Suchergebnisse

Climate politics forms a subsystem of world politics. In this subsystem, states are differentiated by their ambitions to decarbonize their economies. These ambitions proceed from national policies and the nationally determined contributions (NDC) submitted by states in accordance with the Paris Agreement. Based on states' climate ambitions, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) produce multiple reports ranking states and evaluating their contributions. The main parameter of state differentiation by climate ambition is the expected year of achieving carbon neutrality. In 2019–20, the UK and the European Union (EU) promoted this parameter with the Green Deal, and eventually other metrics were overshadowed. The previously used climate parameters and rankings based on them were contradictory and depended heavily on the chosen methodology. Apart from being untrustworthy, they put some western countries in unfavourable positions. N. Luhmann's new systems theory identifying "carbon neutrality" is taken as the main code of the climate communication subsystem that differentiates the climate subsystem of world politics from other functional subsystems. In this review article, how the emerging code of carbon neutrality is used by states and international organizations to form a new hierarchy in international relations is examined. Various constructivist and normative theories, from Foucault's poststructuralism to the historicism and normativity of the English School, are applied in order to capture the possible implications of the political use of carbon neutrality for international relations. The article concludes with a discussion of the potential prospects of climate politics hierarchization for power redistribution in international relations.

In November 2021, Russia and the United States submitted a draft joint resolution on international information security to the UNGA First Committee, which was a significant victory for Russian diplomacy in the formation of an international information security regime. For a long time, Russian-American relations in the field of international information security have been developing on the basis of a confrontational model, while these two states are the most active actors in the global information sphere. The general trends in the formation of an international information security regime depend on the nature of relations between countries. The article presents a historical analysis of cooperation between Moscow and Washington in the digital environment and assesses the impact of the historical experience of interaction on the prospects for the development of bilateral cooperation in the field of international information security. Methodologically, the authors base the research from the theory of defensive realism, according to which the factor of perception of the priority of threats to international information security is an important factor in bilateral interaction. The more significant threats are perceived from the point of view of national security, the more likely is the development and deepening of international cooperation aimed at shaping the rules of conduct in this area. The article examines the evolution of threats to international information security in historical retrospect. Based on the perception of the priority of threats, the evolution of the formats of bilateral interaction in the field of international information security is shown. It has been proved that the perception of the priority of threats in the field of international information security contributes to the development and deepening of bilateral cooperation, which in the future can develop into a full-fledged regime of international information security, based on the rules of responsible behavior of states in the global information space.

French foreign policy discourse during the presidency of E. Macron was often based on the idea of multilateralism as pillar of the international order. Nevertheless, the motives that governed the French approach were far from idealist. The purpose of this article is to analyze the relationship between the rhetoric of multilateralism and the practice of the Fifth Republic's policy in Sub-Saharan Africa in 2017–21. Conclusions are drawn from the documents of the French ministries, texts of French laws and the speeches of the president. The analysis proceeds by exploring the evolution of Paris' approach to the three main "pillars" of its African policy: the French military presence, the influence on the Western and Central African countries' financial system (the former CFA franc), and, finally, French aid to development. In his policy toward Sub-Saharan Africa, Macron showed a clear intention to modernize the practices of the past and to inject more multilateralism into them. The French president wanted to strengthen European and global dimensions of the relations between the Fifth Republic and Africa; he aimed to put these relations into a broader framework, including European Union (EU), the United Nations (UN), the African Union, and other international organizations and fora. Macron also pursued the reform of the CFA franc, which gave more authority to the Western African countries themselves. He validated the evolution in the sphere of aid to development, which resulted in more convergence between the French methods and the international recommendations, though at the same time Paris persisted in its preference for bilateral mechanisms of aid. In general, the emphasis put on multilateralism was a French method to maximize the benefits from its African policy and to minimize its costs.

Moscow-Ankara relations have been experiencing an unprecedented level of partnership simultaneously with a plethora of disputes between the actors. They have managed to continue cooperation without letting the emerging disagreements cause crises similar to the Su-24 Jet incident of 2015. This study examines Russian-Turkish relations since 2016 to expose how this alignment emerged and how the two actors operate in this partnership. After reviewing the literature that highlights the limitations and fragility of the cooperation, the authors shed light on the ideational convergence that allowed the alignment, arguing that it served as the basis of the current pragmatist and personalistic relations. Moreover, four main characteristics of this alignment are explained: 1) risk-aversion as the priority; 2) reliance on personalistic relations between the leaders; 3) focus on resolving issues among themselves instead of including non-regional actors; 4) economic pragmatism. Then, the risks that can potentially cause a collapse of this partnership are discussed, emphasizing the danger caused by the accumulation of unresolved disputes and political uncertainties in bilateral relations. Authors argue that under the current conditions, the partnership is fragile and will be tested by the upcoming challenges

The article explores the possibilities of realizing the benefits of the fourth industrial revolution for the develop-ment of the economy and society based on the newest technological paradigm. It is shown that the mecha-nisms of self-development of man-made systems are associated with the need to identify the main factors that predetermine the formation of the technological paradigm of material production and the formation of a new structure of the economic system on its basis. Taking into account statistical data and expert opinions, it is re-vealed that in modern conditions there are no such fundamental and global characteristics of the fourth indus-trial revolution and technological advantages that would be expressed in their use by all countries and socio-economic systems. Particular attention is paid to the organization of intersystem interaction within the country: between the technological system, the economy and society. Contradictions between theoretical prerequisites for the development of economic systems based on the technological paradigm of the fourth industrial revolu-tion and real assessments of macroeconomic indicators are highlighted. Conclusion dwells upon the fact that there is a high degree of uncertainty of the future for modern economic systems.