Read our full analysis of how this unfolded here:
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
Read our full analysis of how this unfolded here:
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
The ultimate polarizing issue? Vaccination. π
While mask-wearing showed some divides, the intention to vaccinate became the single strongest indicator of societal polarization. By the later waves, your party preference was a better predictor of your health choices than the actual health risks.
Crucially, this polarization wasn't two groups drifting apart equally. It was asymmetric.
The data shows that the widening gap was largely driven by a specific segment, voters of the radical right, radicalizing their non-compliance, while the mainstream remained relatively cohesive.
So, when did the break happen?
Our models show the fracture widening significantly after Summer 2020.
As the crisis continued, the "fear" factor faded, and political identity took over. Polarization wasn't driven by the severity of the virus, but by the politicization of the response.
Using 38 waves of panel data, we clearly see a massive "Rally around the Flag" effect in early 2020. π¨πΏ
Initially, fear of the virus trumped politics. Compliance was high across the board. The polarization we talk about today didn't exist yet. Society held together.
There is a common narrative that the pandemic immediately fractured society.
But our data tells a different story.
In our new article in Political Studies Review, we track the timeline of polarization in Czechia.π§΅
@psrjournal.bsky.social
@fsv.charlesuni.cuni.cz
Check out chesdata.eu for the 1999-2024 CHES trend file, along with individual year surveys with both means and expert-level datasets.
We are also happy to release an updated CHES Shiny (CHES Interactive on the website) at chesdata.shinyapps.io/Shiny-CHES/!
Join us today!
@fsv.charlesuni.cuni.cz
New OA article: The transnationalisation of military leaders in Central and Eastern Europe and EURO-Atlantic integration by @tomaskucera.bsky.social www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
26.08.2025 12:25 β π 4 π 5 π¬ 1 π 0Thanks a lot!
04.07.2025 16:58 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Thank you!
04.07.2025 10:49 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0
7/7 π©
European NATO can stop Russia without U.S. ground forcesβif it acts decisively and prepares.
Our full open-access paper here:
π www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
6/
Why does it matter?
With U.S. focus shifting to China and political will declining, Europe must prepare to defend itself.
Our work shows this is possibleβbut only if Europeans invest now in troops, reserves, and logistics.
5/
ποΈ Key findings:
Numbers & readiness > technology alone
Deep, well-prepared defenses lower risks
Rapid NATO reinforcement is critical
Tech helps but canβt replace manpower
4/
In the larger Russian force scenario (with conscripts):
β οΈ Europe would need ~20+ brigades, stretching its capabilities.
Even then, success is uncertain without deep defenses & low troop exposure.
3/
In the smaller Russian force scenario:
β
~10β13 European brigades (beyond Polandβs) are enough to prevent a breakthrough if deployed quickly.
But:
If Poland fights alone, Russiaβs chances of success rise fast.
2/
We simulate a Russian attack on northeastern Poland (Suwalki Gap) in the late 2020s.
Two scenarios:
π·πΊ ~120k troops (professionals)
π·πΊ ~200k troops (with conscripts)
We test how many NATO brigades are needed to stop a breakthrough in 3β4 weeks.
1/ π§΅ Can Europe defend itself if the U.S. steps back?
Our new study asks: Can European NATO members alone stop a Russian breakthrough in Poland? We model two scenarios and hereβs what we found π