Search results

There are several problems in the modern theory of international relations that are difficult to solve, but the very existence of which leads to a certain demarcation of possible and received knowledge. These phenomena include the problem of 'anthropomorphizing', which is an attribution or an identification of certain human characteristics with complex social actors, including, above all, states. This research technique is often not limited to the use of any figures of speech and serves to ascertain the ontological and epistemological foundations for further theorizing. The purpose of this article is to systematize the existing approaches to 'anthropomorphizing' and put forward further directions for understanding this theoretical problem. The author reconstructs the three main traditions of 'anthropomorphizing' – back to the works of Hugo Grotius, Thomas Hobbes and Georg Hegel. Each tradition has both a certain understanding as regards the meaning of this research technique and ontological along with epistemological consequences, which implicitly affect the result obtained. The tradition of Hugo Grotius is distinguished by a metaphorical understanding of 'anthropomorphizing' associated with a peculiar perception of the rights and freedoms of the individual. On the contrary, the tradition of Thomas Hobbes considers the internal characteristics of the state in comparison with a person while similarities are used to raise new research questions. Finally, the last tradition arose under the influence of Georg Hegel. It connects the problem of 'anthropomorphizing' with the processes of external communication of states. The article provides an orderly interpretation of ontological and epistemological consequences as well as the traditions that are linked to existing theoretical schools (as much as possible). The author analyzes the synthesis of several traditions of 'anthropomorphizing' presented by constructivist Alexander Wendt. The emerging tradition of 'anthropomorphizing' is aimed at clearly defining its own epistemological and ontological foundations while raising the theoretical status of 'humanization' itself. As a result, the article concludes on the possibility, limitations and prospects of revisiting and more actively using the concept of 'anthropomorphizing' in reflectivist and neopositivist methodologies, as well as the likelihood of hybrid versions of the three main research traditions.

In contrast to the representatives of other directions in International Relations Science, constructivists have long distanced themselves from the notion of power, but in the 2000s and 2010s, due to the increasing interest in conceptualizing this phenomenon, the first attempts of the constructivist interpretation of the concept of power started to emerge. Such interpretations received their fullest expression in the concept of Protean power, developed by a group of researchers under the informal leadership of Peter Katzenstein. The article analyzes the main features of the Protean power, as well as the emerging practices. The author shows that this type of power is less associated with specific actors and their intentions than other types of power, since it is aimed at overcoming uncertainty under the conditions when it is impossible to calculate risks. This formulation of the question allows one to reconsider the role of the creativity principle in international interactions and provide it with a higher ontological status. According to the author's conclusion, the concept of Protean power continues the line of revising the ontological foundations of the studies of world politics, which has emerged within constructivism in the last decade. Similarly to some other constructivist concepts, this concept implies a holistic interpretation of the phenomenon of power in international relations and reflects the desire to move away from the classical (Newtonian) worldview. Although today it provides many reasons for criticism and, perhaps, needs further elaboration and reinterpretation, its contribution to the scientific discussion of the ontology of power in international interactions is beyond doubt. Protean power is paving the way that allows bypassing the neo-positivist consensus that has so far set the tone in the International Relations Science.

The article discusses an essential dimension of modern diaspora research related to the functional status of diasporas in contemporary armed conflicts. The conventional point of view is that diasporas can only act as the "third party" of the conflict by either contributing to the deepening of the contradictions between the opposing parties or acting as an intermediary between them. In theoretical terms, the author relies on the concept of "new" or network wars (netwars) and tries to demonstrate that there are the prerequisites for more active involvement of diasporas in armed conflicts at the structural level of modern world political processes. To identify the structural requirements for such participation, the author turns to the analysis of two cases. The first case is the emergence and functioning of the 1st Polish Corps in 1917-1918 in Russia, which was formed when the Polish population of Russia was separated from their territory of origin as a result of the First World War. An analysis of the documents shows that the leadership of the corps quite clearly evaded political subordination to the Russian authorities and retained only military subordination, implying that the task of this unit was to participate in the restoration of Polish statehood. The second case is the genesis and evolution of the "Secret Army" of General Wang Pao in Laos in 1960-1974. This unit played an essential role in the Civil War in Laos, as it managed to restrain the onslaught of the superior forces of the Patet Lao Front and troops from North Vietnam. Such long-term participation in hostilities was made possible thanks to US special services' logistical and technical support. The two case studies allow us to conclude that there were armed units in previous historical periods with a clear diaspora component: they made a significant contribution to the overall dynamics of the confrontation between major parties to the conflict. This experience helps analyze contemporary conflicts with the diaspora component, especially in the context of the gradual erosion of power resources in world politics. The participation of diasporas in armed conflicts outside the "third party" framework is associated with the achievement of several conditions, both internal and external ones.

