RESEARCH ARTICLES
The article revises an established view of Russian Revolution as two separate events - February Revolution and October Revolution. The author supports the concept of the «Great Russian Revolution», which unites these two events in a single process of revolutionary development. The author draws attention to the following advantages of the concept under consideration. First, it conceptualizes the revolution as a process contingent of a local and global historical context. In this sense, the revolution is presented as the transition of society to the modern stage of development, meaning the transition to modernity. Second, revolutionary events in Russia are considered from the point of view of the evolution of the spatial and socioeconomic distribution and rearrangement of key social groups: peasantry, elites, national and ethnic minorities. Third, it takes into account the personal factor in the revolutionary events, the influence of individual personalities on escalation or the reduction of socio-political tensions. Fourth, it draws attention to the fact that revolutions imply the use of various forms of political violence. Each revolution is characterized by a unique correlation of forms and intensity of political violence. Finally, it gives a normative assessment of the Revolution, encouraging a national discussion on the results and consequences of this great event.
The article deals with the personal political evolution of F.F. Raskolnikov, a famous national revolutionary leader in the early USSR. Using the methodology of historical anthropology, the author intends to reach a holistic understanding of the phenomenon of the revolution in Russia, considering the development of Raskolnikov’s views as a reflection of the general evolutions of views in the Bolshevik party elites. Also, the author turns to the ideological origins of Raskolnikov’s work as a theatrical critic, publicist and a writer. His play «Robespierre» raises a key question in the study of the history of the Great Russian Revolution, namely, did the leaders of the Bolsheviks realize that there would be an inevitable rollback after revolution or a counterrevolutionary trend that could lead to a radical renewal of the elite by terror – so-called «Thermidor» . The author reviews the biography of F.F. Raskolnikov, charts his intellectual formation. The article covers Raskolnikov’s development as a military commander and a major functionary in the Bolshevik party. Then it describes the «theatrical period» in his life, including sources for his literary experiments and relations with literary and theatrical figures of the USSR. Finally, the author studies the revised and expanded version of the play «Robespierre» staged in Paris after Raskolnikov became a «defector» from USSR. If the original version of the play emphasizes the specifics of the French and Russian revolutions, the revised version stresses the similarities. The result of this intellectual work was Raskolnikov’s understanding of the failure of revolutionary ideas for which he fought reflected in his «Open letter to Stalin».
The article studies the cooperation between the Russian Foreign Ministry and the State Duma during the First World War. A hundred years ago, the Russian parliament made the first real steps in democratization of public administration. MPs to the best of their ability and within the limits of the emperor’s powers sought to modernize the outdated system of monarchical rule. They were pushed by the tragic conditions of the First World War in which Russia was plunged by the royal family. The February Revolution of 1917 breathed new strength into the political struggle unfolding in Russia, it forced many conservative oriented public administrators to support the efforts of the MPs to establish a republican form of government. Russian diplomats also contributed to the effort when they assisted thousands of Russians who were caught up in captivity in hostile countries, as well as prisoners of war and seriously wounded. Using archival documents and memoirs, the author observes the evolution of the relationship between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the emerging civil society and how these changing relationships influenced the work of Russian diplomatic missions. This complex set of relationships evolved around issues faced by the authorities during the First World War and the February Revolution. Methodologically, the author relies on institutional approach and partially on the Annals school, analyzing the subject matter taking into account the specific historical conditions. In addition, the study uses elements of diachronic analysis, a comparison of the post-revolutionary and post-Soviet restructuring of diplomatic institutions in Russia, which demonstrates how deep the institutional memory can be under conditions of a consistent change in the socio-political structure.
