Email · kontakt@ine.org.pl
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • About
  • Publications
      • Publications

        The primary categories of materials published by the Institute as part of its research and analytical activities.

      • SEE ALL PUBLICATIONS

      • Analyses
        Daily commentary and analysis on international issues provided by our experts and analysts
      • Reports
        Comprehensive thematic studies on international relations and socio-political issues
      • Video
        Recordings of expert debates and series of video podcasts created by our team and experts
      • Maps
        Selection of maps depicting international alliances and foreign visits of key politicians
  • Programmes
      • Programmes

        The main areas of research and publication activities at the Institute with separate teams of experts, functioning under the supervision of the head of a particular programme.

      • WEBSITE OF THE THREE SEAS PROJECT

      • Europe
        Analyses and commentaries on European integration and the place of Europe on the political and economic map of the world
      • Security
        Studies in the field of international and internal security of individual states, with particular emphasis on the role of NATO
      • Indo-Pacific
        An overview of the political and economic situation in the region, the status of the U.S.-China rivalry, and the EU’s policy towards China
      • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
        Analyses and studies of the Three Seas Initiative, taking into account the perspectives of the participating states
  • People
  • Contact-Careers
  • Polish-Czech Forum
  • Polski
Institute of New Europe Institute of New Europe
  • About
  • Publications
      • Publications

        The primary categories of materials published by the Institute as part of its research and analytical activities.

      • SEE ALL PUBLICATIONS

      • Analyses
        Daily commentary and analysis on international issues provided by our experts and analysts
      • Reports
        Comprehensive thematic studies on international relations and socio-political issues
      • Video
        Recordings of expert debates and series of video podcasts created by our team and experts
      • Maps
        Selection of maps depicting international alliances and foreign visits of key politicians
  • Programmes
      • Programmes

        The main areas of research and publication activities at the Institute with separate teams of experts, functioning under the supervision of the head of a particular programme.

      • WEBSITE OF THE THREE SEAS PROJECT

      • Europe
        Analyses and commentaries on European integration and the place of Europe on the political and economic map of the world
      • Security
        Studies in the field of international and internal security of individual states, with particular emphasis on the role of NATO
      • Indo-Pacific
        An overview of the political and economic situation in the region, the status of the U.S.-China rivalry, and the EU’s policy towards China
      • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
        Analyses and studies of the Three Seas Initiative, taking into account the perspectives of the participating states
  • People
  • Contact-Careers
  • Polish-Czech Forum
  • Polski
Feb 15
Analysis, Central Europe, Czech Republic, Geopolitics, Hungary, International Politics, Poland, Publications, Russia, Slovakia, Ukraine, Visegrad Group

The V4’s perception of Russia’s involvement in the Ukrainian crisis. Implications for the formation of Central European identity seven years on.

February 15, 2021
The V4s perception of Russias involvement in the Ukrainian crisis. Implications for the formation of Central European identity seven years onDownload

Introduction

The outbreak of the Ukrainian crisis at the end of 2013, initiated by President Viktor Yanukovych’s decision to suspend the signing of the Association Agreement with the EU, has produced concerns voiced across Europe over the future political and economic development of this country. The subsequent involvement of Russia in the course of these events has fuelled those concerns, adding a security dimension to their scope. The following occupation and annexation of Crimea, developments that constituted an overt breach of international law, resulted in a wave of sanctions imposed on Moscow both by the EU and the US. Despite the fact that EU member states have embraced a joint policy of non-recognition of the Crimean annexation and agreed unilaterally on the imposition of restrictive measures, there was no unity among them over their appropriate scope and depth. 

Different positions over the need of broadening the sanctions and supplementing them with economic and financial components were visible not only at the European level but also among the Visegrad Group (V4) states[1]—most significantly exposed to the negative economic consequences of both EU sanctions and Russian retaliatory measures. The lack of consensus among the four Central European states over this issue and presence of other differences in their perception of the Ukrainian crisis gave rise to questions concerning the V4’s future and its credibility as a (dis)united regional group.[2] In reference to these questions, the present paper illustrates how the V4’s unity has changed in the perspective of the Ukrainian crisis, and particularly in the wake of Russia’s involvement in it.[3] In contrast to claims interpreting the above phenomena as a bone of contention among the V4 states, it assumes that the Russian intervention in Ukraine has been a catalyst for the formation of Central European (Visegrad) identity. The verification of this assumption is based on the analysis of the V4 official discourse (conclusions from the meetings, joint statements, joint communiqués, declarations, and letters) formed around the Ukrainian crisis and referring to the issue of Russian involvement in it.

