FOREIGN POLICY AND THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 2 страница

The geopolitics as scientific discipline has endured three stages of development - classical (before the Second World War), revisionist (till 1989) and modern (after the end of "cold war”). The central question at all these stages there was a character of mutual relations between "sea" and "land", талассократиями and теллурократиями, Leviafanom and the Hippopotamus. Space concepts as political force, хартленда as “geographical axis of history”, панидей as spiritual basis of "the big spaces”, римленда from it “anaconda strategy”, “geostrategic regions” have made serious impact on thinking and activity of politicians which decided destinies of the world the day before and after the first and second world wars. The same ideas explained logic of action of creators of "cold war”, corrected existence geopolitical scientific constructions of modern writers.

The large contribution to development of geopolitical ideas in the end of the XX-th century has brought J. Розенау, put forward the concept according to which the world of a global policy began to develop of two взаимопересекающихся the worlds:

- First, from полицентричного the world “actors out of the sovereignty” in which, along with the states, various corporate subjects and even separate persons began to operate and which began to promote creation of new communications and relations in world politics;

- Secondly, from traditional structure of the world community where the main position is occupied with the national states. Crossing of these two worlds shows dispersal of imperious resources, and also occurrence of contradictory tendencies. For example, increase of abilities of the individual to the analysis of the political world is combined with extreme complication of political interrelations. Erosion of traditional authorities adjoins to role strengthening цивилизационных the beginnings in a substantiation of a policy of the states. Identity search goes along with constant reorientation political лояльностей etc. At the same time recognised, according to J. Розенау, decentralisation of international contacts and relations, and the main thing - washing out of concept "force" and, as consequence, change of the maintenance and sense of concept “safety threat” became factors in this world.

In modern conditions geopolitical principles had new development, they were considerably updated and enriched. So, S.Hantington considers collision of civilisations as sources of geopolitical conflicts. The concept of "gold billion” according to which the civilisation blessings can get only to the limited number of winners of progress owing to limitation of world resources, predicts an aggravation of interstate conflicts because of resources and territories, placing thus emphasis on necessity of creation by the safe and prospering states of artificial obstacles in relations with less successful subjects of the international life.

Along with similar confrontational forecasts a number of politicians and theorists offer “бесполярную” treatment of the world based on general harmony and cooperation of the states, put forward models of type of the "common European home", systems of collective safety of the states meaning creation and the people existing in the interconnected, denuclearized and interdependent world. Essential motions occur and in treatment of the geopolitical principles, which steels to be applied not only at studying international relations, but also to be applied to the analysis of internal political processes.

VI. Modern lines of development of the international relations.Modern international relations became arena of becoming aggravated struggle of global and national forces and the beginnings. On the one hand, on a world scene the role of the national states consistently changes. Thus their dependence on the international community not simply grows at the decision of the global problems demanding connection of efforts of many states, the integrated positions assuming development, but also from a policy of group of the most developed both powerful in economic and military relations of the countries and their military-political unions. Growth of influence of integration factors was marked by blasting of a monopoly position of great powers as individual rulers of destinies of the world, democratisation of the international cooperation meaning increase of access of the population to the information and involving in acceptance of their concerning decisions, real deepening of cooperation of the countries within the limits of incorporated Europe, other integration centres and associations. The tendencies strengthening a role of the various political and cultural centres of influence in the international sphere, strengthening of their self-sufficiency, finally, conduct to formation of logic of development of the multipolar world. At the same time a number of real directions in formation of a modern world order undermine multipolarity as a principle of its organisation, being transformed to configurations of the monopolar world based on dictatorship of separate participants of the international relations.

