Foreign policy and the international relations

Foreign policy as the state phenomenon. The majestic structure of the organisation of life of mankind causes necessity of distinction for the politician of the states of its internal and external aspects. It is considered to be that the foreign policy is an activity of the state on the international scene, regulating relations with other subjects of foreign policy activity - the states, their unions and blocks, foreign public associations, the world and regional international organisations. The form of traditional realisation of foreign policy is:

- An establishment of diplomatic relations (or decrease in their level, a suspension, rupture and even declaration of war at обоcтрении relations with the former partners) between the states;

- Opening of representations of the state at the international organisations or membership in them;

- Cooperation with friendly to the state foreign social movements, associations and the organisations;

- Realisation and maintenance at various levels of incidental and regular contacts to representatives of the states, the international public structures with which the given state has no diplomatic relations or friendship, but with them is interested in dialogue for whatever reasons.

Presence of steady communication channels with foreign partners allows the state to diversify a combination of methods and means in realisation of foreign policy activity: realisation of regular information interchange, visits at different levels; preparation for the conclusion of bilateral and multilateral contracts and agreements on a wide spectrum of questions, including confidential and confidential character; contribution to development of possibilities of foreign policy activity of one states and blocking of similar possibilities of others (in those or other directions); preparation for war and maintenance favorable for conducting operations of foreign policy conditions, etc. Last decades civilised participants of the international life pay the increasing attention to a non-admission of rocket-nuclear war, the organisation of preventive measures on prevention of the international conflicts, technogenic accidents and cooperation on liquidation of their consequences, struggle against hunger, pandemics, joint actions for preservation of the environment etc.

The foreign policy is activity and interaction of the official subjects having or assuming the right to speak on behalf a society name, to express its interests, to select certain methods and ways of their realisation. According to traditional representations, the states express themselves on international scene through foreign policy which can accept two basic forms - diplomacy and strategy. Their appointment - satisfaction of national interests, first of all, maintenance of freedom, safety and favorable conditions for development of the person, a society and the state. In the scientific and publicistic literature there are two basic treatments of concept “national interest”:

1) liberal, representing this phenomenon as a certain generalisation of interests of the citizens which realisations should be subordinated, including, and foreign policy strategy of the state;

2) conservative or государственническая, identifying national interests with interests of the state.

Last years national interests are more and more deduced from difficult interaction of various groups of the interests anyhow influencing the state structures and institutes which are responsible for foreign policy activity of the state. Comprehension of objective national interests by intellectual and political elite allows the states to formulate foreign policy doctrines in which foreign policy strategy as unity of the purposes and the means connected with realisation on international scene of fundamental national interests is defined. Strategy of any international actor represents, first of all, a method of the analysis of a situation, an estimation of directions of its possible development, comparison of the received picture to own interests and a choice on this basis most effective remedies for realisation of the planned purpose. The big strategy of the state unites in itself all means available at its order for maintenance of national interests both in peace, and in a wartime. There are two necessary conditions of successful national strategy:

Correct estimation of a strategic situation, that is features developed by the given moment of the international environment;

The strategic analysis, that is studying of other significant international actors, called to give about them fuller representation.

National or, otherwise, the big strategy of the state is realised in a series of the concrete practical actions undertaken by the state on all azimuths of the foreign policy, forming its foreign policy. Its ordinary consciousness formed by mass media, identifies with state foreign policy that is not absolutely true. The foreign policy of the modern state represents the difficult political phenomenon including as basis objectively existing national interests, the big strategy and a foreign policy as a policy on their realisation. Space of life of mankind on which face and co-operate, confront and co-operate at different levels (global, regional, multilateral, bilateral) the states, realising national interests, it is accepted to name the international relations.

II. Subjects of the international relations. The international relations represent special sphere of the world of a policy. In “the Political encyclopaedia” they are characterised as follows: “the International relations - specific area of public relations; set political, economic, ideological, legal, diplomatic, the military man and other communications and mutual relations between the basic subjects of the world community; behaviour of the states on international scene”.In the western political science it is accepted to reduce all definitions of the international relations to two approaches:

1) when they are represented as a version of human activity at which between persons more than from one state there is a social interaction;

2) when they act in the form of the conflict or cooperation on international scene between various institutes - the states, intergovernmental and non-governmental bodies, the organisations, movements, associations.

The basic subjects of the international relations and now there are states. Operating behind frameworks of own borders in which they possess the internal sovereignty, the states solve also variety of additional problems:

Establish control over activity in the territory of foreign forces and the structures complicating achievement of national safety and stability;

Reflect threats of the integrity, safety and to the national interests;

Co-ordinate interests with stronger partners or contenders;

Fill up the resources increasing their force, authority, influence on international scene.

During historical process such mechanisms of interaction of the states, as союзничество and confrontation, protectorate (protection) and partnership, cooperation and rivalrygradually were created and developed.And now the state continues to represent in the international life a society as a whole, instead of any separately taken social groups or the political organisations. Under the authority of the state there are the questions connected with maintenance of the sovereignty, safety, territorial integrity, development of a science, formation, culture. The state is the unique national institute having legitimate powers to participate in relations with other states, to conclude contracts, to declare war. And now it is possible to represent influence, force of the state as its ability, protecting own interests, to influence other states, on a course of events in the world. The real place of the state in system of the international relations is defined not only military potential, the size of territory and natural riches, but also wider indicators - population formation, a science condition, national economy structure, volume of output per capita, a state of environment etc.

