Everything on Display
Those who are used to thinking of foreign policy and diplomacy as some sort of ceremonious activity should forget the Congress of Vienna and Helsinki talks. The time of intellectual battles between responsible professionals behind closed doors is gone. Now everything is put on display.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the world's largest regional security organisation, possesses most of the attributes traditionally ascribed to an international organisation, but lacks a constitutive treaty and an established international legal personality. Moreover, OSCE decisions are considered mere political commitments and thus not legally binding. As such, it seems to correspond to the general zeitgeist, in which new, less formal actors and forms of international cooperation gain prominence, while traditional actors and instruments of international law are in stagnation. However, an increasing number of voices - including the OSCE participating states - have been advocating for more formal and autonomous OSCE institutional structures, for international legal personality, or even for the adoption of a constitutive treaty. The book analyses why and how these demands have emerged, critically analyses the reform proposals and provides new arguments for revisiting the OSCE legal framework.
After the end of the Cold War, the USA was probably in the most favorable geopolitical
conditions in which a great power has ever found itself during the whole history of the world. The Eurasian
continental massif – the “world island”, as it was called by Halford Mackinder – turned out to be
dissected into “flanks” and “center”, where the leading powers focused on their macro-regions problems
and less interested in the fate of their neighbors. During two decades, the Russian leadership has been
looking for a foothold on one of these flanks – the European one, formulating its policy through the prism
of the concept of building a “Greater Europe” - a territory that includes all European and EAEU member
countries. Economically, Greater Europe was supposed to create a common market from Lisbon to
Vladivostok, where there are no barriers to business and there are common rules that are clear to everyone.
However, in recent years, the nature of Russian politics has undergone fundamental changes – Russia
began to demonstrate its desire to act as a “collector” of the single geopolitical space of the Eurasian
continent. In this article, the authors analyze the structural prerequisites that caused the gradual departure of
Russia's foreign policy from the concept of building a Greater Europe in favor of the formation of a new
geopolitical and geo-economic structure – Greater Eurasia. This conceptual framework of geopolitical,
geo-economic and geostrategic rapprochement of states is aimed at turning Eurasia into the center of
world economy and politics. In their study, the authors give a brief overview of foreign and domestic
works on the geo-economic consolidation of Greater Eurasia.
Greater Eurasia is a joint project of its member states, ready to go towards a common goal. One of
the projects, to which this article is devoted, is the analysis of Russian-Chinese rapprochement, whose actions
in the SCO were previously constrained by the desire to restrain each other's influence, as well as
the reaction to it from the United States.
This article analyzes the relationship of integration, one of the deﬁning trends of our time, with the political stability of countries and regions. An analysis of the events of the last several years leads to the hypothesis of a close relationship be- tween integration as a process and stability as a category of the political process in particular countries and regions. One of the main conclusions is that integrated systems are able to create a much-needed “space of equilibrium” for the modern world and as a result contribute to the stabilization of national political systems. However, these processes are accompanied by a variety of different kinds of risk, including the integration strategy of aggressive contenders for regional and global leadership. The relationship between the dynamic of integration and political stability is analyzed using the examples of the modern Arab world and Latin America. The correlation of integration and stability is very important for modern Russia as the leader of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Strengthening the integration of identity and political stability of the EAEU member states is considered in the context of opposition to integration with the EU program “Eastern Partnership.” Finding a way out of the geopolitical deadlock is impossible without building a new post-conﬂict platform trialogue of EAEU-EU-“Eastern Partnership” countries. A signiﬁcant result of compromise strategies should be the stabilization of the political regimes, systems and the region as a whole. At the global level, the consolidation of new supranational pillars of the world's political and economic architecture (EAEU, BRICS, SCO) is becoming a necessary condition for the formation of an anti-crisis model for the new world order.
Shaper Nations provides illuminating perspectives on the national strategies of eight emerging and established countries that are shaping global politics at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The volume’s authors offer a unique viewpoint: they live and work primarily in the country about which they write, bringing an insider’s feel for national debates and politics.
The conventional wisdom on national strategy suggests that these states have clear central authority, coherently connect means to ends, and focus on their geopolitical environment. These essays suggest a different conclusion. In seven key countries—Brazil, China, Germany, India, Israel, Russia, and Turkey—strategy is dominated by nonstate threats, domestic politics, the distorting effect of history and national identity, economic development concerns, and the sheer difficulty, in the face of many powerful internal and external constraints, of pursuing an effective national strategy.
The shapers represent a new trend in the international arena with important consequences. Among them is a more uncertain world in which countries concentrate on their own development rather than on shared problems that might divert precious resources, and attend more to regional than to global order. In responding to these shaper states, the United States must understand the sources of their national strategies in determining its own role on the global stage.
The authors of this article use a new paradigm of global studies, in which the idea of globalization as a process of making a uniform world is deemed outmoded. The main trend of development on the planet is identiﬁed as a segmentation into several mega-regions ( integrated systems ) which will compete with each other. The processes of the uniﬁcation of states into integrated systems form an entirely new topology of global space. The planetary structure of the near future is seen by the authors as an integration-confrontational polycentricity. Within the integrated systems, special attention goes to the mutual correlations ( determinateness ) of politics, economics and ideology - a “triangle of integration.” There is considerable potential for research in the ﬁeld of ideology of systems integration, the authors maintain. The article analyzes the “point of vulnerability” of the newly reintegrating system in the former Soviet space: the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU ). Attention is drawn to the importance of meaningful analysis of the political risks of the Eurasian integration. In conclusion, the authors of the article outline prospects for further research on the integration process using the methods of political science and global studies.
The collapse of the USSR remains the dominant watershed for Russia’s elites in the early twenty-first century and, under their influence, for Russian society at large. The collapse is, as an event, not only a historical fact, but indeed a central element of today’s Russian politics—one that has conditioned the moods and interpretations of several generations of Russian thinkers and political actors. And it is these moods and interpretations that are the core of today’s contradictions between Russia and the West, which, three decades later, find themselves in a state of “hybrid confrontation”.
The book includes materials of the 30th V.T. Pashuto memorial readings timed to the 100th anniversary of V.T. Pashuto’s births.