Russia as the ‘common other’

The analysis of more than a dozen documents issued by the V4 representatives in the period of March 2014–April 2015 has revealed that along with the development of the crisis, the practices of differentiation and othering directed at Russia have become a recurring element of the Visegrad discourse. The use of discourse analysis[4] for examining the V4 official statements has allowed the identifying of a prevailing representation of Russia constructed jointly by Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary. The results indicate, firstly, that Russia’s role in the crisis has been presented in negative terms (‘destructive’, ‘illegal’, ‘aggressive’) and depicted as contradictory to the V4’s self-declared role (‘constructive’, ‘legal’, ‘peaceful’). Secondly, the consistent use of differentiation and othering practices has positioned Russia as the ‘common’ or ‘external Other’ of the V4 states. Thirdly, the structural relation between the two subjects (the V4 and Russia) reflects a long-established dichotomy of ‘civilised vs. barbarian’—framing the difference in their behaviour towards the situation in Ukraine. 

In this point of view, the outbreak of the Ukrainian crisis at the end of 2013, and the subsequent Russian involvement in it, has significantly remodelled the context of relations between the V4 and Russia—enough to influence the latter’s representation within the official discourse of the V4. The representation of Russia has not only been redefined, but it is simultaneously employed as a point of reference for the construction of the V4’s self-imposed image (as the positive opposite of the former). From this perspective, Russia’s intervention in Ukraine has paved the way for the reconsolidating of the V4’s perception of itself (at least of its role in the Ukrainian crisis), and thereby for the strengthening of the collective identity among its members.[5]

A more united Visegrad Group?

Taking into account that the occurrence of a ‘common Other’ is likely to facilitate collective identity formation, the V4’s positioning of Russia into such a role should be followed by the signs of a rising unity among the V4 states. However, the practices of differentiation and othering directed at Russia were not followed by the identification or reestablishment of common values, beliefs, or understandings which are specific to the group of these states. Secondly, the frequency of issuing joint documents with references to the situation in Ukraine was very irregular. The juxtaposition of several turning points in the Ukrainian crisis with the dating of the V4 official statements has revealed that the pace of these reactions did not mirror the phases of exacerbation and stabilisation of the conflict. The long period of time within which no joint statement was issued, despite the escalation of fighting in Eastern Ukraine and the recurring allegations of Russia crossing the Ukrainian border, indicates that the ability of the V4 to adopt a common position on crucial developments in the crisis was fluctuating over time, and so was its internal unity.

The above outcome does not allow to maintain that the Russian intervention in Ukraine, especially since the annexation of Crimea, has been a catalyst for the formation of Central European identity. As it follows from the present work, the dynamics of collective identity formation cannot be accounted for by focusing attention only on the role of external or systemic developments, such as the emergence and identification of a ‘common Other’. The results suggest that the role of domestic factors in shaping collective identity among states should be considered with no lesser attention, as these were arguably a decisive factor that has hindered the formation of collective identity among the Visegrad states so far.

Conclusion: A long-lasting impact

On the other hand, any identity change is a long-term process (see, for example, the long-lasting process of forging European identity) and should not be examined on the grounds of short-term developments. The deepening of Visegrad cooperation in regional defence and energy security, triggered by the crisis, may lead to the gradual emergence of such an identity in a long-term perspective. Six years on, we can observe the functioning of the V4 EU Battlegroup (operational for the first time in 2016 and reinforced by Ukraine and Croatia), however the list of unfinished projects remains long.[6]In terms of energy security, the Visegrad states have developed projects such as the North–South Gas Corridor, decreasing their energy dependence from Russia.[7] These efforts have been additionally strengthened by the establishment of the Three Seas initiative in 2016.[8] In this sense, Russia’s aggressive behaviour towards Ukraine in 2014 has provided grounds for a more collective behaviour among the V4 states in the future.