As consequence of world politics globalisation, in the world the understanding of force and safety has essentially changed. In particular, strengthening of a versatility of interstate relations in sphere of an exchange of technologies, information exchanges or the transport, providing own game rules and balance of resources, transforms concept of force into the base and advantages, and vulnerability of the separate countries. According to it and the concept of safety began to reveal not only the big dependence on positions of other states, but also the internal structure. Now scientists speak about presence of following components of state security on the world scene:

- Political, assuming state actions on preservation of the national sovereignty and an infringement non-admission other states of the vital interests. Today such actions provide the measures directed on increase of trust to the concrete state; maintenance of a certain transparency of the behaviour in external sphere; cooperation and integration of efforts with other states for the decision of the international conflicts on the basis of international law; transition to a principle of sufficiency of arms and an exception of threats of application of means of mass defeat; activization миротворчества;

- The economic, joint interstate actions directed on strengthening, cooperation and integration with other countries at realisation of social and economic and humanitarian programs. It, first of all, provides state transition to measures of maintenance of steady social and economic development, restriction of a damage to the environment of rational managing, more organic embedding in system мирохозяйственных communications, observance of the general rules of economic cooperation;

- Humanitarian,assuming the actions directed on association of the people, the nations and cultures in uniform community. It is thus provided that the community will be guided by humanistic values, on human rights observance to live according to that understanding of freedom which is accepted in its concrete society, on rendering of the humanitarian help by the sufferer, fight against terrorism and a narcotism;

- Ecological, providing state actions on environment preservation as bases of existence of the present and future generations, to strengthening of the bases of human life in all their variety, to fastening of the relation to the nature as to object of aesthetic character.

The present stage of the international relations is characterised by precipitancy of the changes, new forms of distribution of force, the power and influence in the world. In a motley picture ломки old and buildings of new international relations it is possible to allocate six accurately enough looked through tendencies of their development:

- The first of them - power dispersal in system of the international relations. There is a process of formation of the multipolar (multipolar) world. Today the increasing role in the international life is got by the new centres. On the world scene all leaves Japan more actively, in the international affairs relative density of the European union raises, China and India are invited to the G8 summit, in Latin America the prompt and original development allocates “a black comet” - Brazil. Integration processes of the North America and Europe were threw to Africa, Asia and Latin America. In South East Asia there were new industrial states - so-called ' the Asian tigers ';

- The second tendency - globalisation of many aspects of life of the modern mankind, expressed in occurrence of global economy, the world currency-financial and credit-investment system, development of uniform system of world communication, activization of activity of transnational corporations and banks, occurrence real надгосударственной spheres of life and activity of people. On this basis more and more interdependent and complete world when a little serious shifts in one part of the world inevitably give rise to the response in its other parts, irrespective of will, intentions of participants of such processes was generated;

- The third tendency is increase of the global problems demanding for their decision joint efforts of all mankind. Occurrence of global problems has affected all system of the international relations. Really, the efforts directed on prevention of ecological accident, struggle against the hunger, deadly illnesses, attempt to overcome backwardness will not give results if will dare only at national level, without world community participation. For their decision demands planetary association of intellectual, labour and material resources;

- Thefourthtendency - strengthening of division of the world on two poles - poles of the world, well-being and democracy and a pole of war, fermentation and tyranny. On a pole of the world, well-being and democracy there are 25 countries - the states of the Western and Northern Europe, the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. In them lives 15 % of the population of globe, so-called ' gold billion '. In these countries rich democracies in which the standard of living of the ordinary citizen to historical measures is rather high (from 10 to 30 thousand dollars of the annual income), life expectancy not less than 74 years prevail. On other pole there are states of Africa, Asia, Latin America, republic of the former USSR and the East countries. In them more than 800 million persons live in conditions of absolute poverty, and from 500 million starving about 50 million annually starve. The situation is aggravated with that globalisation processes not only promote liquidation of ruptures in development of "the rich North” and “the poor South”, but also provoke occurrence rather appreciable “the poverty centres” in the richest states of the present;

- The fifth tendency consists in that, as in interstate, and in the international life of the politician as spontaneous collision of sociohistorical forces all is more considerably restricted by the beginnings of the conscious, purposeful, rational regulation based on the right, democratic principles and knowledge.

- Thesixth tendency is shown in processes democratisation both the international relations, and internal political modes in tens countries of the modern world. With the termination ' cold war ' even in the conditions of the most authoritative modes possibilities to hide were considerably narrowed and furthermore to justify infringements by the state of freedom of the person, rights its natural and won in sociopolitical struggle. The world distribution receives such phenomenon, as progressing politicisation of the weights everywhere demanding access to the information, participations in acceptance of their concerning decisions, improvements of the material well-being and quality of life. In turn, all it has deep influence on the international relations.

