The development of international relations in the modern. Modern international relations

Fashion & Style 11.09.2019

Fashion & Style

Questions

1. What's new in the international relations of the XVI-XVII centuries. compared to the Middle Ages? Where has the old retained its strength?

Firstly, the states were already largely centralized, the relations of monarchs with each other, and not feudal lords with monarchs, as was the case in the Middle Ages, came to the fore. Secondly, one of the main roles began to be played by the enmity between Catholics and Protestants, which did not exist in the Middle Ages. Thirdly, wars in modern times began to be waged more often because of the commercial interests of one country or another, often they went because of the colonies.

But just as in the Middle Ages, wars were often fought in the dynastic interests of monarchs.

2. As a religious split in Europe in the 16th century. affected international relations?

The religious schism from the beginning of the Reformation until almost the end of the Thirty Years' War divided the countries of Europe into Catholic and Protestant camps. The cause of most wars was the struggle for the true faith. The first to break the unity of the camps was France, which at the end of the Thirty Years' War took the side of the Protestant camp, although it was a Catholic country.

3. What role did the Ottoman Empire play in international relations?

On the one hand, the Muslim threat from Ottoman Empire sometimes united several Christian states, there were even attempts to conclude an alliance with Orthodox Russia. On the other hand, sometimes European states tried to use the Ottomans in the fight against each other in order to prevent the opponent from becoming too strong.

4. What changes and why have occurred in the organization of the diplomatic service?

The work of diplomacy became much more intense, in addition, a permanent agent of influence was needed at a foreign court. That is why the monarchs abandoned the medieval practice of sending embassies on every specific occasion. Instead, permanent diplomatic missions appeared at foreign courts. They also assessed the situation on the spot using intelligence methods and constantly represented the interests of their sovereigns.

5. Do you think the defeat of the Austrian and Spanish Habsburgs in the Thirty Years' War was accidental?

Both random facts and regularities led to the defeat of the Habsburgs. On the one hand, the Habsburgs became too strong, so a broad coalition of European powers could not help but form against them. On the other hand, what is called military happiness, which is changeable, decided a lot. Also a big role was played by the fact that Catholic France at the end of the war took the side of the Protestants. This was impossible to predict, given the system of camps that developed at that time, in which countries were included on religious grounds. It was another subjective factor - the result of the activities of the first minister of France.

Tasks

1. Give examples of the operation of the "political balance" system in Europe in the 16th-17th centuries.

The system of "political balance" manifested itself, for example, in 1667, when the French aggression in the Spanish Netherlands was opposed by a coalition of Holland, England and Sweden. The coalition was formed in order to prevent France from becoming too strong. The coalition was able to achieve its goals.

2. The Dutch thinker Hugo Grotius wrote in his treatise On the Free Sea:

“The dispute between us and the Spaniards concerns the following: the sea, vast and boundless, can it belong to any one kingdom? Can one nation forbid others to trade, exchange, establish contacts? Can one nation give away what never belonged to it, or discover what already belonged to another? Can such a flagrant injustice eventually become a special right?

Try to restore the point of view from which he argued from the arguments of Grotius. Can it be considered an accident that the treatise was written by a Dutchman and precisely in the 17th century?

Based on these words, it turns out that Spain wanted only her fleet to dominate the sea, and that the ships of other states could not conduct maritime trade, so that only the Spaniards would receive all the profit from it. The time of the creation of this document is not accidental: it was then that Spain and Holland fought for leadership in the oceans and in the colonies.

I know national history tells about the international isolation, blockade, foreign intervention that fell to the lot of Soviet Russia. (Give reasons why this happened.)

The Soviet state began to improve relations with neighboring countries by signing peace treaties with Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Finland. In 1921, treaties of friendship and cooperation were concluded with Iran, Afghanistan, and Turkey. They were based on the recognition of the independence of these states, the equality of partners, and in this they differed from the semi-enslaving agreements imposed on the countries of the East by the Western powers.

