диссертация (1169608), страница 10
Текст из файла (страница 10)
We realize that normative theories and authors who follow them do notexhaust the range of available approaches. For example, we deliberately eliminatedfrom this study constructivism, as it distances itself from the system-structural vision.Its empirical verification is possible at the agent level, rather than the structure. Thismakes it suitable for studying the ideas about the world order of individual agents (forexample, political leaders of states), but does not allow studying the world order as asystem and its regional elements as its components124.The most important aspect in all the approaches considered and included in thetheoretical framework of this project is the analytical isolation of the global level of the123Rosenau, James “Governance, Order and Change in World Politics”, in James N.
Rosenau and Ernst-OttawaCzempiel (eds.), Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. Cambridge University Press. 1992 - Chapter 1, - P. 1-29.124Wendt, Alexander.“Social Theory of International Politics”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. – 1999.– P. 20-46.39system of international relations, which is characterized by “some self-sufficientsystemic autonomy that allows describing and analyzing international relations as acoherent set of interactions”125.At the same time, as we made clear in the previous Chapter, starting from theearly 1990s, a need to distinguish between general and particular issues of the systemsof international relations and to single out the regional level of international relations asan independent level of analysis has become increasingly justifiable126. The regionallevel of IR – through a variety of specific manifestations – be it in the Middle East, inEurasia or in East Asia – clearly has a distinct qualitative specificity and behavioralautonomy (the concrete extent of which varies amongs regions) that requires to beexplained and conceptualized127.
For this reason, new theories of international relationshave appeared on how global trends (Megatrends) are “refracted” at the level ofsubsystems.The liberal wing of the IR theory emphasized the outstanding role of economicinterdependence in reducing the anarchy of the international environment.Globalization, the dying away of trade barriers between developed countries, and thedivision of labor between them have given rise to fundamentally new structural featuresof international relations, where regional processes can be presented as alternative to theglobal ones128. The new structure transferred economic competition to a different aspect,tearing it away from the tools of power politics, which at the level of regions wasexpressed in the integration communities that are formed around local proto-hegemons.States began to form network structures that came to replace the hierarchical imperial or125Колдунова Е.В.
Мировое комплексное регионоведение как исследовательский подход и учебныйдисциплина/ Е.В. Колдунова// Вестник МГИМО. 2016. №5 (50). - С. 63-69126Воскресенский А.Д. Место мирового комплексного / зарубежного регионоведения на "карте наук".Развитие мирополитических теорий и "проверка теорий" / А.Д. Воскресенский // Мировое комплексноерегионоведение.
М.: Магистр-Инфра-М, 2014. - с. 368-392.127Воскресенский А.Д. "Открытый" и "закрытый", "старый" и "новый" регионализм. региональныекомплексы безопасности / А.Д. Воскресенский. Е.В. Колдунова, А.А. Киреева // Мировое комплексноерегионоведение / Под ред. А.Д. Воскресенского. М.: Магистр-Инфра-М, 2014, С. 109-134.128Федорченко А.В. Региональная экономическая интеграция в странах Магриба: состояние иперспективы / А.В.Федорченко // Международная аналитика. №3, 2016. - С 54-70.40quasi-imperial models129. This significantly curtailed the conflict, which was largelybrought to the periphery of international relations.The theoretical lacuna explaining how the global agenda is being manifested indifferent parts of the periphery was originally filled with neo-Marxist system-structuraltheories.
The most prominent among them is the world-system approach of ImmanuelWallerstein130. World order is conceptualized by I. Wallerstein in terms of the capitalistworld system. It is understood as a system formed by the position of states in the worlddivision of labor. Structurally, it consists of a core, semi-periphery and periphery.Capital and high-value-added industries are concentrated in the core, while theperiphery is a resource and raw material base.What is particularly noteworthy in this theoretical construction is how itconceptualizes the role of semi-periphery. States semi-peripheries combine twoqualities.
Their economy is more or less peripheral. However, their state (meaning statecapacity) is robust and strong enough to carry out “modernization from above” and alsouse its political power in bargaining with the core and negotiate a political goal to joinit.
