intertrendsМеждународные процессыInternational Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy1728-27561811-2773AEFIR10.17994/IT.2018.16.1.52.5intertrends-651Research ArticleАНАЛИТИЧЕСКИЕ ПРИЗМЫANALYTICAL PRISMSНаследие империй и политика США в странах «третьего мира»: историческое моделирование асимметричных конфликтовLegacy of Empires and the U.S. Policies in the “Third World”: Historical Modelling of Asymmetric ConflictsМалкинСтаниславMalkinStanislav

Малкин Станислав Геннадьевич - доктор исторических наук, доцент, заведующий Кафедрой всеобщей истории, права и методики обучения исторического факультета Самарского государственного социально-педагогического университета

Самара

Prof. Dr Stanislav Malkin - Chair, Department of World History, Law and Educational Technology, Samara State Social and Pedagogical University

Samara, 443099

s.g.malkin@mail.ruСамарский государственный социально-педагогический университетРоссияSamara State Social and Teaching UniversityRussian Federation2018300620251615368Copyright © Малкин С., 20252025Малкин С.Malkin S.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.intertrends.ru/jour/article/view/651

В свете стремительной трансформации современного миропорядка в контексте продолжительной военно-политической дестабилизации на Ближнем и Среднем Востоке всё большее внимание экспертного сообщества привлекает феномен империи. В 2016 г. мир отметил 100-летний юбилей знаменитого британско-французского соглашения Сайкса–Пико, во многом заложившего сотрясаемые в наши дни основы политической конфигурации современного Ближнего Востока – обстоятельство, которое сообщает дополнительную актуальность изучению наследия европейских колониальных империй в практической плоскости. Ответ на вопрос о роли приобретённого в эпоху империй колониального знания в военно-политическом планировании и прогнозировании в Великобритании и США во второй половине XX – начале XXI века (англосаксонская модель представляет особый интерес, так как является наиболее цельной с точки зрения рецепции колониального опыта европейских держав в постколониальную эпоху) позволяет составить более предметное представление о теории и практике международных отношений после Второй мировой войны, с переходом от эпохи глобальных колониальных империй к эпохе ядерных супердержав, а таже после «холодной войны», в условиях распада биполярной системы и нарастающих противоречий между сторонниками концепции «глобального лидерства» и многополярного мира. Последнее имеет не только академическое, но и политическое значение.

В этой связи основное внимание в статье уделено роли исторического моделирования асимметричных конфликтов  как  метода  военно-политического  прогнозирования  во  второй половине XX – начале XXI в. в экспертном сопровождении политики США в странах «третьего мира». Состояние и тенденции развития науки о международных отношениях позволяют утверждать, что «уроки истории» асимметричных конфликтов в экспертных кругах сохраняют свое значение для анализа процесса принятия решений в странах с высокой степенью включённости представителей академического мира в экспертное сообщество и актуальные общественно-политические дискуссии. При этом, когда речь идёт о роли колониального наследия европейских империй в выработке актуального внешнеполитического курса, необходимо учитывать влияние дисциплинарных фильтров на суждения и выводы экспертов. Эти методологические ограничения анализа политики США в странах «третьего мира» представителями экспертного сообщества также исследуются в данной статье.

In the light of rapid transformation of contemporary world order in the context of long military-political destabilization in the Near and Middle East the increasing attention of expert community is drawn by an empire phenomenon. In 2016 the world has celebrated 100-year anniversary of the well-known British- French Sykes-Picot agreement which in many respects has laid the foundation of a political configuration of the contemporary Middle East shaken today – a circumstance which reports additional relevance to studying the heritage of the European colonial empires in the practical plane. The answer to the question of a role of the colonial knowledge acquired during an era of empires in military-political planning and forecasting in Great Britain and the USA in the second half of XX – the beginning of the XXI centuries (the Anglo-Saxon model is of special interest as is the most integral from the point of view of reception of colonial experience of the European powers during a post-colonial era) allows to make more subject idea of the theory and practice of the international relations after World War II, with transition from an era of global colonial empires by an era of nuclear superpowers, and after “Cold War”, in the conditions of disintegration of bipolar system and the accruing contradictions between supporters of the concept of “global leadership” and the multipolar world that has not only the academic, but also political value.