Last decades the international organisations become more and more important subjects of the international relations. They are usually divided on interstate (or intergovernmental) and the non-governmental organisations. Arising in economic, political, cultural and other spheres of life of the people, they have certain features and specificity, play own role in the international relations. As examples it is possible to name:

- The regional organisations - Association of the states of South East Asia (АСЕАН), League of the Arabian states, OSCE etc.;

- The organisations of economic character - the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Currency fund (IMF), the World bank, etc.;

- The organisations within the limits of separate branches of the world economy - the International power agency (МЭА), the International agency on atomic energy (IAEA), the Organization of the countries of exporters of oil (OPEC) etc.

- The political-economical organisations - the Organization of the African unity (ОАЕ), the Organization of the American states (ОАГ), the North American zone of free trade (НАФТА), etc.;

- The professional organisations, such, as the International organisation journalists (International Federation of Journalists), the International organisation of criminal police (INTERPOL), etc.;

- The demographic organisations - the International democratic federation of women (МДФЖ), the World association of youth (YOU) etc.;

- The organisations in the field of physical culture and sports - the International Olympic committee (IOC), the Organization of the Incorporated nations concerning formation, sciences and cultures (UNESCO), etc.;

- The military organisations - the Organization of the North Atlantic contract (NATO), the Pacific pact of safety (АНЗЮС), etc.;

- The trade-union organisations - the International confederation of free trade unions (МКСП), the World confederation of work (ВКТ);

- The organisations in support of the world and solidarity: the World council of the world (ВСМ), Paguoshsky movement, the International institute of the world etc.;

- The religious organisations - the World council of churches (ВСЦ), Christian peace conference (ХМК) etc.;

- The organisation which purpose is the help to prisoners of war, to other victims of war, accidents and acts of nature - the International red cross (МКК);

- The ecological organisations - Green Peace, etc.

The most considerable role in the international relations is played by the Organization of the Incorporated nations. Formed in 1945, it has reached almost full universality, having united 191 the modern independent state. Within the limits of the United Nations there was variety of the organisations which were included into the international relations and as United Nations structures, and as independent structures (World Health Organization, the International court, IMF, the World bank, UNESCO, etc.). In United Nations structure it is possible to allocate six principal organs - General assembly, Security council, Economic and social council, Council about guardianship, Secretary, the International Court. Powerful and many-sided influence of the United Nations on the international relations is defined by following major factors:

- The United Nations are the most representative forum for discussions between the states on pressing questions of world development;

- The United Nations charter is the base of modern international law, some kind of conventional by the code of behaviour of the states in their mutual relations;

- In the shadow of the United Nations there is a great number of the international organisations which carry out regulation of the international life;

- The United Nations are allocated by the all-important competence - to solve war and peace questions, including by use of the armed force.

Last decades the role of non-governmental participants constantly increases in the international relations. If in the XX-th century beginning was only 69 international non-governmental organisations in the beginning of this century their number exceeds 60 000. Usually among non-governmental actors (differently them name “actors out of the sovereignty“) allocate the international non-governmental organisations (МНПО) both transnational corporations and banks (the multinational corporation, ТНБ). According to the resolution of General Assembly of the United Nations, МНПО “any international organisation which has been not founded on the basis of the intergovernmental agreement” is considered.As the basic signs МНПО are considered: absence of the purposes of extraction of profit; its recognition at least one state or consultative state presence at the international intergovernmental bodies; reception of money resources more than from one country. Now such organisations is nearby 10 000. The most known and influential among them - “Doctors without borders”, Green Peace, ”the International amnesty”, etc.

Transnational corporations have received rapid development in second half of XX-th century and, according to the United Nations, by the end of their this century was more than 53 thousand, 90 which % are based in the developed countries of northern hemisphere. Such fact testifies to their influence on the international relations at least: in 1998 “Dzheneral моторс”, one of the largest multinational corporations, has made production on 161,3 bln. dollars that was more national produce of such countries, as Greece (137,4 bln. dollars), Israel (96,7), Ireland (59,9), Slovenia (19,5), Nicaragua (9,3). Growth and multinational corporation influence it was stimulated with development of transnational banks which carried out financial operations worldwide. On the beginning of 1999 actives only 20 largest of them exceeded the sum of 425 bln. dollars As a whole transnational corporations became rather active and influential players in the international relations. Their activity in this plan had and has both positive, and negative the parties.

It is possible to consider as "pluses": 1) world trade development; 2) investment of large capitals in economy of the developing states; 3) creation of workplaces in underdeveloped countries; 4) expansion of sphere of democracy in the world at the expense of perfection of market relations; 5) preparation of national shots; 6) introduction of procedures of the conciliatory permission disputable and conflict situations.

