Suchergebnisse

Since the end of the Cold War, the United States of America has pursued an offensive foreign policy. In the realities of the 2010s and 2020s, marked by mounting resistance to American global dominance, primarily from Russia and China, there are prerequisites for the adjustment of the U.S. foreign policy strategy. The aim of the article is to identify the underlying causes of offensiveness in U.S. foreign policy of the post–bipolar period based on theoretical constructs of offensive realism and liberalism. Research has shown that offensive realism and offensive liberalism can help understand the offensive nature of U.S. foreign policy after 1991 in their own way and make appropriate projections for the future. Based on the tenets of offensive realism, it can be assumed that the collapse of the Soviet Union and communism have created an enabling environment for maximizing the power of the United States, which Washington could not but leverage. Witnessing the dwindling U.S. power potential, as well as the strengthening of China and Russia in the 2010s – 2020s, Washington has not stopped acting in the logic of offensive realism, but under the Trump and Biden administrations it has definitely began to move towards defensive realism. As the rivals to the US continue to strengthen their capacities, this trend can only intensify. Following the tenets of offensive liberalism, it is possible to assume that after the Cold War, the power of the United States has turned out to be so great in comparison with other great and major powers that Washington has begun to offensively build an American liberal hegemony, letting power rivalry falls by the wayside. However, due to the weakening of the U.S. power potential, as well as the simultaneous rise of China and Russia, it has been forced to begin a transition to a strategy based on offensive and defensive realism under the Trump and Biden administrations. If its rivals continue to rise, the U.S. may turn away from offense altogether.

Политика США на Ближнем Востоке на протяжении десятилетий оказывает серьезное влияние на политическое и экономическое состояние региона. Ближний Восток, в свою очередь, был и остается важным направлением для каждой американской администрации. Действия последних президентов США радикально изменили традиционный американский подход к политике на Ближнем Востоке и, в частности, к палестино-израильскому вопросу более того, эти действия стали импульсом к началу революционных изменений в сложной мозаике ближневосточных противоречий. Ситуация на Ближнем Востоке меняется, выражается это в нормализации отношений между Израилем и такими странами арабского лагеря, как ОАЭ, Бахрейн и Судан. Цель исследования – рассмотреть процесс формирования ближневосточной политики США и подходы к ближневосточной политике различных американских лидеров с целью определения «классического» американского подхода. Для достижения цели необходимо решить следующие задачи: рассмотреть историю американо-израильского сотрудничества и политики США в регионе для определения «традиционных» особенностей американского ближневосточного подхода и подхода к решению палестинской проблемы; изучить некоторые результаты политики американских президентов на ближневосточном направлении и определить, как она вписывается в «классическую» американскую политику. В процессе исследования использованы исторический метод и метод сравнительного анализа. Изменения, произошедшие на Ближнем Востоке за последние 4 года, революционны. Перенос американского посольства в Иерусалим, признание Америкой Голландских высот частью Израиля, заключение мирных соглашений между Израилем и некоторыми арабскими странами на фоне рекордно быстрого израильского строительства на оккупированных палестинских землях – еще вчера все это казалось невозможным, а уже сегодня является неотъемлемой частью реальности на Ближнем Востоке. Наиболее важным трендом остается процесс нормализации отношений между Израилем и арабскими странами.