In this regard the main attention in the article is paid to a role of historical modeling of the asymmetric conflicts as method of military-political forecasting in the second half of XX – the beginning of the 21st centuries in expert maintenance of the USA policy in the countries of “the Third world”. The state and tendencies of development of science about the international relations allow to claim that “lessons of history” of the asymmetric conflicts in expert circles keep the value for the analysis of decision-making process in the countries with high degree of inclusiveness of representatives of the academic world in expert community and relevant social and political discussions. At the same time, so far as concerns the role of colonial heritage of the European empires in development of a relevant  foreign  policy,  it  is necessary to consider influence of disciplinary filters on judgments and conclusions of experts. These methodological restrictions of the analysis of the USA policy in the countries of “the Third world” representatives of expert community also investigate in this article.

империясверхдержаваимпериализмколониализмВеликобританияСШААфганистанИракБлижний и Средний ВостокempiresuperpowerimperialismcolonialismGreat BritainUSAAfghanistanIraqNear and Middle EastИсследование выполнено за счет гранта Российского научного фонда (проект № 17-78-20029).ReferencesСогрин В.В. США в XX–XXI вв. Либерализм. Демократия. Империя. М.: Весь Мир, 2015. 592 с.Aust M., Vulpius R., Miller A. (Eds) (2010). Imperium inter Pares: rol' transferov v istorii Rossijskoj imperii (1700–1917): Sb. st. [Imperium inter Pares: the Role of Transfers in the History of the Russian Empire]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 392 p.Уолтон К. Британская разведка во времена холодной войны. Секретные операции МИ-5 и МИ-6. М.: Центрполиграф, 2016. 543 с.Badger A. (2012). Historians, a legacy of suspicion and the «migrated archives». Small Wars & Insurgencies. Vol. 23. No. 4-5. P. 799–807.Фергюсон Н. Империя. Чем современный мир обязан Британии. М.: Аст: CORPUS, 2013. 560 с.Bell D. (2007). The Idea of Greater Britain. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 336 p.Черчилль У. «Мускулы мира». Речь 5 марта 1946 г. в Фултоне // Черчилль У. Мировой кризис. М.: Эксмо, 2003. 768 с.Bell D. (2009). Writing the World: Disciplinary History and Beyond. International Affairs. Vol. 85 No. 1. P. 3–22.Imperium inter Pares: роль трансферов в истории Российской империи (1700–1917): Сб. ст. М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2010. 392 с.Bradley M. (2010). Classics and Imperialism in the British Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 350 p.After the Imperial Turn: Thinking with and through the Nation / Ed. By A.M. Burton. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003. 384 p.Brendon P. (2010). Upadok i razrushenie Britanskoj imperii 1781–1997 [Decline and Destruction of British Empire 1781–1997]. Moscow: Ast: Ast Moskva. 957 p.Badger A. Historians, a legacy of suspicion and the «migrated archives» // Small Wars & Insurgencies. 2012. Vol. 23. No. 4–5. P. 799–807.Burton A.M. (ed.) (2003). After the Imperial Turn: Thinking with and through the Nation. Durham: Duke University Press. 384 p.Bell D. The Idea of Greater Britain. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007. 336 p.Chin W. (2010). Colonial Warfare in a Post-Colonial State: British Military Operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. Defense Studies. Vol. 10, No. 1–2 (March–June). P. 215–247.Bell D. Writing the World: Disciplinary History and Beyond // International Affairs. 2009. Vol. 85. No. 1. P. 3–22.Churchill W. (2003). Mirovoj krizis [World Crisis]. Moscow: Jeksmo. 768 p.Bradley M. Classics and Imperialism in the British Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 350 p.CIA (1948). The Break-Up of the Colonial Empires and its Implications for US Security. 3 September. ORE 25-48.Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations. / Ed. By C. Elman and M.F. Elman. Cambridge [Massachusetts]: The MIT Press, 2001. 438 p.CIA (1949). Current Situation in Malaya. CIA report for the President of the United States. 