диссертация (1169608), страница 8
Текст из файла (страница 8)
Waever, at the present stage, certain regionalsecurity subsystems as components of the international system have significantautonomy, in contrast to the comprehensive rigid structure of the times of the Cold War.With the collapse of the bipolar system of international relations, the extent to which theworld powers interfered with processes taking place in various parts of the world hasdecreased. As a consequence, the status of regions in the system of internationalrelations has changed: from the arenas of rivalry between the two superpowers, theregions began to gradually evolve into independent elements of the global securityarchitecture that directly influence the policy of global players. In some cases, theregions act as centers of power in their own right99.As the next logical step, awareness of the need for collective efforts within asingle geographic region to resolve security problems and counter common threats overtime leads to the creation of a regional security complex (RSC) - a group of units whosemain processes occur within the political society of the regional countries, during whichthe perception of a factor as a significant threat, become so widely shared that theproblems of their national security cannot be considered separately from oneanother"100.Nevertheless, not every group of neighboring states ends up with a regionalsecurity complex.
In order to be able to talk about the appearance of the RSC, theregional space must meet certain criteria. Thus, the American expert on the study of thetheory of regional security complexes, Patrick Morgan, laid out the following conditionsfor the formation of a RSC:1) self-identification of members of the RSC as representatives of one region, aswell as appropriate perception by external actors;2) geographical proximity of participants;3) certain autonomy of the RSC from other complexes, as well as from theinfluence of global players;98Buzan B.
Security: A New Framework for Analysis // B. Buzan, O. Weaver, J. de Wilde. Colorado, L, 1998. –99Barry Buzan, Ole Waever. Regions and Powers. Regions and Powers. – P. 10-11Buzan B. Security: A New Framework for Analysis // B. Buzan, O. Weaver, J. de Wilde. Colorado, L, 1998.P.
201.100– P. 201.304) regular and intensive interactions between members of the RCU;5) a high degree of political, economic and cultural similarity101.One could add to this that regions are not “equal” in terms of the hierarchy ofimportance of regions in the global security realms from the standpoint of their conflictpotential and the presence of potential threats to international security and the securityof the major global players. Furthermore, each region is obviously different in terms offormalization and institutionalization of regional security systems, including regionalorganizations, treaties, agreements, arms control regimes, forms of collectiveresponsibility, ways to provide mutual assistance, etc.
The highest degree of suchinstitutionalization can be found in the Transatlantic area, a similar system is graduallybeing formed on a large Eurasian space, the prerequisites for its formation are observedin the integration efforts of ASEAN and the African Union. The least degree ofinstitutionalization is characteristic of security processes in the Middle East andNortheast Asia102.The specific weight of all the above processes and factors that determine the newparameters of international security is not equivalent and not constant.
Nevertheless, inorder to gauge the emerging new quality of international security on a global scale andto identify the determining trajectory of its long-term development, it is necessary toensure, as far as possible, an objective and systematic consideration of these parameters,since their deliberate exclusion from the categorical apparatus will adversely affect thequality of the analysis.Over the past decade, regional and subregional levels of analysis have provenincreasingly important in our understanding of global security103. The above descriptionof the notion of regional security confirms the assumption that regional cooperation inthe field of security begins with the realization of the prospect of such cooperation andof the commonality of national interests and national security strategies 104.
This, in turn,101Morgan Patrick M.. Regional security complexes and Regional Orders. Regional Orders// Regional Orders:Building Security in a New World. ed. by David A. Lake, Patrick M. Morgan. The Pennsylvania State University Press.University Park, Pennsylvania, 1997. – P. 26.102Бакланов. А.Г., Ближний Восток: региональная безопасность и интересы России, М., - 2010 - С.43.103А.С. Засыпкин. Безопасность в Персидском заливе. // Международная жизнь, №1, 2009, С.
3-15.104Воскресенский А.Д. Специфика политической идентичности в глобальном мире / А.Д.Воскресенский// Сравнительная политика. №1. - 2016. - с. 135-139.31implies the transformation of the ways counties deal with these issues towards theirsuper-nationalisation, a RSC being of most likely but far from the only upshot of thisrealization.1.3. Basic Approaches to the Study of the Phenomenon of Regionalization in theContext of the Notion of "Regional Security"The process of transformation of the existing system of international relations, thedynamic of change and the end result of the ongoing processes are undoubtedly boundup with the termination of the Cold War and the end of the bloc confrontation.
Thecollapse of the bipolar world order marked the disintegration of the international orderbased on a system of checks and balances that had existed for four and a half decadesand determined the forms of international interaction, its goals and the circle ofparticipants. The emergence of a multi-polar international system is normally closelyconnected in the literature with the notion of regionalization, which became widespreadin the late XX - early XXI century.Regionalization is a collection of empirical processes that result, typically, fromthe trends of microeconomic integration in the areas of trade and industrial cooperationin manufacturing and mutual direct investments and lead to the formation of institutionsof cooperation within a certain transnational geographical space105.
As driving forces ofregionalization, intra-regional processes, as well as external influence, are oftenmentioned. Specialists distinguish two types of regionalization106.The first type is the emergence of regional powers that are active in their effortsto improve their own positions both within the region and in the international arena.
Asa result, such actors seek to build relationships with smaller states in the region in orderto maximize their use in their political and economic interests, through agreements,treaties, and various informal practices107.105Robert Z. Lawrence, Regionalism, Multilateralism and Deeper Integration - Washington, DC: BrookingsInstitution, 1995.
– 297 p.106Абрамов Ю. А., Куйбарь В. И. Глобальная регионализация: к обоснованию понятия // Социальногуманитарные знания. 2008. № 1. С. 242–250.107Ibid.32The second type of regionalization process involves the formation of regionalintegration groups, whose purpose is also to create a certain regional economic andpolitical environment that exists separately within the framework of the world system.At the same time, as a rule, the leading driving force of economic integration is theresult of political decisions by participants in the relevant regional groups108.
Moreover,in a number of cases, economic cooperation is seen as an effective means of resolvingexisting or potential political contradictions, minimizing political risks and overallimproving the security of the region, both within and outside the regional space109.When analyzing world politics at the regional level, one normally resorts to asystems approach which theoretically singles out the regional level and regionalsubsystems as independent units of analysis of research.The issue of regional and subregional subsystems are subject to debate andvarying opinions. In the bipolar world order the role of regional powers as well asregional cooperative arrangements was subordinated to the overall logic and laws ofsystem-wide bipolar confrontation.
However, after the demolition of the bipolarinternational system, the situation became much more complicated and calling for adifferent theoretical explanation and conceptualization. Let us assume that we are seeingnow in the works is a fledgling multipolar world. Then, it would be fair to view it as aresult of the crumbling of a bipolar realm of mainly political, vertically organizedrelations into relatively bound geo-economic regional and/or subregional entities110.What is more, one could argue that with the demise of bipolarity there is only one levelof analysis left to researchers of IR, and that is the regional and subregional level ofinteraction111.Furthermore, at the end of the 20th century, one felt a pressing need for a cleardelineation of the general and particular problems of international relations.
The reasonfor this view lay in the parallel trends towards intensified globalization, on the one108Wilfred J. Ethier, «The New Regionalism», - The Economic Journal, 108 - July 1998, - p. 1161.Абрамов Ю. А., Куйбарь В. И. Глобальная регионализация: к обоснованию понятия // Социальногуманитарные знания.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