"Minuses" look so indisputable also: blasting of the national sovereignty of the countries where there are multinational corporations; strengthening as a result of their activity of rupture between “the rich North” and “the poor South”; readiness of the multinational corporation and ТНБ for the sake of own profits to co-operate with repressive modes; interest to preservation of cheap labour in developing countries that blocks their social progress; washing out of national culture of underdeveloped countries by means of introduction of foreign technologies, the goods, cultural and cultural wealth etc.

III. Features of the international political processes. One is shown that in this area of a policy there is no uniform legitimate centre of compulsion, a uniform source of the power which would possess indisputable authority for all participants of these communications and relations. The international sphere of a policy is regulated by various norms. Its main actually political regulator is the balance of forces developing between the states. Bring the contribution to this business and norms of international law. In the international relations there is a place and for moral regulators - principles of the international relations which all subjects operating in this sphere should adhere. In the United Nations Charter, and also in the Helsinki declaration of Meeting on safety and cooperation in Europe (СБСЕ, subsequently transformed to OSCE) 1975 they have been formulated as follows:

- A principle of sovereign equality of the states. This principle includes in itself following elements: 1) the states are legally equal; 2) each state has the rights inherent in the full sovereignty; 3) each state is obliged to respect правосубъектность other states; 4) territorial integrity and political independence of the state are inviolable; 5) each state has the right to choose and develop freely the political, social, economic and cultural systems; 6) each state is obliged to carry out completely and honesty international obligations and to live in peace with other states;

- A principle of non-use of force and threats by force. According to the United Nations charter, “all members of the United Nations abstain in their international relations from threat by force or its application against territorial inviolability and political independence of any state, and otherwise, incompatible with the United Nations Charter”;

- A principle of indestructibility of frontiers. Has been accepted on СБСЕ in 1975 in which Final certificate it was ascertained: “the States-participants consider as indestructible all borders each other, as well as borders of all states in Europe. And consequently they will abstain from any encroachments on these borders”. The principle maintenance can be reduced to three elements: a recognition of existing borders; refusal of any territorial claims now and in the future; refusal of any other encroachments on borders, including threat by force or its application;

- A principle of territorial integrity of the states. In the United Nations Charter it is declared that the state “should abstain from any actions directed on infringement of national unity and territorial integrity of any other state” that “the state territory should not be object of acquisition by other state as a result of threat by force or its application”. In this connection “any territorial acquisitions which have grown out of threat by force or its application” should not admit lawful;

- A principle of the peace permission of the international disputes. According to the United Nations charter, “all members of the United Nations resolve the international disputes by peace means so that not to subject to threat an international peace, safety and justice”;

- A principle non-interference to internal affairs. According to the United Nations Charter, it “has no right to intervention in the affairs in essence entering into the internal competence of any state”. This prohibition extends on actions of any other participants of the international dialogue, and not just the United Nations;

- A principle general respect of human rights. In the Charter of the United Nations of the obligation of the states on observance of human rights are stated in the most general form, and till now the states aspire to concretise the standard maintenance of a principle of general respect of human rights. But the direct regulation and protection of the rights and freedom of the person still remains a domestic concern of each state;

- A principle of self-determination of the people and the nations. It declares unconditional respect of the right of each people freely to choose ways and forms of the development. After disorder of colonial empires the question on self-determination of the nations in sense of formation of the independent national states basically is solved;

- A cooperation principle. As defines the Charter of the United Nations, the states are obliged “to carry out the international cooperation in the permission of the international problems of economic, social, cultural and humanitarian character”, and also are obliged “to support an international peace and safety and with that end in view to accept effective collective measures”;

- A principle of diligent performance of the international obligations. Under the United Nations Charter “е members of the United Nations honesty carry out the obligations taken up on the present Charter to provide to all of them in aggregate the rights and the advantages following from an accessory to structure of members of the United Nations”.

At the same time the constant pluralism of the state sovereignties does interstate relations unpredictable enough, chaotic, unbalanced. In such atmosphere any state is not capable to keep constantly accurately expressed and invariable positions under the relation to each other, being, for example, with somebody in constant confrontation or in so steady allied relations. The sphere of the international relations represents area of nonequilibrium and non-uniform political interactions. As practice shows, last decades imbalance of the international relations has increased because disintegration of world socialist system and liquidation of the USSR have essentially altered balance of forces of the world. It has allowed the western states to offer and impose to the world own criteria of settlement of the international political relations that has met counteraction from the whole group of the states. Chaos growth in the international relations has been caused also by an exit on the international political arena of new independent subjects of the international relations operating out of and besides the state institutes and the organisations. Complexity and ambiguity of relations of participants of world politics is caused as well by that their behaviour in the given sphere is initiated by the most different reasons.

IV. Theoretical dispute of realists and idealists in a science about the international relations.In ХХ century of discussion about the nature and specific characteristics of the international relations were conducted basically between realists and idealists (20-40th which in second half of XX-th century were replaced by their followers neorealists and neoliberals), традиционалистами and модернистами (50-60th), statesmen and глобалистами (70-80th).