The article explores the changes in the mutual perceptions between the FRG and the USSR from mid-60s through early 70s of the 20th century, which became a precondition for the détente in their relationship. It is based largely on the analysis of the documents stored in the Archive of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation and recently released for the researchers. The author highlights the initiatives by Willy Brandt as a Foreign Minister in 1966–1969 and subsequently as a Federal Chancellor in breaking the deadlock in Bonn’s foreign policy created by his predecessors. It is emphasized that those initiatives found the positive response from the Soviet side. A reversal movement towards a regime of confrontation took place under conditions of the Czechoslovak crisis of 1968 (“Prague spring”), but its impact was rather short-lived. With the government of Social-Liberal coalition coming to power in October 1969, the Federal Republic’s course to the détente took the firmer contours (joining the Non-Proliferation Treaty, positive attitude to the All-European Conference, beginning the negotiations with the USSR), and the process of the normalization between West and East in the Central Europe accelerated. The complicating factor was the dogmatic positions taken by some leaders of “socialist community” countries (in Poland and GDR in particular) as well as by some representatives of the Soviet diplomatic corps. Critically scrutinized in this context are the attempts to promote the course towards the “fencing-off” in the German-German relations as dictated by the theory of “two German nations”. The examples of confronting those mindsets are cited – in particular, from the exponents of the nascent civil society in the USSR (the case of the “Spiegel” interview by the Soviet expert on Germany D.E. Melnikov in the first month of 1970). The positions of the détente supporters both in the USSR and in the FRG turned out to be strong enough for a conclusion of the Moscow Treaty on August 12, 1970,– a hall-mark of Soviet-West German rapprochement. The historical experience of overcoming the “enemy image” in the relationship between the Soviet Union and the FRG has a great practical value for the solution of the present-day international conflicts.
The article analyzes the problem and the process of securitization in the context of interconnection between security and development implicated in the concept of sustainable development. The concept combines in a single system the security and change (progressive development) of civilization and preservation of the environment. Sustainable development in the broadest sense is seen by the author as the safest type of evolution, which reduces to an acceptable level any negative effects on civilization and the biosphere for the purpose of their conservation and co-evolution. The article shows that due to systemic interconnection of development and security, the goals of sustainable development will not be achieved, because they do not include a goal of international peace and security on a global scale. The opposite is also true: most types of security, including national and global security, could be achieved not through means of defense but through the most secure type of development, i.e. sustainable development. This fact requires systematic updating and improving the theoretical basis of the concept of sustainable development. The author initiates the formation of two new integrative areas of scientific knowledge: «global securitology» and «security globalistics».
The article examines the new U.S. administration’s outlook on arms control, analyses the existing problems in this field and possible ways for their resolution, compares Donald Trump’s statements on military and political issues with the president’s first steps in this area, and offers forecasts and recommendations on the prospects for U.S.-Russia cooperation in arms limitations and reductions. The author proceeds from the assumption that arms control is a key component in measures to ensure international security. Even if the current tense U.S.- Russian relations provide little room for maneuver and the internal political struggle in DC sets limits on the possible bilateral measures, Moscow should nevertheless take initiative in putting forward a set of proposals to reduce weapons, especially in the very sensitive and risk-prone nuclear field. This will allow in future negotiations to proceed from options that will take into account Russian interests and the specifics of Russia’s weapons systems, while at the same time showing the resolve of the nuclear superpowers to reduce existing threats through negotiations and leading the way for other countries to join. Taking into account the importance of arms control, all efforts should be made to enforce the existing treaties, consolidate the current international treaty-based legal system, and work further on new arms control and arms reduction agreements.
At the present stage Germany seeks to increase its influence at the international arena and plays active role in the solution of the problems in the sphere of inter-national security. In this regard Germany uses a wide range of foreign policy tools, some of them are military. The Bundeswehr becomes the armed forces which are intended for the usage at the global level and for the solution a large range of tasks, including ones which are atypical for the period of the «cold war». The reform of the Bundeswehr led to its real division of German armed forces into two components. The first of them were the forces which were intend-ed for the usage outside NATO zone of responsibility, and the second component were troops which should complete the tasks of the ensuring the territorial de-fense of Germany and its Alliance`s partners if necessary. In the 1990s – 2000s years the undisputed priority was the development of forces, used outside the Euro-Atlantic society. At the same time the combat capa-bilities of another component were gradually declining in the situation of com-mon reducing the personnel and armaments of the Bundeswehr. At the present stage the Western countries came to a period of profound deterioration of rela-tions with Russia and faced with the increasing manifestations of the non-traditional security threats caused by instability in the Middle East and North Af-rica. It puts Germany in front of necessity of simultaneous development of both parts of the armed forces. In this regard in the conclusion there is an attempt to characterize the modern and perspective image of the Bundeswehr and to outline possible ways of overcoming the existing difficulties of its development.