Autor se bavi odnosima Sjedinjenih Država i Venezuele zaključno sa aktuelnom‎ predsedničkom krizom ne bi li odgovorio na pitanje kako i zašto je Venezuela‎ postala problem za spoljnu politiku SAD koji zahteva pojačanu pažnju‎ i radikalne mere. Analiza ovih odnosa u toku 20. veka pokazuje da su oni zasnovani‎ na naftnoj međuzavisnosti dveju država. Kada je krajem veka višedecenijsko‎ loše upravljanje naftnim bogatstvom u Venezueli izazvalo društvenu‎ i ekonomsku krizu koja je dovela na vlast Huga Cháveza, spremnog da koristi‎ prihode od nafte protiv interesa regionalne hegemonije SAD, ove su Venezuelu‎ označile kao problem. Američki establišment je prema tom problemu nastupio‎ oportunistički – naftna međuzavisnost je sprečavala da sukob eskalira‎ sve dok aktuelna ekonomsko-politička kriza u Venezueli nakon Chávezove‎ smrti nije dala Washingtonu priliku za konačni obračun sa režimom, po cenu‎ privremenog prekida u trgovini naftom. Godinu i po dana od izbijanja predsednička‎ kriza u Venezueli još nije razrešena, jer se čavistički režim održao, a‎ SAD odustale od vojne intervencije, pa autor nastoji da ukaže na perspektive‎ problema i mogućnosti njegovog prevazilaženja nakon što tekuća pandemija‎ korona virusa bude obuzdana.‎ ; The author deals with the United States and Venezuela relations up to the‎ current presidential crisis, in order to answer how and why Venezuela became‎ a problem for U.S. foreign policy which requires increased attention‎ and radical measures. The analysis of these relations during the 20th century‎ shows that they were based on oil interdependence of the two states.‎ When a decades-long mismanagement of oil riches in Venezuela at the end‎ of the century caused a social and economic crisis that brought to power‎ Hugo Chávez, who was ready to use oil revenues against U.S. regional hegemonic‎ interests, it marked Venezuela as a problem. American establishment‎ treated the problem with opportunism – oil interdependence prevented‎ the conflict from escalating until the current economic and political crisis in‎ Venezuela after the death of Chávez gave Washington an opportunity for the‎ final clash with the regime at the price of a temporary break in the oil trade.‎ A year and a half after the presidential crisis in Venezuela erupted, it has not‎ been resolved yet, for the chavista regime remained in place, while the U.S. gave up on military intervention. The author points to the perspectives of the‎ problem and the possibilities of its overcoming once the current coronavirus‎ pandemic gets contained.‎

A recent conspiracy about U.S. troops points to the wider problem of unregulated media in Iraq's polarized political environment.

For the last few years, the German foreign policy has been under constant temptations and substantial reconsideration. The key role in resolving the difficult economic and financial crises in the EU, the development of close economic ties with the Russian and other rising world economic powers, the decision to sustain in the UN Security Council in deciding to authorise the use of force in Libya, as well as the dominant attitude towards the crises in Greece and Kosovo clearly shows the wish of Germany to pursue a more independent foreign policy. In spite of all these efforts and its huge economic power, Germany has failed to become a global political power. Moreover, in order to protect and develop its trade interests Germany must remain within the frameworks of the EU and the NATO. For a long time, Germany has been one of Serbia's most important economic and political partners. Since it is realistic to expect that Germany will be more oriented towards developing its economic ties with the new world economic powers, the Western Balkans and Serbia will not be in the focus of its foreign and economic policies. Therefore, for Serbia, it will be useful to concentrate on the cooperation with the mighty German provinces that have their interests in developing this cooperation. In the future, the Kosovo issues will remain the main obstacle to it.

Раздел - "Международные отношения" ; В настоящее время одним из наиболее острых вопросов, обсуждаемых на международной арене, является проблема отношения государственного суверенитета к моральной ответственности за защиту граждан страны от геноцида, этнических чисток, массовых убийств и последствий гуманитарных катастроф. Представленная статья посвящена концепции «ответственности по защите», являющейся на сегодняшний день наиболее приемлемым и одобренным ООН вариантом разрешения данной проблемы, и ее отражению во внешней политике США как одной из ведущих мировых держав. Стоит отметить, что эта страна не только имеет глобальные интересы, но и располагает всем спектром средств, в том числе военных, для их реализации, что делает взгляды ее руководства на вышеуказанную проблему важными и представляющими определенный интерес. Особое внимание в данной связи уделено анализу операции «Одиссея. Рассвет» как первого в истории примера применения концепции «ответственности по защите» на практике. = Today's one of the most topical questions discussed by the global community is the problem of correlation between state sovereignty and moral responsibility to protect population from genocide, ethnical cleansing, mass atrocities and consequences of humanitarian disasters. This article deals with «the responsibility to protect» concept as today's most acceptable solution of this dilemma, approved by the UN, and its adoption in the U.S. foreign policy. One of the most powerful states in the world, the USA has not only global interests but also a whole range of methods of their pursuit, including the military ones, which makes the position of its leaders towards this concept interesting and important. Special attention is focused on the analysis of the operation «Odyssey Dawn» as the fi rst case in history of «the responsibility to protect» implementation.

The article examines the U.S. foreign policy in the South Caucasus at the present stage. Its main directions and features are highlighted. The article lays down the chronology of bilateral relations in the economic and military fields, as well as the U.S. policy of "democracy promotion" in the region. The current state of relations between the United States and the states of the South Caucasus is analyzed. The focus is on the policy of the Donald Trump administration in the region, as well as on the prospects of its implementation under the new Joe Biden administration. ; В статье рассматривается внешняя политика США в Закавказье на современном этапе. Выделяются ее основные направления и особенности. Приводится краткая хронология развития отношений в экономической и военной областях, реализации американцами политики «продвижения демократии» в регионе. Анализируется состояние двусторонних отношений США с закавказскими странами в настоящее время. Акцент делается на шагах администрации Д. Трампа в регионе, а также на перспективах закавказской внешнеполитической повестки новой администрации Дж. Байдена.

