Истоки новой холодной войны: Основные черты системного конфликта XXI века
This article responds to the question of whether the tensions
and conflicts in international relations today are only a repetition of the Cold
War, or the international community observes a different process. Advancement
in the discussion on this topic would prompt the modern generation of
politicians and experts on the usefulness of the Cold War experience dating
back to 1947–1989 for interaction between the great powers. It may be also
helpful for analyzing the perspectives of the resolution of this conflict as well as
for finding the solutions which will be at least partly acceptable to the participants.
The article compares the main features of the «old» and «new» cold wars
according to the number of participants, the role of ideology, degree of military
tensions, concentration of economic and other resources for the victory over the
opponent. The article relies on a qualitative approach and does not resort to
quantitative arguments. Although the new conflict differs from the old Cold
War by many parameters, its nature has not changed from the nature of the
conflict in the past.
Russia’s Skinheads: exploring and rethinking subcultural lives provides a through examination of the phenomenon of skinheads, explaining its nature and its significance, and assessing how far Russian skinhead subculture is at the “lumpen” end of the extreme nationalist ideological spectrum. There are large numbers of skinheads in Russia, responsible for a significant number of xenophobic attacks, including 97 deaths in 2008 alone, making this book relevant to Russian specialists as well as to sociologists of youth subculture. It provides a practical example of how to investigate youth subculture in depth over an extended period – in this case through empirical research following a specific group over six years – and goes on to argue that Russian skinhead subculture is not a direct import from the West, and that youth cultural practices should not be reduced to expressions of consumer choice. It presents an understanding of the Russian skinheads as a product of individuals` whole, and evolving, lives, and thereby compels sociologists to rethink how they conceive the nature of subcultures.
The 2012 G8 summit, hosted by US president Barack Obama at the presidential retreat of Camp David in Maryland on 18-19 May, promises to be a particularly significant event. It takes place in the political lead-up to the US presidential election in November 2012, and is being held in tandem with a summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Chicago on 20-21 May. The summit will feature a full-strength agenda, including a global economy struggling to generate growth and jobs, delivery of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as the due date of 2015 moves closer, and security in troubled regions and countries where the G8’s core mission of promoting democracy and reform is acutely at stake. The G8 Camp David Summit publication features articles by German chancellor Angela Merkel and Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper on the key issues that will be under discussion.
For the past 37 years, the annual G8 summits have generated a wide breadth of declarations and communiqués binding the leaders to hard commitments across a diverse range of global policy issues. The extent to which the G8 members comply with their annual commitments has, in recent years, become a hotly contested topic, pitting academics, politicians, policy wonks and newsmakers against each other in an effort to understand whether commitments by the G8 do, in fact, matter. Given this era of ongoing domestic political constraints and conflicting global demands, does the G8 have the ability and, indeed, the capacity not only to make, but also to keep the commitments its members collectively generate at their annual summits?
“Empire Speaks Out” is a result of the collaborative international research project whose participants aim to reconstruct the origin, development, and changing modes of self-description and representation of the heterogeneous political, social, and cultural space of the Russian Empire. The collection offers an alternative to the study of empire as an essentialized historical phenomenon, i.e. to those studies that construe empire retrospectively by projecting the categories of modern nation-centered social sciences onto the imperial past. It stresses dynamic transformations, adaptation, and reproduction of imperial patterns of sociability and governance. Chapters of the collection show how languages of rationalization derived from modern public politics, scientific discourses of applied knowledge (law, sociology, political economy, geography, ethnography, physical anthropology) and social self-organization influenced processes of transformation of the imperial space.
The diverse and contested nature of the contemporary skinhead scene makes it impossible to identify a single common body regime, or set of gender norms, characteristic of the skinhead (sub)culture. This chapter explores one example of how these fraternal bonds and spaces are constituted. It pays particular attention to practices of the body (individual and collective) within the group and how these practices were enacted to confirm its skinhead identity while shaping a particular regime of closeness and intimacy. It considers, firstly, the group as a particular form of fraternity based on homosocial bonds of friendship, closeness and (dis)trust. Secondly, the aesthetics and the ethics of intimacy within the group are discussed. In particular practices of displaying the – naked and bare – body of the skinhead are considered as well as tests of, and conflicts over, the meaning of the intimacies that these practices forge. Finally, the chapter explores these practices in the context of the wider and competing masculinities through which they are enacted.
The article analyses the EU activity in assisting developing countries to develop energy sector throughperspective of the functional approach. The author identifies the EU approach by assessing EU compliance with the G8 commitments on assisting developing countries to develop energy sector. The assessment is made on the basis of the analysis of EU implementation of its commitments made in four major spheres of international engagement for energy development, such as ensuring developing countries’ access to modern energy sources, clean energy development, raw natural energy resources, sustainable management and environmental protection. In order to ensure comprehensive and unbiased assessment the author applies the methodology of global governance delivery function approach and compares EU compliance with compliance of other traditional donors such as USA and emerging donors such as Russia. In conclusion some recommendations on how to raise effectiveness in assisting developing countries to develop energy sector are made for the Russian Federation.
The world’s financial crisis made worth an effort to rethink the existing model of global economic governance. One of the striking things among the others – is the insufficient level of global financial regulation. Experts do not share a common view on the functioning of the system. Some of them consider the system of global governance was not ready to react to the new challenges and to sustain the pressure of critical events. Others will defend the system, admitting that only some slight changes into it would make possible to cope with the current problems. The truth, as very often, is probably somewhere in between. The necessity to modify the pattern of functioning of the global financial institutions is clear. The institutions themselves should be made more viable and efficient and their competences to manage different aspects of global economy should be substantially enlarged. How useful could an EU experience be in achieving the new global governance goals?
One of the popular answers to the challenges of the modern world is the concept of global governance. Does it exist really/ This is the questyion J/ Kirton answers in his book.