This article demonstrates that ethnicity itself didn’t play a significant role to cause conflicts in Osh in 1990 and 2010, but was rather a side effect or a catalyst produced inevitably by political struggle in the country. The Osh conflict in 1990 occurred at the weakening of the USSR's institutional control and decreasing material support from the center. Kyrgyzstan being the major recipient of both indirect and direct subsidies from the USSR suffered a severe economic depression because subsidies were cut or substantially reduced. Moreover, the sudden disintegration of production and trade relations further exacerbated the economic situation in Kyrgyzstan. The economic decline caused a demographic imbalance, which has contributed to increased confrontation between Kyrgyz and ethnic Uzbeks in Osh. These social tensions coincided with political mobilization under the slogans of ethnicity and contributed to the intensification of the conflict making it look similar to an ethnic conflict for an outside observer. Similarly, the Osh conflict in 2010 happened in the declining economy which was not only the result of the global economic crisis and difficulties in relations with Russia. The political short-sightedness of the Bakiyev regime in resolving problems with the air base at Manas led to complication of relations with Russia, which subsequently led to economic decline in Kyrgyzstan. The economic difficulties soon translated into institutional instability. Massive public demonstrations “framed” as an ethnic conflict by political elites intensified the battle, adding to it an “ethnic” dimension.
The article examines the correlation of two concepts: «soft power» and «propaganda» in International Relations. The author argues that within realism these concepts are used synonymously, but within neoliberalism they have fundamental differences. The parameters of comparison of the neoliberal and realistic approaches are given with reference to the concept of soft power. It is noted that, despite the differences between these approaches and between the concepts of hard power and soft power, the opposition of the concepts is not an absolute one. Soft power and hard power, according to J. Nye, can be represented as a continuum. Similarly, propaganda and soft power can also merge into one another. It is shown that, contrary to the widespread notion that the field of application determines the choice between soft and hard power (for example, education, culture are associated with soft power), in fact it does not. The coercive imposition of cultural norms, educational models is a manifestation of hard power. One of the most common tools for implementation of soft power is public diplomacy, which can be carried out through both official channels (public speeches of officials) and informal channels (NGOs, universities, etc.). It is emphasized that non-state actors can be agents of states’ soft power. There are also a number of other features of soft power that must be considered. Among them are such characteristics as specificity of a region and a country; competition in soft power of different countries in the same region; negative consequences of the use of soft power and others.
Public diplomacy has become a common attribute of the global political life since the early 21 century. The interest for the public diplomacy is also evident among the EEU countries. Nevertheless, the question of the public diplomacy resource savailable for the integrating post-Soviet states and their usage remains open. The practice of the Union State of Russia and Belarus (USRB) is characterized by a wide range of public initiatives to increase the public attractiveness of the bilateral integration project. It communicates with a broad international environment and thereby creates a positive image for the Russian-Belarusian partnership. Public diplomacy of the USRB is a complex phenomenon combining various functional components, mechanisms and. Two mutually complementary vectors in its development can be distinguished, the first one related to the actions of officials and leaders of partner countries, and the second one – to the practice of non-state actors in the form of public organizations, business communities, academics, and the media. The state institutions along with the special social structures are actively involved in different projects boosting the international public image of USRB and play a critical part in creating a positive image of the Russian-Belarus cooperation. This fact represents the growing structural interaction of the traditional and new actors of the world political processes.