[1] Nowadays the Visegrad Group is comprised of Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary.

[2] See, e.g., Markovic, F. (2014), Divided more than united? Behind the V4’s different positions towards Ukraine and Russia, http://visegradinsight.eu/divided-more-than-united12092014/

[3] The paper draws largely on the Master’s thesis written by the author in the frame of Joint Degree Programme in International Relations: Europe from the Visegrad Perspective.

[4] Discourse analysis is a method of extracting the meanings attributed to objects, subjects, and phenomena in a particular discourse and uncovering the system of relations between them.

[5] Theorising on collective identity formation is strongly correlated with the arrival of constructivist and post-structuralist perspectives for studying international politics. It is based on the realisation that the fundamental structures of international politics are socially rather than materially constructed.

[6] Krupa, J. (2019), Visegrad Four Defense Cooperation: Years of Missed Opportunities, https://warsawinstitute.org/visegrad-four-defense-cooperation-years-missed-opportunities/

[7] Dyduch, J., Skorek, A. (2020), Go South! Southern dimension of the V4 states’ energy policy strategies – An assessment of viability and prospects, Energy Policy, vol. 140.

[8] Wycisk, M. (2019), Die Drei-Meere-Initiative und die EU. Zum jüngsten Gipfel der 3SI-Initiative in Bukarest, Welttrends, nr. 147.

Image: https://twitter.com/PLParliament/status/1361016918271021059/photo/1

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Tumblr
  • Pinterest
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • E-Mail
Marcin Chruściel Marcin Chruściel. Graduate of PhD studies in Political Science at the University of Wroclaw and Master studies in International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. President of the Management Board at the Institute of New Europe in the period I 2022–VI 2023. Currently Director of the Government Plenipotentiary Office for Polish-Ukrainian Development Cooperation.

Related Posts

See All Publications
  • Analysis, Military and army, Publications

Ballistic Missiles, Asymmetric Warfare, and Law of Armed Conflict: A Technical Approach to Ensuring Compliance with the Distinction Principle

Introduction: In armed conflict, one of the enduring challenges is the risk of targeting civilians instead of military objectives, which…
  • Mehran Atashjameh
  • June 16, 2025
  • Europe, Publications, Russia

Russia Affairs Review May 2025

Ksawery Stawiński, Adam Jankowski 08.05.25 - Mineral Deal On May 8th, the Ukrainian parliament ratified the so-called Mineral Deal. The…
  • Adam Jankowski
  • June 15, 2025
  • China, European Union, Indo-Pacific, Publications

EU-China Affairs Review May 2025

Mikołaj Woźniak, Konrad Falkowski 9.05. Slovakian-Chinese talks in Moscow Against the background of the celebrations of Russia's Victory Day on…
  • Konrad Falkowski
  • June 15, 2025
See All Publications

Comments are closed.

Marcin Chruściel Marcin Chruściel. Graduate of PhD studies in Political Science at the University of Wroclaw and Master studies in International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. President of the Management Board at the Institute of New Europe in the period I 2022–VI 2023. Currently Director of the Government Plenipotentiary Office for Polish-Ukrainian Development Cooperation.
Program Europa tworzą:

Marcin Chruściel

Dyrektor programu. Absolwent studiów doktoranckich z zakresu nauk o polityce na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim, magister stosunków międzynarodowych i europeistyki Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prezes Zarządu Instytutu Nowej Europy.

dr Artur Bartoszewicz

Przewodniczący Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk ekonomicznych Szkoły Głównej Handlowej. Ekspert w dziedzinie polityki publicznej, w tym m. in. strategii państwa i gospodarki.

Michał Banasiak

Specjalizuje się w relacjach sportu i polityki. Autor analiz, komentarzy i wywiadów z zakresu dyplomacji sportowej i polityki międzynarodowej. Były dziennikarz Polsat News i wysłannik redakcji zagranicznej Telewizji Polskiej.