Realists (J. Кеннан, J. Ball, Z.Bzhezinsky, etc.) believed that the basic natural purpose of each state is accumulation of force which provides realisation of national interests.

Each state as they considered, should aspire to creation of such balance of forces which would act in the conditions of a general competition, power opposition as the constraining mechanism and guaranteed to the state of its safety. Any morally-ethical and even standard establishments for the state should be considered by it not differently, as means of restriction of its sovereignty. Thus admitted that any means of achievement of the purpose - belief, blackmail, force, trade, diplomacy, - are initially justified, so far as multiply power of the state and create possibility of the decision of tasks in view. Care and responsibility at decision-making should be the main values of behaviour of the states on international scene. It is considered to be the theoretical father of political realism the American political scientist G.Morgentau (1904-1980), which in the book published in 1948 “Political relations between the nations: Struggle for influence in the world ”ascertained:“ the World policy, similar any policy, is race for power. Whatever ultimate goals were pursued in a world policy, the direct purpose always is the power ”.

Idealists (D.Perkins, V.Din, U.Lippman, T.Cook, etc.), on the contrary, considered the international relationsthrough a prism of legal and ethical categories, being guided by creation of standard models of world relations.

At the heart of their belief refusal of a recognition of power and military means as major regulators of interstate relations lay. The preference was completely given to system and international law institutions. Instead of balance of forces idealists offered the mechanism of collective safety. This idea was based on that reason that all states have an overall aim - the world and general safety as instability of power balance and war cause to the states a huge damage, conduct to senseless expenditure of resources. V.Wilson, having stated in 1918 in 14 points substantive provisions of post-war peaceful settlement, has accurately expressed sights of idealists. In particular, as the basic mechanisms of harmonisation of world political relations he has offered: to spend open peace talks; to guarantee a freedom of commerce in peace and a wartime; to reduce national arms to is minimum sufficient level compatible to national safety; To create League of the Nations which overall objective would be maintenance of collective safety of member countries of this international organisation.

After the Second World War on the foreground there was a discussion between модернистами and традиционалистами. Модернисты (M.Kaplan, R.Nort, G.Alisson, etc.) The basic attention gave to modelling of actions of the national states on international scene. In their researches the emphasis became on studying of procedures and decision-making mechanisms, on the description of behaviour of various segments of ruling elite and the governments, working out of technologies of bureaucratic compromises and other components of development of foreign policy of the states. The account of influence of all actors who were taking part in working out of foreign policy decisions, allowed them to model concrete systems of the international relations, to make forecasts of interaction of the states at various political levels. In turn традиционалистыfocused attention to necessities of the account of influence of those factors influencing foreign policy which broadcast characteristic traditions for the concrete countries and customs, express features of personal behaviour of politicians, a role of mass and group values etc.

Discussion модернистов and традиционалистов about value of various components of foreign policy activity of the states was replaced by dispute of scientists on, whether there was a state the central element in the international relations or integration processes have transformed this sphere to qualitatively other, interdependent and interconnected world community.So-called statesmen (K.Dojch, K.Uoltts, etc.)believed that, despite changes, the states remained the central subjects of world politics, forms of relations between them have changed only. Therefore and the nature of sphere of the international relations remained former: it is sated with foreign policy actions of the states which are guided by principles of realism, power restraint of competitors and achievement of balance of forces arranging their foreign policy. Contrary to statesmen глобалисты (E.Haas, L.Linberg, etc.) Originally continuing a line of idealists, insisted on decrease in a role of the national states in the world.

In their opinion, modern changes in the world of transport, communication, the information have made the national state the inefficient tool of achievement of own safety and maintenance of well-being of the citizens. Спрессованность the international relations, “world compression” (O.Young) were the most adequate reflexion of dynamics of modern international relations. Objective necessity for cooperation of forces and possibilities of the states for struggle against global threats pulls together the people, there is a process of merging of mankind in a single whole. All it, on thought глобалистов, promoted creation of reliable preconditions for formation of more directed world order, control increase over problems of safety, integration strengthening.

V. The Geopolitical approach to an explanation of the international relations. Theessential contribution to development of the theory of the international relations was brought by authors of geopolitical theories who have offered all of the ideas opening dependence of foreign policy of the states from factors, allowing them to supervise certain geographical spaces. The most appreciable contribution to geopolitics development at the first stage was brought by English, German and American scientists - F.Rattsel, H.Makkinder, K.Haushofer, A.Mehen, Russian thinkers N.JA.Danilevsky, S.N.Trubetsky, P.N.Savitsky, L.I.Mechnikov, V.Semenov-Tjanshansky.

The geopolitics as scientific discipline has endured three stages of development - classical (before the Second World War), revisionist (till 1989) and modern (after the end of "cold war”). The central question at all these stages there was a character of mutual relations between "sea" and "land", талассократиями and теллурократиями, Leviafanom and the Hippopotamus. Space concepts as political force, хартленда as “geographical axis of history”, панидей as spiritual basis of "the big spaces”, римленда from it “anaconda strategy”, “geostrategic regions” have made serious impact on thinking and activity of politicians which decided destinies of the world the day before and after the first and second world wars. The same ideas explained logic of action of creators of "cold war”, corrected existence geopolitical scientific constructions of modern writers.