The developing uniform, global world penetrated by contradictions today it is still far not homogeneous society. The reality of modern international relations assumes paramount orientation of the states to rules of law as regulators of their foreign policy communications. However still early to assert that the force right has given way to force of the right. The system of international law needs qualitative updating. The changes which have occurred in the world of qualitative character demand change of structure and functions of the United Nations and other international organisations, proceeding from requirements of the further democratisation of world politics and the international relations.

VII. Modern foreign policy strategy of Russia.After disintegration of the USSR Russia has appeared in essentially new foreign policy situation.

The Russian Federation was reduced in the geopolitical parametres. It has lost a number of important seaports, military bases, in its structure there was a semienclave - the Kaliningrad region. The country not only has lost allies in East and the Central Europe, but also has received along the new and not equipped borders a number of the states with unfriendly adjusted management. Defensibility of the Russian Federation has considerably suffered. Its fleet has lost bases in Baltiysk and Black the seas, thus the Russian part of the Black Sea fleet divided with Ukraine remained to be based in Sevastopol which has appeared the Ukrainian city. The former Soviet union republics have nationalised powerful military groups which took place in their territory. The uniform system of antiaircraft defence of all post-Soviet territory has collapsed. There was a problem of the status of ethnic Russian in again formed countries of the near abroad. As a whole Russia has as though kept away from Europe, became even more northern and continental country.

Development of new tactics and strategy of behaviour of Russia on international scene was defined not only long-term plans of updating of the country. She has to the full tested on herself braking influence of the domestic political traditions inherited from the past of mass and elite stereotypes of thinking, negative influence of the problems connected with occurrence of the new states on its borders. From height of today initial representations of the Russian democrats that the former union republics grateful to Moscow for given freedom and dividing with her the general ideals, will aspire to preservation of "brotherly bonds” with the changed Russia look groundless. Have appeared a utopia and their iridescent hopes that after the termination of "cold war” nations of the world will begin to live an united family and on the earth the world, stability, an order and good neighbourhood will prevail. Illusions of have vanished also that the West becomes for new Russia the most reliable ideological and political ally, the generous and disinterested sponsor, the ideal sample for imitation in questions of social and economic and political development.

After December, 1991 foreign policy strategy of Russia changed some times. At the first stage, per 1992-1993, Moscow carried out strongly pronounced westernized to the policy. At a fact-finding meeting with collective of the USSR which was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the end of 1991 the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation A.V.Kozyrev has underlined that henceforth Moscow will carry out a course on sanguineous partnership with the West, integration with it. In turn, the president of Russia B.N.Yeltsin, acting on January, 31st, 1992 at UN Security Council session, has especially allocated that circumstance that Russia “considers the United States and other countries of the West not only as partners, but also as allies”. He asserted that Moscow divides with the West basic foreign policy principles - “domination of the democratic rights and personal freedoms, legality and morals”. Sobering up has come with the announcement of plans of expansion of the NATO on the east that has been apprehended in Russia as demonstration of mistrust and even animosities to Moscow as West attempt to be fenced off from Russia new "Iron Curtain", at last, as threat of safety of the Russian Federation. E.M.Primakov, at that time head of the Russian investigation, has declared in November, 1993: “This expansion will approach the largest military group in the world directly to borders of Russia. There is a necessity of fundamental revision from our party of all defensive concepts”. B.N.Yeltsin in the autumn of 1995 warned that expansion of a NATO alliance at the expense of the East Europe countries can unleash a war flame across all Europe. Correction of foreign policy strategy of Russia in developing conditions became more and more necessary.

To the same conclusion the analysts familiar with a state of affairs in the CIS came also. With the beginning of economic reforms in Russia, especially after clearing of the prices for energy carriers and changes of structure of the Russian export, the Commonwealth has endured the first serious crisis, the exit of the CIS countries from a rouble zone has begun. Since 1993, the majority of the CIS countries have strengthened the political sovereignty, have turned out serious communications with the nearest neighbours who were not entering into Commonwealth. In frameworks of the CIS their relation to accepted joint decisions became more and more rigid and critical. There were outstanding arrangements on creation of the economic, payment unions and many other things. However between the separate countries the aspiration to establish more close connections was shown also. It was expressed in formation of the Customs union and the central-Asian economic community.