Maciej Pawłowski

Ekspert ds. migracji, gospodarki i polityki państw basenu Morza Śródziemnego. W latach 2018-2020 Analityk PISM ds. Południowej Europy. Autor publikacji w polskiej i zagranicznej prasie na temat Hiszpanii, Włoch, Grecji, Egiptu i państw Magrebu. Od września 2020 r. mieszka w północnej Afryce (Egipt, Algieria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Absolwent studiów prawniczych Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach. Jego zainteresowania badawcze koncentrują się na Inicjatywie Trójmorza i polityce w Bułgarii. Doświadczenie zdobywał w European Foundation of Human Rights w Wilnie, Center for the Study of Democracy w Sofii i polskich placówkach dyplomatycznych w Teheranie i Tbilisi.

Program Bezpieczeństwo tworzą:

dr Aleksander Olech

Dyrektor programu. Wykładowca na Baltic Defence College, absolwent Europejskiej Akademii Dyplomacji oraz Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego główne zainteresowania badawcze to terroryzm, bezpieczeństwo w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej oraz rola NATO i UE w środowisku zagrożeń hybrydowych.

dr Agnieszka Rogozińska

Członek Rady Programowej Instytutu Nowej Europy. Doktor nauk społecznych w dyscyplinie nauki o polityce. Zainteresowania badawcze koncentruje na problematyce bezpieczeństwa euroatlantyckiego, instytucjonalnym wymiarze bezpieczeństwa i współczesnych zagrożeniach.

Aleksy Borówka

Doktorant na Wydziale Nauk Społecznych Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Przewodniczący Krajowej Reprezentacji Doktorantów w kadencji 2020. Autor kilkunastu prac naukowych, poświęconych naukom o bezpieczeństwie, naukom o polityce i administracji oraz stosunkom międzynarodowym. Laureat I, II oraz III Międzynarodowej Olimpiady Geopolitycznej.

Karolina Siekierka

Absolwentka Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe, specjalizacji Bezpieczeństwo i Studia Strategiczne. Jej zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną i wewnętrzną Francji, prawa człowieka oraz konflikty zbrojne.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Podoficer rezerwy, student studiów magisterskich na kierunku Bezpieczeństwo Międzynarodowe i Dyplomacja na Akademii Sztuki Wojennej, były praktykant w BBN. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują m.in. operacje pokojowe ONZ oraz bezpieczeństwo Ukrainy.

Leon Pińczak

Student studiów drugiego stopnia na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim na kierunku stosunki międzynarodowe. Dziennikarz polskojęzycznej redakcji Biełsatu. Zawodowo zajmuje się obszarem postsowieckim, rosyjską polityką wewnętrzną i doktrynami FR. Biegle włada językiem rosyjskim.

Program Indo-Pacyfik tworzą:

Łukasz Kobierski

Dyrektor programu. Współzałożyciel INE oraz prezes zarządu w latach 2019-2021. Stypendysta szkoleń z zakresu bezpieczeństwa na Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security w Waszyngtonie, ekspert od stosunków międzynarodowych. Absolwent Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego oraz Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika. Wiceprezes Zarządu INE.

dr Joanna Siekiera

Prawnik międzynarodowy, doktor nauk społecznych, adiunkt na Wydziale Prawa Uniwersytetu w Bergen w Norwegii. Była stypendystką rządu Nowej Zelandii na Uniwersytecie Victorii w Wellington, niemieckiego Institute of Cultural Diplomacy, a także francuskiego Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques.

Paweł Paszak

Absolwent stosunków międzynarodowych (spec. Wschodnioazjatycka) na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim oraz stypendysta University of Kent (W. Brytania) i Hainan University (ChRL). Doktorant UW i Akademii Sztuki Wojennej. Jego zainteresowania badawcze obejmują politykę zagraniczną ChRL oraz strategiczną rywalizację Chiny-USA.

Jakub Graca

Magister stosunków międzynarodowych na Uniwersytecie Jagiellońskim; studiował także filologię orientalną (specjalność: arabistyka). Analityk Centrum Inicjatyw Międzynarodowych (Warszawa) oraz Instytutu Nowej Europy. Zainteresowania badawcze: Stany Zjednoczone (z naciskiem na politykę zagraniczną), relacje transatlantyckie.