The large contribution to development of geopolitical ideas in the end of the XX-th century has brought J. Розенау, put forward the concept according to which the world of a global policy began to develop of two взаимопересекающихся the worlds:

- First, from полицентричного the world “actors out of the sovereignty” in which, along with the states, various corporate subjects and even separate persons began to operate and which began to promote creation of new communications and relations in world politics;

- Secondly, from traditional structure of the world community where the main position is occupied with the national states. Crossing of these two worlds shows dispersal of imperious resources, and also occurrence of contradictory tendencies. For example, increase of abilities of the individual to the analysis of the political world is combined with extreme complication of political interrelations. Erosion of traditional authorities adjoins to role strengthening цивилизационных the beginnings in a substantiation of a policy of the states. Identity search goes along with constant reorientation political лояльностей etc. At the same time recognised, according to J. Розенау, decentralisation of international contacts and relations, and the main thing - washing out of concept "force" and, as consequence, change of the maintenance and sense of concept “safety threat” became factors in this world.

In modern conditions geopolitical principles had new development, they were considerably updated and enriched. So, S.Hantington considers collision of civilisations as sources of geopolitical conflicts. The concept of "gold billion” according to which the civilisation blessings can get only to the limited number of winners of progress owing to limitation of world resources, predicts an aggravation of interstate conflicts because of resources and territories, placing thus emphasis on necessity of creation by the safe and prospering states of artificial obstacles in relations with less successful subjects of the international life.

Along with similar confrontational forecasts a number of politicians and theorists offer “бесполярную” treatment of the world based on general harmony and cooperation of the states, put forward models of type of the "common European home", systems of collective safety of the states meaning creation and the people existing in the interconnected, denuclearized and interdependent world. Essential motions occur and in treatment of the geopolitical principles, which steels to be applied not only at studying international relations, but also to be applied to the analysis of internal political processes.

VI. Modern lines of development of the international relations.Modern international relations became arena of becoming aggravated struggle of global and national forces and the beginnings. On the one hand, on a world scene the role of the national states consistently changes. Thus their dependence on the international community not simply grows at the decision of the global problems demanding connection of efforts of many states, the integrated positions assuming development, but also from a policy of group of the most developed both powerful in economic and military relations of the countries and their military-political unions. Growth of influence of integration factors was marked by blasting of a monopoly position of great powers as individual rulers of destinies of the world, democratisation of the international cooperation meaning increase of access of the population to the information and involving in acceptance of their concerning decisions, real deepening of cooperation of the countries within the limits of incorporated Europe, other integration centres and associations. The tendencies strengthening a role of the various political and cultural centres of influence in the international sphere, strengthening of their self-sufficiency, finally, conduct to formation of logic of development of the multipolar world. At the same time a number of real directions in formation of a modern world order undermine multipolarity as a principle of its organisation, being transformed to configurations of the monopolar world based on dictatorship of separate participants of the international relations.

As consequence of world politics globalisation, in the world the understanding of force and safety has essentially changed. In particular, strengthening of a versatility of interstate relations in sphere of an exchange of technologies, information exchanges or the transport, providing own game rules and balance of resources, transforms concept of force into the base and advantages, and vulnerability of the separate countries. According to it and the concept of safety began to reveal not only the big dependence on positions of other states, but also the internal structure. Now scientists speak about presence of following components of state security on the world scene:

- Political, assuming state actions on preservation of the national sovereignty and an infringement non-admission other states of the vital interests. Today such actions provide the measures directed on increase of trust to the concrete state; maintenance of a certain transparency of the behaviour in external sphere; cooperation and integration of efforts with other states for the decision of the international conflicts on the basis of international law; transition to a principle of sufficiency of arms and an exception of threats of application of means of mass defeat; activization миротворчества;

- The economic, joint interstate actions directed on strengthening, cooperation and integration with other countries at realisation of social and economic and humanitarian programs. It, first of all, provides state transition to measures of maintenance of steady social and economic development, restriction of a damage to the environment of rational managing, more organic embedding in system мирохозяйственных communications, observance of the general rules of economic cooperation;

- Humanitarian,assuming the actions directed on association of the people, the nations and cultures in uniform community. It is thus provided that the community will be guided by humanistic values, on human rights observance to live according to that understanding of freedom which is accepted in its concrete society, on rendering of the humanitarian help by the sufferer, fight against terrorism and a narcotism;

- Ecological, providing state actions on environment preservation as bases of existence of the present and future generations, to strengthening of the bases of human life in all their variety, to fastening of the relation to the nature as to object of aesthetic character.