At the same time, following the signing of the Anglo-Soviet trade agreement (March 1921), the question arose of resuming Russia's economic ties with the leading European countries. In 1922, representatives of Soviet Russia were invited to an international economic conference in Genoa (it opened on April 10). The Soviet delegation was headed by the People's Commissar for foreign affairs G.V. Chicherin. Western powers expected to gain access to Russian natural resources and the market, as well as to find ways of economic and political influence to Russia. The Soviet state was interested in establishing economic ties with outside world and diplomatic recognition.

The means of pressure on Russia from the West was the demand for the payment of its external debts of tsarist Russia and the Provisional Government and compensation for property foreign citizens, nationalized by the Bolsheviks. The Soviet country was ready to recognize the pre-war debts of Russia and the right of the former foreign owners to receive in concession the property that previously belonged to them, subject to the legal recognition of the Soviet state and the provision of financial benefits and loans to it. Russia proposed to annul (declare invalid) military debts. At the same time, the Soviet delegation submitted a proposal for a general reduction in armaments. The Western powers did not agree to these proposals. They insisted that Russia pay off all debts, including military debts (totaling about 19 billion gold rubles), return all nationalized property to its former owners, and abolish the monopoly of foreign trade in the country. The Soviet delegation considered these demands unacceptable and, for its part, proposed that the Western powers compensate for the losses inflicted on Russia by intervention and blockade (39 billion gold rubles). The negotiations stalled.

It was not possible to reach a general agreement at the conference. But Soviet diplomats managed to negotiate with representatives of the German delegation in Rapallo (a suburb of Genoa). On April 16, a Soviet-German treaty was concluded on the resumption of diplomatic relations. Both countries renounced claims for compensation for losses caused to each other during the war years. Germany recognized the nationalization of German property in Russia, and Russia refused to receive reparations from Germany. The treaty came as a surprise to international diplomatic and political circles, both because of the very fact of its signing and in terms of its content. Contemporaries noted that he gave the impression of an exploding bomb. It was a success for the diplomats of the two countries and an example for others. It became more and more obvious that the problem of relations with Soviet Russia had become one of the main problems of international politics of that time.

Questions and tasks 1.

Compare how the collapse of the Russian and Austro-Hungarian empires took place (draw material from the course of national history). What was common? What were the differences? How did they explain? 2.

Why do you think, at the moment of gaining independence by the peoples of Central and of Eastern Europe there were states that united several peoples - Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia (then - the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes)? 3.

Describe the positions of the leading Western politicians regarding the post-war settlement. What can explain the differences? four.

*Compare "14 points" by W. Wilson and foreign policy principles proclaimed by the Soviet government in 1917-1918. What were the main differences? Was there anything in common? 5.

*In Germany, the Treaty of Versailles was called the "Carthaginian Peace". How would you explain the meaning of this title? 6.

Explain why representatives of Soviet Russia were not present at the peace conferences in 1919-1921. 7.

* How would you answer the question: were Wilson's "14 points" put into practice when creating the Versailles system? Argument your opinion. eight.

Indicate which international contradictions were eliminated as a result of the conclusion of the treaties of 1919-1920, and which ones aggravated or reappeared.

Source: Aleksashkin JI. N .. General history. XX - the beginning of the XXI century. Grade 9: textbook. for general education institutions. - 12th ed., Rev. and additional - M.: Mnemosyne. - 295 p. : ill.. 2012(original)

Modern stage international relations characterized by the rapidity of change, new forms of distribution of power. The old system of international relations, which was called bipolar - bipolar, collapsed. In the twentieth century this system was personified by the USSR and the USA - two superpowers, in the hands of which, after 1945, nuclear weapons appeared. The opposing systems have entered a period of “ cold war and hindered each other's development by building up their military power. The whole world was divided into spheres of "vital interests" of the two superpowers.

In 1991, the period of the Cold War ended, and with it the bipolar model of international relations became a thing of the past. The process of building a new system of international relations is underway. At the same time, both new trends in their development appear, and the previously existing ones are more clearly visible.

The main trends in the development of modern international relations include:

1. The dispersal of power. There is a process of formation of a multipolar (multipolar) world. Today, an increasing role in international life acquire new centers. There are integration processes in Europe. In Southeast Asia, new post-industrial states emerged - the so-called "Asian Tigers".

