Search results

Autorica istražuje mogućnost da se pesimizam etablira kao relevantan pravac unutar teorije realizma međunarodnih odnosa u objašnjavanju kako prošlih, tako i budućih događaja u međunarodnoj politici. U radu se koristi metateorijska interpretativna metoda kako bi se iznijele neke od temeljnih niti vodilja misli pesimizma, pri čemu je fokus samo na klasičnom realizmu unutar realističke teorije, budući da su njezine postavke ujedno i temeljna izvorišta pesimizma. U prvom dijelu rada iznosi se temeljne odrednice i biti realizma i pesimizma, drugi dio se fokusira na intelektualnu pozadinu pesimistične misli u radovima Schopenhauera, Nietzschea i Freuda, a posljednji dio iznosi kritiku optimizma i temeljne opreke u poimanju koncepta vremena između pesimizma i optimizma, kao i implikacije koje pesimizam ima za međunarodne odnose. Pesimizam kao pravac unutar teorije realizma međunarodnih odnosa ima filozofsku snagu i jaku teorijsku pozadinu te može imati svoje mjesto unutar realističke teorije međunarodnih odnosa. ; The author evaluates the possibility of the concept of pessimism establishing itself as a relevant factor within the theory of realism in international relations, that is, for explaining past and future events in international politics. The approach applies the meta theoric interpretative method in order to expose some of the tenets of the leading pessimistic theories where the focus is on classical realism within the realistic theory, since its origins are also the fundamental origins of pessimism. The first part exposes the fundamental postulates and essence of realism and pessimism, while the second part focuses on the intellectual background of the pessimism thought found in the works of Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Freud. The last part expose a criticism of optimism as well as the fundamental contradictions in understanding the concept of time between pessimism and optimism, as well as the implications of pessimism on international relations. Pessimism, as a part of the theory of realism in international ...

The article analyzes how the 16+1 Cooperation promotes the Chinese new type of international relations from four perspectives: firstly, the "16+1 Cooperation" insists on not rejecting third parties and promotes the idea of open and inclusive international cooperation; Secondly, the cooperation framework adheres to the principle of mutually-beneficial and win-win cooperation, and proposes to wisely handle differences and divergences; Thirdly, this framework never engages in zero-sum games, instead, it fully respects and closely watches the core interests and major concerns of the relevant parties; Fourthly, it is committed to creating a cooperative platform through consultation, to meet the interests of all. The article also makes an analysis of the challenges facing 16+1 Cooperation and gives some suggestions. ; The article analyzes how the 16+1 Cooperation promotes the Chinese new type of international relations from four perspectives: firstly, the "16+1 Cooperation" insists on not rejecting third parties and promotes the idea of open and inclusive international cooperation; Secondly, the cooperation framework adheres to the principle of mutually-beneficial and win-win cooperation, and proposes to wisely handle differences and divergences; Thirdly, this framework never engages in zero-sum games, instead, it fully respects and closely watches the core interests and major concerns of the relevant parties; Fourthly, it is committed to creating a cooperative platform through consultation, to meet the interests of all. The article also makes an analysis of the challenges facing 16+1 Cooperation and gives some suggestions.

The author explores some fundamental aspects of international cooperation, its functional incentives & structural limitations, by describing the discussion between two most influential approaches in international relations theory: neorealism & neoliberalism, or to be more precise, between defensive neorealism & neoliberal institutionalism. During the discussion on possibilities & limitations of international co-operation neorealism & neoliberalism showed their differences, but also similarities of views that resulted in their approach, which is called the neo-neo synthesis in international relations theory. The discussion, that has been going on for three decades in USA also reflects on the practical foreign policy decision-making in this country. The discussion contains the ideas that can serve as means to explain some foreign policy approaches in our country as well. References. Adapted from the source document.