17 November. Declassified Documents Reference System.Chin W. Colonial Warfare in a Post-Colonial State: British Military Operations in Helmand Province, Afghanistan // Defense Studies. Vol. 10, No. 1–2 (March–June 2010). P. 215–247.CIA (1951). French Problems in Indochina. 4 September. Board of National Estimates. Staff Memorandum 124. WSH/CLC. № 53617.Cooper R. The Post-modern State and the world order. London: Demos, 2002. 43 p.CIA (1951). Resistance of Thailand, Burma, and Malaya to Communist Pressures in the Event of a Communist Victory in Indochina. 20 March. National Intelligence Estimate. NIE-20.Counterinsurgency. A Symposium, April 16–20, 1962. The RAND Corporation’s Washington Office. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 1963.CIA (1954). Current Outlook in Indochina. Memorandum for the Director of Intelligence. 9 February. NE-11.Current Outlook in Indochina. Memorandum for the Director of Intelligence. 9 February 1954. CIA. NE-11.Cooper R. (2002). The Post-modern State and the world order. London: Demos. 43 p.Current Situation in Malaya. CIA report for the President of the United States, 17 November 1949. Declassified Documents Reference System.D'Aoust A.M. (2004). Abusing History: A Critical Analysis of Mainstream International Relations Theory Misconduct. Occasional Paper № 6. Center for Unites States Studies. University of Quebec. Montreal: UQAM. 16 p.D'Aoust A.M. Abusing History: A Critical Analysis of Mainstream International Relations Theory Misconduct. Occa sional Paper № 6. Center for Unites States Studies. University of Quebec. Montreal: UQAM, 2004. 16 p.Deudney D. (2001). Greater Britain or Greater Synthesis: Seeley, Mackinder, and Wells on Britain in the Global Industrial Era. Review of International Studies. No. 27. Р. 187–208.Deudney D. Greater Britain or Greater Synthesis: Seeley, Mackinder, and Wells on Britain in the Global Industrial Era // Review of International Studies. 2001. Vol. 27. Р. 187–208.Egorova N.I. (2009). «Novaja istorija “holodnoj vojny”» v sovremennyh zarubezhnyh issledovanijah [“New History of the Cold War” in Contemporary Foreign Studies]. Novaja i novejshaja istorija. No. 4. P. 116–129.Felbab-Brown V. President Trump’s Afghanistan Policy: Hopes and Pitfalls. Washington. Brookings Institution Press, September 2017. 18 p.Elman C., M.F. Elman M.F. (eds) (2001). Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations. Cambridge [Massachusetts]: The MIT Press. 438 p.Ferguson N. Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire. New York: Penguin Press, 2004. 384 p.Felbab-Brown V. (2017). President Trump’s Afghanistan Policy: Hopes and Pitfalls. Washington. Brookings Institution Press. 18 p.Ferguson N. Hegemony or Empire? // Foreign Affairs. September/October 2003 URL: https://www. foreignaffairs.com/reviews/review-essay/2003-09-01/hegemony-or-empireFergjuson N. (2013). Imperija. Chem sovremennyj mir objazan Britanii [The Empire]. Moscow: Ast: CORPUS. 560 p.French D. Army, Empire and Cold War: The British Army and Military Policy, 1945–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 346 p.Ferguson N. (2003). Hegemony or Empire? Foreign Affairs. September/October 2003. URL: https:// www.foreignaffairs.com/reviews/review-essay/2003-09-01/hegemony-or-empireFrench Problems in Indochina. 4 September 1951. CIA. Board of National Estimates. Staff Memorandum 124. WSH/CLC. № 53617.Ferguson N. (2004). Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire. New York: Penguin Press. 384 p.Gaddis J.L. History, Science and the Study of International Relations // Explaining International Relations Since 1945 / Ed. By N. Woods. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. 392 p.French D. (2012). Army, Empire and Cold War: The British Army and Military Policy, 1945–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 346 p.Gerasimov I., Glebov S., Kaplunovski A., Mogilner M., Semynov A. In Search of a New Imperial History // Ab Imperio. 