World System's Transformation in the 2000s

       On the verge of the second decade of the XXI century, time has come to assess the changes in the world in the 2000s, which are considered the last phase in the period of evolution of the international system that started with the erosion and eventual dismantlement of the bipolar confrontation regime. The nascent system naturally lacks legibility, stability and conceptual organization, however it is appropriate to identify it as multipolar. The transitional period finale is always marked by the shaping of solid supporting axes for the new global order, but it does not presuppose the ultimate completion of the structural transformation of the system. Traditional challenges to the world stability gain new facets and new meanings, as the composition and design of the global system continues to evolve. The ever intensifying globalization pushes increasingly more actors towards a proactive international stance, thus provoking new economic conflicts, which seem to top the global agenda. In the years after the end of the Cold War, the nature of security issues has transformed – the reduction in nuclear weapons became marginal, while the problems of proliferation became much more acute and pressing, with transnational criminal groups and terrorist organizations becoming more active in the field. The trend to trivialize the sovereignty hasn’t yet been compensated by a functional approach to legitimate intervention in domestic affairs of the states, while poverty, hunger, natural disasters and climate change consequences have not become prerogative of an accountable global task force. Thus, new features of the emerging global political system necessitate intensification of collective action and predetermine the future model of international interaction.

International Rivalry in Common Spaces

       The termination of the recent Balkan Wars towards the late 1990s marked an ending of probably the last round of map redrawing, at any rate in Europe. The major wars of the 2000s in Iraq and Afghanistan were not directly associated with grabbing new territories, which therefore supports the formerly made presumption. There obviously seems to be a strong belief inculcated in the minds of diplomats and politicians that any further round of map redrawing is bound to involve a high intensity armed conflict or other emergency situations of a veritably global magnitude. This has basically constituted the backdrop against which we have seen a clearly rising interest in privatising what is referred to as common spaces, that is World Ocean, airspace, outer space, information space, and polar regions. These spaces are seen by the world's leading nations as 'not yet distributed' and in a sense they indeed should be treated as such. The rivalry for common spaces reflects a fundamental shift in the global security environment. The appreciation of space per se has gone far beyond the XIXth century style geopolitics. On top of its physical and geographical dimensions, it has come to take on a number of new aspects: flows of information, communicative and public opinion shaping tools, etc. Apart from that, it has transcended the late XXth centrury geoeconomic notions. Hence, an increased interest in classical geopolitical concepts. Meanwhile, the soaring number of multiple shared spaces is giving birth to new disguises of interstate or even transnational disputes.

Governing Global Information Space

       In the globalized world of the 21st century, information management has become an indispensable tool for social engineers. New political and social realities are being constructed within the framework of a sophisticated dynamic field – “the information space”, where different agents wage wars for the hearts and souls of a community of new types individuals – members of the emerging “information society”. In the new age, technologies of soft-power influence are being employed by various actors in the regional and international arenas. Gigantic media-conglomerates strive to gain market share by fueling their ratings with deceitful economic and political news and analyses; NGOs of various kinds distort the information space with false threats and fictional claims; while individuals spread their views through blogs and forums, creating their own special interest Internet communities. In these new conditions of the global environment states are bound to engage in a new battle for the minds of not only their own citizens, but for a favorable public opinion in a broader international ambience, introducing special strategies of information management to counter hostile media interference and to foster auspicious attitudes in other nations of the world. The new global information society, though giving chance to public opinion manipulations and facilitating social processes management, opens up new opportunities for social sciences, providing new methods and techniques to analyze the evolving human nature.

Contemporary Economic Realities vis-a-vis Archaic State Regulation

       From the dawn of humanity, formal institutions validated evolving economic, social and political relations among people. While at the initial stages of human development, the gatherers’ communities operated according to simple sets of rules, which were based on family hierarchy, the transition to the agrarian society, however, required more sophisticated administrative practices and mechanisms. Thus, the early state institutions were born, set to become an irreplaceable foundation of the human civilization. Although states established procedural and legal frameworks for the economic and social development, political and technological innovations of the XVIII–XX centuries didn’t contribute to the expansion of government power and influence over the backbone processes in the integrating world. Furthermore, new actors and institutions had started to deprive the state of some of its functions. Breakthrough discoveries in science and constant financial innovations, along with the process of expansion of capitals and ideas throughout two centuries resulted in the advent of a new paradigm in social and economic development of the world – ‘knowledge economy’. Oddly enough, its core features – diffusion and volatility of its main product – knowledge, as well as its producers – qualified educated individuals, and the internationalization of economy, act primarily in favor of state’s competitors: transnational corporations and supranational economic and political institutions. The new nature and interpretation of threats, and the new norm of progress and welfare based on transnational regulation and management play a role in quenching the status of the state, and although the humanity has yet to walk a long way towards a model of global organizational order, the descent of the state is inevitable.

Integration Studies in the 2000s

The Cross-Border Transfer of Russian Technologies:
Political and Legal Aspects

The Future of Inter-State Cooperation in East Asia

International Regulation of Migrant Workers’ Rights

Politics and Law in Human Rights

PERSONA GRATA

Faces and Personalities

“The interaction between State and Academia in Russia is so weak due to the gap in basic assessments of the current social and economic course…”

FORUM STRENGTHENS THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY

Our Network

Talk on American Culture

A China Department is Needed in the Kremlin

China As Viewed by a Russian Far Easterner

SCRIPTA MANENT

Reviews

Depreciation of Force: How to Win a Modern War
Murden S.W. The Problem of Force: Grappling with the Global Battlefield, Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc., 2009. 234 p.

US Outer Space Policies: Pros and Cons
Joan Johnson-Freese. Heavenly Ambitions: America's Quest to Dominate Space. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009.178 р.

Non-State Actors in World Affairs
Power, Interdependence, and Nonstate Actors in World Politics / Helen V. Milner and Andrew Moravcsik (eds.). Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009. 320 с.

Contemporary World Politics
Современная мировая политика: прикладной анализ / Отв. ред. А.Д. Богатуров. М.: Аспект Пресс, 2009. 588 с.

Two Perspectives on Space Security
Космос: оружие, дипломатия, безопасность / Под. ред. А. Арбатова, В. Дворкина. М.: Российская политическая энциклопедия (РОССПЭН), 2009. 174 с.
James Clay Moltz. The Politics of Space Security: Strategic Restraint and the Pursuit of National Interests. Stanford: Stanford Security Studies, 2008. 367 p.

In brevi

A POTENTIA AD ACTUM

New doctorships

Our authors

Contents and Summaries