Development of Socio-Economic Behaviour and Attitudes of Baltic Nationalities: Perspectives for Integration with Europe

This project is the third stage of a comparative research project, The New Baltic Barometer, which was carried out simultaneously with the "New Democracies Barometer" of the Paul Lazerfeld Society (Vienna) and The Russian Barometer. It studied the opinion and behaviour of the largest Baltic ethnic groups (Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians). The main focus was on the attitudes of Baltic residents towards the changes in the economic and political system, attitudes towards political values, political trust, and attitudes to the Baltic countries joining the European Union. An analysis of macroeconomic indicators of the Baltic states made it possible to deduce the link between the country's economic development, and satisfaction with the political regime and attitudes towards democratic values. The study analysed the conditions for the democratisation of society, i.e. the development of culture and public opinion in the Baltic states. Attention was also paid to the development of a social network of individuals, showing the transition from informal networks to impersonal institutions. The group concluded that the participation of residents in formal organisations, NGOs in particular, considerably fosters political trust and also increases political efficacy. Participation in formal organisations also reduces the importance of esteem for an authoritarian leader.

Trends in Migrations of Refugees in Serbia

This project aimed to establish a comprehensive long-term projection of refugee migration trends in Serbia which would allow the different organisations engaged in caring for refugees to plan their work more effectively. Mr. Cvetkovic studied first the official records of numbers and origins of refugees and the various definitions used to describe refugees, exiled persons, etc., considering also the indication of nationality, i.e. Serb or Yugoslav, and the future intentions expressed by refugees. He concluded that more than three quarters of the total number of refugees in Serbia wish to remain in Serbia/Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and only 20% wish to repatriate. He concludes that the situation in relation to the ethnic-national structure of Serbia is extremely complicated, even to the point of chaos. One certainty is that sooner or later a huge majority of the refugees in Serbia today will be granted full citizenship and will then participate in the choice of the political system and the dominant national values and institutions of the country. The experiences of the refugees, as well as of their fellow nationals in Serbia, make it relatively unlikely that they will make rational choices that could produce a balance between civil democracy and national totalitarianism. Insofar as overall political relations within Serbia and its Federation with Montenegro develop along democratic lines, the civic identity of Serbs (as opposed to their national/ethnic status) can be expected to become stronger, and the civil and national to become an integral part of thinking which does not represent a challenge to the democratic state. This would help ensure that the migratory movements of the Serbs and of other national and ethnic groups in the region are motivated by economic rather than political or ethnic reasons.

The Legal Protection of Fundamental Human Values in Central and Eastern Europe and Modern Biotechnology: Towards European Harmonization

The protection of the fundamental human values (life, bodily integrity, human dignity, privacy) becomes imperative with the rapid progress in modern biotechnology, which can result in major alterations in the genetic make-up of organisms. It has become possible to insert human genes into pigs so that their internal organs coated in human proteins are more suitable for transplantation into humans (xenotransplantation), and micro-organisms that cam make insulin have been created, thus changing the genetic make-up of humans. At the end of the 1980s, the Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries either initiated new legislation or started to amend existing laws in this area (clinical testing of drugs, experiments on man, prenatal genetic diagnosis, legal protection of the embryo/foetus, etc.). The analysis here indicates that the CEE countries have not sufficiently adjusted their regulations to the findings of modern biotechnology, either because of the relatively short period they have had to do so, or because there are no definite answers to the questions which modern biotechnology has raised (ethical aspects of xenotransplantation, or of the use of live-aborted embryonic or foetal tissue in neuro-transplantation, etc.). In order to harmonise the existing regulations in CEE countries with respect to the EU and supranational contexts, two critical issues should be taken into consideration. The first is the necessity for CEE countries to recognise the place of humans within the achievements of modern biotechnology (a broader affirmation of the principle of autonomy, an explicit ban on the violation of the genetic identity of either born or unborn life, etc.). The second concerns the definition of the status of different biotechnological procedures and their permissibility (gene therapy, therapeutic genomes, xenotransplantation, etc.). The road towards such answers may be more easily identified once all CEE countries become members of the Council of Europe and express their wish to join the EU, which in turn presupposes taking over the entire body of EU legislation.

