|The Anthropology of International Relations|
Current inquiries in the field of IR arguably tend to ignore the "human factor". For example, while analyzing global challenges, many prominent scholars operate mostly at the systemic and nation-state levels, but fail to adequately address the intellectual capacities and creative potential of national and international leaders who tackle global challenges.
It is important that the studies of the Human as a designer and builder of international relations not equate Homo politicus with Homo international – the latter functions in a wide variety of areas apart from politics, including transnational economic or cultural exchanges. Research on the "international dimension" of human behavior should embrace and, possibly, link "macro-variables" (such as the national character or mass psychology) and "micro-variables" (e.g. psychological profiles of popular leaders).
An anthropological study of IR should also consider how international factors change humans. These factors include implications of humanitarian interventions, regime changes and democratization under outside influence – to name just a few. The normative thrust of the discipline should be focused on shaping a New Homo international whose worldview, values, commitments and activities are defined and driven by global concerns.
Self-Determination of the Russian Nation
It was only recently that political leaders and officials in the Russian Federation began to employ the term "rossiiskaya natsiya (nation)", or "rossiiskiy narod (people)" to denote the country’s multi-ethnic population. The adjective "rosiiskiy" here derives from "Rossia" – the name of the whole Russian State – and is distinct from "russkiy" (literally meaning "Russian by ethnic origin"). Rossia is populated by a large variety of ethnic groups forming the "rossiiskaya nation" and the Russian Federation as a state. It is, therefore, suggested that, to avoid confusion of Russians as an ethnic group with Russians as the nation constituting the Russian State, the Russian Federation be called Rossia instead of Russia in English.
The people of Rossia (not only ethnic Russians!) have been long carrying out mission civilisatrice with regard to both the non-Russian areas of contemporary Russia and many surrounding states. This was done, among other policies, by propagating the Russian language which remains the main communication tool not only within the former Soviet republics, but also among the inhabitants of different new independent states.
The people from these republics seeking to get permanent residence in the Russian Federation should not be repelled by migration authorities out of hand as unwelcome migrants. A wiser policy is necessary whereby the best brains and the most disciplined and able workers would be invited to live and apply their skills in Russia.
The Contemporary Socio-Economic Model in the USA
The relative success of American economy in the last quarter-century has been defined by specific national trends as well as state-of-the-art policies rather than by the observance of general liberal economy principles. These trends include flexible modes of short-run production, the rising role of knowledge and the expansion of information transmission infrastructure, rapid growth of the service sector (which now accounts for 80% of the U.S. GDP), transition to corporate ownership of means of production, and shrinking influence of trade unions in the U.S. economy.
With a highly adaptive economy, the U.S. surpassed all other OECD states in the average GDP growth rate (4.4%) over the period from 1972 to 2003. Currently, the U.S. produces the largest GDP which accounts for over 21.3% of the world economic output. American per capita income of $38,500 yields only to that of Luxemburg. The United States remains the largest international investor and creditor. It is also the world’s leading recipient of foreign capital.
After a short downturn in 2001-2003, the U.S. economy started gathering new speed. In 2000-2004, productivity growth in the non-agricultural sector reached 4.3% mainly due to the introduction of new technologies.
Although during the 2004 campaign George W. Bush was anxious to stress distinctions between his presidential platform and that of the Democratic candidate, the Republican economic agenda was in fact no less "socially-oriented" than a traditional left-of-the-center program.
Norms in World Politics
Rules can serve as a powerful regulative mechanism in IR. To be an effective tool, they need to be unambiguous and supported by an administrative apparatus that monitors their application and coordinates enforcement. Rules also need to be adaptive and widely accepted as legitimate. Regulation by rules (as opposed to regulation by force) has major limitations commonly attributed to the lack of ultimate authority in IR and the presence of "wrong-doing" states, e.g. those with undemocratic regimes prone to violence.
Rules can be based on morality or legal norms. Yet attempts to achieve the "rule of morality" in world politics can lead to excesses in the form of "unbound" behavior by states believing in their "manifest destiny". International legal norms appear to be a more effective regulator than parochial moral values. International order built around evolving norms is preferable to an order based on morality or far-fetched "world government" ideals.
International norms are based on coordination rather than subordination. Unlike domestic legal systems, international norms are created directly by member of the community – national states. These are most effective in regulating specific "technical" aspects of IR – such as arms limitations or jus in belli. The body of contemporary international law is a result of a century-and-a-half-long evolution which started with conventions regulating the treatment of injured combatants and civilians in armed conflicts.
Digest of foreign publications
Contemporary Western Studies of International Conflict
Targeting Terrorist Finances
U.S. Intelligence Overhaul
«Mass Political Production» and «Mass Political Consumption» under Globalization
Transnational Terrorism as a Sign
«Voluntary» and «Forced» Solidarity in NATO’s History
Images and Personalities
There Is No Such Thing as «Male» Political Science Interview with Anne de Tinguy
A COLD MIND FOR A HOT ISSUE
Debating current trends
A Stable Disequilibrium: Relations with Russia in Uzbekistan’s Foreign Policy
The Russia Factor in Central Asia
REVISITING EARLIER PUBLICATIONS
Does the Philosophy of International Relations Constitute
a Scholarly Discipline?
The Forum consolidates the scholarly community
Forum’s «Network Conference» in Moscow and the Deans’ Workshop on Teaching International Relations
The Fatigue Symptom from Theoretical Liberalism in the English School of I R
Barry Buzan. From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 300 p.
The European Union: An Aborted Flight or...
T.R. Reid. The United States of Europe: The New Superpower and the End of American Superemcy. New York: The Penguin Press, 2004. 306 p.
The Pitfalls of Relations within the «Post-West»
Timothy Garton Ash. Free World. America, Europe and the Surprising Future of the West. New York: Random House, 2004. 286 p.
Avoiding the «Unavoidable Empire»
Will the United States Guarantee Russian Security?
Thomas P.M. Barnett. The Pentagon New Map. War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 2004. 435 p.
THE DEPARTING WITNESSES
George Kennan (1904-2005). Idealist, Patriot, Pragmatist?
A POTENTIA AD ACTUM