The article aims to present the current situation in Ukraine through international relations theory that is able to provide the necessary theoretical background to analyse the complex problems that unfold in the contemporary international environment. These problems are analysed through several perspectives including realist, postmodern and socialconstructivist dimensions, as well as from the point of view of classical institutionalism. What is more, on the basis of their deliberations, the authors describe several possible scenarios of the future events, including the strategy of Russia to continue destabilization in Ukraine in order to seize control over its entire territory and the long-term effects of international sanctions on the Russian economy with the possibility of the collapse of the aggressor state. Nonetheless, the Crimean crisis reveals an important fact that, according to the authors, has deep ramifications for the entire international security system – at present, the international community is not able to exert influence on any of the nuclear powers through military means. While other, non-military means of influence can be used, such as broad economic sanctions or political isolation of an aggressor-state, they are not effective immediately thus allowing the aggressor states to violate international law with a feeling of impunity and invincibility.
The article aims to present the current situation in Ukraine through international relations theory that is able to provide the necessary theoretical background to analyse the complex problems that unfold in the contemporary international environment. These problems are analysed through several perspectives including realist, postmodern and socialconstructivist dimensions, as well as from the point of view of classical institutionalism. What is more, on the basis of their deliberations, the authors describe several possible scenarios of the future events, including the strategy of Russia to continue destabilization in Ukraine in order to seize control over its entire territory and the long-term effects of international sanctions on the Russian economy with the possibility of the collapse of the aggressor state. Nonetheless, the Crimean crisis reveals an important fact that, according to the authors, has deep ramifications for the entire international security system – at present, the international community is not able to exert influence on any of the nuclear powers through military means. While other, non-military means of influence can be used, such as broad economic sanctions or political isolation of an aggressor-state, they are not effective immediately thus allowing the aggressor states to violate international law with a feeling of impunity and invincibility.
The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisciplinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplomacy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment.Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as actors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda. ; The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisciplinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplomacy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment.Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as actors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda.
Celem tekstu jest wskazanie na nową dyplomacją publiczną jako na obszar badawczy, który wymaga podejścia interdyscyplinarnego. Na obecnym etapie rozwoju tej dyscypliny dominują podejścia badawcze i narzędzia zaczerpnięte z nauki o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Autorka postuluje włączenie podstawowych paradygmatów badań nad komunikacją polityczną do analizy nowej dyplomacji publicznej. Na razie jednak nie można wskazać takiego podejścia badawczego, które wychodziłoby poza prostą sumę metod stosowanych w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych i badaniach nad komunikacja polityczną. Na potrzeby artykułu dyplomacja publiczna została zdefiniowana jako symetryczna forma międzynarodowej komunikacji politycznej, której celem jest wspieranie osiągnięcia celów państwa za granicą poprzez wpływanie na opinię publiczną. Współcześnie dyplomację publiczna określa się jako "nową", aby odróżnić ją od dyplomacji publicznej Stanów Zjednoczonych, uprawianą przed 1999 r. oraz wskazać na dostosowanie tej formy komunikacji politycznej do procesów globalizacji, w tym do rosnącego znaczenia aktorów niepaństwowych w stosunkach międzynarodowych. W tym ujęciu dyplomacja publiczna nie jest tożsama z propagandą. ; The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisci - plinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplo - macy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment. Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as ac - tors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda
International relations are a form of human action so they should become the object of praxiology as a science oriented to efficiency. The traditional approach however must be changed. As it suggested in this article, human action is divided into three sections – cooperation, struggling and rivalry, which correspond to three types of theories. It should be added that cooperation is a positive-sum game, struggling – a negative-sum game and rivalry – a zero-sum game. The theory of international relations should be focused on the link between principles of cooperation and principles of struggling. This means that theory of foreign policy should be a theory of control in the zero-sum game system. ; International relations are a form of human action so they should become the object of praxiology as a science oriented to efficiency. The traditional approach however must be changed. As it suggested in this article, human action is divided into three sections – cooperation, struggling and rivalry, which correspond to three types of theories. It should be added that cooperation is a positive-sum game, struggling – a negative-sum game and rivalry – a zero-sum game. The theory of international relations should be focused on the link between principles of cooperation and principles of struggling. This means that theory of foreign policy should be a theory of control in the zero-sum game system.
