The process of democratization varies greatly between states that attempt it. While some states successfully achieve democratization at an alarmingly fast rate, other states remain stagnated for...Show moreThe process of democratization varies greatly between states that attempt it. While some states successfully achieve democratization at an alarmingly fast rate, other states remain stagnated for years, sometimes even decades, ultimately being labeled as failed democratization attempts. Specifically concerning former Soviet Union (USSR) states, many have attempted democratization, yielding vastly different results. Some states, such as Estonia, have successfully democratized, and are now officially considered to be a democratized state. However, other states, such as Moldova, have been unable to progress further towards democratization, plagued by political, social and economic unrest. When looking at the case of Ukraine, we see a similar situation as Moldova—a stagnated process of democratization, plagued by unrest and conflict. However, in the case of Ukraine, there is still a chance at democratization. How will this become so? Why is it that some former USSR states have achieved democratization, while others have fallen behind and stagnated? This thesis will focus on evaluating the role of third-party mediation and Russian interference in the democratization of Ukraine, specifically considering the Eastern Ukrainian War in Donbas. This research will draw from established factors of successful democratization and apply several theories to analyze the impact Russian interference and failure of third-party mediation efforts during a conflict have on these factors. The research finds that Ukraine’s path towards democratization has been stagnated in part due to the failure of credible third-party mediation to monitor Russian aggression and commitment to ceasefire agreements. The visible effects can be seen during, and after, the War in Donbas. This research builds on existing factors of democratization in order to analyze a new argument of why democratization has failed, using the new factors of credible third-party mediation and Russian intervention again the theoretical framework of multidimensional prevention and the commitment problem.Show less
The paper looks at the process of the fight against corruption in Slovakia and Malta after the accession to the European Union and, in particular, analysing the impact of the murder of...Show moreThe paper looks at the process of the fight against corruption in Slovakia and Malta after the accession to the European Union and, in particular, analysing the impact of the murder of investigative journalists in both countries. It shows that even though membership brings new means of influence, it also failed several times to fully tackle the corruption in both countries. Moreover, to prove the point that the anti-corruption policies were not sufficiently effective before the murder, I will compare these two countries of the European Union with a similar context.Show less
This research signifies the first political persuasion experiment on Universal Basic Income (UBI) in the Netherlands. By applying the counterargument technique in an online survey, this study has...Show moreThis research signifies the first political persuasion experiment on Universal Basic Income (UBI) in the Netherlands. By applying the counterargument technique in an online survey, this study has presented Dutch respondents with arguments that contradict their initially expressed opinion on UBI, in which the arguments would either be focused on the recipients of UBI, or on the financial consequences of implementing UBI. This study has demonstrated that within a Dutch sample of 557 respondents aged between 18 and 88 years and which predominantly consists of higher educated, left-leaning women with a general interest in politics, support for UBI is strong and predominantly robust. It proved harder to persuade the initial supporters of UBI than the initial opponents. The findings provide validity for the issue-specific explanation on attitude change, as respondents were more likely to be persuaded when the arguments are more in line with their ideological views. However, contrary to what was expected, the initial supporters who are socio-economically more left-wing were substantially more susceptible to the financial arguments than arguments on the recipients UBI, while the initial opponents who place themselves more towards the right were substantially more susceptible to the arguments on the recipients than the financial arguments. The findings of this study are relevant for scholars of political persuasion and those interested in the public legitimacy of the welfare state and UBI. It has shown that con arguments are not always more persuasive than pro arguments and that the content of the arguments matters for political persuasion on UBI. This can also inform advocates and opponents of UBI about the political feasibility of a coalition against or for the implementation of UBI.Show less
