Search results

The article investigates the formal models as a method of analysis in international studies. The importance of this type of models in writing articles for world leading high-ranking journals from Scopus list is shown. The author reveals the main challenges of interdisciplinary synthesis related to the construction of formal models. The problem of identifying the actors of international relations is revealed, including the assessment of actor's involvement in a concrete international conflict (or process) in the context of the concepts of defensive and offensive realism, as well as of real and of latent (potential) power. The decrease in the influence of the state as the primary actor in international relations, and the increase of influence of new types of actors are shown, including international terrorist networks (led by IS), political parties, media and NGOs in the context of post-modernism, global business structures. At the national level, the main actors are illustrated both by the example of countries with a developed civil society and a market economy, and by that of the traditional non-Western society. The question of levels of analysis in international relations, as well as agent-structure problem are illustrated by concrete cases from modern international relations. The author describes a model of "nested" politics. The main types of models used in international studies (game theoretic, econometric, network analysis, simulation) are indicated as well as their shortcomings. Two kinds of simulation models - system dynamics and agent-based modeling are described. It is noted that the agent-based modeling is carried out mainly in the framework of the constructivist paradigm of international relations theory.

The article provides an overview of international and Russian literature on the genesis and development of System Research in IR studies, demonstrates the emergence of System Research in Russia and in the world, the development of the general theory of systems. It is shown that at the fi rst stage, the representatives of natural sciences tried to identify the isomorphism between the international relations system and other systems (biological, physical). In this context, the attempts to form a general theory of international confl ict could be viewed. It is noted that at the beginning of the 1970s, these attempts ended unsuccessfully in general. The second area of international relations system modeling is related to the work of structural realists, primarily K. Waltz and M. Kaplan. Despite the fact that in their papers the verbal analysis dominates over the formal international relations system model, they have madea signifi cant contribution to the political science in perception of the systems theory. The paper also describes the system modeling in the context of the Neo-Marxist theory of international relations, fi rst and foremost, in the meaning of the I. Wallerstein's world-system theory. Special attention is paid to the systemic research crisis in the IR science at the turn of 1980-1990s, also due to a sharp change in the international situation, and the transition from a predominantly deterministic world of the Cold War to the post-bipolar non-equilibrium international system. The authors clearly reveal the evolution of the international relations perception in terms of the systems theory. They also illustrate the intensifi cation of the international system modeling in the XXIst century on the basis of a new methodology - via the use of the more sophisticated complexity theory (the theory of complex systems), as well as by adapting the sociological theory of structuration by A. Giddens in political sciences. Showing the most promising areas of the complexity theory practical application in the modeling of international relations - agentbased modeling and simulation of system dynamics, - the authors enumerate the most promising spheres for the system modeling in international studies.

Раздел I «Актуальные проблемы международного публичного права» ; Настоящая статья посвящена вопросам демократии в современной западной международно-правовой доктрине. В первой части статьи предлагается обзор международно-правовых теорий демократии, вторая часть посвящена взглядам на роль международного гражданского общества в решении проблемы демократического дефицита на международном уровне, в третьей части освещены исследования международного правления. = Present article analyzes the issues of democracy in contemporary Western international law doctrine. Firstly the theories of democracy in international law are discussed, than presented are views on the role of international civil society in the elimination of the democratic deficit at the international level and finally international governance studies are briefed.

One of the achievements of the reflectivist turn in international relations theory in the late 20th century was the attention given to the role of discourse and other ideational factors in international politics. In recent years, however, approaches critical of the discursive emphasis in international studies have emerged, seeking to restore the significance of non-discursive aspects of international relations such as geography, technology, and the non-human. This article offers a perspective on the development of international relations theory from the standpoint of the debate between materialism and idealism. Within this framework, it provides a brief overview of the historical evolution of international relations theory and subsequently delves into a detailed analysis of three strands of the new wave of materialist theorizing in the field - critical realism, new materialism, and neoclassical geopolitics. The article suggests considering the new materialist wave as, on the whole, a positive development, but also points out the necessity of taking into account the risk of "exiling" the human element from international relations research as such concepts proliferate. The possibility of collaboration between reflecivists and post-reflecivists, as well as between idealists and materialists in general, is underlined for the comprehensive study of contemporary international realities.

This article assesses the impact of sovereign countries in global financial governance. It uses the methodology of international political economy that studies the interaction between political and economic processes in the international arena. It shows the dualistic nature of international financial institutions, which, on the one hand, represent intergovernmental organizations and, on the other hand, are financial institutions with financial goals. The author investigates the principles of sovereign equality, equitable geographical representation and equal (parity) representation of groups of countries with distinct interests in the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Group of 20 (G20) and Financial Stability Board (FSB). The IMF's decision-making mechanism is shown in detail, including its executive board and the recent redistribution of quotas among member states, with special attention on the formula for calculating quotas, its criticism and possible reform. The article shows the major causes of reducing the impact of the IMF and the formation of a new, globally distributed system of financial governance. The article shows the hierarchy (by function as well as by country representativeness) of the system of global financial governance, established by 2010. It discusses the leadership of countries according to quantity and to key indicators (revenues, assets and market capitalization) of global systemically important financial institutions (banks and insurance company). Based on countries' membership in the G7 and the G20, the FSB, IMF, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, and Bank for International Settlements countries are designated as at the core, semi-periphery or periphery of the international financial system in the context of the world systems theory. The influence of the technical elite, prevailing in the international financial sector, as well as the qualitative composition (education) of its members are revealed. The article concludes that there is significant polarization in the international financial system (core and the socalled marginal majority). Unlike the IMF, the newly created global financial institutions of the G20 and FSB fully comply with the principles of equitable geographical representation and parity representation of states with distinct interests.