There is still no consensus among political scientists about the future of the system of international relations. Some are inclined to believe that a system of collective leadership of the United States, Western Europe and Japan is currently being formed. Other researchers believe that the United States should be recognized as the only world leader. Still others do not exclude the revival of the bipolar system, in which either Russia or China will take the place of the USSR in the ideological and military-political confrontation with the United States.

2. Globalization of international relations. It consists in the internationalization of the economy, the development of a unified system of world communications, the change and weakening of the functions of national states, the revitalization of the activities of transnational non-state entities. On this basis, an increasingly interdependent and whole world, interactions in it have become systemic, when more or less serious shifts in one part of the world inevitably reverberate in other parts of it, regardless of the will and intentions of the participants in such processes.

Globalization has affected all regions of the world to varying degrees, placing some in the center and pushing others to the periphery. Due to the permeability of interstate borders, the old ideas about security, about conflicts and their settlement, about the relationship between foreign and domestic policies, about diplomacy and about other basic problems of the political development of countries, regions and the world as a whole turned out to be “inverted”.

3. The growth of global problems and the desire of the states of the world to jointly solve them.

The very concept of “global problems of our time” appeared in the last third of the 20th century, when after flights into space, tests of atomic weapons, a number of natural disasters, and numerous conflicts, the vulnerability of life on Earth itself became obvious.

All global problems facing humanity can be conditionally divided into three large groups: socio-economic, natural-economic and social (see diagram 15.2).

Social-Natural-Social and

economic economic political

Prevention Environmental Demographic

nuclear war

Normal functioning Energy International

the world economy of relations

Overcoming backwardness Food crisis of culture and

underdeveloped countries morality

International Commodity Urbanization

terrorism

Regional Military Ocean Health

conflicts

Ending the race Sustainable development Elimination of hunger,

epidemics space weapons

Figure 15.2. Global problems of our time

The most important global problem is the accumulation and improvement of weapons mass destruction. The nature of nuclear weapons makes it impossible for any state to ensure the reliability of its defense by military means. Security in the world can only be achieved through joint efforts. It can either be common to all countries, or it cannot exist at all.

An important problem that worries all mankind is international terrorism, among the various forms of which state terrorism is the most dangerous.

In the group of natural and economic problems, environmental issues deserve special attention. Excessive human exploitation of nature has led to massive deforestation, deterioration of the quality of resources fresh water, pollution of the seas, lakes, rivers, violation of the ozone layer, which poses a danger to human life. These and other facts oblige all countries and peoples to join efforts aimed at protecting and improving the environment.

Diverse and social problems. This is, first of all, an increase in the number of dangerous diseases and harmful addictions. Cardiovascular and oncological diseases, AIDS, alcoholism, drug addiction have acquired an international character and become one of the global problems.

Global problems arose at the intersection of the relationship between man, society and nature. All of them are organically interconnected, and therefore their solution requires an integrated approach.

4.Strengthening the division of the world into two poles - the poles of peace, prosperity and democracy and the poles of unrest, poverty, tyranny.

About two and a half dozen states are at the pole of peace, prosperity and democracy - these are the countries of Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. They are home to 15% of the world's population, the so-called "golden billion". In these countries, the standard of living of an ordinary citizen by historical standards is very high (from 10 to 30 thousand dollars of annual income), life expectancy is at least 74 years. The country can achieve such well-being only due to the presence of a highly developed knowledge-intensive economy.

At the other extreme are many states of Africa, Asia, Latin America, countries formed as a result of the collapse of the USSR. In these countries, tens of millions of people live in absolute poverty.

5. Democratization of both international relations and domestic political processes. It is observed in all countries, regardless of the type of political regime prevailing in them. Such a phenomenon as the progressive politicization of the masses, who everywhere demand access to information, improve their material well-being and quality of life, is gaining worldwide distribution.

Achievements of the post-industrial revolution - satellite communications and cable television, telefax and Email, the global Internet network, which makes it possible to almost instantaneously disseminate and obtain the necessary information on almost all issues of interest to a person - have become signs of people's daily life not only in the most economically developed countries, but are becoming more and more widespread throughout the world. The composition and variety of political actors is expanding sharply. As a result, the development and implementation of foreign policy guidelines cease to be the lot of a narrow group of people of a special state department. Foreign policy problems become the property of a combination of a wide variety of institutions, both governmental and non-political.