2005. No. 1. P. 33–55.Gaddis J.L. (1996). History, Science and the Study of International Relations. Explaining International Relations Since 1945. Ed. By N. Woods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 392 p.Ghosh D. Another Set of Imperial Turns? // American Historical Review. June 2012. P. 772–793.Gerasimov I., Glebov S., Kaplunovski A., Mogilner M., Semynov A. (2005). In Search of a New Imperial History. Ab Imperio. No. 1. P. 33–55.Hevia J. The Imperial Security State. British Colonial Knowledge and Empire-Building in Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 304 p.Ghosh D. (2012). Another Set of Imperial Turns? American Historical Review. June. P. 772–793.Hoffmann S. An American Social Science: International Relations // Daedalus: American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 1977. Vol. 106, № 3. P. 41–60.Hevia J. (2012). The Imperial Security State. British Colonial Knowledge and Empire-Building in Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 304 p.Images of Rome: Perceptions of Ancient Rome in Europe and the United States in the Modern Age. Portsmouth: Journal of Roman Archaeology L.L.C., 2001. 190 p.Hingley R. (Ed.) (2001). Images of Rome: Perceptions of Ancient Rome in Europe and the United States in the Modern Age. Portsmouth: Journal of Roman Archaeology L.L.C. 190 p.Jones D.M., Smith M.L.R. Grammar but No Logic: Technique is Not Enough – A Response to Nagl and Burton // Journal of Strategic Studies. 2010. 33:3. P. 437–446.Hoffmann S. (1977). An American Social Science: International Relations. Daedalus: American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Vol. 106, No. 3. P. 41–60.Jones D.M., Smith M.L.R. Myth and the small war tradition: Reassessing the discourse of British counter-insurgency // Small Wars & Insurgencies. 2013. 24:3. P. 436–464.Hosmer S.T., Crane S.O. (Eds) (1963). Counterinsurgency. A Symposium, April 16–20, 1962. The RAND Corporation’s Washington Office. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation.Jones D.M., Smith M.L.R. Whose Hearts and Whose Minds? The Curious Case of Global CounterInsurgency // Journal of Strategic Studies. 2010. 33:1. P. 81–121.Howe S. (ed.) (2010). The New Imperial Histories Reader. London: Routledge. 480 p.Kennedy D. Essay and Reflection: On the American Empire from a British Imperial Perspective // The International History Review. 2007. Vol. 29. № 1. P. 83–108.Jones D.M., Smith M.L.R. (2010). Grammar but No Logic: Technique is Not Enough – A Response to Nagl and Burton. Journal of Strategic Studies. Vol. 33. No. 3. P. 437–446.Koebner R., Shmidt H.D. Imperialism: The Story and Significance of a Political Word, 1840–1960.Jones D.M., Smith M.L.R. (2010). Whose Hearts and Whose Minds? The Curious Case of Global Counter-Insurgency. Journal of Strategic Studies. Vol. 33. No. 1. P. 81–121.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964. 460 p.Jones D.M., Smith M.L.R. (2013). Myth and the small war tradition: Reassessing the discourse of British counter-insurgency. Small Wars & Insurgencies. Vol. 24. No. 3. P. 436–464.Lieven D. Dilemmas of Empire 1850–1918. Power, Territory, Identity // Journal of Contemporary History. 1999. Vol. 34. № 2. P. 163–200.Kennedy D. (2007). Essay and Reflection: On the American Empire from a British Imperial Perspective. The International History Review. Vol. 29. No. 1 (Mar.). P. 83–108.Neoclassical Realism, The State, and Foreign Policy / ed. by S.E. Lobell, N.M. Ripsman, J. Taiaferro. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 324 p.Koebner R., Shmidt H.D. (1964). Imperialism: The Story and Significance of a Political Word, 1840– 1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 460 p.Long A. On «Other War». Lessons from Five Decades of RAND Counterinsurgency Research. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 2006. 99 p.Lieven D. (1999). Dilemmas of Empire 1850–1918. Power, Territory, Identity. Journal of Contemporary History. Vol. 34. № 2 (Apr.). P. 163–200.Lorcin P.M.E. France and Rome in Africa: recovering Algeria’s Latin Past // French Historical Studies. 2002. Vol. 25. No. 2. Р. 295–329.Liven D. (2007). Rossijskaja imperija i ee vragi s XVI veka do nashih dnej [Russian Empire and Its Enemies from 16th Century till Today]. Moscow: Evropa. 688 s.Lorcin P.M.E. Historicizing Colonial Nostalgia: European Women’s Narratives of Algeria and Kenia 1900– Present. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. 