Stosunki międzynarodowe są postacią działania ludzi, dlatego powinny stać się obiektem zainteresowania prakseologii jako nauki nastawionej na sprawność działania. Dotychczasowe rozumienie sprawności musi być jednak odmienne od tradycyjnego. Zgodnie z propozycją zawartą w artykule, ludzkie działanie dzieli się na trzy działy – współpracę, walkę oraz rywalizację , którym odpowiadają trzy rodzaje teorii. Charakterystyczne jest to, że współpraca jest grą o sumie dodatniej, walka – grą o sumie ujemnej, natomiast rywalizacja – grą o sumie zerowej. Teoria stosunków międzynarodowych powinna skupiać się na teorii rywalizacji, rozpostartej pomiędzy współpracą a walką. Oznacza to, że teoria stosunków międzynarodowych powinna opierać się na zasadach współpracy i zasadach walki, a teoria polityki międzynarodowej państwa powinna być teorią sterowania w systemie gry o sumie zerowej. ; International relations are a form of human action so they should become the object of praxiology as a science oriented to efficiency. The traditional approach however must be changed. As it suggested in this article, human action is divided into three sections – cooperation, struggling and rivalry, which correspond to three types of theories. It should be added that cooperation is a positive-sum game, struggling – a negative-sum game and rivalry – a zero-sum game. The theory of international relations should be focused on the link between principles of co- operation and principles of struggling. This means that theory of foreign policy should be a theory of control in the zero-sum game system.
The object of research is the trust problem in the relations of the East and the West. The author in detail analyzes the phenomenon of trust, its principles and distinctive signs. Special attention is paid to conditions of formation of trust as on micro (between individuals) and at the macro level (between societies). The author connects the trust problem with a categorization "friend-or-foe", considered in the civilization aspect of the subject. Thus, the author in the research used the case study method and content analysis. The novelty of research consists in approach to understanding intensity between civilizations of the East and the West through a problem of the possibility of confidential relations between them. The author comes to a conclusion that in the modern international relations there is a paradoxical situation: the trust measure between the countries decreases, in volume time as it is possible to cope with new calls and threats only through consolidation of the world community on the basis of mutual trust.
The object of research is the trust problem in the relations of the East and the West. The author in detail analyzes the phenomenon of trust, its principles and distinctive signs. Special attention is paid to conditions of formation of trust as on micro (between individuals) and at the macro level (between societies). The author connects the trust problem with a categorization "friend-or-foe", considered in the civilization aspect of the subject. Thus, the author in the research used the case study method and content analysis. The novelty of research consists in approach to understanding intensity between civilizations of the East and the West through a problem of the possibility of confidential relations between them. The author comes to a conclusion that in the modern international relations there is a paradoxical situation: the trust measure between the countries decreases, in volume time as it is possible to cope with new calls and threats only through consolidation of the world community on the basis of mutual trust.
The author distinguishes threats to international security from challenges faced by the security policy of states and collective international actors but approaches them as a certain continuum. The following phenomena are considered threats and challenges in the second decade of the 21st century: military threats (nuclear weapons and their proliferation, conventional weapons and huge military spending), terrorism, other threats (cybernetic, economic and energy-related, ecological), as well as the migration challenge. A separate major challenge, which the author analyses in detail, is the reconfiguration of the international order that has been taking place for more than a decade now. The author believes that this reconfiguration constitutes a serious challenge to the West, including to its security policy. In order to take up this challenge, benefit from it and prevent the emergence of new threats to international security, the West needs to not only consolidate its security system but also engage in dialogue and cooperation with the emerging competitors and rivals challenging the West's global leadership (the emerging powers from BRICS), as the American political scientist Charles Kupchan proposed in 2010, emphasising that lasting peace can be achieved by turning enemies into friends. It is, however, uncertain what kind of foreign policy will be conducted by the new US President, Donald Trump, elected in November 2016.
The task of the article is a comparison of theoretical findings of the conception of the international economic cooperation of the CMEA member states with the premises of their economic policies in this scope and with the previous course of integrational processes in the CMEA group. In the first part of the study, three basic theoretical concepts of economic cooperation are presented which can be related to differing views of economists on the part played by planning and international market in the socialist economy. In the second part of the study a system of the international economic cooperation adopted in the premises of the economic policies of the CMEA member states is analyzed. The author's attention is focused mainly on those elements of the international cooperation system which are compromising opposing pursuits of the particular member states of securing themselves most favorable conditions for balancing necessary means with needs stated autonomously in the national plans of economic developement. The third part of the study is devoted to the analysis of features of functioning of the present system of international cooperation of the CMEA states. The actual distribution of competence and roles in the system of relations between various levels of domestic and international institutions and organizations are characterized. The scope of implementation of resolutions and recommendations of the CMEA on the developement of the international specialization and productional cooperation is evaluated. The excessive build up of the consulting and negociating activities almost on all the levels of economic organizations of the member states and of the CMEA organs is also indicated. The identification and analysis of structure of interdependence of economic interests in the sphere of realization of international economic cooperation in the CMEA are performed. Particularly, following groups of interests can be singled out: Party and government governing bodies, central economic administration, productional and trade enterprises, international organs of the CMEA. In the final remarks factors diminishing the ability to control a mechanism of the international cooperation are presented, this can well account for the lack of developement in real integrational ties and related organizational structures in the system of cooperation of the CMEA states. ; Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016
