Suchergebnisse

Diplomatic theory is under reconstruction. The process is long overdue. This article singles out possibilities for improved explanations offered by reconstructed diplomatic theory having the sustainability concept as a pivot. The very concept of sustainability proves able to discern diverse diplomatic entrepreneurs and capture the existing realities of diplomatic encounters. It provides understanding of varied diplomatic actions and new structuring patterns of partnership and connectivity in relations among diplomatic entrepreneurs. The raising awareness that sustainability is highly needed guides the changing patterns of diplomatic entrepreneurs' relationships in finding agreements on innovative practices of multilevel governance for creating global goods and preventing and reducing the production of global bads and disservices. The aspects studied here validate the concept of sustainable diplomacy for navigating understanding and explaining the changed global diploscape. ; Diplomatska teorija je u procesu presređivanja. Istina okasneloj. Ovaj rad izdvaja razloge zbog kojih upiranje preuređivanja diplomatske teorije u zamisao održivosti popravlja objašnjavanje stvarnosti raznorodnog diplomatskog preduzetništva, raznolikosti diplomatskog delovanja, partnerstva i spojivosti kao novih obrazaca odnosa današnjih diplomatskih preduzetnika, sve više vođenih svešću o potrebi održivosti prinovljenja praksi sporazumnog upravljanja stvaranjem globalnih dobara i predohranom i otklanjanjem globalnih zala. Ispitane strane pokazuju pronicljivosti zamisli održivosti u razumevanju novih oblika vladavine u izmenjenom globalnom predelu diplomatskog opštenja.

Providing the answer to chosen research question on sustainability of diplomacy today is guided by the leading assumption that state is not the sole owner of diplomacy. Relying on ordered existing construction of theoretically and empirically gathered evidence that from its beginnings diplomacy has belonged to every social person and every society the first part of the analysis is used for summing up the indicators and findings why diplomacy could not be enlisted as one of 'extinct species', nor the state for that matter as one of its territorially sovereign entrepreneur. The account of theoretically produced body of knowledge on conditions of sustainable diplomacy is given in the second part. The focus in the third part is on the ongoing turn in understanding of diplomacy. It is growingly realized that its real lair is every social personality and all human societies (historic and geographic). This lair is now theoretically revisited. There are two most visible cognitive results gained. These are the concepts of social entrepreneurship and social power. Concluding remarks are taken for presenting exemplary diplomatic action of one among several of nowadays agile non-territorial sovereigns who by being entrepreneurial in global governance by agreement makes diplomacy sustainable. In wrapping up not only the finding that under existing conditions new forms of diplomatic action of different civil and commercial society entrepreneurs as non-territorial sovereigns make diplomacy sustainable is underlined, but also that it entails the change in entrenched thinking on organizational structure of assenting governance of global affairs. ; Istraživanje pitanja održivosti diplomatije danas polazno je pretpostavilo da diplomatija nije vlasništvo države. Oslanjanjem na potvrđena znanja da je diplomatija oduvek bila svojina svake društvene ličnosti i svakog društva prvo je preduzeto sabiranje pokazatelja i nalaza zašto se danas diplomatija ne može staviti na listu takozvanih 'neodrživih vrsta', kao što ne može ni država, jedan od njenih teritorijalnih suverenih preduzetnika. Pregled teorijske građe o uslovima održivosti diplomatije saopšten je u drugom delu rada. Treći deo posvećen je vraćanju razumevanja današnje diplomatije u njeno stvarno ležište društvenog preduzetništva i društvene moći. Zaključna razmatranja svode nalaz da novi oblici diplomatskog delovanja različitih preduzetnika građanskog i trgovačkog društva kao neteritorijalnih suverena globalne vladavine ne samo što čine diplomatiju održivom, nego povlače i promenu ukorenjenog mišljenja strukture organizacije sporazumnog upravljanja globalnim poslovima.

Inter-regionalism as a form of effective networking multilateralism comes to be suggested for the task of restructuring a crumbling architecture of global governance unsafe for humankind. Safe for the Commonwealth of Citizens turns to be the global governance of networked global institutions within the multilateral system, raised instead of previous differently power-centred forms of international system (unipolar /hegemonic, bipolar, polycentric multipolar). Assessment of merits and disadvantages of Leaders' Twenty (L20) multilateral initiative proves that inter-regionalism offers the best service for effective restructuring of global governance. Out of cross-cutting agencies of states, civil society networks, and international organizations in inter-regional hubs, as the most reliable producers of effective networking multilateralism, much needed building of global institutions will come and their systemic harnessing safe for humankind will eventually set off. ; Interregionalizam kao oblik delotvornog umrežavajućeg multilateralizma učestalo biva preporučivan za 'sanaciju' oronule arhitekture globalne vladavine koja nije bezbedna za čovečanstvo. Bezbedna za komonvelt građana je globalna vladavina koju daje multilateralni sistem umreženih globalnih ustanova, umesto dosadašnjih različito centriranih međunarodnih sistema (jednopolarni/hegemoni, dvopolni/bipolarni, policentrični/ multipolarni). Ispitivanje dobrih strana i slabosti inicijative Dvadeset predvodnika (P20/L20) potvrđuje interregionalizam kao izlaz za delotvorno restrukturiranje globalne vladavine. Iz ukrštajućeg delatništva i država, i društvenih mreža, i međunarodnih organizacija u interregionalnim čvorištima kao najpouzdanijim proizvođačima delotvornog umrežavajućeg multilateralizma može proisteći neophodno pravljenje globalnih ustanova i njihovo sistemsko sprezanje bezbedno za čovečanstvo.

