Suchergebnisse

Hans J. Morgenthau, utemeljitelj realističke teorije međunarodne politike četrdesetih godina 20. stoljeća, donedavno se smatrao pozitivističkim teoretičarom "tvrde" politike moći u međunarodnoj politici. No sve veći akademski interes za njegovo djelo posljednjih godina pokazao je kako je riječ o kompleksnom misliocu koji je ponajprije teoretičar politike. U ovome rada autor prikazuje Morgenthauovu političku teoriju i njezine temeljne pojmove u trima razdobljima njihova razvoja: do Drugoga svjetskog rata, od kraja rata do šezdesetih godina i poslije šezdesetih. Posebno se osvrćući na glavne studije iz svakoga od tih razdoblja, autor nastoji dokazati da je svrha Morgenthauove teorije međunarodne politike bio pokušaj da se politika i političko konstituiraju kao odgovor na duboku društvenu i političku krizu modernog Zapada. Njegova realistička teorija međunarodne politike nije samo akademski pothvat nego i svojevrstan politički projekt. ; Hans J. Morgenthau, who founded realist theory of international politics in the 1940s, has until recently been considered a positivist theorist of crude power politics in international relations. However, in recent years, with rising academic interest for his works, Morgenthau has been seen as a complex thinker and primarily a political theorist. This article aims to show Morgenthau's political theory and its fundamental concepts that run through the three periods of his writing: up to the Second World War, during the post-war period, and in the 1960s. With a special overview of the pivotal studies from each of the above periods, this article will show that the purpose of Morgenthau's theory of international politics is an attempt at constructing politics and the political as an answer to the deep social and political crisis of the modern West. His realist theory of international politics is not just an academic endeavor but also a political project of sorts.

Globalizacija i povećana međunarodna međuovisnost pridonose tomu da se ponovno povećava interes utjecaja strukture međunarodnog sustava na međunarodne odnose. Međunarodni sustav od kraja Hladnog rata neprestano proživljava promjene. One se najviše odlikuju u političkim i sigurnosnim novitetima. U takvim je uvjetima struktura sustava postala glavnom odrednicom ponašanja država koje se, promatrajući ih kroz perspektivu strukturalnog realizma ili neorealizma, ponašaju isključivo u skladu s vlastitim interesima, u uvjetima anarhičnog sustava. S obzirom na geopolitički položaj te veličinu Hrvatskoj je izrazito bitno čvrsto članstvo unutar NATO-saveza i Europske Unije. Kontekst razvoja sigurnosti i obrane time postaje više usmjeren na činjenicu da se zemlje članice saveza obvezuju pomagati jedna drugoj u slučaju pojave ugroze, te se time jača stabilnost nacionalne sigurnosti potrebne da se omoguće dugoročni mir i stabilnost u zemlji, ali i u susjedstvu. Kao središnji i konstantan fenomen u proučavanju međunarodnih odnosa, savezi nastaju jer su vlade svih razvijenih država svjesne da su dio jednog većeg entiteta u međunarodnoj politici u kojoj, prema postavkama neorealističke škole među-narodnih odnosa, postoje prijetnje koje su uzroci stvaranja saveza. ; Globalisation and increased international interdependence have contributed to the fact that once again the interest of the impact on the structure of the international system to international relations is increased. The international system, since the end of the Cold War, is constantly going through changes. They are the most distinguished in political and security innovations. In such circumstances, the structure of the system has become the main determinant of behaviour of states that, looking through the perspective of structural realism or neorealism, act solely pursuing their own interest, in terms of an anarchic system. Given the geopolitical position and size of the country, it is extremely important for Croatia to have a firm membership within the NATO and the European Union. The context of development of security and defence thus becomes more focused on the fact that the member states of the alliance commit to assist each other in case of threats, so the stability of national security needed to enable long-term peace and stability in the country, but also the neighbourhood, is strengthened. As a central and constant phenomenon in the study of international relations, alliances are formed because the governments of all developed countries are aware that they are part of a larger entity in international politics, in which, according to the neorealist school of international relations, there are threats that cause creating alliances.

Thucydides is considered to be the founder of political realism. Even in those times he determined the basic premises of realism - security and survival. He made an impact on subsequent development of realism embodied in the works of Machiavelli, Hobbes, Morgenthau, Car, Niebuhr, Aaron, Waltz etc. They will call the system of international relations as anarchical one since there is no supreme arbitrator which will force states to adequate behaviour. His views of realism were given in the volume 'The Peloponnesian War' where he had determined the anarchy of the relationships among states. Such system did not rely on justice and morale, but force and power were the predominant facts. He also introduces the category of just wars by claiming that Sparta led a just war against the increased power of Athens, and observed morale principles. Nevertheless, Thucydides faces contradictory, since Sparta itself as the largest land force of that time had to use force in order to beat Athens. He went ahead since he considered force and power as a necessary condition to achieve other objectives, which was later on adopted by Raymond Aaron. Following the example of the war between Athens and Sparta, he successfully analysed bipolar system of balance of power in which the conflict between the leading members of the two opposite blocks was possible in the end, while beforehand there should have been conflicts among weaker members of both blocks. Thucydides explained the manifestation of force and power using example of the Melian dialogue between the envoys of Athens and Melos. It was about the pure politics of force of Athens regardless of the fact that Melos had its independence.