Democratic Transition and Political Patronage

Mr. Korosenyi begins by analysing the particular relationship holding between politics and administration in different countries. Within Europe three major patterns have emerged in the 20th century. Firstly there is the politically neutral British Civil Service, secondly the German and French state bureaucracies, which traditionally are supposed to embody the "common good", and thirdly there is the patronage system of the so-called consociate democracies, e.g. Austria. In general Mr. Korosenyi believes that, though politics do not penetrate into the Hungarian administration to the extent they do in Belgium and Austria, nevertheless, there is a stronger fusion than there is in the traditional British pattern. He is particularly interested in this relationship with regard to its effect on democratic institution building and the stabilisation of the new regime in Hungary, now the old "nomenklatura" system has been abolished. The structure of the Hungarian government was a result of the constitutional amendments of 1989 and 1990. Analysing this period, it becomes clear that for all the political actors who initiated and supported the democratic transition to democracy, the underlying assumption was a radical depoliticisation of the administration in order to maintain its stability. The political leadership of the executive is a cabinet government. The government is structured along ministries, each headed by a politician, i.e. the minister, who is a member of the cabinet. The minister's political secretary is not a cabinet member, but he or she is a politician, usually a member of the parliament. The head of the administration of the ministry is the administrative state secretary, who is a civil servant. He or she usually has four deputies, also civil servants. Naturally it is assumed that there should be a clear separation between politicians and civil servants. However in practice, the borders can be blurred, giving rise to a hybrid known as the "political civil servant". Mr. Korosenyi analyses the different faces of these hybrids. They are civil servants for the following reasons. They need special educational qualifications, working experience, a civil service exam etc., they are not allowed to do anything which is incompatible with their impartial role, and they cannot occupy political office nor may they appear in the name of any political party. On the other hand, the accepted political dimension to their function is revealed by the following facts. The state secretary (a civil servant) may participate in cabinet meetings instead of the minister. The state secretary is employed by the minister. A state secretary or any of their deputies can be dismissed at any time by the minister or the prime minister. In practice then, ministers appoint to these senior administrative positions civil servants whose personal and political loyaties are strong. To the second level of political patronage in ministries belong the ministerial cabinet, press office and public relation office. The ministerial cabinet includes the private advisors and members of the personal staff of the minister. The press office and the PR office, if they exist, are not adjusted to the administrative hierarchy of the ministry, but under the direct control of the minister. In the beginning of the 1990s, such offices were exceptions; in the second half of the 90s they are accepted and to be found in most ministries. Mr. Korosenyi's work, a 92-page manuscript of a book in Hungarian, marks the first piece of literature within the field of political science which analyses the structure of the Hungarian government in the 1990s and the relationship between the political leadership and the public administration.

Changing Values in a Transitional Period

This project examined the change in values in the still unfinished transitional period in Serbia during the 1990s and compared it with Greece in the same period. During this period the social and political transition affected the ruling value system primarily through changes in the modes of the production and representation of reality. The most remarkable trait of this period in Serbia is the parallel and interweaving existence of different value systems. The very perception of reality has been blurred by the emergence of a very complex technical and ideological structure. Reality is presented by and through extensions and additions, the models of which are language and media. With the development of media technology and global communication and information systems, representation has become the only available reality. This enables the media to overtly and unlimitedly intervene in reality, to manage and change it without constraint and thus have a direct impact on values. The difference between public and private is abolished, so the media start promoting exclusive collective values. However, since the collective thus loses its counterpart, it itself needs to be redefined. This confusion of values make the possible results of their change uncertain. It will either open up a space for multiculturalism and social pluralism and thus completely replace the old systems of values, or result in an indefinite survival of different, often contradictory, value systems and conceptions of reality, which often lead to all forms of exclusivity and intolerance.