317 p.Lobell S.E., Ripsman N.M., Taiaferro J. (2009). Neoclassical Realism, The State, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 324 p.Lorcin P.M.E. Pax Romana Transposed: Rome as an exemplar for western imperialism // Routledge History of Western Empires. London and New York: Routledge, 2013. 544 p.Long A. (2006). On «Other War». Lessons from Five Decades of RAND Counterinsurgency Research. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation. 99 p.Louis W.R. Imperialism at Bay, 1941-5: The United States and the Decolonization of the British Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. 608 p.Lorcin P.M.E. (2002). France and Rome in Africa: recovering Algeria’s Latin Past. French Historical Studies. Vol. 25, No. 2. Р. 295–329.Louis W.R. The Pax Americana: Sir Keith Hancock, The British Empire and American Expansion // Ends ofLorcin P.M.E. (2012). Historicizing Colonial Nostalgia: European Women’s Narratives of Algeria and Kenia 1900–Present. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 317 p.British Imperialism: The Scramble for Empire Suez and Decolonization. London, New York: I.B. Tauris, 2006. 1082 p.Lorcin P.M.E. (2013). Pax Romana Transposed: Rome as an exemplar for western imperialism. Routledge History of Western Empires. London and New York: Routledge. 544 p.Louis W.R., Robinson D. The imperialism of decolonization // Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History. 1994. Vol. 22. Р. 462–511.Louis W.R. (1977). Imperialism at Bay, 1941-5: The United States and the Decolonization of the British Empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 608 p.Mabee B. Discourses of empire: the US “empire”, globalization and international relations // Third World Quarterly. 2004. Vol. 25. № 8. P. 1359–1378.Louis W.R. (2006). The Pax Americana: Sir Keith Hancock, The British Empire and American Expansion. Ends of British Imperialism: The Scramble for Empire Suez and Decolonization. London, New York: I.B. Tauris. 1082 p.Maier C.S. Among Empires: American Ascendancy and Its Predecessors. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006. 384 p.Louis W.R., Robinson D. (1994). The imperialism of decolonization. Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History. 22. Р. 462–511.McNay J.T. Acheson and the Empire: the British Accent in American Foreign Policy. Columbia: Missouri University Press, 2001. 219 p.Mabee B. (2004). Discourses of empire: the US “empire”, globalization and international relations. Third World Quarterly. Vol. 25. No. 8. P. 1359–1378.Mockaitis T.R. The minimum force debate: contemporary sensibilities meet imperial practice // Small Wars & Insurgencies. 2012. Vol. 23. No. 4-5. P. 762–780.Maier C.S. (2006). Among Empires: American Ascendancy and Its Predecessors. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 384 p.Morefield J. Empires Without Imperialism: Anglo-American Decline and the Politics of Deflection. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. 304 p.McNay J.T. (2001). Acheson and the Empire: the British Accent in American Foreign Policy. Columbia: Missouri University Press. 219 p.Mumford A. The Counter-Insurgency Myth: The British Experience of Irregular Warfare. London: Routledge, 2012. 216 p.Miller A., Lipman M. (Eds) (2012). Istoricheskaja politika v XXI veke: Sbornik statej [Politics of History in the 21st Century]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 648 p.O’Brien P., Clesse A. Two Hegemonies: Britain 1846–1914 and the United States 1941–2001. Aldershot: Ashgate Pub Ltd., 2002. 365 p.Miller A.I. (2008). Nasledie imperij i budushhee Rossii [The Heritage of Empire and the Future of Russia]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 528 p.O’Cadhla S. Civilizing Ireland. Ordnance Survey 1824–1842: Ethnography, Cartography, Translation. Dublin, Portland: Irish Academic Press, 2007. 280 p.Mockaitis T.R. (2012). The minimum force debate: contemporary sensibilities meet imperial practice. Small Wars & Insurgencies. Vol. 23. No. 4-5. P. 762–780.Palmer R.R. The American Historical Association in 1970 // American Historical Review. 1971. Vol. 76, No. 1. P. 1–15.Morefield J. (2014). Empires Without Imperialism: Anglo-American Decline and the Politics of Deflection. