Реалистский конструктивизм: новый взгляд на теорию норм

В своей работе мы дополняем научные исследования о реалистском конструктивизме, демонстрируя его потенциал в том, что касается обогащения теории норм и прояснения роли государства в формировании идентичности. Основная проблема, препятствующая в полной мере раскрытию потенциала реалистского конструктивизма, заключается в согласовании взглядов конструктивистов на нормы как векторы универсальных этических стандартов с позицией представителей реалистской школы, рассматривающих их в качестве инструментальных каналов трансляции государственных интересов. Мы разрешаем это противоречие, подчёркивая существование двух различных типов норм: индивидуальных и групповых. Первые основаны на фундаментальных и неотъемлемых правах человека – они обладают универсальностью и устойчивостью. Вторые ориентированы, в свою очередь, на коллективные права и интересы, что делает их более подверженными инструментализации со стороны государств и, следовательно, более неопределёнными и изменчивыми. Реалистский конструктивизм позволяет нам признать сосуществование обоих типов норм и проанализировать их взаимодействие. Наша концепция прошла эмпирическую проверку на примере двух норм, касающихся индивидуальных прав (норма по запрещению противопехотных мин и пыток), двух норм, связанных с групповыми интересами (норма, способствующая переходу к «зелёной» энергетике, и норма, продвигающая создание университетов мирового класса), и одного пограничного случая (норма по недопущению геноцида). В статье показывается, что усилия по переосмыслению норм второй категории и их увязывание с правами человека привели к неожиданным результатам, легитимировав новые принципы и придав им силу. С другой стороны, инструментализация норм первой категории в угоду национальным интересам может привести к их ослаблению, что влечёт за собой потерю авторитета на международной арене.

1. Altbach P. (2003). The costs and benefits of world-class universities. International higher education. (33) https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2003.33.7381

2. Babayan D. (2016). ‘Soft Power’ and ‘Hard Weakness’ in Chinese-Mongolian Relations, Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 14. No. 4. P. 99–105. In Russian: "Мягкая сила" и" жесткая слабость" в китайскомонгольских отношениях.

3. Banister D. (2019). The climate crisis and transport. Transport Reviews. Vol. 39. No. 5. P. 565–568.

4. Bano S. (2020). The India–US Nuclear Deal: Norms of Power and the Power of Norms. The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism, Chap. 5 (101–122).

5. Barkin J.S. (2003). Realist constructivism. International Studies Review. Vol. 5. No. 3. P. 325–342.

6. Barkin J.S. (2004). Realist constructivism and realist-constructivisms. International Studies Review. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 348–352.

7. Barkin J.S. (2010). Realist Constructivism: Rethinking International Relation Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

8. Barkin J.S. (Ed.). (2020). The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism. Policy Press.

9. Bode I., Huelss H. (2018) Autonomous Weapons Systems and Changing Norms in International Relations.

10. Review of International Studies. Vol. 44. No. 3. P. 393–413.

11. Boyle M. (2020). Huadu: A Realist Constructivist Account of Taiwan’s Anomalous Status. The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism. Bristol University Press. P. 73–100.

12. Bucher B. (2007). The false promise of constructivist optimism. In Standing Group on International Relations (ECPR)’s Sixth Pan-European Conference on International Relations, Making Sense of a Pluralist World, University of Turin, Italy.

13. Budabin A.C. (2015). Celebrities as norm entrepreneurs in international politics: Mia Farrow and the ‘Genocide Olympics’ campaign. Celebrity Studies. Vol. 6. No. 4. P. 399–413.

14. Carpenter R.C. (2014). Lost Causes. Agenda Vetting in Global Issue Networks and the Shaping of Human Security. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 234.

15. Castrejon-Campos, O., Aye, L., Hui, F.K.P. (2020). Making policy mixes more robust: An integrative and interdisciplinary approach for clean energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, volume 64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101425.

16. Chengeta T. (2017). Defining the Emerging Notion of Meaningful Human Control in Weapon Systems. Journal of International Law and Politics. Vol. 49. No. 3. P. 833–890.

17. Copeland D.C. (2000). The constructivist challenge to structural realism: a review essay. International security. Vol. 25. No. 2. P. 187–212.

18. Cortell A., Davis J. (2005). When Norms Clash: International Norms, Domestic Practices, and Japan’s Internalisation of the GATT/WTO. Review of International Studies. Vol. 31. No. 1. P. 3–25.

19. Crowley-Vigneau A., Kalyuzhnova Y., Baykov A. (2022). World-class universities in Russia: a contested norm and its implementation. Journal of Studies in International Education. 27(3).

20. Deitelhoff N., Zimmermann L. (2019). Norms under challenge: Unpacking the dynamics of norm robustness. Journal of global security studies. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 2–17.

21. Delacour J.O. (2020). Taking Co-constitution Seriously: Explaining an Ambiguous US Approach to Latin America. The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism. Bristol University Press. P. 145–170.

22. Dubé L., Addy N.A., Blouin C., Drager N. (2014). From policy coherence to 21st century convergence: a whole-of-society paradigm of human and economic development. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1331. No. 1. P. 201–215.

23. Duncan F.J. (2007). Framing African genocide: location, time and gender in the coverage of genocide in Rwanda and Sudan (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia) 104p.