For the world order this category is extremely important because it is represented bylarge developing states whose political role in international affairs cannot simply beignored. According to modern interpretations of this concept, the BRICS countries andASEAN are the most vivid representatives of the contemporary semi-periphery131.The core, periphery and semi-periphery are in a state of dynamic equilibrium.Once this equilibrium is broken, the world order is in crisis.
I. Wallerstein defines it as astate of the world-system, in which a cumulative set of contradictions makes itimpossible for it to stay on indefinitely in the same form and necessitates a transition toa different quality and configuration132. The fact that the core now increasingly uses129David A. Lake, «Regional Hierarchy: Authority and Local International Order», - Review of InternationalStudies, - Vol. 35, Globalising the Regional, Regionalising the Global, - Feb.,- 2009. - pp.
35-58130Wallerstein, Immanuel Maurice. World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Durham, NC: Duke UniversityPress, 2004 – 490 p131Шаклеина Т.А. Формирование мирового порядка: новая державная и институциональнаяполицентричность / Т.А.Шаклеина // Ситуационные анализы. Выпуск 5: Международные институты в мировойполитике. Под ред. Т.А.Шаклеиной. / Т.А.Шаклеина, Э.Я.Баталов, А.В.Худайкулова, Д.А.Дегтерев, И.А.Истомин,А.И.Смирнов, Е.Н.Ямбуренко и др. М.: Изд-во МГИМО, 2017.
- С. 94-125.132Wallerstein, Immanuel Maurice. World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Durham, NC: Duke UniversityPress, 2004 – 301-311 pp.41military force to solve problems on the periphery, according to I. Wallerstein, is one ofthe signs of such a crisis.The neo-realism of Kenneth Waltz was a pioneer in putting normative principlesof conservatism and realism on a system-structural basis. It was K. Waltz who in factadapted the political and philosophical core of realism to the requirements of modernempirical political science133. As a result, a qualitatively new theory was obtained thatoperated on realistic categories, but acquired a new explanatory apparatus using theconcepts of system analysis. In the Soviet Union, and later in Russia, this approach hasalso received serious development. Mark Khrustalev, Yevgeny Primakov, AlexeiBogaturov and other Russian international experts all claimed allegiance to thestructural theory, even though they did adjust it in one fashion or another.As part of their work, a fundamentally new approach is being developed toassess the quality of the impact of regional processes on the global level of internationalrelations134.Interestingly, K.
Waltz intentionally distances himself from the Marxists,criticizing them for explaining international politics by non-political factors (economyand division of labor). From this point of view, power and influence, as the main criteriathat determine the regional hierarchy, allow us to view the world order as a politicalsystem in which the hierarchy of global problems and threats will differ in differentregional segments of the international political arena135.Despite a common understanding of the strength of the state's ability to ensureits security and achieve its interests in various regional subsystems, this quality has tobe updated and specified in different ways.
In the subsystem, the problem of ensuringenergy security will actively influence the realization of the national interests of actors,while for most of the actors in the Middle East subsystem the security threat from the"filibusters formations" is more urgent136.133K. Waltz Theory of International Politics. – Addison-Wesley, 1979. – Р 23.A View From the Gulf: A Discussion of Gulf Politics and Security [Электронный ресурс]. // The MiddleEast Institute.
URL: http://www.mei.edu/audio/view-gulf-discussion-gulf-politics-and-security135Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, "Security-Seeking Under Anarchy: Defensive Realism Reconsidered."' InternationalSecurity 25 – 2001. – P. 40-75.136James J. Hentz, ‘Introduction: New Regionalism and the ‘‘Theory of Security Studies’ - Burlington, VT :Ashgate, 2003. – Р. 21613442In other words, the various parameters of force are usually interrelated: largestates have considerable military power, are strong economically, can afford to projectforce in various non-military ways, for example, through regional integration projectsthat include key subjects of the subsystem.Finally, it is also important that there are few really strong states in the system.It consists of many weak and only a few strong.
Strong players form the poles of theinternational system, making it either unipolar, or bipolar, or multipolar. The more polesin the system, the less stable it is, the higher the level of uncertainty in the relationsbetween the poles, the more it will be anarchistic and the more likely the world orderwill undergo changes. Against this background, according to T. Shakleina, the moststable regional subsystems have one clearly expressed hegemon, whose strengthexceeds the aggregate strength of all other elements of the subsystem.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
