoman Empire are considered, their assessment is given through the prism of the ideological ideas about the place of religion in the life of society

The evolution of integration policy of Charles de Gaulle (mid 1950s – late 1960s)

This article traces the evolution of the Western European policy of the General Charles de Gaulle during his presidency. In the early 1950s, he willingly cooperated with the European countries in terms of creating the economic union; however, in the course of solution of decolonization issues and, namely the Algerian problem that constrained the implementation of the key vectors of state policy, the president began focused on advancing the concept of national mightiness of France and commitment to the principles of intergovernmental cooperation in the development of integration. Charles de Gaulle fought for the foundation of the political union “Europe of the Homelands”, in which France would be assigned a significant role. The article analyzes de Gaulle’s failures in negotiations with the “P5+1” countries, which once again demonstrated to the Europeans that building integration is a long and complex process that does not tolerate rapid decisions and requires the ability to compromise. Special attention is turned to the development of integration policy of the General Charles de Gaulle based on his formal speeches, correspondence, and memoirs. De Gaulle's efforts in the sphere of integration policy of the Fifth Republic yielded certain results. First and foremost, he was able to establish the superiority of national principles in addressing the general policy issues in the European Community. Secondly, he prevented the Great Britain from joining the Common Market, as from his opinion it was an economic and political competitor of France. Thirdly, de Gaulle strengthened the international reputation of France as the country that was at the dawn and in the lead of the integration processes in Europe.

The Riel Rebellion and Canadian-American Relations

The Riel Rebellion presents an interesting case in Canadian-American history. For relations between the two nations, already strained by the Civil War, Fenian movements within the United States, and the American rejection of reciprocity, took a turn for the worse in 1869–70 when Canada was suddenly confronted with the insurrection in Rupert’s Land. Beguiled by the evasive dream of becoming a continental republic, Americans had long coveted the lands of their northern neighbour. That the new Dominion of Canada could survive – indeed, could dare to envision its own transcontinental glory – was inconceivable to many Americans. In their own self-interest, they exaggerated the signs of disaffection within the Dominion. And when the Metis of Rupert’s Land forcibly rejected political union with Canada, and certain citizens of British Columbia petitioned President Grant for admission into the United States, it seemed that all British North America was breaking up and that its separate members would soon become a part of the American family to which they “naturally” belonged.

Conclusions: What future for the Treaty of Lisbon?

This conclusion to the special issue reflects on the evolution of European integration since the early 1990s in order to better understand the contested origins of the Treaty of Lisbon and the consequences the latter have had for the EU’s political system. It considers the various contributions of the special issue and shows how the Treaty emerged in an era of shifting cleavages, disputed steps towards a more political Union and rising populism. This legacy has led to more polarisation and politicisation – a phenomenon that the Treaty of Lisbon struggles to encapsulate and conciliate with the culture of consensus and compromise inherent to its institutional structures. As a result, we observe a bias towards policy stability – and even failure – that affects the legitimacy and democratic standards of the European Union. In a context of polycrisis, the difficulty to find compromises – especially in highly normative issues – leads to the de-politicisation of the EU and reinforces the gap between EU institutions and its citizens. The COVID-19 pandemic is a window of opportunity for the EU, in which to choose between integration and disintegration; between values and inaction.

Nation States and Political Unions

A political union is a distinct form of polity. Unlike the nation-state, it does not require consensus on demos (the people), telos (purpose), ethos (common values) or the locus of sovereignty. At one time it was believed that unions would give way to nation-states in the process of modernization. In recent years, the concept of union has been revived, to refer both to plurinational states and to international bodies like the European Union. Thinking about sovereignty has been revised to encompass shared and divided sovereignty. Union has several dimensions, including political, social and economic, which do not necessarily coincide in space. Managing unions requires distinct forms of statecraft to balance centrifugal and centripetal tendencies.

THE QUESTION OF UKRAINIAN STATEHOOD ON THE INTERNATIONAL STAGE (1919–1923): THE STUDY AND INTERPRETATION OF POLISH HISTORIANS

Summary. The purpose of this study is to show the achievements of Polish historiography in the study of international aspects of the Ukrainian question during 1919–1923. Research methodology is based on the principles of historicism, systemicity, and objectivity. In solving specific problems, methods of historiographical analysis and synthesis were applied. The scientific novelty is that the qualitative completeness of historical information of historiographical sources, the personal contribution of Polish scholars to the study of Ukrainian statehood in the international arena during 1919–1923 is highlighted. Conclusions. The analyzed problem began to be studied in Poland at the scientific level in 1960–1980’s. The historians tried to show the place of the Ukrainian question in the system of international relations after the end of the First World War; the attitude of the Entente countries to Ukrainian statehood; Polish-Ukrainian military and diplomatic confrontation for Eastern Galicia; transformation of the political status of Eastern Galicia; actualization of the Ukrainian question in the League of Nations and its place in Polish-Soviet relations, etc. After 1989, an important event in the Polish-Ukrainian studies became the emergence of special monographic studies. The authors deepened the work of historians period of people’s Poland, especially in such areas as Pilsudski’s federal program, Polish-Ukrainian military-political union of 1920, the Treaty of Riga and the Ukrainian question. In fact, modern researchers were the first to violate the problem of state and legal status Carpathian Ruthenia and Northern Bukovyna. However, despite significant scientific advances, the following aspects need in-depth study: miscalculations and inconsistent actions of Ukrainian governments, that influenced the policies of the victorious states concerning the Ukrainian People’s Republic and the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic; Anglo-French controversy over the problem of Eastern Galicia; activities of special Entente missions in order to reach a truce between Poland and the Western Ukrainian People’s Republic. Polish historians have mostly covered the Ukrainian question through the prism of the foreign policy of the reborn Republic of Poland and Polish national interests. Therefore, it would be good if in the Polish historiography the diplomacy of the UPR and ZUNR in the period of the Ukrainian revolution became a separate topic of research in the future.