The events of the World War ordeal for the peoples. At its final stage, it became obvious that some of the belligerent states could not stand the difficulties that had befallen them. First of all, these were multinational empires: Russian, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman. The burden of war they carried exacerbated social and national contradictions. A long-term exhausting war with external opponents developed into a struggle of peoples against their own rulers. We know how it happened in Russia.

Formation of new states

How did Austria-Hungary collapse?

Dates and events

October 16, 1918. - The head of the Hungarian government announced the termination of the union with Austria by Hungary.
28 of October- The National Czechoslovak Committee (established in July 1918) decided to form an independent Czechoslovak state.
29th of October- the National Council was created in Vienna and the independence of German Austria was proclaimed; on the same day, the National Council in Zagreb proclaimed the state independence of the southern Slavs of Austria-Hungary.
October 30- in Krakow, a Liquidation Commission was created, which took over the management of the Polish lands that were previously part of Austria-Hungary, and proclaimed that these lands belong to the resurgent Polish state; on the same day, the National Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina (which were captured by Austria-Hungary in 1908) announced the annexation of both lands to Serbia.

At the final stage of the World War, the Ottoman Empire also collapsed, from which the territories inhabited by non-Turkish peoples separated.

As a result of the fall of multinational empires, a number of new states appeared in Europe. First of all, these were the countries that restored the once lost independence - Poland, Lithuania and others. The revival took a lot of effort. At times, this was especially difficult to do. Thus, the “gathering” of Polish lands, previously divided between Austria-Hungary, Germany and Russia, began during the war, in 1917, and only in November 1918 did power pass into the hands of a single provisional government of the Polish Republic. Some of the new states first appeared on the map of Europe in such composition and borders, for example, the Republic of Czechoslovakia, which united two kindred Slavic peoples - Czechs and Slovaks (proclaimed on October 28, 1918). The new multinational state was the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, Slovenes (proclaimed on December 1, 1918), later called Yugoslavia.

The formation of a sovereign state was a turning point in the life of each of the peoples. However, it did not solve all problems. The legacy of the war was economic devastation and exacerbated social contradictions. Revolutionary unrest did not subside even after gaining independence.

Paris Peace Conference

On January 18, 1919, a peace conference opened at the Palace of Versailles near Paris. Politicians and diplomats from 32 states had to determine the results of the war, paid for with the blood and sweat of millions of people who fought at the fronts and worked in the rear. Soviet Russia did not receive an invitation to the conference.

The main role at the conference belonged to the representatives of the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan, but in fact the main proposals were made by three politicians - US President W. Wilson, British Prime Minister D. Lloyd George and the head of the French government J. Clemenceau. They represented the conditions of the world in different ways. Wilson, back in January 1918, proposed a program for a peaceful settlement and the post-war organization of international life - the so-called "14 points" (on its basis an armistice was concluded with Germany in November 1918).

The "14 points" provided for the following: the establishment of a just peace and the rejection of secret diplomacy; freedom of navigation; equality in economic relations between states; arms limitation; the settlement of colonial questions, taking into account the interests of all peoples; the liberation of the occupied territories and the principles for determining the borders of a number of European states; the formation of an independent Polish state, including "all the lands inhabited by Poles" and having access to the sea; creation of an international organization guaranteeing the sovereignty and integrity of all countries.

The program reflected both the aspirations of American diplomacy and the personal views of W. Wilson. Before being elected president, he was a university professor for many years, and if before he sought to accustom students to the truth and ideals of justice, now they are entire nations. The desire of the author to oppose the "positive democratic program" to the ideas of the Bolsheviks and the foreign policy of Soviet Russia also played an important role in putting forward the "14 Points". In a confidential conversation at that time, he admitted: "The ghost of Bolshevism lurks everywhere ... All over the world there is a serious concern."

