Political Parties and Partisanship provides an up-to-date examination of the conceptualizations, causes, and consequences of partisanship in both new and established democracies in Eastern Europe.

In 2001, for the first time in the history of the Italian Republic, an opposition replaced the incumbent government as a consequence of an electoral victory. In the May General Election, the center-left government was ousted and a new right-right majority came into office. It would be premature to suggest that this election represents the birth of a new Italian political system, one that will be based on an ongoing alternation in government between two coalitions and a realignment of voters and parties. Nevertheless, the second Berlusconi government - aside from the various political judgments of it - undoubtedly constitutes an institutional and political novelty. This is not just because the left-left proved unable, in the election campaign, to exploit its achievements in office when confronted with someone with undoubted (if controversial) abilities, but also because of the likely impact of the new government on policy making and Italy's economic, social and international trajectory. This edition of Italian Politics evaluates the 2001 election and impact and analyzes the electoral success of the right, the election campaign, the crisis of the left-left after the defeat, and the composition of the new parliament. Paolo Bellucci is Professor of Political Science at the University of Molise at Isernia, Italy, and is part of the Cattaneo Institute's research group, ITANES. Martin Bull is Professor of Politics at the University of Salford, UK. His recent publications include Crisis and Transition in Italian Politics.

This title provides an account of partisanship in comparative empirical research, particularly by advancing the debate focusing on three key aspects: theories of partisanship, dynamics of partisanship and behavioural consequences of partisanship.

The central concern ofThe Europeanization of National Polities? is to know and describe how far EU 'legal' citizens feel that they are actually part of a functioning European political system and how much they think of themselves as EU citizens. The authors report evidence of the levels of European identity, sense of EU representation and preferences for EU policy scope among European mass publics, which are the main dimensions of EU citizenship. The analysis uses a new comparative dataset on EU attitudes derived from a survey in 16 EU countries plus Serbia in 2007. This study shows that, despite initial expectations, levels of European identity, sense of EU representation, and preferences for EU policy scope among European mass publics did not display a strong trend in any particular direction during the period between 1975 and 2007. However, there are interesting variations in these measures of EU citizenship both across individuals and across countries that are described and explained by reference to a series of relevant hypotheses. The book pays particular attention to the inter-linkages among the three dimensions of citizenship itself. EU identity, representation and scope are all reciprocally related, but the representation dimension is key to the development of a generalised sense of a sense of citizenship at the EU level. This in turn places a significant premium on the need to address popular doubts about the EU's 'democratic deficit'.

Does public opinion matter in international conflict resolution? Does national foreign policy remain independent of public opinion and the media? International Public Opinion and the Bosnia Crisis examines, through U.S., Canadian, and European case studies, how public reaction impacted democratic governments' response to the ethnic and religious conflict in Bosnia during the period from 1991-1997. Each case study offers an overview of the national media coverage and public reaction to the war in the former Yugoslavia and examines the links between public opinion and political and military intervention in Bosnia. The result is a comprehensive evaluation of the complex relationship between public opinion, media coverage, and foreign policy decision-making.

Does public opinion matter in international conflict resolution? Does national foreign policy remain independent of public opinion and the media? International Public Opinion and the Bosnia Crisis examines, through U.S., Canadian, and European case studies, how public reaction impacted democratic governments' response to the ethnic and religious conflict in Bosnia during the period from 1991-1997. Each case study offers an overview of the national media coverage and public reaction to the war in the former Yugoslavia and examines the links between public opinion and political and military intervention in Bosnia. The result is a comprehensive evaluation of the complex relationship between public opinion, media coverage, and foreign policy decision-making.