Suchergebnisse

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 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 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.

This study aims to explore the concept of authoritarianism, which – presented in terms of the "wicked problem" of the contemporary world – seems to be a severe challenge to present-day International Relations (IR), both in theoretical and practical dimensions. The author of the article defines the concept of authoritarianism as a form of the political system in which the power and material resources of the state have been centralized, appropriated, and put at the disposal of either an individual or an elitist group "in power." In this way, the possibilities of integrating the authoritarian state – both in the political and economic dimension – with the global system of international relations are limited, and the vital administrative institutions of the state have been manipulated and appropriated. The applied research method allows for interpreting the discussed issues in a complex – albeit specific – systemic form, characteristic not only for politically fragile or declining countries and regions but also for politically stable and economically developed ones. The author's analysis allows for the presentation and reinterpretation of the issue of contemporary authoritarian regimes concerning international relations in terms that not only define but often legitimize – and repeatedly even validate – some of the most despotic, autocratic, and hegemonistic forms of the political systems in modern times.

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

The aim of the paper is the analysis of the relationship between the perception of the success factors in international collaborative relationships and firm's international experience. The results of an empirical study on the sample of 278 Polish exporters and importers cooperating with partners from China and Germany are presented and both the differences in success factor perception depending on foreign partners' home country, and the correlation of the perception of the success factors with the international experience of the firms are discussed. The study revealed that the firms working with partners in China have somewhat more international experience. The importance of the majority of the success factors in relationships with German partners did not differ significantly from those in collaboration with Chinese firms. However, some consequential differences were observed. Internationalization experience is not strongly related with the perception of international cooperation success factors.

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 aim of this work is to present the role of Poland in the system of international relations governed by the principles of (neo) liberalism, mainly in the context of crisis phenomena taking place in the West. The hypothesis of this article is as follows: the downturn in Western liberal structures may lead to the modification of the functions and legal and economic system of the Polish state, undermining the principles and rules of liberal democracy applicable there. The turbulence to which the liberal structures of the West are subject may be problematic for those states that have identified their longterm interests with the phenomena of globalization/liberalization and do not have their own strategies of action and more autonomous tools to achieve national goals. Should the western zone weaken, there may be a possibility not only of a geopolitical transformation but also of significant political and economic transformations in countries like Poland. The state may fall into the zone of influence of the new center in a geographical or functional sense, which will impose a different civilization model, based on alternative economic principles and institutional solutions, violating the rights of individuals, minorities, and private businesses. The compulsion to adapt to the new rules that will emerge as a consequence of lowering the role of liberal institutions, the foundations of which are not yet known, may lead to a reduction in the level of protection of citizens and capital in the region. The work includes comments on the functioning of the (neo) liberal system of international relations, the socio-political transformation of Central and Eastern European countries, and Polish internal/foreign policy in the face of the crisis in the Western zone. ; W artykule podjęto próbę przedstawienia roli Polski w systemie stosunków międzynarodowych regulowanym zasadami (neo)liberalizmu, głównie w kontekście zjawisk kryzysowych rozgrywających się na Zachodzie. Postawiono następującą hipotezę: dekoniunktura zachodnich ...

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.