Добавил:
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

«Новая нормальность» и международные отношения от теорий к практикам. Монография

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
07.09.2026
Размер:
2 Мб
Скачать
Аннотации/Summaries
international order transformation, speci cally the alliance – sovereignty dilemma rise and the role of global and regional actors in this process.
Keywords: sovereignty, nation-state, sovereignty – alliance dilemma, actorness.
ВЕСТФАЛЬСКИЙ МИР 1648 Г. КАК ПЕРВЫЙ ВАРИАНТ
ПРАКТИЧЕСКОЙ РЕАЛИЗАЦИИ ПОНЯТИЯ «СУВЕРЕНИТЕТ»
      ­ «»                ,            1648 .    ­ - ,    ­    . ,   ­    ,      ,            ,      ­          -.         «»  « »   .        ,             ­.    ,                 ,      .
Ключевые слова: ,  , - ,  ,  .
THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA OF 1648 AS THE FIRST VARIANT
OF PRACTICAL REALISATION OF THE CONCEPT “SOVEREIGNTY“
The problem of determining the beginning of the period of practical implementation of the concept of “sovereignty“ in international treaties and agreements in modern Russian and foreign historiography continues to be the subject of scienti c discourse, the essence of which is mainly reduced to the recognition or non-recognition of the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 as the starting point of the formation of the modern international legal system based on the recognition of the sovereignty of all actors of international politics. The discourse that has developed in contemporary Russian and foreign historiography is mainly devoted to the question
251
Аннотации/Summaries
of whether the signing of the Peace of Westphalia can be considered the beginning of the formation of a new system of international relations, or whether it was merely a formal consolidation of the status quo that had been established in Europe by the end of the Thirty Years’ War. This discourse discusses the problem of the formation of the concept of “sovereignty“ and “sovereign state“ in world politics. We can agree with the opinion of a number of researchers that the practical realisation of the principle of sovereignty and the balance of power in the post-Westphalia period was impossible. It should be emphasised that the Treaty of Westphalia in this case can be considered as the  rst treaty in the history of international law, formally built on the basis of these principles.
Keywords: sovereignty, Peace of Westphalia, international legal system, sovereign
state.
РЕЖИМЫ СУВЕРЕННОСТИ ДЖОНА АГНЬЮ
     . ,  ­  ,  .       .           (­  ),   ,    ­ (  ),  . ,         , ­  ,         ,   .
Ключевые слова: ,  ,  ­,  .
SOVEREIGNTY REGIMES OF JOHN AGNEW
The chapter analyzes J. Agnew’s concept of sovereignty, which is positioned as an alternative model to the dominant one. Agnew introduces the concept of sovereignty regimes. The four sovereignty regimes appear to be the result of different combinations of central state power (legitimate power model) on the one hand and the degree of political territoriality (infrastructural power management) on the other. The conclusion drawn from recent research in political geography is that sovereignty is neither inherently territorial nor exclusively state-centered.
Keywords: territoriality, sovereignty regime, e ective sovereignty, John Agnew.
252
Аннотации/Summaries
ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЙ СУВЕРЕНИТЕТ И ЭКОЛОГИЧЕСКАЯ ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТЬ.
ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЕ БАЛАНСА МЕЖДУ ИНТЕРЕСАМИ
ГОСУДАРСТВА И ОБЩЕСТВА
        ­      .   ­         ­  –   ,              .    ­  ,     ,  ­      ,       ,                .    ,     ­  ,           ,   ­   .       ,         ­   .           ,           .  ,    « »      ,        ­    .             ­ ,   ,          .
Ключевые слова:  ,  ,  ,  ,  , ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ­,  .
POLITICAL SOVEREIGNTY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY.
ENSURING THE BALANCE BETWEEN THE INTERESTS
OF THE STATE AND SOCIETY
The chapter presents an attempt to comprehensively analyse the links between state sovereignty and environmental care. These relations are considered in the
253
Аннотации/Summaries
context of the actively developing knowledge of environmental sovereignty – a rather new paradigm, which intends to integrate the concept of traditional state governance with the theme of environmental responsibility. The author explores the existing tensions between the ideas underlying state sovereignty and the demands of global environmental responsibility, and suggests that sovereignty can be rede ned in such a way that environmental care is included as a core concept. Drawing on interdisciplinary sources, the author proposes a number of new tools and strategies to balance environmental responsibility with national interests, within the framework of adopting harmonious, equitable and sustainable environmental law. As a concrete example, the author cites Indonesia, whose constitution enshrined environmental rights as fundamental human rights. The paper considers this fact as an example of constitutional recognition of environmental sovereignty, conditioning the role of the state in ensuring a healthy environment for its citizens. The author argues that Indonesia’s adoption of a “green constitution“ marks a shift towards an ecocracy that emphasises human participation in environmental governance. The author concludes with promising directions for the presented agenda and emphasises the need to create a new ontology involving synergy principles that will be based on ecological values to protect the environment.