Since 1997 all participants the crisis state of the CIS which is shown in default of basic decisions, refusal of some countries of cooperation on many economic problems and in the structural organisations of Commonwealth admits. "Revolved" including plans разноскоростной integration. Contradictions between Commonwealth member countries became aggravated in connection with not hidden desire of the USA and EU to minimise influence of Russia in the CIS, their support of the modes which were carrying out Antirussian policy, инспирирированием and financing of "colour revolutions” in Georgia, Kirghizia, Ukraine. Russia thereupon has appeared before necessity of search of the new uniting purposes, more effective ways of perfection of collective activity with those from the CIS countries which really aspired to association of the efforts in the decision of economic, social, political and defensive problems.

In formation of new foreign policy strategy of Russia in second half 90th years of the XX-th century the choice needed to be made between three basic models of this process:

- The first assumed that the foreign policy is fragmentary, as the state departments and various groups of elite realise outside of the country own, no means always coinciding interests, and the centralised control over them and coordination of their actions are weak or and at all are absent;

- The second recognised that between the basic groups of elite there was a full or almost full consensus on the foreign policy problems, reflected in strategic installations, documents of the state and in its activity. The maintenance of such consensus often associated with national interests of Russia;

- According to the third model the foreign policy became result of realisation of various ideological concepts - neoimperial, sotsial-revanchist, liberal, conservative etc.

Internal circumstances of reforming of the country and external conditions of this process declined the Russian political elite to a choice of the second model of formation of strategy of foreign policy. It meant that Russia meaningly refuses from экспансионистской strategy, is realistic estimating the cardinally decreased foreign policy potential. So clear there was also that the Russian Federation could not spend and to the politician of the further concessions to external forces as it was fraught with decomposition of the country and destruction of the state. It is unique rational there was a balancing strategy between influential forces of the modern world, the policy based, first of all, on national interests in relation to leading powers and the unions.

Politicians adhering such sights underlined: Russia does not have enemies, it can and should co-operate with the majority of the countries of the world, especially with the next states. They considered thus that Moscow should not "be declined" in this or that party for owing to the geographical position, the size, power, history Russia should maintain the balanced relations with the West, the East and the South, without searching for the unions with one against others. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation E.M.Primakov who underlined called for similar equation in foreign policy also: “It is necessary to spendдиверсифицированную, the active policy on all azimuths where interests of Russia … are infringed It is simply vital necessity to create the best conditions for internal development - more dynamical, more effective in our changing world”.

In 1996-1997 the balanced approach began to be fixed in the Russian foreign policy, bringing it long-awaited dividends. Russia did not have other exit how to continue a course on development of communications with the West in interests, first of all, the internal development. But simultaneously Moscow has found the major partners on east and southern directions. In this strategy that circumstance was considered also that failure in relations with the nearest neighbours - the CIS countries can deprive Russia of access to transport highways, natural and to a manpower, economic and cultural cooperation without which can seriously become complicated and progress of Russia. In the modern interdependent world Moscow supports idea of multipolarity in the international relations. Contribution to world community advancement to multipolarity also has made an essence of the Russian foreign policy strategy in the end of ХХ - the beginning of the XXI-st centuries.

For movement streamlining to new system of the international relations Moscow has suggested all countries to observe a number of conditions:

- First, not to suppose occurrence of new dividing lines in a world policy. For example, Europe should not be divided on "NATO" and “not NATO”, because of becoming more active extremist groupings in the Islamic world it is impossible to do conclusions about “Muslim threat to Europe” etc.;

- Secondly, it is not necessary to allocate winners and won in “cold war” for the Russian democracy at all does not feel lost and will not suffer the haughty relation to;

- Thirdly, it is necessary to democratise the international economic relations, not to suppose to use economic levers for reception of the egoistical purposes of political character;

- Fourthly, encouragement of cooperation of the international community in the decision of the actual problems connected with settlement of conflicts, the further reduction of armaments and realisation of measures of trust in military area, strengthening of humanitarian and legal aspects of national and international safety, rendering assistance and supports to the countries experiencing various difficulties in development.

