Большая Евразия: от полюса конфронтации к сообществу развития
This article analyzes the development potential of Greater Eurasia and its long-term institutionalization. The authors believe that Greater Eurasia, as a geopo-litical reality, is undergoing a certain transformation. Originally formed as a pole of confrontation under the pressure of American politics and based mainly on the Russian-Chinese strategic partnership, now it is acquiring more and more features of the international community, in which the development agenda prevails. This so far only emerging international community is involving more and more players, expanding its geographic coverage almost throughout the Eurasian continent, which poses new challenges for its participants: overcoming geo-political contradictions, forming a sustainable security architecture and linking potentials for achieving economic growth. The approaches and motives of the main Eurasian powers and the possibilities of their linking in order to build a geopolitically sustainable international community “from Lisbon to Singapore” are examined. This text develops and completes some of the theses presented by the authors in the article “From Greater Europe to Greater Eurasia: what brings the world a fundamental geopolitical shift”, which was published in the previous issue of the journal “Vostok (Oriens)”.
The article presents the results of the research «Development methodology of international institutions effectiveness assessment, analysis and assessment of the G8 effectiveness and possibility of different reform models for realization of Russia's foreign policy priorities during global governance system crisis» conducted within the State University - Higher School of Economics plan of fundamental studies. Functional analysis methodology is used to assess G8 effectiveness in realization of global governance functions, priorities, cooperation with multilateral institutions and mechanisms. Special attention is given to dynamics of Russia's role in the G8 and the G8 effectiveness in Russia's priorities realization. The paper examines the G8 and the G20 comparative effectiveness. The research is based on the specialized data base of the G7/G8 and the G20 documents issued from 1998 to 2009 and special programme for their analysis.
The paper analyses the process of establishment and development of the national system of international development assistance in Russia. The analysis covers the period starting from 2005 when key national priorities for international development assistance were defined and amounts of foreign aid were substantially increased on the threshold of Russia’s G8 Presidency preparations. The emerging structure of governance, the aid flows and amounts of allocated ODA, as well as the funding priorities in the sphere of development assistance are described on the basis of the analysis of official documents, statements and speeches of officials, reports of international institutions, and statistics available for public access. Russia’s participation in multilateral international organizations and institutions in the sphere of development cooperation is also considered. Drawing on the results of the analysis the author proposes recommendations for further development of the national system of international development assistance in Russia.
This chapter examines the EU’s contribution to global governance, in large part by focusing on its evolving role in the G8. Covering the period from 1998 to 2008, it picks up where the earlier studies left off. It thus reflects the EU’s changing identity as a global player following the 1997 signing of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the birth and development of the European Security and Defence Policy and the European Security Strategy, the enlargement that increased its representative weight in international institutions, and the further extension of its competencies, as well as the changing world order. It presents the findings from a functional analysis of EU and G8 contributions in four areas of comparison: the performance of global governance functions, the definition of global agenda priorities, the promotion of shared values, and the intensity of the EU’s engagement with international institutions.
The monograph reflects on the dynamics of the EU role in global governance processes, presents analysis of the methods and instruments the EU employs for achieving its objectives in the international arenas, models and options of multilateral partnerships. The EU’s evolving role and influence in the G7/G8 over the last ten years reflecting its growth in power and influence as well as the EU expanding community competencies and legal authority are specifically explored, as an area which so far has not been sufficiently investigated. The work is tracing the transformation of the EU identity as a global actor in the recent decade and looks into how these changes affect the EU – Russia relationship.The authors hope that the book will be a worthwhile reading and will add value to the scholarly literature in the field of studying the EU as a global actor. The contributions aim to serve as a reference and analysis for academics and students in the fields of political science, economics, law and other disciplines. The work aspires to be helpful to government officials, financial institutions, research libraries, the news media, and to members of the interested public.
The reader describes various aspects of the international position of Russia and its policy in the beginning of the 21st century. The general problems of international relations in the present-day polycentric world are discussed.
This article accounts for the revival of geopolitics in Russian post-Soviet foreign policy thinking and also for the fact that geopolitics-inspired foreign policy prescriptions had relatively little impact on the actual conduct of Russian foreign policy. It is argued that classical geopolitics was revived in Russia in order to objectively present the dissolution of the Soviet Union as a crisis. The crisis, in turn, was constructed using a number of themes first articulated by classical Eurasians, namely ideology, modernisation and Russia's distinctiveness. However, geopolitical thinking had little practical relevance because the solution to the crisis was eventually conceptualized in non-geopolitical terms.
The article analyzes main trends of the international cooperation between Russia and Germany in the field of innovative development and modernization.
The results of cross-cultural research of implicit theories of innovativeness among students and teachers, representatives of three ethnocultural groups: Russians, the people of the North Caucasus (Chechens and Ingushs) and Tuvinians (N=804) are presented. Intergroup differences in implicit theories of innovativeness are revealed: the ‘individual’ theories of innovativeness prevail among Russians and among the students, the ‘social’ theories of innovativeness are more expressed among respondents from the North Caucasus, Tuva and among the teachers. Using the structural equations modeling the universal model of values impact on implicit theories of innovativeness and attitudes towards innovations is constructed. Values of the Openness to changes and individual theories of innovativeness promote the positive relation to innovations. Results of research have shown that implicit theories of innovativeness differ in different cultures, and values make different impact on the attitudes towards innovations and innovative experience in different cultures.