A different position was taken by the French Prime Minister J. Clemenceau. His goals had a practical orientation - to achieve compensation for all losses of France in the war, maximum territorial and monetary compensation, as well as the economic and military weakening of Germany. Clemenceau adhered to the motto "Germany will pay for everything!". For his intransigence and fierce defense of his point of view, the participants of the conference called him the nickname "tiger" that had been assigned to him.

The experienced and flexible politician D. Lloyd George strove to balance the positions of the parties, to avoid extreme decisions. He wrote: “... it seems to me that we should try to draw up a peace treaty as objective arbitrators (judges), forgetting about the passion of war. This treaty should have three goals in mind. First of all - to ensure justice in taking into account the responsibility of Germany for the outbreak of war and for the ways in which it was waged. Secondly, it must be a treaty which the responsible German government can sign with confidence that it is able to fulfill the obligations assigned to it. Thirdly, it must be a treaty that will not contain any provocations of a subsequent war and will create an alternative to Bolshevism by what it will offer everyone reasonable people a real solution to the European problem...”

The discussion of peace terms lasted almost half a year. Behind the scenes of the official work of the commissions and committees, the main decisions were made by the members of the "Big Three" - Wilson, Clemenceau and Lloyd George. They conducted closed consultations and agreements, "forgetting" about "open diplomacy" and other principles proclaimed by W. Wilson. important event in the course of protracted discussions, a decision was made to create an international organization that contributes to the maintenance of peace - the League of Nations.

On June 28, 1919, a peace treaty between the Allied Powers and Germany was signed in the Hall of Mirrors at the Grand Palace of Versailles. Under the terms of the agreement, Germany transferred Alsace and Lorraine to France, the Eupen district, Malmedy to Belgium, the Poznan region and parts of Pomerania and Upper Silesia to Poland, northern part Schleswig - Denmark (according to the results of the plebiscite). The left bank of the Rhine was occupied by the troops of the Entente, and a demilitarized zone was established on the right bank. The Saar region was under the control of the League of Nations for 15 years. Danzig (Gdansk) was declared a "free city", Memel (Klaipeda) moved away from Germany (later included in Lithuania). In total, 1/8 of the territory, where 1/10 of the country's population lived, was torn away from Germany. In addition, Germany was deprived of colonial possessions, its rights in the Shandong province in China were transferred to Japan. Restrictions were introduced on the number (no more than 100 thousand people) and weapons of the German army. Germany also had to pay reparations - payment to individual countries for the damage caused as a result of the German attack.

Versailles-Washington system

The Treaty of Versailles was not limited to resolving the German question. It contained provisions on the League of Nations - an organization created to resolve international disputes and conflicts (the Charter of the League of Nations was also cited here).

Later, peace treaties were signed with the former allies of Germany - Austria (September 10, 1919), Bulgaria (November 27, 1919), Hungary (June 4, 1920), Turkey (August 10, 1920). They determined the borders of these countries, established after the collapse of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire and the rejection of part of the territories from them in favor of the victorious powers. For Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, restrictions on the number of armed forces were introduced, and reparations were paid to the winners. The terms of the treaty with Turkey were particularly harsh. She lost all her possessions in Europe, on the Arabian Peninsula, in North Africa. Armed forces Turkey was reduced, it was forbidden to keep the fleet. The zone of the Black Sea straits came under control international commission. This treaty, humiliating for the country, was replaced in 1923, after the victory of the Turkish revolution.

The League of Nations, established in accordance with the Treaty of Versailles, took part in the redistribution of colonial possessions. The so-called mandate system was introduced, according to which the colonies taken from Germany and its allies under the mandate of the League of Nations were transferred under the tutelage of "advanced" countries, primarily Great Britain and France, which managed to occupy a dominant position in the League of Nations. At the same time, the United States of America, whose president put forward the idea and actively contributed to the creation of the League of Nations, did not join this organization and did not ratify the Treaty of Versailles. This indicated that new system, eliminating some contradictions in international relations, gave rise to new ones.

The post-war settlement could not be limited to Europe and the Middle East. Significant problems also existed in Far East, in Southeast Asia and pacific ocean. There clashed the interests of the British, the French, who had previously penetrated into this region, and the new contenders for influence - the United States and Japan, whose rivalry turned out to be especially sharp. A conference was convened in Washington (November 1921 - February 1922) to resolve the problems. It was attended by representatives of the United States, Great Britain, Japan, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, Portugal and China. Soviet Russia, whose borders were in this region, did not receive an invitation to the conference this time either.

