The Security Environment of the V4 Countries

Ušiak, Jaroslav

doi:10.2478/pce-2018-0007

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 3 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, the study by Muller et al [66] confirms the importance of resources, information and innovation capabilities as key preconditions for the sustainability of SMEs. Ušiak [67] tried to define the security environment of the Visegrad countries in both its narrow and broader senses. According to the author, state security policy is not created in a vacuum.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Assessment of Non-Financial Risk Sources of SMES in the V4 Countries and Serbia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risks are a very important part of the business environment. If risks are managed well, they can provide a higher level of competitiveness and sustainability advantages for a company. The first step towards successful risk management is an identification of risks. The aim of this article is to create a risk profile for (small and medium-sized enterprises) SMEs in V4 countries (Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary), compare them to each other and then compare the results with those for Serbia. The data were collected during an extensive research project organized by Tomas Bata University in Zlín in 2017 and 2018. In total 2110 answers of SMEs were analyzed. For the verification of hypotheses, a 5-point Likert scale, Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) and Multiple Factors Analysis (MFA) and ANOVA were used. The level of legal, security, personnel and operational risks is statistically higher in Serbia than in V4 countries, and the lowest level is in Slovakia. Some significant differences among the exposure to risk according to economic sectors were identified.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Assessment of Non-Financial Risk Sources of SMES in the V4 Countries and Serbia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The V4 continues to maintain an informal character of cooperation that is founded on the principle that such cooperation is developed only in issues in which relatively simple agreement can be assumed. Several contributions in this book also point to the same fact -for instance, in terms of security we see agreement primarily in areas of so -called "soft security" (Waisová 2018), while in terms of "hard security" a gap between Poland and other member states is widening (Ušiak 2018a;Ušiak 2018b;cf. Cabada -Walsch 2017: 135).…”

mentioning

confidence: 70%

The Visegrad Group as an Ambitious Actor of (Central-)European Foreign and Security Policy

Cabada

Waisová

2018

Politics in Central Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even after achieving its goals, i.e. the entrance of member states into NATO and the EU, the Visegrad Group has managed to profile itself as a significant collective actor. Analyses to date clearly show that the group is able to function as a distinct and even key actor in various policies, including those within the EU; this statement is without doubt valid primarily for the region of the European neighborhood policy and the Eastern partnership, but also for enlargement policy and its clear targeting of the Western Balkans. We can also observe a highly proactive approach in issues linked to security, primarily in the energy sector and recently also cyber security. Nonetheless, all of these and many other significant V4 activities have been overshadowed of late by dispute between the group and a significant portion of members states on perspectives regarding the migration crisis including the tools to deal with it or preventive measures to prevent it from continuing or repeating. This stance on the issue, however, can be seen as proof of the relative power and success of the V4.

show abstract

“…The activity is sometimes common, however concerning terrorism; V4 does not play as a united actor. We could agree that V4 is at the crossroad between EU and NATO when we speak about fight against terrorism (Ušiak 2018). One of the reasons why the starts behave like that is different position in the debate about migration flows and how it it connected to fight against terrorism (more detailed in Bauerová 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The fight against terrorism is not optional: cases of V4 states and their participation in the fight against IS

Hlaváčková

2019

Politics in Central Europe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes attitudes of V4 states (Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and Poland) and their activity in the fight against terrorism, and specifically in the fight against the so-called Islamic State that has appeared in 2014. In addition to applying role theory, the main aim of article is to define the roles that V4 states perform. The second aim is to give an explanation of their (non-)participation of active involvement in general in the fight against terrorism within the EU. The results showed that roles differ and only Poland is active in the fight against IS, however rest of V4 took part in passive support that relies on their size, budget and also political will. These results were observed in main statements made by policymakers of each particular state that have been done through content analysis.

show abstract

The Security Environment of the V4 Countries

Cited by 8 publications

References 3 publications

The Assessment of Non-Financial Risk Sources of SMES in the V4 Countries and Serbia

The Assessment of Non-Financial Risk Sources of SMES in the V4 Countries and Serbia

The Visegrad Group as an Ambitious Actor of (Central-)European Foreign and Security Policy

The fight against terrorism is not optional: cases of V4 states and their participation in the fight against IS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About