After the fall of the Iron Curtain the European Union was challenged partly by an institutionalized organization of the union, as well as by a socio-psychology awareness concerning the meaning of the European Union. The increase in European integration has generated a political collaboration where national understandings in identities are constantly being exposed for reconstruction. This results in a collective European identity where states are united in diversity.National identities are created when boundaries are set up in a relation to other states. In these identity constructions there are thoughts and questions raised such as who we are and who we are not. Ukraine and the European Union has, during a long time, had diversified preconceptions concerning who has been the others.

This study aims at examine what kind of interest the European Union (EU) have in promoting a democracy process in Eastern Europe. The study is a descriptive case study where the case Ukraine is used to draw general conclusions. The questions asked to pursue the aim are: why does the EU want to promote a democracy process in Ukraine, what kind of methods does the EU use  and why is Russia trying to prevent the EU-Ukraine development and instead supporting a Russia-Ukraine development. In this study an analytical model is created and used to analyze EU:s way in promoting democracy in Ukraine. The analyze model consists of six steps used to describe the general promotion of a democracy process and it?s applied in the empirical analysis.

This study aims at examine what kind of interest the European Union (EU) have in promoting a democracy process in Eastern Europe. The study is a descriptive case study where the case Ukraine is used to draw general conclusions. The questions asked to pursue the aim are: why does the EU want to promote a democracy process in Ukraine, what kind of methods does the EU use  and why is Russia trying to prevent the EU-Ukraine development and instead supporting a Russia-Ukraine development. In this study an analytical model is created and used to analyze EU:s way in promoting democracy in Ukraine. The analyze model consists of six steps used to describe the general promotion of a democracy process and it?s applied in the empirical analysis.

We have chosen to write our examination essay about Ukraine, we wanted to find out what kind of possibilities there is to run a farm there, and also find out what kind of problems that might arise. Ukraine is still heavily influenced by Russia and the legacy from the former Soviet Union. The agriculture today looks pretty much like it did before the collapse of the Soviet system. There are large governmental or cooperatively owned farms. The large farms have to deal with bad cash-liquidity and they often have trouble getting a hold of seed and artificial manure to their whole acreage.

After the orange revolution in Ukraine, hope was given to achieve fullydemocracy in the whole society. However, this has not been the outcome; theUkrainian public administration still has problems to deliver what the societydemands. By answering the question: ?Which problems have the publicadministration to become democratic and how can we explain them??, we analyzethe failures within the public administration to accomplish democratic procedures.The empirical material in this thesis is mainly obtained from interviews andresearch during a field study in Ukraine. The problems for the civil servants inUkraine to act as guardians of the society are strongly connected to an inadequateprofessional knowledge.

Ukraine shares a long history with Russia. In the early 21th century, Ukrainians wanted a freer Ukraine. Therefore the orange revolution started in 2004 by the Ukrainians and had a positive outcome. The situation later became worse because of the economic crisis in 2008 and a corrupt president. The pro-western politician Petro Poroshenko was elected to become president in 2014.

The three post-communist states - Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine ? have gone different ways in terms of freedom and democracy since the breakdown of the Soviet Union 1991. During these years, the state and the civil society have been fundamental actors in the struggle against, and even for, authoritarianism.A strong state with great capacity in Belarus has undermined the chances for the civil society to fulfil its task as a watchdog of the state and link between the citizens and the government.Failed authoritarianism in Moldova has led to a situation where both the state and the civil society are weak. The major problem is lack of organization and cohesion; both the state and the civil society have often been divided by ethnical differences and are therefore not strong enough to promote democracy.In Ukraine, the dominance of a strong state ended in 2004 when the Orange Revolution took place, sometimes called a ?peak of democracy? where popular mobilization and protests succeeded in it's opposition against the state.

This thesis is a comparative analysis of language policy in the Post-Soviet states Ukraine and Kazakhstan, wherein the states are seen as rational actors using language as an instrument in the nation-building process. With a take-off point in an underframe of theories on the nation, national identity, instrumentalism, power and the particular role of language in the nation-building process, this thesis shows that language is a key instrument used by the two states.The Ukrainian and Kazakhian language policies create and put across a certain image of the nation, by emphasising the titular languages as symbols of the new states. The line of argument in the language policy is a balance act between large-scale promotion of titular languages and a careful and inclusive attitude towards the Russian language. The biggest differences are that Ukraine, compared to Kazakhstan, has a more comprehensive and consequent language policy with a deeply rooted historic rhetoric. The most obvious instruments of the states in language policy is censuses, corpus-planning and the state choosing one official language..