This paper is about accomplished understanding of the regions as 'a trigger force in the world policy' in 'new' international regionalism. In the article there are presented the results of 'new' international regionalism and there is extracted a key analysis that the complex of theories and directions within the research under that 'name' had established the region as a new 'third' level in the world politics analysis, an important foundation of the global order and real international relations, that is also the object of scientific analysis of the reality of international relations. Firstly, there are presented leading standings of 'new' international regionalism regarding the significance of the region as an object of research. Then the differences between understanding of globalization and regionalism as the trigger of world politics are underlined. For purpose of cognitive effectiveness there are presented the attempts of new regionalism to avoid the trap of division of these indissolubly connected processes. Within the context there are presented the results of theoretical striving of one Buzan and Vaever on one side, and Peter Katzenstein on other side, to observe the world as the world of regions through comprehension of connection between globalism and regionalism, and not disconnection of that one process from the other one. A short review of basic notions of 'new' research of international regions is presented in third part of the article. Final part of the article is dedicated to descriptive illumination of the most important questions of the world politics from the angle of 'new' international regionalism. Conclusion of the article is that the 'new' international regionalism supplies a fresh influx of knowledge to overall international studies on making of modern world politics by establishment of the research of the regions as a specific level within the global governing. ; Rad se bavi ostvarenim razumevanjem regiona kao 'pokretačke sile svetske politike' u 'novom' međunarodnom regionalizmu. ...

Author wrote about the knowledge of the nature and importance of the principles in solving conflicts in the process of mediation, with a retrospective view on a prescriptive theory of international mediation. The author distinguished three types of the mediation, in particular putting accent on the manipulative type of the mediation. The author also made definition of the mediation in the field of diplomatic theory, including important determinants and mediative approaches. ; Autor piše o znanju prirode i važnosti načela rešavanja sukoba u procesu medijacije, s osvrtom na preskriptivnu teoriju međunarodne medijacije. Razlikuje tri tipa medijacije, osvrćući se posebno na manipulativnu medijaciju. Definiše medijaciju u ravni diplomatske teorije, uključujući važne determinante i medijacije pristupe.

Continuity of traditional diplomatic structures between the member states of the European Union treats understanding with contempt. The appropriate response could be made by studying the core reasons and lines of actions of bilateral embassies in the intra EU bilateral diplomacy and dealings of the member state permanent representations in Brussels. Both structures are considered to be properly geared only for modern diplomacy and unsuitable for the post-modern polity, as European Union is more often regarded to be. Bilateralism and bilateral diplomacy are not two profoundly researched topics, least in the EU context. Scarce attempts to link the change in bilateral diplomatic structures within the EU to the changing EU environment have revealed that they differ from modern ones. Empirical enquiries into the intra-European member states bilateral diplomacy are even in shorter supply than theoretical work. Available evidence is pointing into direction of not so structurally different intra-EU bilateral diplomacy from the traditional one. Differences are discernible in functioning and targeting of diplomatic representation in the European Union. Variations from modern modes of bilateral diplomacy prove that developed theorizing would be a worth while effort for making systematic scientific research into bilateral diplomacy in the EU. One of the most recent theories of intra-Union bilateral diplomacy change and adaptation (Bátora, Hocking, 2008) built for this purpose is taken under the scrutiny. Its ample advantages are presented, followed by shortcomings identified, in order to be remedied for enhancing the knowledge on the state component within the emerging diplomatic system of the European Union. . ; Postojanje struktura tradicionalne bilateralne diplomatije među državama članicama evropske integracije postaje saznajni izazov. Pogodno mu se može odgovoriti ispitivanjem sržnih razloga i načina delovanja strukture bilateralne diplomatije kojom se svaka od članica povezuje sa ostalima, kao i kojom je svaka od njih povezana sa Unijom. Smatra se da te dve strukture pripadaju modernoj diplomatiji, ali ne i post-modernoj politici, kako se EU sve češće razume. Ostvarena razmatranja bilateralizma, kao i diplomatskog bilateralizma u EU, delom su nastojala da ga povežu sa izmenom same sredine Unije, i predstave različitim od modernog obrasca. Oskudna istraživanja dala su skromne nalaze. Prikupljeni podaci upućuju na zaključak da se strukturno bilateralna diplomatija u Uniji ne razlikuje od tradicionalne. Razlike se uočavaju u sredini delovanja, kao i funkcijama i ciljevima bilateralnog diplomatskog opštenja država članica. Promene ukazuju na potrebu razvijanja teoretizacije koja bi pomogla sprovođenju sistematičnog naučnog istraživanja bilateralne diplomatije u EU. Jedna takva, nedavno ponuđena teoretizacija (Bátora, Hocking, 2008) podrobno je ispitana. Prikazane su pogodnosti koje pruža, i predočene slabosti koje bi trebalo otkloniti u cilju poboljšanja znanja o unutar državnoj bilateralnoj komponenti oblikujućeg diplomatskog sistema Evropske unije. .

In this text author wrote on diplomatic character of the European Union in the light of European integrations. In the field of international relations it is considered to be an important factor of European diplomacy in solving international disputes in Europe and in the world. ; Autor piše o diplomatskoj ličnosti Evropske unije u svetlu evropskih integracija. Smatra da je u međunarodnim odnosima značajan faktor evropske diplomatije u rešavanju međunarodnih sporova u Evropi i šire.