Several treaties were signed at the Washington Conference. They consolidated the rights of the USA, Great Britain, France and Japan to the territories belonging to them in this region (for Japan this meant the recognition of its rights to the captured possessions of Germany), a ratio was established naval forces individual countries. Particular attention was paid to the issue of China. On the one hand, the principle of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China was proclaimed, and on the other, the position of "equal opportunities" for the great powers in this country. Thus, a monopoly seizure of China by one of the powers was prevented (a similar threat existed from Japan), but hands were untied for the joint exploitation of the wealth of this vast country.

The alignment of forces and mechanisms of international relations in Europe and the world that had developed by the early 1920s were called the Versailles-Washington system.

Old and new in international relations

Since 1920, the Soviet state began to improve relations with neighboring countries by signing peace treaties with Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Finland. In 1921, treaties of friendship and cooperation were concluded with Iran, Afghanistan, and Turkey. They were based on the recognition of the independence of these states, the equality of partners, and in this they differed from the semi-enslaving agreements imposed on the countries of the East by the Western powers.

At the same time, following the signing of the Anglo-Soviet trade agreement (March 1921), the question arose of resuming Russia's economic ties with the leading European countries. In 1922, representatives of Soviet Russia were invited to an international economic conference in Genoa (it opened on April 10). The Soviet delegation was headed by People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs GV Chicherin. Western powers expected to gain access to Russian natural resources and the market, as well as to find ways of economic and political influence on Russia. The Soviet state was interested in establishing economic ties with the outside world and diplomatic recognition.

The means of pressure on Russia from the West was the demand for the payment of its external debts of tsarist Russia and the Provisional Government and compensation for the property of foreign citizens nationalized by the Bolsheviks. The Soviet country was ready to recognize the pre-war debts of Russia and the right of the former foreign owners to receive in concession the property that previously belonged to them, subject to the legal recognition of the Soviet state and the provision of financial benefits and loans to it. Russia proposed to annul (declare invalid) military debts. At the same time, the Soviet delegation submitted a proposal for a general reduction in armaments. The Western powers did not agree to these proposals. They insisted that Russia pay off all debts, including military debts (totaling about 19 billion gold rubles), return all nationalized property to its former owners, and abolish the monopoly of foreign trade in the country. The Soviet delegation considered these demands unacceptable and, for its part, proposed that the Western powers compensate for the losses inflicted on Russia by intervention and blockade (39 billion gold rubles). The negotiations stalled.

References:
Aleksashkina L. N. / General History. XX - the beginning of the XXI century.

Since ancient times, international relations have been one of the important aspects of the life of any country, society and even an individual. The formation and development of individual states, the emergence of borders, the formation of various spheres of human life has led to the emergence of numerous interactions that are implemented both between countries and with interstate unions and other organizations.

In modern conditions of globalization, when almost all states are involved in a network of such interactions that affect not only the economy, production, consumption, but also culture, values and ideals, the role of international relations is overestimated and becomes more and more significant. There is a need to consider the question of what these international relations are, how they develop, what role the state plays in these processes.

The origins of the concept

The appearance of the term "international relations" is associated with the formation of the state as a sovereign entity. The formation of a system of independent powers in Europe at the end of the 18th century led to a decrease in the authority of reigning monarchies and dynasties. A new subject of relations appears on the world stage - the nation state. The conceptual basis for the creation of the latter is the category of sovereignty, formed by Jean Bodin in the middle of the 16th century. The thinker saw the future of the state in separating it from the claims of the church and provided the monarch with all the fullness and indivisibility of power on the territory of the country, as well as its independence from other powers. In the middle of the 17th century, the Treaty of Westphalia was signed, which consolidated the established doctrine of sovereign powers.

By the end of the 18th century, the western part of Europe was an established system of nation-states. Interactions between them as between peoples-nations received the appropriate name - international relations. This category was first introduced into scientific circulation by the English scientist J. Bentham. His vision of the world order was far ahead of its time. Even then, the theory developed by the philosopher assumed the abandonment of colonies, the creation of international judicial bodies and an army.