The main aims of this study is from a gender perspective identify possible reasons why so many men compared to women visited the European football Championship in Poland/Ukraine 2012. The study also aims to classify European Championship visitors from their primary purpose with the trip.To be able to answer the study's purpose and issues, it is important that we get an understanding of the phenomenon so that we can clearly express an opinion on this phenomena. This meant that we chose to use qualitative methods designed to give a deeper insight into what is being investigated. We made use of both deep, email and telephone interviews with our respondents. The six respondents are evenly distributed between the sexes.

The purpose of the essay is to investigate whether the principles formulated by Peter Ackerman and Christopher Kruegler, concerning strategic non-violent conflicts, can serve a purpose when analyzing improvised non-violent conflicts. The principles are derived from factors that have been prominent in earlier successful improvised non-violent conflicts.The essay is based on two research questions; if the factors included in the principles formulated by Ackerman and Kruegler, exist in the two cases that this study investigates, and if those principles offer a satisfactory explanation for the outcome of an improvised non-violent conflict.To answer the questions the study uses a comparative method, where the improvised non-violent conflict of 2004 in Ukraine is compared to the improvised non-violent conflict of 1988 in Burma.The answer to the first question shows that the factors contained in the principles previously mentioned, exists in both cases. The answer to the second question is more uncertain, as there seems to be doubts on whether the case of Ukraine really was completely improvised. Another reason for caution is that the factors contained in the principles, only consider actions made by non-violent actors, and not by opponents or third parties. Thus the risks of missing vital explanatory factors are substantial..

Intense competition among companies and luck or unavailability of certain resources in country of company?s origin force last to cross the borders, and start to hunt for new markets and cheaper inputs. However, by investing abroad the company is not only facing and dealing with cultural differences and new regulatory framework, but also becomes dependent on decisions and actions of different and to large extend unknown government. Moreover, the majority of the investments? flows are directed to developing countries, where power and capabilities of state authorities are considered to be more extensive than in countries of developed economies.

This essay seeks, by applying to theories of nationalism, to explain the reasoning behind the Russian annexation of Crimea and to understand the ideology and nationalistic influences in Russian foreign policy in the case of the Ukraine crisis and the annexation of Crimea. The argumental analysis exemplifies the nationalistic tendencies of Vladimir Vladimirovitj Putin and the Russian foreign actions and attempts to specify a nationalistic motif in the case of Crimea and in Russian foreign policy. The study seeks to illustrate tendencies in Russian foreign policy and to show what can be expected of Russia in the near future..

The purpose of this study was to examine and explain Sweden?s defence and security policy during the twenty-first century. The method that was used in this research was a case study. The material that was used were government documents focusing on this area of policy, and numerous books concerning the theoretical perspectives on international relations and defence security policy. The study is of an explaining art and the analysis explains Sweden?s security and defence policy during the twenty-first century. The analysis explains this by testing it against a liberal and a realist view on international relations. The conclusion of the study is that Sweden?s defence and security policy has been liberal during this time period ? and still is.

Title:?Varför går man inte hårdare fram? ? En studie i krigsorienterad journalistik av Public Service från Ukrainakonflikten?Authors:Cemil Arikan, Staffan Florén Sandberg and Karl Henrik OlssonSubject:Undergraduate research paper in journalism studies, Dept. of journalism, media and communication (JMG) Gothenburg UniversityTerm:Spring 2014Supervisor:Mathias Färdigh, JMG, Gothenburg UniversityPages/words:48 pages/16701 wordsPurpose:The main purpose of the paper was to examine if and to what extent the conflict coverage of two Swedish public service news programmes from the ongoing Ukrainian conflict could be said to orientate towards either war or peace journalism.Method:Quantitative and qualitative content analysisProcedure:News broadcasts from Rapport 19:30 and Dagens Eko kvart-i-fem, covering the Ukrainian conflict, over a period of two months, were analyzed from the normative perspective of Johan Galtung?s peace journalism theory and Wilhelm Kempf?s theory of war and peace discourse.Results:Both Rapport and Dagens Eko were found orientating towards war journalism. Reports were given, in a great extent, to events of violence and verbal threats.

Studien syftar till att undersöka vilka externa respektive interna faktorer som påverkar valet av etableringsstrategi då svenska tjänstebolag etablerar sig på den ukrainska marknaden. Med etableringsstrategi menar vi valet mellan uppköp(acquisition), kapitalallians(joint venture) eller nyetablering(green-field). I teoridelen redogör vi för de faktorer vi valt att utgå ifrån och vad tidigare forskning säger om deras inverkan på val av etableringsstrategi. De externa faktorerna är kulturella skillnader, marknad, landsrisk och produktion. De interna faktorerna är kontroll och risk, produkten och resurser.Kvalitativa intervjuer har genomförts på plats i Kiev med fem representanter som haft ledande positioner innan och under etableringen.