Patryk Szczotka

Absolwent filologii dalekowschodniej ze specjalnością chińską na Uniwersytecie Wrocławskim oraz student kierunku double degree China and International Relations na Aalborg University oraz University of International Relations (国际关系学院) w Pekinie. Jego zainteresowania naukowe to relacje polityczne i gospodarcze UE-ChRL oraz dyplomacja.

The programme's team:

Marcin Chruściel

Programme director. Graduate of PhD studies in Political Science at the University of Wroclaw and Master studies in International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. President of the Management Board at the Institute of New Europe.

PhD Artur Bartoszewicz

Chairman of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Economic Sciences at the SGH Warsaw School of Economics. Expert in the field of public policy, including state and economic strategies. Expert at the National Centre for Research and Development and the Digital Poland Projects Centre.

Michał Banasiak

He specializes in relationship of sports and politics. Author of analysis, comments and interviews in the field of sports diplomacy and international politics. Former Polsat News and Polish Television’s foreign desk journalist.

Maciej Pawłowski

Expert on migration, economics and politics of Mediterranean countries. In the period of 2018-2020 PISM Analyst on Southern Europe. Author of various articles in Polish and foreign press about Spain, Italy, Greece, Egypt and Maghreb countries. Since September 2020 lives in North Africa (Egypt, Algeria).

Jędrzej Błaszczak

Graduate of Law at the University of Silesia. His research interests focus on the Three Seas Initiative and politics in Bulgaria. He acquired experience at the European Foundation of Human Rights in Vilnius, the Center for the Study of Democracy in Sofia, and in Polish embassies in Tehran and Tbilisi.

PhD Aleksander Olech

Programme director. Visiting lecturer at the Baltic Defence College, graduate of the European Academy of Diplomacy and War Studies University. His main research interests include terrorism, international cooperation for security in Eastern Europe and the role of NATO and the EU with regard to hybrid threats.

PhD Agnieszka Rogozińska

Member of the Institute's Programme Board. Doctor of Social Sciences in the discipline of Political Science. Editorial secretary of the academic journals "Politics & Security" and "Independence: journal devoted to Poland's recent history". Her research interests focus on security issues.

Aleksy Borówka

PhD candidate at the Faculty of Social Sciences in the University of Wroclaw, the President of the Polish National Associations of PhD Candidates in 2020. The author of dozen of scientific papers, concerning security studies, political science, administration, international relations. Laureate of the I, II and III International Geopolitical Olympiad.

Karolina Siekierka

Graduate of International Relations specializing in Security and Strategic Studies at University of Warsaw. Erasmus student at the Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1) and the Institut d’Etudes Politique de Paris (Sciences Po Paris). Her research areas include human rights, climate change and armed conflicts.

Stanisław Waszczykowski

Reserve non-commissioned officer. Master's degree student in International Security and Diplomacy at the War Studies University in Warsaw, former trainee at the National Security Bureau. His research interests include issues related to UN peacekeeping operations and the security of Ukraine.

Leon Pińczak

A second-degree student at the University of Warsaw, majoring in international relations. A journalist of the Polish language edition of Belsat. Interested in the post-Soviet area, with a particular focus on Russian internal politics and Russian doctrines - foreign, defense and information-cybernetic.

Łukasz Kobierski

Programme director. Deputy President of the Management Board. Scholarship holder at the Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security in Washington and an expert in the field of international relations. Graduate of the University of Warsaw and the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń

PhD Joanna Siekiera

International lawyer, Doctor of social sciences, postdoctor at the Faculty of Law, University of Bergen, Norway. She was a scholarship holder of the New Zealand government at the Victoria University of Wellington, Institute of Cultural Diplomacy in Germany, Institut de relations internationales et stratégiques in France.

Paweł Paszak

Graduate of International Relations (specialisation in East Asian Studies) from the University of Warsaw and scholarship holder at the University of Kent (UK) and Hainan University (China). PhD candidate at the University of Warsaw and the War Studies University. His research areas include the foreign policy of China and the strategic rivalry between China and the US in the Indo-Pacific.