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 304 p.Plank G. An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign against the Peoples of Acadia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001. 239 p.Mumford A. (2012). The Counter-Insurgency Myth: The British Experience of Irregular Warfare. London: Routledge. 216 p.Plank G. Rebellion and Savagery: The Jacobite Rising of 1745 and the British Empire. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Press, 2006. 259 p.Mumford A., Reis B.S. (eds) (2014). The Theory and Practice of Irregular Warfare. Warrior-scholarship in counter-insurgency. London, N.Y.: Routledge. 176 p.Porch D. The dangerous myths and dubious promise of COIN // Small Wars & Insurgencies. 2011. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 239–257.O’Brien P., Clesse A. (2002). Two Hegemonies: Britain 1846–1914 and the United States 1941–2001. Aldershot: Ashgate Pub Ltd. 365 p.Reis B.C. The Myth of British Minimum Force in Counterinsurgency Campaigns during Decolonisation (1945–1970) // Journal of Strategic Studies. 2011. Vol. 34. No. 2. P. 245–279.O’Cadhla S. (2007). Civilizing Ireland. Ordnance Survey 1824–1842: Ethnography, Cartography, Translation. Dublin, Portland: Irish Academic Press. 280 p.Resistance of Thailand, Burma, and Malaya to Communist Pressures in the Event of a Communist Victory in Indochina. 20 March 1951. CIA. National Intelligence Estimate. NIE-20.Palmer R.R. (1971). The American Historical Association in 1970. American Historical Review. Vol. 76. No. 1. P. 1–15.Smith S. The Discipline of International relations: Still an American Social Science? // British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2000. Vol. 2. № 3. P. 393–396.Plank G. (2001). An Unsettled Conquest: The British Campaign against the Peoples of Acadia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 239 p.Smith S. The United States and the Discipline of the International Relations: «Hegemonic Country, Hegemonic Discipline» // International Studies Review. 2002. Vol. 4. № 2. P. 67–86.Plank G. (2006). Rebellion and Savagery: The Jacobite Rising of 1745 and the British Empire. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania Press. 259 p.Steel R. Pax Americana: The Cold War Empire. How It Grew and What It Means. New York: Viking Press, 1967. 371 p.Porch D. (2011). The dangerous myths and dubious promise of COIN. Small Wars & Insurgencies. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 239–257.Sunderland R. Antiguerrilla Intelligence in Malaya, 1948-1960. Memorandum № RM-4172 ISA.Rahshmir P.Ju. (2008). Amerikanskie neokonservatory i imperskaja ideja [American Neoconservatives and Imperial Idea]. Novaja i Novejshaja istorija. No. 4. P. 3–25.Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 1964. 80 p.Reis B.C. (2011). The Myth of British Minimum Force in Counterinsurgency Campaigns during Decolonisation (1945–1970). Journal of Strategic Studies. Vol. 34. No. 2. P. 245–279.Sunderland R. Army Operations in Malaya, 1947-1960. Memorandum № RM-4170 ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 1964. 267 p.Rich P.B., Duyvesteyn I. (Eds) (2012). The Routledge Handbook of Insurgency and Counterinsurgency. London: Routledge. 386 p.Sunderland R. Organizing Counter-insurgency in Malaya, 1947-1960. Memorandum № RM-4171 ISA.Sili Dzh.R. (2004). Rasshirenie Anglii. Britanskaja imperija [Expansion of England. British Empire]. Moscow: Algoritm-Kniga, Jeksmo. 488 p.Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 1964. 95 p.Smith S. (2000). The Discipline of International relations: Still an American Social Science? British Journal of Politics and International Relations. Vol. 2, No. 3. P. 393–396.Sunderland R. Resettlement and Food Control in Malaya. Memorandum № RM-4173 ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Excluded from automatic downgrading and declassification. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 1964. 145 p.Smith S. (2002). The United States and the Discipline of the International Relations: «Hegemonic Country, Hegemonic Discipline». International Studies Review. Vol. 4, No. 2. P. 67–86.Sunderland R. Winning the Hearts and Minds of the People. Malaya, 1948-1960. Memorandum №Sogrin V.V. (2015). SShA v XX–XXI vv. Liberalizm. Demokratija. Imperija [The USA in the 20th and 21st Centuries. Liberalism, Democracy and Empire]. Moscow: Ves' Mir. 592 p.RM-4174 ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation, 1964. 