The present stage of the international relations is characterised by precipitancy of the changes, new forms of distribution of force, the power and influence in the world. In a motley picture ломки old and buildings of new international relations it is possible to allocate six accurately enough looked through tendencies of their development:

- The first of them - power dispersal in system of the international relations. There is a process of formation of the multipolar (multipolar) world. Today the increasing role in the international life is got by the new centres. On the world scene all leaves Japan more actively, in the international affairs relative density of the European union raises, China and India are invited to the G8 summit, in Latin America the prompt and original development allocates “a black comet” - Brazil. Integration processes of the North America and Europe were threw to Africa, Asia and Latin America. In South East Asia there were new industrial states - so-called ' the Asian tigers ';

- The second tendency - globalisation of many aspects of life of the modern mankind, expressed in occurrence of global economy, the world currency-financial and credit-investment system, development of uniform system of world communication, activization of activity of transnational corporations and banks, occurrence real надгосударственной spheres of life and activity of people. On this basis more and more interdependent and complete world when a little serious shifts in one part of the world inevitably give rise to the response in its other parts, irrespective of will, intentions of participants of such processes was generated;

- The third tendency is increase of the global problems demanding for their decision joint efforts of all mankind. Occurrence of global problems has affected all system of the international relations. Really, the efforts directed on prevention of ecological accident, struggle against the hunger, deadly illnesses, attempt to overcome backwardness will not give results if will dare only at national level, without world community participation. For their decision demands planetary association of intellectual, labour and material resources;

- Thefourthtendency - strengthening of division of the world on two poles - poles of the world, well-being and democracy and a pole of war, fermentation and tyranny. On a pole of the world, well-being and democracy there are 25 countries - the states of the Western and Northern Europe, the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. In them lives 15 % of the population of globe, so-called ' gold billion '. In these countries rich democracies in which the standard of living of the ordinary citizen to historical measures is rather high (from 10 to 30 thousand dollars of the annual income), life expectancy not less than 74 years prevail. On other pole there are states of Africa, Asia, Latin America, republic of the former USSR and the East countries. In them more than 800 million persons live in conditions of absolute poverty, and from 500 million starving about 50 million annually starve. The situation is aggravated with that globalisation processes not only promote liquidation of ruptures in development of "the rich North” and “the poor South”, but also provoke occurrence rather appreciable “the poverty centres” in the richest states of the present;

- The fifth tendency consists in that, as in interstate, and in the international life of the politician as spontaneous collision of sociohistorical forces all is more considerably restricted by the beginnings of the conscious, purposeful, rational regulation based on the right, democratic principles and knowledge.

- Thesixth tendency is shown in processes democratisation both the international relations, and internal political modes in tens countries of the modern world. With the termination ' cold war ' even in the conditions of the most authoritative modes possibilities to hide were considerably narrowed and furthermore to justify infringements by the state of freedom of the person, rights its natural and won in sociopolitical struggle. The world distribution receives such phenomenon, as progressing politicisation of the weights everywhere demanding access to the information, participations in acceptance of their concerning decisions, improvements of the material well-being and quality of life. In turn, all it has deep influence on the international relations.

The developing uniform, global world penetrated by contradictions today it is still far not homogeneous society. The reality of modern international relations assumes paramount orientation of the states to rules of law as regulators of their foreign policy communications. However still early to assert that the force right has given way to force of the right. The system of international law needs qualitative updating. The changes which have occurred in the world of qualitative character demand change of structure and functions of the United Nations and other international organisations, proceeding from requirements of the further democratisation of world politics and the international relations.

VII. Modern foreign policy strategy of Russia.After disintegration of the USSR Russia has appeared in essentially new foreign policy situation.

The Russian Federation was reduced in the geopolitical parametres. It has lost a number of important seaports, military bases, in its structure there was a semienclave - the Kaliningrad region. The country not only has lost allies in East and the Central Europe, but also has received along the new and not equipped borders a number of the states with unfriendly adjusted management. Defensibility of the Russian Federation has considerably suffered. Its fleet has lost bases in Baltiysk and Black the seas, thus the Russian part of the Black Sea fleet divided with Ukraine remained to be based in Sevastopol which has appeared the Ukrainian city. The former Soviet union republics have nationalised powerful military groups which took place in their territory. The uniform system of antiaircraft defence of all post-Soviet territory has collapsed. There was a problem of the status of ethnic Russian in again formed countries of the near abroad. As a whole Russia has as though kept away from Europe, became even more northern and continental country.

Development of new tactics and strategy of behaviour of Russia on international scene was defined not only long-term plans of updating of the country. She has to the full tested on herself braking influence of the domestic political traditions inherited from the past of mass and elite stereotypes of thinking, negative influence of the problems connected with occurrence of the new states on its borders. From height of today initial representations of the Russian democrats that the former union republics grateful to Moscow for given freedom and dividing with her the general ideals, will aspire to preservation of "brotherly bonds” with the changed Russia look groundless. Have appeared a utopia and their iridescent hopes that after the termination of "cold war” nations of the world will begin to live an united family and on the earth the world, stability, an order and good neighbourhood will prevail. Illusions of have vanished also that the West becomes for new Russia the most reliable ideological and political ally, the generous and disinterested sponsor, the ideal sample for imitation in questions of social and economic and political development.