Jakub Graca

Master of International Relations at the Jagiellonian University in Krakow. He also studied Arabic therein. An analyst at the Center for International Initiatives (Warsaw) and the Institute of New Europe. Research interests: United States (mainly foreign policy), transatlantic relations.

Patryk Szczotka

A graduate of Far Eastern Philology with a specialization in China Studies at the University of Wroclaw and a student of a double degree “China and International Relations” at Aalborg University and University of International Relations (国际关系学院) in Beijing. His research interests include EU-China political and economic relations, as well as diplomacy.

Three Seas Think Tanks Hub is a platform of cooperation among different think tanks based in 3SI member countries. Their common goal is to strengthen public debate and understanding of the Three Seas region seen from the political, economic and security perspective. The project aims at exchanging ideas, research and publications on the region’s potential and challenges.

Members

The Baltic Security Foundation (Latvia)

The BSF promotes the security and defense of the Baltic Sea region. It gathers security experts from the region and beyond, provides a platform for discussion and research, promotes solutions that lead to stronger regional security in the military and other areas.

The Institute for Politics and Society (Czech Republic)

The Institute analyses important economic, political, and social areas that affect today’s society. The mission of the Institute is to cultivate the Czech political and public sphere through professional and open discussion.

Nézöpont Institute (Hungary)

The Institute aims at improving Hungarian public life and public discourse by providing real data, facts and opinions based on those. Its primary focus points are Hungarian youth, media policy and Central European cooperation.

The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (Austria)

The wiiw is one of the principal centres for research on Central, East and Southeast Europe with 50 years of experience. Over the years, the Institute has broadened its expertise, increasing its regional coverage – to European integration, the countries of Wider Europe and selected issues of the global economy.

The International Institute for Peace (Austria)

The Institute strives to address the most topical issues of the day and promote dialogue, public engagement, and a common understanding to ensure a holistic approach to conflict resolution and a durable peace. The IIP functions as a platform to promote peace and non-violent conflict resolution across the world.

The Institute for Regional and International Studies (Bulgaria)

The IRIS initiates, develops and implements civic strategies for democratic politics at the national, regional and international level. The Institute promotes the values of democracy, civil society, freedom and respect for law and assists the process of deepening Bulgarian integration in NATO and the EU.

The European Institute of Romania

EIR is a public institution whose mission is to provide expertise in the field of European Affairs to the public administration, the business community, the social partners and the civil society. EIR’s activity is focused on four key domains: research, training, communication, translation of the EHRC case-law.

The Institute of New Europe (Poland)

The Institute is an advisory and analytical non-governmental organisation active in the fields of international politics, international security and economics. The Institute supports policy-makers by providing them with expert opinions, as well as creating a platform for academics, publicists, and commentators to exchange ideas.

YouTube

Latest publications

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
  • Ballistic Missiles, Asymmetric Warfare, and Law of Armed Conflict: A Technical Approach to Ensuring Compliance with the Distinction Principle
    by Mehran Atashjameh
    June 16, 2025
  • Russia Affairs Review May 2025
    by Adam Jankowski
    June 15, 2025
  • EU-China Affairs Review May 2025
    by Konrad Falkowski
    June 15, 2025

Categories

THE MOST POPULAR TAGS:

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

China economy European Union International politics International security NATO Poland Russia Security Ukraine USA

  • About
  • Publications
  • Europe
  • Security
  • O nas
  • Publikacje
  • Europa
  • Bezpieczeństwo
  • Indo-Pacific
  • Three Seas Think Tanks Hub
  • People
  • Contact – Careers
  • Indo-Pacyfik
  • Trójmorze
  • Ludzie
  • Kontakt – Kariera

Financed with funds from the National Freedom Institute - Center for Civil Society Development under the Governmental Civil Society Organisations Development Programme for 2018-2030.

Sfinansowano ze środków Narodowego Instytutu Wolności – Centrum Rozwoju Społeczeństwa Obywatelskiego w ramach Rządowego Programu Rozwoju Organizacji Obywatelskich na lata 2018-2030.



© 2019-2024 The Institute of New Europe Foundation · All rights reserved · Support us