Россия и Польша: неизбежное соседство?
Over the last quarter of the century relations between Russia and Poland are balancing between trying to understand the burden of mutual guilt and a desire to construct non-emotional pragmatic relations. Sources of tension vary. In particular, it is the desire of Poland to position itself as a valued player in NATO and the EU and the role distance between the two countries in IR system, which does not allow Russia to maintain an equal political dialogue with Poland. In fact, Poland is not afraid of a direct threat from Russia, but the worst scenario is the one in which Russia without changing the content of its imperial policy can be accepted as a full partner in the international community. The evolution of Russian statehood and national specifics of democracy is largely determined the assessment of the prospects of Russian politics in Poland. The mistake of Polish diplomacy last years was that it took no direct efforts to improve relations with Russia, but only tried to impose the dialogue on Russian authorities. Diplomatic methods were designed to hurt Russian interests and to create a topic for discussion. In response, after 2006 Russia chose the tactic of ignoring Poland. But, ignoring Polish authorities, Russian politicians acted similarly with other political forces. In Poland among influential political forces, there was and there is still no loyalty to Russia. For Russian interests it is no matter who are or will be in power in Poland. However as a rule, it is an important factor that foreign policy decisions are de facto within the competences of the President and the government, as well as experiencing a significant influence of the parliamentary forces. Recent trends show no tangible innovations in bilateral programme. But innovations appear in multilateral and conflict enough issues, such as deployment of US missile defense system in Poland or Polish supervision of "Eastern Partnership" programme. The main problem is low self-sufficiency of bilateral relations and excessive influence of third countries. Any efforts to normalize bilateral relations will be meaningless until the weight of bilateral relations really increases to each of the party.
Russia-Polish relations, foreign policy of Poland, Polish-American relations, EU, Common Foreign and Security Policy, NATO
Do the EU and NATO threaten Russian security? The book explores the rise of these exclusive ’inter-democratic’ security institutions after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the ensuing effects on relations with Russia. Two competing theories are tested to explore whether these institutions aggravate or mitigate the security dilemma with Russia. These institutions can be theorised to promote security as a positive-sum game through European integration and democracy promotion, or pursue collective hegemony with ideologically uncompromising bloc-politics. Glenn Diesen argues that a European security architecture that demotes the largest state on the continent to an object of security inevitably results in ’European integration’ becoming a zero-sum geopolitical project that has set the West on a collision course with Russia.
The author looks at the airbase on the (Portugal) as a showcase of America's attitude to its lesser NATO partners, and a demonstration of how an individual nation can use the home field advantage to play with the superpower and a military alliance at its peak in the modern multipolar world.
Korean-Russian Jeju Forum 2012 was organized by the East Asia Foundation and was dedicated to relations between Russia and the countries of the Korean Peninsula.
This paper analyzes the role of Russia in nonproliferation global efforts, providing a comprehensive overview on Russian nonproliferation, disarmament and arms control policies. With this aim, it will review the main strategic Russian documents on this topic, its participation in nonproliferation regimes and international initiatives, as well as its political approach to the topic. Russia's role in the Iranian and North Korean nuclear challenges as the main current nuclear proliferation concerns is examined. Based on current international engagement and domestic rules and statements, the paper shows that Russia is, at present, a non-revisionist pragmatic actor; but one that is ready to defy the established legal and political order if a threat to its security or interest is present.
Ce numéro est consacré à l’Otan dont la France est un pays membre fondateur de l’Alliance atlantique comme de l’Union européenne et un pays partenaire historique de la Russie. Ce thème est d’une grande actualité pour ces deux pays aux extrémités des espaces de l’Atlantique à l’Oural, cher au général de Gaulle et attaches à la sécurité et a la stabilité de l’Europe continentale. Dans ce numéro, on trouvera un article du rédacteur en chef de l’édition française, Jean Dufourcq, qui aborde la question de la place de l’Alliance atlantique. La question de la sécurité de l’Europe est également posée : comment penser la sécurité et la défense d’un espace européen composite ? Les relations de l’Otan avec la Russie restent marquées par une méfiance réciproque malgré le redémarrage voulu par le Président américain, il y a deux ans ; comment vont se développer ces relations ? Vous trouverez des pistes pour répondre à cette question avec une analyse de Jean-Christophe Romer. La nécessité d’une réflexion sur une défense européenne est abordée par Arnaud Danjean. La mise en place du bouclier antimissiles, et ses conséquences, est une question analysée par l’article de Vivien Pertusot. La place de la dissuasion nucléaire dans l’Otan et le nucléaire, un autre sujet important pour un pays qui possède la bombe, est explorée dans un texte signé d’Emmanuel Nal. Un espace géographique comme celui de l’Asie centrale, important pour la Russie, avec un possible redéploiement de l’Otan après l’Afghanistan : c’est le texte de René Cagnat qui ouvre des pistes de réflexions. Comment doit-on penser la sécurité et la défense d’un espace qui va bien plus loin que les frontières de l’Union européenne ? Quel espace devons-nous protéger, contre qui et avec quels alliés ? Dans ce monde multicentrique, cette question doit appeler une réponse. Vous trouverez des pistes de réflexions sous la plume de l’ancien ministre Jean-Pierre Chevènement sur ces sujets. À noter aussi une analyse sur le cheminement stratégique de la Pologne en vue d’assurer sa sécurité avec l’Otan et l’UE faite par Roland Delawarde. Trois auteurs russes leur donnent la réplique avec leurs préoccupations spécifiques.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.