70 p.Steel R. (1967). Pax Americana: The Cold War Empire. How It Grew and What It Means. New York: Viking Press. 371 p.The Break-Up of the Colonial Empires and its Implications for US Security. 3 September 1948. Central Intelligence Agency [CIA]. ORE 25-48.Sunderland R. (1964). Antiguerrilla Intelligence in Malaya, 1948-1960. Memorandum № RM-4172The New Imperial Histories Reader / Ed. By S. Howe. London: Routledge, 2010. 480 p.ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation. 80 p.The Routledge Handbook of Insurgency and Counterinsurgency. London: Routledge, 2012. 386 p.Sunderland R. (1964). Army Operations in Malaya, 1947-1960. Memorandum № RM-4170 ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation. 267 p.The Theory and Practice of Irregular Warfare. Warrior-scholarship in counter-insurgency / Ed. by A. Mumford and B.S. Reis. London and New York: Routledge, 2014. 176 p.Sunderland R. (1964). Organizing Counter-insurgency in Malaya, 1947-1960. MemorandumThomas M. Empires of Intelligence. Security Services and Colonial Disorder after 1914. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2008. 428 p.№ RM-4171 ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation. 95 p.Thompson R. Defeating Communist Insurgency: The Lessons of Malaya and Vietnam. New York: F.A. Praeger, 1966. 171 p.Sunderland R. (1964). Resettlement and Food Control in Malaya. Memorandum № RM-4173 ISA.Ucko D.H. Critics gone wild: Counterinsurgency as the root of all evil // Small Wars & Insurgencies. 2014. 25:1. P. 161–179.Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Excluded from automatic downgrading and declassification. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation. 145 p.Vaughan-Williams N. International relations and the “Problem of History” // Millenium: Journal of International Studies. 2005. Vol. 34, № 1. P. 115–136.Sunderland R. (1964). Winning the Hearts and Minds of the People. Malaya, 1948-1960. MemorandumWestad A.O. The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of our Times. Cambridge:№ RM-4174 ISA. Sponsored by the Department of Defense, Contract SD-79. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation. 70 p.Cambridge University Press, 2007. 484 p.Thomas M. (2008). Empires of Intelligence. Security Services and Colonial Disorder after 1914. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. 428 p.Thompson R. (1966). Defeating Communist Insurgency: The Lessons of Malaya and Vietnam. N.Y.: F.A. Praeger. 171 p.Thompson R. (1966). Defeating Communist Insurgency: The Lessons of Malaya and Vietnam. N.Y.: F.A. Praeger. 171 p.Ucko D.H. (2014). Critics gone wild: Counterinsurgency as the root of all evil. Small Wars & Insurgencies. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 161–179.Ucko D.H. (2014). Critics gone wild: Counterinsurgency as the root of all evil. Small Wars & Insurgencies. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 161–179.Vaughan-Williams N. (2005). International relations and the “Problem of History”. Millenium: Journal of International Studies. Vol. 34, No. 1. P. 115–136.Vaughan-Williams N. (2005). International relations and the “Problem of History”. Millenium: Journal of International Studies. Vol. 34, No. 1. P. 115–136.Walton K. (2016). Britanskaja razvedka vo vremena holodnoj vojny. Sekretnye operacii MI-5 i MI-6 [British Intelligence during the Cold War. Secret Operations of MI-5 and MI-6]. Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf. 543 p.Walton K. (2016). Britanskaja razvedka vo vremena holodnoj vojny. Sekretnye operacii MI-5 i MI-6 [British Intelligence during the Cold War. Secret Operations of MI-5 and MI-6]. Moscow: Tsentrpoligraf. 543 p.Westad A.O. (2007). The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of our Times.Westad A.O. (2007). The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of our Times.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 484 p.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 484 p.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.