| Abstract [eng] |
This master's thesis focuses on the bilateral relations between Lithuania and Poland from 2008 to 2014, a period marked by a decline in cooperation. Despite sharing similar interests and conditions, the relationship between the two countries continued to deteriorate until the start of the war in Ukraine in 2014. The main research question of this thesis is why Lithuanian-Polish bilateral cooperation had fallen until the start of the war in Ukraine in 2014. Various explanations have been put forward to understand the issue, such as ethnic minority tensions, changes in leadership in both countries, Poland's aspirations to become one of the main powers in the EU, and the ambitions of both countries to establish closer relations with third parties. However, these explanations are often symptoms rather than reasons for the decline. While it's important to showcase examples, understanding why it happened is important for theory-building and determining what future relations might look like. This thesis uses the relative gains theory, which originates from the realism IR paradigm, to understand the reasons behind the decline in Lithuanian-Polish relations. The theory is additionally enriched by threat perception and clarity variables, as understood in neoclassical realism. The relative gains theory, developed by J. Grieco, posits that states strive to ensure that their position in the balance of power is not weakened, and they are concerned about gains derived from cooperation with other countries. If they feel that cooperation is more beneficial to the other side, even if the state is also gaining benefits, they will seek to pull out or stop agreements and/or friendly relations. This applies regardless of whether the agreement is with a rival or a friend since today’s friend can be tomorrow’s enemy and states do not want anyone to become stronger than they are in the balance of power. Threat perception and clarity are crucial variables because they are closely related to the logic of relative gains. If two states face a significant threat, concerns about relative gains can diminish, making it possible to resist or defeat the larger threat. It is therefore essential for both countries to perceive and clearly see that they are indeed both threatened to cooperate and forego any relative gains considerations. The methodology used in this thesis is called congruence, which is useful for case studies such as this, where only a small number of cases are being analyzed. The congruence methodology aims to determine whether empirical evidence matches what the theory states. The analysis showed that Lithuanian-Polish relations were indeed worse than in the period before or after 2008-2014. There were tensions between both countries regarding minority rights, infrastructure ownership and development (particularly energy infrastructure), and even some rivalry between the two states for leadership or EU/NATO attention. The threat perception of a common threat, namely Russia, was low in Poland and at a medium level in Lithuania. Not perceiving it as an immediate threat and even trying to maintain friendly relations meant that there were no reasons to forego relative gains considerations. As such, Poland viewed that cooperation was relatively more useful for Lithuania. As a result, minority rights issues were broadly emphasized, cooperation with developing energy interconnections stalled, and many conflicts erupted over the Mažeikiai oil refinery, which is owned by Polish company PKN “Orlen”. The analysis showed that what the relative gains theory and threat perception and clarity variables suggested to occur in such a case are accurate. Thus, this master’s thesis argues that the theory used is congruent with the evidence. Alternative theories are useful for enriching the argument and understanding of the situation, but they fall short in offering an all-encompassing explanation for this case. |