The emergence and development of the theory

Researchers note that the theory of international relations is contradictory: on the one hand, it is very old, and on the other, it is young. This is explained by the fact that the origins of the emergence of studies of international relations are associated with the emergence of states and peoples. Already in ancient times, thinkers considered the problems of wars and ensuring order, peaceful relations between countries. At the same time, as a separate systematized branch of knowledge, the theory of international relations took shape relatively recently - in the middle of the last century. In the post-war years, a reassessment of the world legal order takes place, attempts are made to create conditions for peaceful interaction between countries, international organizations and unions of states.

The development of new types of interactions, the emergence of new subjects in the international arena led to the need to single out the subject of science that studies international relations, freeing itself from the influence of such related disciplines as law and sociology. The sectoral variety of the latter is being formed to this day, studying certain aspects of international interactions.

Basic paradigms

Speaking about the theory of international relations, it is necessary to turn to the works of researchers who devoted their work to considering relations between powers, trying to find the foundations of the world order. Since the theory of international relations took shape as an independent discipline relatively recently, it should be noted that its theoretical provisions developed in line with philosophy, political science, sociology, law and other sciences.

Russian scientists identify three main paradigms in the classical theory of international relations.

Traditional, or classical, the ancestor of which is considered the ancient Greek thinker Thucydides. The historian, considering the causes of wars, comes to the conclusion that the main regulator of relations between countries is the factor of force. States, being independent, are not bound by any specific obligations and can use force to achieve their goals. This direction was developed in their works by other scientists, including N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbes, E. de Vattel and others.
Idealistic, the provisions of which are presented in the works of I. Kant, G. Grotius, F. de Vittoria and others. The emergence of this trend was preceded by the development of Christianity and Stoicism in Europe. The idealistic vision of international relations is based on the idea of the unity of the entire human race and the inalienable rights of the individual. Human rights, according to thinkers, are a priority in relation to the state, and the unity of mankind leads to the secondary nature of the very idea of a sovereign power, which in these conditions loses its original meaning.
The Marxist interpretation of relations between countries proceeded from the idea of the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie and the struggle between these classes, which would lead to unity within each and the formation of a world society. Under these conditions, the concept of a sovereign state also becomes secondary, since national isolation will gradually disappear with the development of the world market, free trade and other factors.

AT modern theory international relations, other concepts have appeared that develop the provisions of the presented paradigms.

History of international relations

Scientists associate its beginning with the appearance of the first signs of statehood. The first international relations are those that developed between the most ancient states and tribes. In history, you can find many such examples: Byzantium and Slavic tribes, the Roman Empire and German communities.

In the Middle Ages, a feature of international relations was that they did not develop between states, as is the case today. Their initiators were, as a rule, influential persons of the then powers: emperors, princes, representatives of various dynasties. They concluded agreements, assumed obligations, unleashed military conflicts, replacing the interests of the country with their own, identifying themselves with the state as such.

As society developed, so did the features of interactions. The turning point in the history of international relations is the emergence of the concept of sovereignty and the development nation state late 18th - early 19th century. During this period, a qualitatively different type of relations between countries was formed, which has survived to this day.

concept

The modern definition of what constitutes international relations is complicated by the multitude of connections and spheres of interaction in which they are implemented. An additional obstacle is the fragility of the division of relations into domestic and international. Quite common is the approach, which at the heart of the definition contains subjects that implement international interactions. Textbooks define international relations as a certain set of various connections-relationships both between states and between other entities operating on the world stage. Today, in addition to states, their number began to include organizations, associations, social movements, social groups etc.

The most promising approach to the definition seems to be the selection of criteria that make it possible to distinguish this type of relationship from any others.

Features of international relations

To understand what international relations are, to understand their nature will allow consideration characteristic features these interactions.

The complexity of this kind of relationship is determined by their spontaneous nature. The number of participants in these relationships is constantly growing, new subjects are being included, which makes it difficult to predict changes.
AT recent times the positions of the subjective factor have strengthened, which is reflected in the growing role of the political component.
Inclusion in relations of various spheres of life, as well as the expansion of the circle of political participants: from individual leaders to organizations and movements.
The absence of a single center of influence due to the many independent and equal participants in the relationship.