Keywords: political sovereignty, environmental responsibility, human rights, environmental sovereignty, green constitution, ecocracy, public administration, environmental problems, sustainable development, environmental management, interdisciplinary approach, synergy principles, ecopolitical sovereignty.
ВЛИЯНИЕ ПРОЦЕССА ЕВРОАТЛАНТИЧЕСКОЙ ИНТЕГРАЦИИ
НА СУВЕРЕНИТЕТ ГОСУДАРСТВ
           .           ,   - .      ­   –  ,           .    ­ ,      .  ­,      .          -,    -    ,       .
   ,     ,     ,     .       ­     ,      ,
254
Аннотации/Summaries
           .        ,        - .
Ключевые слова: ,  , , ­ ,  , ,  ­, .
IMPACT OF THE EURO-ATLANTIC INTEGRATION PROCESS
ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF STATES
The chapter analyzes various forms of the Euro-Atlantic integration process’ in uence on the sovereignty of states. The general trends of this phenomenon and the national speci cs of the post-Soviet space, Northern and South-Eastern Europe’s states are considered. Particular attention is paid to assessing the degree of policy independence of NATO partner states participating in its operations and missions in Afghanistan and the Balkans. The economic dimension of the countries’ sovereignty that have built active partnerships with the Alliance is explored. In particular, the dynamics of their defense spending is analyzed. Brussels has invariably in recent years demanded not only from member states, but also from partner countries to increase defense spending, although this does not always correspond to their interests.
It is concluded that the implementation by states of a foreign policy focused on their Euro-Atlantic integration leads to their loss of sovereignty. These countries abandon their own national interests and participate in various projects, missions and operations under the auspices of NATO, despite the fact that they are primarily bene cial to the United States and its allies. The results of such a policy are clearly visible in the example of Ukraine, which has largely lost its sovereignty in the military-political sphere.
Keywords: NATO, Euro-Atlantic integration, sovereignty, international security, defense spending, Ukraine, post-Soviet space, Balkans.
ГЕОПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЕ МЕХАНИЗМЫ И ИНСТРУМЕНТЫ ФОРМИРОВАНИЯ
«НОВОЙ НОРМЫ» В КОНТЕКСТЕ УГЛЕВОДОРОДНОЙ ПРОБЛЕМАТИКИ
ВОСТОЧНОГО СРЕДИЗЕМНОМОРЬЯ
          ­        ,    , -      ,      .     ­    - -
255
Аннотации/Summaries
     ,     ,          2023 .  ,      ­,       , ­          ­     .           -­         ­                 ­     .          ,             ­  ,      ,    ,       ­.    -              ,           ,           .                 ­ EastMed    ,    ­   .    ,           ­,      ,   ­ .  ,     ­                .     ­ ,   ,     ­        .
Ключевые слова:  ,  , -
 , ,  EastMed.
GEOPOLITICAL MECHANISMS AND INSTRUMENTS
FOR THE FORMATION OF A “NEW NORMAL“ IN THE CONTEXT
OF THE HYDROCARBON ISSUES OF THE EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN
Over the past two decades in the Eastern Mediterranean, in connection with the discovery of new hydrocarbon deposits, a new con ict zone has been formed, in which resource, military-strategic and territorial interests of both coastal states and
256
Аннотации/Summaries
an impressive set of extra-regional players are concentrated. The study attempts to comprehensively examine the problem of the participation of the Eastern Mediterranean region in the redrawing of the world energy map, leading to large-scale geopolitical consequences, by analyzing the positions of many states as of December 2023. For Israel, in addition to gas production from its  elds, giving it diplomatic leverage impact on neighbors, characterized by involvement in hydrocarbon exploration and work on foreign sea shelves with the direct support of the United States. A special feature of the work carried out is the inclusion of deliberate attempts by the Israeli leadership, under various pretexts, to prevent the Palestinians from developing their o shore  elds in the Gaza Strip and including them in their gas infrastructure among the reasons for the latest escalation of the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation and the transition to its phase of armed con ict. One of the objectives of the study was to evaluate the emerging analytical materials that shed light on the process of escalation of the con ict against the backdrop of the con scation of Palestine’s o shore natural gas reserves, the inclusion of new players who consider the Palestinians a secondary nation, and the participation of Western energy companies in the events. In recent years, due to growing competition, the Eastern Mediterranean has become the focus of attention of many states in the Middle East and the European Union, which have shown their ambitions in a dispute over access to the discovered blue fuel, for the right to transport it through their territory to European markets. The work attempted to comprehensively consider the problems of the long-planned and technically complex EastMed gas transportation system by analyzing the positions of states involved in one way or another in this project. It was repeatedly updated, constantly introduced geopolitical di culties in relations between its supporters and opponents, and in the con ict region increased the level of tension bordering on military confrontation. It is concluded that even the latest blocking of the gas transportation project by the US administration to please Turkey was not able to initiate a simultaneous abandonment of it by a number of states. Against this background, concrete steps taken by EU states to replace old schemes of dependence on hydrocarbon raw materials with environmentally friendly energy systems are noticeable.