After December, 1991 foreign policy strategy of Russia changed some times. At the first stage, per 1992-1993, Moscow carried out strongly pronounced westernized to the policy. At a fact-finding meeting with collective of the USSR which was the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the end of 1991 the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation A.V.Kozyrev has underlined that henceforth Moscow will carry out a course on sanguineous partnership with the West, integration with it. In turn, the president of Russia B.N.Yeltsin, acting on January, 31st, 1992 at UN Security Council session, has especially allocated that circumstance that Russia “considers the United States and other countries of the West not only as partners, but also as allies”. He asserted that Moscow divides with the West basic foreign policy principles - “domination of the democratic rights and personal freedoms, legality and morals”. Sobering up has come with the announcement of plans of expansion of the NATO on the east that has been apprehended in Russia as demonstration of mistrust and even animosities to Moscow as West attempt to be fenced off from Russia new "Iron Curtain", at last, as threat of safety of the Russian Federation. E.M.Primakov, at that time head of the Russian investigation, has declared in November, 1993: “This expansion will approach the largest military group in the world directly to borders of Russia. There is a necessity of fundamental revision from our party of all defensive concepts”. B.N.Yeltsin in the autumn of 1995 warned that expansion of a NATO alliance at the expense of the East Europe countries can unleash a war flame across all Europe. Correction of foreign policy strategy of Russia in developing conditions became more and more necessary.

To the same conclusion the analysts familiar with a state of affairs in the CIS came also. With the beginning of economic reforms in Russia, especially after clearing of the prices for energy carriers and changes of structure of the Russian export, the Commonwealth has endured the first serious crisis, the exit of the CIS countries from a rouble zone has begun. Since 1993, the majority of the CIS countries have strengthened the political sovereignty, have turned out serious communications with the nearest neighbours who were not entering into Commonwealth. In frameworks of the CIS their relation to accepted joint decisions became more and more rigid and critical. There were outstanding arrangements on creation of the economic, payment unions and many other things. However between the separate countries the aspiration to establish more close connections was shown also. It was expressed in formation of the Customs union and the central-Asian economic community.

Since 1997 all participants the crisis state of the CIS which is shown in default of basic decisions, refusal of some countries of cooperation on many economic problems and in the structural organisations of Commonwealth admits. "Revolved" including plans разноскоростной integration. Contradictions between Commonwealth member countries became aggravated in connection with not hidden desire of the USA and EU to minimise influence of Russia in the CIS, their support of the modes which were carrying out Antirussian policy, инспирирированием and financing of "colour revolutions” in Georgia, Kirghizia, Ukraine. Russia thereupon has appeared before necessity of search of the new uniting purposes, more effective ways of perfection of collective activity with those from the CIS countries which really aspired to association of the efforts in the decision of economic, social, political and defensive problems.

In formation of new foreign policy strategy of Russia in second half 90th years of the XX-th century the choice needed to be made between three basic models of this process:

- The first assumed that the foreign policy is fragmentary, as the state departments and various groups of elite realise outside of the country own, no means always coinciding interests, and the centralised control over them and coordination of their actions are weak or and at all are absent;

- The second recognised that between the basic groups of elite there was a full or almost full consensus on the foreign policy problems, reflected in strategic installations, documents of the state and in its activity. The maintenance of such consensus often associated with national interests of Russia;

- According to the third model the foreign policy became result of realisation of various ideological concepts - neoimperial, sotsial-revanchist, liberal, conservative etc.

Internal circumstances of reforming of the country and external conditions of this process declined the Russian political elite to a choice of the second model of formation of strategy of foreign policy. It meant that Russia meaningly refuses from экспансионистской strategy, is realistic estimating the cardinally decreased foreign policy potential. So clear there was also that the Russian Federation could not spend and to the politician of the further concessions to external forces as it was fraught with decomposition of the country and destruction of the state. It is unique rational there was a balancing strategy between influential forces of the modern world, the policy based, first of all, on national interests in relation to leading powers and the unions.

Politicians adhering such sights underlined: Russia does not have enemies, it can and should co-operate with the majority of the countries of the world, especially with the next states. They considered thus that Moscow should not "be declined" in this or that party for owing to the geographical position, the size, power, history Russia should maintain the balanced relations with the West, the East and the South, without searching for the unions with one against others. The Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation E.M.Primakov who underlined called for similar equation in foreign policy also: “It is necessary to spendдиверсифицированную, the active policy on all azimuths where interests of Russia … are infringed It is simply vital necessity to create the best conditions for internal development - more dynamical, more effective in our changing world”.

In 1996-1997 the balanced approach began to be fixed in the Russian foreign policy, bringing it long-awaited dividends. Russia did not have other exit how to continue a course on development of communications with the West in interests, first of all, the internal development. But simultaneously Moscow has found the major partners on east and southern directions. In this strategy that circumstance was considered also that failure in relations with the nearest neighbours - the CIS countries can deprive Russia of access to transport highways, natural and to a manpower, economic and cultural cooperation without which can seriously become complicated and progress of Russia. In the modern interdependent world Moscow supports idea of multipolarity in the international relations. Contribution to world community advancement to multipolarity also has made an essence of the Russian foreign policy strategy in the end of ХХ - the beginning of the XXI-st centuries.