Globalizacija i povećana međunarodna međuovisnost pridonose tomu da se ponovno povećava interes utjecaja strukture međunarodnog sustava na međunarodne odnose. Međunarodni sustav od kraja Hladnog rata neprestano proživljava promjene. One se najviše odlikuju u političkim i sigurnosnim novitetima. U takvim je uvjetima struktura sustava postala glavnom odrednicom ponašanja država koje se, promatrajući ih kroz perspektivu strukturalnog realizma ili neorealizma, ponašaju isključivo u skladu s vlastitim interesima, u uvjetima anarhičnog sustava. S obzirom na geopolitički položaj te veličinu Hrvatskoj je izrazito bitno čvrsto članstvo unutar NATO-saveza i Europske Unije. Kontekst razvoja sigurnosti i obrane time postaje više usmjeren na činjenicu da se zemlje članice saveza obvezuju pomagati jedna drugoj u slučaju pojave ugroze, te se time jača stabilnost nacionalne sigurnosti potrebne da se omoguće dugoročni mir i stabilnost u zemlji, ali i u susjedstvu. Kao središnji i konstantan fenomen u proučavanju međunarodnih odnosa, savezi nastaju jer su vlade svih razvijenih država svjesne da su dio jednog većeg entiteta u međunarodnoj politici u kojoj, prema postavkama neorealističke škole među-narodnih odnosa, postoje prijetnje koje su uzroci stvaranja saveza. ; Globalisation and increased international interdependence have contributed to the fact that once again the interest of the impact on the structure of the international system to international relations is increased. The international system, since the end of the Cold War, is constantly going through changes. They are the most distinguished in political and security innovations. In such circumstances, the structure of the system has become the main determinant of behaviour of states that, looking through the perspective of structural realism or neorealism, act solely pursuing their own interest, in terms of an anarchic system. Given the geopolitical position and size of the country, it is extremely important for Croatia to have a firm membership within the NATO and the European Union. The context of development of security and defence thus becomes more focused on the fact that the member states of the alliance commit to assist each other in case of threats, so the stability of national security needed to enable long-term peace and stability in the country, but also the neighbourhood, is strengthened. As a central and constant phenomenon in the study of international relations, alliances are formed because the governments of all developed countries are aware that they are part of a larger entity in international politics, in which, according to the neorealist school of international relations, there are threats that cause creating alliances.

Hans J. Morgenthau, utemeljitelj realističke teorije međunarodne politike četrdesetih godina 20. stoljeća, donedavno se smatrao pozitivističkim teoretičarom "tvrde" politike moći u međunarodnoj politici. No sve veći akademski interes za njegovo djelo posljednjih godina pokazao je kako je riječ o kompleksnom misliocu koji je ponajprije teoretičar politike. U ovome rada autor prikazuje Morgenthauovu političku teoriju i njezine temeljne pojmove u trima razdobljima njihova razvoja: do Drugoga svjetskog rata, od kraja rata do šezdesetih godina i poslije šezdesetih. Posebno se osvrćući na glavne studije iz svakoga od tih razdoblja, autor nastoji dokazati da je svrha Morgenthauove teorije međunarodne politike bio pokušaj da se politika i političko konstituiraju kao odgovor na duboku društvenu i političku krizu modernog Zapada. Njegova realistička teorija međunarodne politike nije samo akademski pothvat nego i svojevrstan politički projekt. ; Hans J. Morgenthau, who founded realist theory of international politics in the 1940s, has until recently been considered a positivist theorist of crude power politics in international relations. However, in recent years, with rising academic interest for his works, Morgenthau has been seen as a complex thinker and primarily a political theorist. This article aims to show Morgenthau's political theory and its fundamental concepts that run through the three periods of his writing: up to the Second World War, during the post-war period, and in the 1960s. With a special overview of the pivotal studies from each of the above periods, this article will show that the purpose of Morgenthau's theory of international politics is an attempt at constructing politics and the political as an answer to the deep social and political crisis of the modern West. His realist theory of international politics is not just an academic endeavor but also a political project of sorts.

Ovaj članak prvo izlaže teorije koje zagovaraju koncentraciju moći. Na području političke filozofije to je Hobbesova teorija koja zagovara koncentraciju moći u rukama monarha, zasnovanu na pravu, kako bi se spriječio povratak u prirodno stanje. Na području teorija o međunarodnim odnosima to je teorija nadmoći koja tvrdi da nadmoć jedne države smanjuje vjerojatnost izbijanja ratova. Obje teorije, de facto, idu u prilog američkoj hegemoniji jer iz njih proizlazi to da ta hegemonija nije samo u interesu SAD-a, nego i u interesu svjetskog mira. Međutim ovaj članak tvrdi da je sustav ravnoteže i kontrole (checks and balances) važan ne samo unutar države nego i u međunarodnim odnosima. ; This article first presents theories that justify the concentration of power. In the field of political philosophy, Hobbes's theory argues in favor of the concentration of power in the hand of a monarch in order to prevent the state of nature. In the field of theories of international relations, power preponderance theory argues that power preponderance of one country prevents international wars. Consequently, both theories justify American hegemony, arguing that hegemony does not only serve the best interest of the USA, but also the interest of world peace. However, this article claims that checks and balances are important not just in domestic politics but in international relations as well.