Currently, social networks are increasingly being used as an effective medium for public diplomacy. The article is devoted to the consideration of the phenomenon of Twitter diplomacy and its role in the foreign policy of most countries of the world. The events of recent years show that Twitter has not only become a new tool in diplomatic activity, but also changed the way the diplomatic processes themselves are perceived. Diplomats and world political leaders have begun to understand the benefits of some of Twitter's services and capabilities to maintain the most favorable relationships in a networked public space. Thanks to Twitter, the relationship between social networks and diplomacy began to transform into a dynamically developing modern phenomenon, showing that social networks can play both negative (Twitter revolutions, social instability, the formation of negative public opinion, etc.), and a positive important role in building favorable relations and ensuring peace between peoples. Therefore, Twitter today remains the most popular social network for world political leaders and foreign ministries of several countries.

The article explains that political propaganda verbalized by America's leaders is the most illustrative example of the rhetoric of double standards, hypocrisy and lies. American policy is based on its legitimizing rhetoric. Irresponsibility and treachery are characteristics of American rhetoric and policy. The author gives a lot of examples of American propagandists' ideologems and U.S. actions on the world stage, proving this thesis. Both geopolitical and economic events are described. The author examines U.S. foreign policy towards Russia, Iraq, Syria, Georgia and Ukraine. ; В статье обосновывается, что вербализуемая американскими лидерами политическая пропаганда выступает наиболее наглядным образцом риторики двойных стандартов, лицемерия и лжи. Американская политика опирается на эту легитимирующую ее риторику. Безответственность и вероломство — характерные черты американской риторики и политики. Автором приведено достаточно много примеров высказанных американскими пропагандистами идеологем и действий США на мировой арене, доказывающих этот тезис. Описаны как геополитические, так и экономические случаи. Анализируется внешняя политика США по отношению к России, Ираку, Сирии, Грузии и Украине.

The article presents a brief overview of India-U.S. relations during the period of Narendra Modi's government and Barack Obama's administration. The author analyzes the dynamics of cooperation development after the victory of Bharatiya Janata Party in the 2014 Parliamentary elections in India and studies the key directions of bilateral agenda. The current condition of India-U.S. strategic dialogue and the influence of human rights issues on the countries' cooperation are characterized.

Since 2014 the states' cooperation has been growing rapidly. The bilateral investment, trade and economic interdependence have significantly increased. Some experts and mass media note that Barack Obama and Narendra Modi are having friendly relations. From a different angle, a number of agreements between countries still remain unaccomplished. For instance, the U.S. support for India's permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, its accession to APEC and the implementation of nuclear deal have yet to be turned into achievement.

Together with strengthening the bilateral strategic dialogue, the U.S. has intensified the criticism of India's human rights record. The main part of it includes the cases of religious intolerance, which are observed in the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom reports and the remarks given by U.S. lawmakers and official representatives, including the Ambassador to India. Washington's careful attention to the human rights issues and religious violence in particular is one of the major irritants in the U.S.-India relations.

The engagement of Indian Americans in the local U.S. politics and their lobbying efforts in the context of U.S.-India relations are revealed. The author outlines the near-terms perspectives of bilateral cooperation.

We strive to show the direction of the Georgian foreign policy, which is fully oriented towards European integration and economic development. The focus of Georgia's foreign policy is shifting to the EU region. European integration into the economic and political space is the main direction of Georgia's development. Today, integration processes between Georgia and the European Union are going on in such areas as economy, politics, and security. The undoubted political significance of rapprochement with the EU is connected, first of all, with Georgia's concern for security. Development in a peaceful and stable environment is not only the national interest of Georgia, but also the priority of the entire civilized world. In this regard, the coincidence of interests of Georgia and the Western world is obvious. Georgia's cooperation with the European Union began in the 1990s. The first official agreement signed in 1992 with the EU and regulating the priority areas of cooperation was the 1999 Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. Georgia adopted the European Neighborhood Policy Action Plan in 2006, the Eastern Partnership Communiqué was signed in 2008 and the Mobility Partnership Joint Declaration was signed in 2009. The Association Agreement signed in 2014 is an important milestone for Georgia on the path to EU integration. The agreement is basically an action plan for the modernization of the country, it provides for the strengthening of democratic institutions and the promotion of economic growth.