For movement streamlining to new system of the international relations Moscow has suggested all countries to observe a number of conditions:

- First, not to suppose occurrence of new dividing lines in a world policy. For example, Europe should not be divided on "NATO" and “not NATO”, because of becoming more active extremist groupings in the Islamic world it is impossible to do conclusions about “Muslim threat to Europe” etc.;

- Secondly, it is not necessary to allocate winners and won in “cold war” for the Russian democracy at all does not feel lost and will not suffer the haughty relation to;

- Thirdly, it is necessary to democratise the international economic relations, not to suppose to use economic levers for reception of the egoistical purposes of political character;

- Fourthly, encouragement of cooperation of the international community in the decision of the actual problems connected with settlement of conflicts, the further reduction of armaments and realisation of measures of trust in military area, strengthening of humanitarian and legal aspects of national and international safety, rendering assistance and supports to the countries experiencing various difficulties in development.

Bases of foreign policy strategy of the Russian Federation are stated in “the Concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation”, the Russian Federation confirmed by the president V.V.Putinym in 2000

МУНТЯН ПЕРЕВОД 20(2)

Тема Внешняя политика и международные отношения

Внешняя политика как государственный феномен. Державная структура организации жизни человечества обусловливает необходимость различения в политике государств ее внутренних и внешних аспектов. Принято считать, что внешняя политика – это деятельность государства на международной арене, регулирующая отношения с другими субъектами внешнеполитической деятельности – государствами, их союзами и блоками, зарубежными общественными объединениями, всемирными и региональными международными организациями. Формой традиционного осуществления внешней политики является:

- установление дипломатических отношений (или снижение их уровня, приостановка, разрыв и даже объявление войны при обоcтрении отношений с бывшими партнерами) между государствами;

- открытие представительств государства при международных организациях или членство в них;

- сотрудничество с дружественными государству зарубежными общественными движениями, объединениями и организациями;

- осуществление и поддержание на различных уровнях эпизодических и регулярных контактов с представителями государств, международных общественных структур, с которыми данное государство не имеет дипломатических отношений или дружественных отношений, но в диалоге с ними заинтересовано по тем или иным причинам.

Наличие устойчивых каналов связи с зарубежными партнерами позволяет государству разнообразить сочетание методов и средств в осуществлении внешнеполитической деятельности: а) осуществление регулярного обмена информацией, визитами на разных уровнях; б) подготовка к заключению двусторонних и многосторонних договоров и соглашений по широкому спектру вопросов, в том числе конфиденциального и секретного характера; в) способствование развитию возможностей внешнеполитической деятельности одних государств и блокирование аналогичных возможностей других (по тем или иным направлениям); г) подготовка к войне и обеспечение благоприятной для ведения боевых действий внешнеполитической обстановки и т.п. В последние десятилетия цивилизованные участники международной жизни уделяют все большее внимание недопущению ракетно-ядерной войны, организации превентивных мер по предотвращению международных конфликтов, техногенных катастроф и сотрудничеству по ликвидации их последствий, борьбе с голодом, пандемиями, совместным мероприятиям по охране окружающей среды и т.д.

Внешняя политика есть деятельность и взаимодействие официальных субъектов, имеющих или присваивающих себе право выступать от имени общества, выражать его интересы, избирать определенные методы и способы их реализации. Согласно традиционным представлениям, государства выражают себя на международной арене через внешнюю политику, которая может принимать две основные формы – дипломатии и стратегии. Их назначение – удовлетворение национальных интересов, прежде всего, обеспечение свободы, безопасности и благоприятных условий для развития человека, общества и государства. В научной и публицистической литературе существуют две основные трактовки понятия “национальный интерес”:

1) либеральная, представляющая этот феномен как некое обобщение интересов граждан, реализации которых должна быть подчинена, в том числе, и внешнеполитическая стратегия государства;

2) консервативная или государственническая, отождествляющая национальные интересы с интересами государства.

В последние годы национальные интересы все больше выводятся из сложного взаимодействия различных групп интересов, так или иначе воздействующих на государственные структуры и институты, которые отвечают за внешнеполитическую деятельность государства. Осознание объективных национальных интересов интеллектуальными и политическими элитами позволяет государствам сформулировать внешнеполитические доктрины, в которых определяется внешнеполитическая стратегия как единство целей и средств, связанных с реализацией на международной арене фундаментальных национальных интересов. Стратегия любого международного актора представляет собой, прежде всего, метод анализа ситуации, оценку направлений ее возможного развития, сопоставление полученной картины с собственными интересами и выбор на этой основе наиболее эффективных средств для реализации намеченной цели. Большая стратегия государства объединяет в себе все имеющиеся в его распоряжении средства для обеспечения национальных интересов как в мирное, так и в военное время. Существуют два необходимых условия успешной национальной стратегии:

а) правильная оценка стратегической ситуации, то есть особенностей сложившихся к данному моменту международного окружения;

б) стратегический анализ, то есть изучение других значимых международных акторов, призванное дать о них как можно более полное представление.

Национальная или, иначе, большая стратегия государства реализуется в серии конкретных практических мероприятий, предпринимаемых государством по всем ази