The article analyzes resources of political influence on the foreign policy of the country of residence that Polish diaspora in the United States possesses. This analysis is useful for two reasons. Firstly, it will expand the focus of research in the study of pressure groups and their influence on the American foreign policy. Secondly, the Polish diaspora in the United States is rarely the object of research in migrant and ethnic lobbying, despite its the significant share of the country’s population. Analysis of the given resources that the Polish diaspora (American Polonia) has leads to the following. Firstly, the foreign policy agenda of the Polish diaspora in the United States faces no strong opponents. This fact means the diaspora has sufficiently developed structural resource. In addition, the Polish diaspora possesses an organizational resource: its institutions are in close cooperation and are coordinated by the Polish American Congress. Secondly, the Polish diaspora in the US is a significant group of the population, especially in the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, Connecticut, New York and Illinois. However, its electoral and financial capacities are not used to the fullest extent. Finally, there are certain difficulties with the discursive political resource of Polish diaspora. The social and political perception provides of Polonia in the USA two opposing narratives. The first one stresses that it is important for the Americans of Polish descent to share such values as democracy, defending his position, including by military means. The second narrative is a reproduction of widespread stereotypes about Poles, including in the popular culture. Thus, institutions of the American Polonia face several tasks. The most important tasks are the search for new ways of political mobilization of the diaspora and the formation of a balanced image of Polish Americans in the social and political perception in the United States.
The article redefines economy as a phenomenon of culture, a product of a historically and socially grounded set of values shared by members of a given society. The research shows that culture is not always identical to social utility, because there are multiple examples when archaic, traditionalist, irrational cultural norms hinder social and economic progress and trap nations into poverty and underdevelopment. One of the reasons for the lack of scholarly attention to cultural dimension of economy is the triumph of positivism in economics. Mathematics has become the dominant language of economic analysis. It leads to the transformation of the economics into a sort of «social physics», accompanied by the loss of its original humanitarian nature shared in the works of all the great economists of the past. The author emphasizes the importance of the interdisciplinary approach to the economic research and the incorporation of the achievements of the other social disciplines – history, philosophy, sociology and cultural studies - into the subject matter of economic theory. Substantiating the main thesis of the article, the author shows that there is a profound ontological bond between economy and culture, which primarily consists in the fact that these spheres of human relations are aimed at the solution of the same problem – the competitive selection of the best ways for survival of people, of satisfying the relevant living needs. In order to overcome the difficulties related to the inclusion of culture in the set of analytical tools used in the economic theory, the author suggests using a category of «cultural capital», which reestablishes the earlier and more familiar for the economists meaning of capital.
Spain is a country that traditionally suffers a lot from high level of regional disparities. From the end of XX century Spanish government has taken different measures to smooth them. For example, the state of autonomies was established, statutes were approved for every region, more powers were transferred to regional authorities. There are several institutions in Spain that increase the efficiency of cooperation between different levels of authorities and between autonomies, such as conference of the presidents, sectoral conferences, agreements on cooperation and bilateral commissions. Activity of these mechanisms is of a great interest for the author. The author tries to find the ways to modernize Russian regional policy using Spanish experience, considering its pros and cons. Undoubtedly it is impossible to copy other countries practice as Russia and Spain differ a lot, for example, in size, population, the level of socialeconomic development and the supply of mineral resources. Still there is something in common, like high level of regional disparities and amount of authorities the territories obtain. Even though Spain is a unitary state, its autonomies are quite independent. Territorial status of the country is a hybrid between unitary and federative state. Its institutional structure of regional policy is pretty diversified. So both these aspects are worth considering. Regional policy is one the most important directions of the state activity in Russia, because of its extensive territories. Today Russia has to face a number of regional challenges and regional policy cannot cope with them. The growing territorial polarization slow down the development of the whole country. It is useful to analyze foreign institutions, which solve regional problems in the other states, to adapt their practice to the Russian realities.
BOOK REVIEWS
Book review: Oleg Pichkov, Evgeniy Rakov. Foreign Direct Investment and National Interest of the State. Moscow: MGIMO-University, 2016. 214 p.
ISSN 2541-9099 (Online)