Keywords: energy markets, Eastern Mediterranean, Palestinian gas, Israel, EastMed
gas pipeline.
ВЫШЕГРАДСКАЯ ГРУППА И ЕЕ «ЭФФЕКТИВНЫЙ СУВЕРЕНИТЕТ»
НА ФОНЕ ПОСЛЕДСТВИЙ «ЗЕРНОВОЙ СДЕЛКИ»
  «»    ­   ,     ­  «»     ­ .  ,       « »   ,  
257
Аннотации/Summaries
      - .    ,  «» ,     « »,          ­ .     «»    –    ­ ,        ,     ()   (V4).   ­          .      ­    .    ­       ­    « »   ,   « »  ­        .
Ключевые слова: « »,  , «-
 », , ,  .
THE VISEGRAD GROUP AND ITS “EFFECTIVE SOVEREIGNTY“ AGAINST
THE BACKGROUND OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE “GRAIN DEAL“
The current state of “uncertainty“ in international relations blurs the boundaries of the state sovereignty concept. That poses the issue of the probable sustaining the e ectiveness of sovereignty for states in terms of their national security. Furthermore, the study raises the question of whether the non-state actors could also have “e ective sovereignty”. The case of Visegrad Group in current socio-political conditions serves as an empirical basis for this research. The consequences of the “grain deal“ are posed as a key factor of “e ective sovereignty”, due to its impact on the food security sphere of Visegrad Group’s countries. The paper examines three dimensions of the “e ective sovereignty”, such as national on, subregional, which performs as a set of national strategies in communication with each other, as well as the interaction between the region (EU) and the sub-region (V4). To analyse these dimensions, the discursive space of the Visegrad Group countries and the European Union is studied. The author also turns to the statistical reports and databases aiming to give approvance to the hypothetical model. The conclusion provides the illustration of Visegrad Group internal restructuring in subregional dimension in accordance with the predominance of “e ective sovereignty” at the national dimensions of only a part of the group members.
Keywords: “e ective sovereignty”, Visegrad Group, “grain deal”, embargo, subregionalism, EU polycrisis.
258
Аннотации/Summaries
ИНТЕГРАЦИОННЫЕ ПРОЦЕССЫ НА ПОСТСОВЕСТКОМ ПРОСТРАНСТВЕ
И ВОПРОС ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО СУВЕРЕНИТЕТА
    ,   ­ ,    . ­    .      ­     .  ,         ,            ,   .       -  ­       (). ­     .        .
    -         (),  ,  ,   ,   ­         .
       ­ ,                    ,   ­     , ­-     .
Ключевые слова: ,  ,  ,  , , , .
INTEGRATION PROCESSES IN THE POST-SOVIET SPACE AND
THE ISSUE OF STATE SOVEREIGNTY
The study presents key issues related to the integration processes taking place in the post-Soviet space. Their features and prospects have been considered. In the study, issues of state sovereignty occupy an important place in integration processes. In particular, in this context, an attempt was made to answer the question of why the former Soviet Union states initially shied away from implementing integration through integration bodies endowed with supranational powers. Particular attention was paid to integration processes in the military-political and economic spheres within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The role of the CIS in the post-Soviet space has been mentioned. Sub-regional integration processes in the post-Soviet space have also been touched upon.
259
Аннотации/Summaries
The study also presents military-political cooperation in the framework of the Collective Security Treaty organization (CSTO), in particular how provisions relating to state sovereignty are re ected in the founding documents of the CSTO and how they are applied within the CSTO.
Economic integration has always been important in the post-Soviet space; therefore, a discussion of integration processes within the Eurasian Economic Union from the point of view of the issue of state sovereignty is also an important part of the study, since it is the only integration organization in the post-Soviet space whose member states have endowed it with supranational powers.
Keywords: integration, post-Soviet space, state sovereignty, regional organi­zations, CIS, CSTO, EAEU.
СУКУК КАК ИНСТРУМЕНТ ФОРМИРОВАНИЯ
МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫХ ОТНОШЕНИЙ СО СТРАНАМИ ПЕРСИДСКОГО ЗАЛИВА
        ­   – ,    ­      ­     , ,   ,         ­   417-  04.08.2023,   ­   .
 –       ,  ­   ,  ,       ,          ­ (  ).     ­      ,          .         ,   ,         ­     .    «» ,    ,        , ,  ,  ­.          «­»  «», « »  « ».        , ­      .
  ,  , ,   ,    ,      ­   ,    
260
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]