All the variety of international relations is usually classified on the basis of various criteria, including:

spheres: economics, culture, politics, ideology, etc.;
intensity level: high or low;
in terms of tension: stable/unstable;
geopolitical criterion for their implementation: global, regional, sub-regional.

On the basis of the above criteria, the concept under consideration can be designated as a special type of social relations that goes beyond the framework of any territorial entity or intra-social interactions that have developed on it. Such a formulation of the question requires a clarification of how international politics and international relations are related.

Relationship between politics and international relations

Before deciding on the relationship between these concepts, we note that the term "international politics" is also difficult to define and is a kind of abstract category that allows us to single out their political component in relations.

Speaking about the interaction of countries in the international arena, people often use the concept of "world politics". It is an active component that allows you to influence international relations. If we compare world and international politics, then the first one is much wider in scope and is characterized by the presence of participants at various levels: from the state to international organizations, unions and individual influential entities. While the interaction between states is more accurately revealed with the help of such categories as international politics and international relations.

Formation of the system of international relations

At different stages of the development of the world community, certain interactions develop between its participants. The main subjects of these relations are several leading powers and international organizations capable of influencing other participants. The organized form of such interactions is the system of international relations. Its goals include:

ensuring stability in the world;
cooperation in solving world problems in different areas activities;
creating conditions for the development of other participants in relations, ensuring their security and maintaining integrity.

The first system of international relations was formed back in the middle of the 17th century (Westphalian), its appearance was due to the development of the doctrine of sovereignty and the emergence of nation-states. It lasted three and a half centuries. Throughout this period, the main subject of relations in the international arena is the state.

In the heyday of the Westphalian system, interactions between countries are formed on the basis of rivalry, the struggle to expand spheres of influence and increase power. The regulation of international relations is implemented on the basis of international law.

A feature of the twentieth century was the rapid development of sovereign states and the change in the system of international relations, which underwent a radical restructuring three times. It should be noted that none of the previous centuries can boast of such radical changes.

The last century brought two world wars. The first led to the creation of the Versailles system, which, destroying the balance in Europe, clearly marked two antagonistic camps: Soviet Union and the capitalist world.

The second led to the formation of a new system, called the Yalta-Potsdam. During this period, the split between imperialism and socialism intensifies, opposing centers are identified: the USSR and the USA, which divide the world into two opposing camps. The period of existence of this system was also marked by the collapse of the colonies and the emergence of the so-called "third world" states.

The role of the state in the new system of relations

The modern period of development of the world order is characterized by the fact that a new system is being formed, the predecessor of which collapsed at the end of the 20th century as a result of the collapse of the USSR and a series of Eastern European velvet revolutions.

According to scientists, the formation of the third system and the development of international relations have not yet ended. This is evidenced not only by the fact that today the balance of forces in the world has not been determined, but also by the fact that new principles of interaction between countries have not been worked out. The emergence of new political forces in the form of organizations and movements, the unification of powers, international conflicts and wars allow us to conclude that a complex and painful process of forming norms and principles is underway, in accordance with which a new system of international relations will be built.

Special attention of researchers is drawn to such a question as the state in international relations. Scientists emphasize that today the doctrine of sovereignty is being seriously tested, since the state has largely lost its independence. Strengthening these threats is the process of globalization, which makes the borders more and more transparent, and the economy and production more and more dependent.

But at the same time, modern international relations put forward a number of requirements for states that only this social institution can do. In such conditions, there is a shift from traditional functions to new ones that go beyond the usual.

The role of the economy

International economic relations play a special role today, since this type of interaction has become one of the driving forces of globalization. The emerging world economy today can be represented as a global economy that combines various branches of specialization of national economic systems. All of them are included in a single mechanism, the elements of which interact and are dependent on each other.

International economic relations existed before the emergence of the world economy and linked industries within continents or regional associations. The main subjects of such relations are states. In addition to them, the group of participants includes giant corporations, international organizations and associations. The regulatory institution of these interactions is the law of international relations.