The author's intention is to access the impact that diasporas have on world politics. The notion "diaspora" implies a transnational migrant community, which maintains material and emotional bonds with territory of origin and simultaneously adapts to limitations and possibilities of host society. The emotional component of a community entails psychosocial complex that includes the group solidarity and certain myths about the territory of origin. Taking into account the specifics of a given community, diasporas meet in general all the requirements of a non-state actor that have been elaborated in the current studies on the world politics. In particular, a diasporas exist independently and participates in the transnational interactions. Moreover, there are several situations which enhance diaspora's ability to interfere. These situations may include the unsatisfactory status of the given community, migrants' desire to improve certain political or economic conditions in the territory of origin, the prerequisites for changes in the relationships between the hostland and the homeland, urgent crises in the country of origin. In addition, diasporal influence depends on demographic and geographic characteristics of the particular community. Diasporas achieve their goals on global, regional and national levels mainly by influencing state's institutions. However, some developments have been evolved that can facilitate a substantive diasporas' involvement in the world political processes, involvement without dependence on state's capabilities. Elite of the community plays a crucial role in the resource management. The elite presents "the controlling centre" that forges a strategy of action and makes transactions of resources. Stability within "the controlling centre" can be named as an indicator of diaspora's ability to manage the potential available.

Recent years have seen a substantial increase in remittances from diaspora communities to their home countries, prompting developing economies to establish and enhance institutional mechanisms. These mechanisms aim to channel and leverage the emotional connections of emigrants to their native lands for economic purposes. This article concentrates on the influence of migrant remittances on the formulation of diaspora policies in Africa. It closely examines two clusters encompassing a total of 8 states recognized as leaders in terms of migrant remittances' share in GDP and their absolute value, respectively. The article evaluates three primary categories of tools and practices that structure diaspora cooperation: formal institutional means, economic tools, and socio-cultural practices. The research applies a neo-institutional approach, conceiving diaspora policy as a network of interconnected practices across various spheres. By comparing cases within and between these clusters, it demonstrates diverse approaches to developing diaspora cooperation mechanisms. Additionally, the authors outline the most promising pathways for advancing diaspora policies while identifying existing barriers.They advocate for the establishment of distinct platforms for diaspora representation, deepening cooperation between origin and host states, and extending certain diaspora policy mechanisms to subnational and supranational levels. However, the development of diaspora politics in the examined cases is impeded by insufficient resources, weak state institutions, and state reluctance to cede control over their population's interaction with external actors. Despite the prevalent notion that the evolution of diaspora cooperation mechanisms correlates with the volume of migrant remittances, empirical analysis within the African context exposes the explanatory limitations of such a model.

The article deals with the "Quantum mind"hypothesis which has been elaborated in recent works of Alexander Wendt. It is ultimately significant to analyze this hypothesis and to expand on its difficulties and possible inconsistencies given Wendt's credentials in IR theorizing. It allows us to develop a new approach and promising research program on the basis of the hypothesis and its critical reflection. Wendt's quantum physicalism (or holism) implies serious philosophical injury and outstanding usage of different science disciplines' apparatus including physics, biology, and psychology. Thought-provoking approach of Wendt boosts researching efforts within the field of political philosophy, world politics and international relations. The main feature of the hypothesis is the idea of quantum nature in social and political processes which appears to be the consequence of epistemological authority of current science. Alexander Wendt proposes several explanations for quantum foundations within the political and social processes including wide-known "agent-structure" dilemma. According to him, invisibility of social structures does not lead to denial of its existence. Firstly, social structures emerge from the space of possibilities and are not directly dependant on material factors. Secondly, invisibility and its acceptance in different areas are parts of science clarification in many areas including quantum physics. The article discuses how quantum physics principles such as particle-wave dualism, superposition and size absoluteness can be useful in social and political studies. This allows us to demonstrate the given hypothesi' potential in research field of social sciences with regard to international relations and world politics.

The article deals with the evolution of constructivist paradigm of international relations. The issue is of utmost importance in terms of the search for theoretical alternatives in the IR thinking. First, we are giving basic introduction of constructivism on the basis of historical and hermeneutical approaches. There is no doubt that the paradigm has faced different theoretical challenges and a lot of critics which has to be addressed. The authors reconsider some constructivist theories and notions in Alexander Wendt's works and the way Wendt tried to reinforce and reassure the constructivist paradigm. This allows us to claim that quantum turn in recent Wendt's work was almost inevitable. Second, the article attempts to answer a question whether the fundamentals of quantum physics are relevant when speaking about social and political processes. At first glance, quantum physics approach has nothing in common with the theory of politics and the theory of international relations. However, there are some grounds to believe that certain problem issues of the political science and IR theory are not deadlocks. In the second part of the article we use the unleashed and underestimated potential of analytical philosophy. To conclude, we believe that today there are more questions than answers but the quantum paradigm is expected to be the important part of the political studies and IR theory as well.