Bases of foreign policy strategy of the Russian Federation are stated in “the Concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation”, the Russian Federation confirmed by the president V.V.Putinym in 2000

МУНТЯН ПЕРЕВОД 20(2)

Тема Внешняя политика и международные отношения

Внешняя политика как государственный феномен. Державная структура организации жизни человечества обусловливает необходимость различения в политике государств ее внутренних и внешних аспектов. Принято считать, что внешняя политика – это деятельность государства на международной арене, регулирующая отношения с другими субъектами внешнеполитической деятельности – государствами, их союзами и блоками, зарубежными общественными объединениями, всемирными и региональными международными организациями. Формой традиционного осуществления внешней политики является:

- установление дипломатических отношений (или снижение их уровня, приостановка, разрыв и даже объявление войны при обоcтрении отношений с бывшими партнерами) между государствами;

- открытие представительств государства при международных организациях или членство в них;

- сотрудничество с дружественными государству зарубежными общественными движениями, объединениями и организациями;

- осуществление и поддержание на различных уровнях эпизодических и регулярных контактов с представителями государств, международных общественных структур, с которыми данное государство не имеет дипломатических отношений или дружественных отношений, но в диалоге с ними заинтересовано по тем или иным причинам.

Наличие устойчивых каналов связи с зарубежными партнерами позволяет государству разнообразить сочетание методов и средств в осуществлении внешнеполитической деятельности: а) осуществление регулярного обмена информацией, визитами на разных уровнях; б) подготовка к заключению двусторонних и многосторонних договоров и соглашений по широкому спектру вопросов, в том числе конфиденциального и секретного характера; в) способствование развитию возможностей внешнеполитической деятельности одних государств и блокирование аналогичных возможностей других (по тем или иным направлениям); г) подготовка к войне и обеспечение благоприятной для ведения боевых действий внешнеполитической обстановки и т.п. В последние десятилетия цивилизованные участники международной жизни уделяют все большее внимание недопущению ракетно-ядерной войны, организации превентивных мер по предотвращению международных конфликтов, техногенных катастроф и сотрудничеству по ликвидации их последствий, борьбе с голодом, пандемиями, совместным мероприятиям по охране окружающей среды и т.д.

Внешняя политика есть деятельность и взаимодействие официальных субъектов, имеющих или присваивающих себе право выступать от имени общества, выражать его интересы, избирать определенные методы и способы их реализации. Согласно традиционным представлениям, государства выражают себя на международной арене через внешнюю политику, которая может принимать две основные формы – дипломатии и стратегии. Их назначение – удовлетворение национальных интересов, прежде всего, обеспечение свободы, безопасности и благоприятных условий для развития человека, общества и государства. В научной и публицистической литературе существуют две основные трактовки понятия “национальный интерес”:

1) либеральная, представляющая этот феномен как некое обобщение интересов граждан, реализации которых должна быть подчинена, в том числе, и внешнеполитическая стратегия государства;

2) консервативная или государственническая, отождествляющая национальные интересы с интересами государства.

В последние годы национальные интересы все больше выводятся из сложного взаимодействия различных групп интересов, так или иначе воздействующих на государственные структуры и институты, которые отвечают за внешнеполитическую деятельность государства. Осознание объективных национальных интересов интеллектуальными и политическими элитами позволяет государствам сформулировать внешнеполитические доктрины, в которых определяется внешнеполитическая стратегия как единство целей и средств, связанных с реализацией на международной арене фундаментальных национальных интересов. Стратегия любого международного актора представляет собой, прежде всего, метод анализа ситуации, оценку направлений ее возможного развития, сопоставление полученной картины с собственными интересами и выбор на этой основе наиболее эффективных средств для реализации намеченной цели. Большая стратегия государства объединяет в себе все имеющиеся в его распоряжении средства для обеспечения национальных интересов как в мирное, так и в военное время. Существуют два необходимых условия успешной национальной стратегии:

а) правильная оценка стратегической ситуации, то есть особенностей сложившихся к данному моменту международного окружения;

б) стратегический анализ, то есть изучение других значимых международных акторов, призванное дать о них как можно более полное представление.