Дипломатия "Шелкового пути" как новый тренд внешней политики Китая.
The main focus of the research is "one belt and one road" intitiative and its role in public diplomacy of China.
The authors are looking into the question if teo kyy players on the Eurasian chessboard - Russia and China - are allies or competitors in the global game? This question becomes more important in the context of Western sanctions against Russia and her strategic pivot to the East.
Report on state of research project on the early medieval town of Dzhankent (Kazakhstan)
Foreign policy uses a wide range of soft power policy instruments and models. It is thus useful to identify the best practices, key tools and approaches that ensure the sustainability and coherence of policy, as well as the connecting elements that allow a country to coordinate its foreign policy actions. This article analyzes the experience of China, the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom and the European Union in five areas: the promotion of language and culture; cooperation in the fields of education, science and technology; business relations; public diplomacy; and official development cooperation. The article is based on the expert survey conducted by National Research University Higher School of Economics in December 2013. The sample includes experts of the international relations engaged in Russian foreign affairs, as well as development cooperation. The results of the expert survey allowed to identify the tools ensuring the most impact and best application of soft power in various socioeconomic and political conditions. The identified tools are structured into a system of interconnected organizational forms with five areas or clusters of influence. Key institutions acting in the five areas constitute the centres of sustainability of the respective clusters. Structural cohesion is ensured by connecting elements such as regulatory frameworks, resources, coordination mechanisms, visa regimes, and communication and public relations.
The book presents research of public diplomacy process in the Eurasian region.
This paper attempts to ascertain the role of public diplomacy in the East Asian region and focuses on the civilization potentials of Russia and China in the region. Dialogue of civilizations, based not on conflict of cultures, values, but on movement to mutual understanding, collaboration and even to the process of harmonization of civilization, is becoming a major requirement of our time. All efforts to solve difficult international problems by “hard power” are not successfully completed – use of military force provokes a counter response. In the light of this, the role of public diplomacy and foreign-policy propaganda is increasing. Despite the fact that the world’s financial and economic crises dispelled the myth of universality of the Western liberal-economic model, USA still continues to impose her ideology – “the new rules of the world ” – on the world. Under these conditions, Russia and China are facing a challenge – consolidating their positions in the world economy and politics. Nowadays, without doubts, both Russia and China are interested in the integration approach. This study explores the possibility of working out the paradigm of political and diplomatic cooperation between the two countries.
The present world order that restricts the possibilities of individual civilizations causes reaction from East-Asian and other developing countries. China in particular, is taking the lead among developing countries, disputing regional and recently global positions. While China assumes responsibility as a regional leader, Russia has interests in her age-old region – Commonwealth of Independent States.
The article is devoted to Russian-Chinese humanitarian cooperation in the 90-ies of XX century. The author emphasizes the special importance of humanitarian cooperation between Russia and China for the promotion of national interests and the expansion of Russia's presence in China by applying the mechanism of "soft power". The author notes that the 90-ies of XX century were the starting point of cooperation between Russia and China in the humanitarian sphere, it laid the legal foundation of Russian-Chinese humanitarian cooperation, moreover, the main directions and priorities of cooperation between the two countries in the humanitarian field have been identified. However, the author stresses that the practical realization of the objectives of the signed intergovernmental documents was carried out in an insufficiently wide format. And the main reason is the deep socio-economic crisis, which Russia had faced after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and, as a consequence, the lack of funding for joint Russian-Chinese projects in the humanitarian field.
The article examines the main trends of contemporary public diplomacy of China focusing on the elements that can be used to enhance Russian public diplomacy efforts.
The textbook gives an all-embracing exposition of the world economic history. The author proposes a new perioization of the history of the world economy on the basis of the methodology of the world-system analysis and the achievements of Russian economic and historical thought. Special attention is paid to the origin of various market institutions, the impact of economic crises on the development of the powers of capitalist world-system core, peripheral countries and Russia. The distinguishing features of Russia's economic development are disclosed in a context of the comparision of the economic evolution of the countries of the East and the West.
Since the global financial crisis of 2007–2009 all Asian powers (both rising and already well established) initiated or supported some large-scale infrastructure projects in the region. The Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) has put much effort into promoting connectivity concept both within the Association and via the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Korean President Pak officially presented a Eurasian initiative. India started to position itself as a continental power and proposed an idea of a new North–South corridor—a cross-Eurasian trade route. China also put its project ‘One Belt, One Road’ (OBOR) into the centre of its foreign economic policy, cultural diplomacy, military strategy, and internal strategic development. Russia put such initiatives as modernisation and promotion of the northern sea route and renovation of the Trans-Siberian route as important objectives of national development policy. This chapter investigates the role of Russian Siberia and the Far East—33 % of the territory of the Asian continent—in these new strategic plans. Our finding is that a place has already been found for the Russian Far East on a new infrastructure map of Eurasia, but Siberia remains mostly excluded from all the key projects despite its enormous resources and technological and human potential. Analysis of official documents, development strategies, business news, and transport budget allocation all support this proposition. It appears that there is a serious challenge for Russian authorities (both federal and regional), while Siberian development policy needs to be reconsidered and written into cross-border and continental projects—not only in the long-existing transit dream of the Trans-Siberian route.