Publications in western specialized journals which describe the Russian Federation's international behavior have always followed a certain paradigm of international relations. The article is an analysis of opinions and beliefs held by commentators and analysts writing for "Foreign Affairs", based on their publications about the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation on march 2014. They have been scrutinized using three predominant theories of international relations: realism, liberalism and constructivism. The research proved that western commentators and analysts writing about the annexation of Crimea usually present a single paradigm of international relations. Moreover, they believe it to be the only effective tool in explaining countries' foreign policy, thereby depreciating the value and usefulness of other paradigms. ; Publikacje w zachodniej prasie specjalistycznej dotyczące zachowań międzynarodowych Federacji Rosyjskiej od zawsze wpisują się w jakiś konkretny paradygmat stosunków międzynarodowych. Artykuł jest analizą opinii i poglądów prezentowanych przez komentatorów i analityków publikujących na łamach "Foreign Affairs", przeprowadzoną na podstawie ich publikacji dotyczących aneksji Krymu przez Federację Rosyjską w marcu 2014 r. Przeanalizowano je przez pryzmat trzech teorii stosunków międzynarodowych głównego nurtu, tj. realizmu, liberalizmu i konstruktywizmu. W wyniku badań uzyskano potwierdzenie opinii, iż zachodni komentatorzy i analitycy zazwyczaj wyraźnie prezentują wybrany paradygmat stosunków międzynarodowych, pisząc o aneksji Krymu. Ponadto uznają, iż jest on jedynym skutecznym narzędziem wyjaśniania polityki zagranicznej państw, a tym samym deprecjonują znaczenie i przydatność pozostałych paradygmatów.
Europe/the European Union, with its obvious trump cards, should be an active and efficient player on the international arena. Such are the expectations of the United States, formulated especially by the administration of Barack Obama. However, from the American perspective, the EU has not proved successful as an important international actor, engaged in resolving global problems and prepared to assume greater responsibility for the course of events in the world. This inertia of the EU resulted in the marginalisation of Europe in American politics, as manifested by the latter's pivot to the Pacific Rim. It was only after the developments in the Ukraine, which resulted from Russia's imperial tendencies, that a greater activity and coherence in American and European politics was triggered, having a positive influence also on transatlantic relations. ; Europe/the European Union, with its obvious trump cards, should be an active and efficient player on the international arena. Such are the expectations of the United States, formulated especially by the administration of Barack Obama. However, from the American perspective, the EU has not proved successful as an important international actor, engaged in resolving global problems and prepared to assume greater responsibility for the course of events in the world. This inertia of the EU resulted in the marginalisation of Europe in American politics, as manifested by the latter's pivot to the Pacific Rim. It was only after the developments in the Ukraine, which resulted from Russia's imperial tendencies, that a greater activity and coherence in American and European politics was triggered, having a positive influence also on transatlantic relations.
Mimo ścisłych związków między technologią i stosunkami międzynarodowymi istnieje niewiele prac w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych, które podejmują próbę teoretycznego połączenia obu tych sfer rzeczywistości społecznej. Podstawowym celem artykułu jest historyzacja technologii militarnej w społecznej historii stosunków międzynarodowych. Autor przedstawia proces historycznego wzrostu znaczenia technologii militarnej w funkcjonowaniu społeczeństw i jej destruktywny wpływ na życie społeczne. Przekonuje, że nowe technologie rozwinaje są przez istoty ludzkie, a nie "odkrywane". Dokonane wynalazki odzwierciedlają określone interesy, posiadanie adekwatnych zasobów do ich dokonania i istnienie określonego instytucjonalnego wsparcia. W takim rozumieniu nauka, technologia i innowacje są funkcją ludzkich wyborów, interesów, idei, instytucji i zasobów. ; Despite close connections between technology and international relations, there are few works in international relations studies that would make an attempt to theoretically connect both of these two spheres of social reality.The main aim of the article is a historization of military technology in a social history of international relations. The author presents the process of historical growth of importance of military technology in functioning of societies and its destructive influence on social life. He convinces one that new technologies are developed, not "discovered" by human beings. Inventions reflect specific interests, owning proper resources to develop them and the existence of determined institutional support. In this understanding, science, technology and innovations are functions of human choices, interests, ideas, institutions and resources.In the first part of the article, the author presents relations between science, technology and innovations, as well as main attitudes in international relations studies in the context of comprehending these relations. Problems caused by technological development are also discussed. In the second part of the article, the author presents the meaning of military technology in international relations through its historization. By showing different contexts of "war machines" (horse, chariot, cavalry, cannons, conventional and nuclear weapon, information technology),one can observe the influence of military technology on international relations in the process of uneven and related development of different societies in different times from antiquity to the present day. In particular, the results of transformation of relations between armed forces and scientific institutions after World War II into permanent structures of society and government are shown. On the example of United States of America, the author points negative consequences of forming bureaucratic national security services for many aspects of social life. Finally, referring to James Der Derian's analysis, the author presents transformative influence of information technology on international relations.