24. Escher G., Aebischer P. (2018). Pour des universités de rang mondial: Défis et chances des universités européennes au XXIe siècle. Futuribles. Vol. 424. No. 3. P. 37–45.

25. Finnemore M., Sikkink K. (1998). International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization. Vol. 52. No. 4. P. 887–918.

26. Gronke P., Rejali D., Drenguis D., Hicks J., Miller P., Nakayama B. (2010). US public opinion on torture, 2001–2009. PS: political science & politics. Vol. 43. No. 3. P. 437–444.

27. Fuso Nerini F., J. Tomei L.S.T., Bisaga I., Parikh P., Black M., Borrion A., Spataru C., Broto V.C., Anandarajah G., Milligan B. (2018). Mapping synergies and trade-offs between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Energy 3, 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-017-0036-5.

28. Gallo A.B., Simões-Moreira J.R., Costa H.K. M., Santos M.M., Dos Santos E.M. (2016). Energy storage in the energy transition context: A technology review. Renewable and sustainable energy review. 65. P. 800–822.

29. Guo Y., Guo S., Yochim L., & Liu X. (2022). Internationalization of Chinese higher education: Is it westernization?. Journal of Studies in International Education, No. 26(4). P. 436–453.

30. Hammond P. (2018). When frames collide: ‘Ethnic war’and ‘genocide’. Media, War & Conflict. Vol. 11. No. 4. P. 434–445.

31. Harland C. (2008). Anti-Personnel Landmines: Balancing Military Utility and the Humanitarian Cost. Centre for Land Warfare Studies Journal. P. 236–248.

32. Henderson K.E. (2019). Contradictory governance norms within world society: energy development strategies, environmental protection, and carbon dioxide emissions. Environmental Sociology. Vol. 5. No. 4. P. 393–404.

33. Hobsbawn E. (1996). Language, culture, and national identity. Social research. P. 1065–1080.

34. Hoffmann M.J. (2009). Is constructivist ethics an oxymoron? International Studies Review. Vol. 11. No. 2. P. 231–252.

35. Hoffmann M.J. (2010). Norms and social constructivism in international relations. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. P. 1–23.

36. Iancu A. (2020). The Bridging Capacity of Realist Constructivism: The Normative Evolution of Human Security and the Responsibility to Protect. The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism. 171 p.

37. Jackson P.T., Nexon D.H. (2004). Constructivist realism or realist-constructivism? International Studies Review. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 337–341.

38. Katzenstein P.J., Keohane R.O., Krasner S.D. (1998). International organization and the study of world politics. International organization. Vol. 52. No. 4. P. 645-685.

39. Keohane R.O. (1988). International institutions: Two approaches. International studies quarterly. Vol. 32. No. 4. P. 379–396.

40. Koh H.H. (2004). A world without torture. Colum. J. Transnational Law., 43. P. 641–662.

41. Krebs R.R., Jackson P.T. (2007). Twisting tongues and twisting arms: The power of political rhetoric. European Journal of International Relations. Vol. 13. No. 1. P. 35–66.

42. Lebow R.N. (2004). Constructive realism. International Studies Review. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 346–348.

43. Legro J.W. (1996). Culture and preferences in the international cooperation two-step. American Political Science Review. Vol. 90. No. 1. P. 118–137.

44. Maesse J. (2017) The elitism dispositif: hierarchization, discourses of excellence and organizational change in European economics. Higher Education. Vol. 73. No. 6. P. 909–927.

45. March J.G., Olsen J.P. (1998) The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders. International Organization. Vol. 52. No. 4. P. 943–69.

46. Martin N. (2019). From containment to realpolitik and back again: A realist constructivist analysis of Turkey–EU relations and the migration issue. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 57. No. 6. P. 1349–1365.

47. Mattern J.B. (2005). Why soft power isn't so soft: representational force and the sociolinguistic construction of attraction in world politics. Millennium. Vol. 33. No. 3. P. 583–612.

48. McKeown R. (2009). Norm regress: US revisionism and the slow death of the torture norm. International relations. Vol. 23. No. 1. P. 5–25.

49. Mearsheimer J. (2018). The rise & fall of the liberal inter-national order. Paper prepared for presentation at Notre Dame International Security Center. Available online at: https://ndisc.nd.edu/assets/288231/rise_%20and_fall_of_the_liberal_international_order.september_11_2018.pdf

50. Mearsheimer J.J. (1994). The false promise of international institutions. International security. Vol. 19. No. 3. P. 5-49.

51. Michael A. (2018). Realist-Constructivism and the India–Pakistan Conflict: A New Theoretical Approach for an Old Rivalry. Asian Politics & Policy. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 100–114.

52. Moszynski P. (2004). Nairobi summit opens with call for action for landmine survivors. British Medical Journal. No. 7478. P. 1306.

53. Nadelmann E. (1990) Global Prohibition Regimes: The Evolution of Norms in International Society. International Organization. 44. P. 479–526.

54. Nagtzaam G. (2009). The making of international environmental treaties: Neoliberal and constructivist analyses of normative evolution. Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham. 259 p.

55. Nayan R. (Ed.). (2013). The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty and India. Routledge. O'Sullivan, K. (2014). Humanitarian encounters: Biafra, NGOs and imaginings of the Third World in Britain and Ireland, 1967–70. Journal of Genocide Research. Vol. 16. No. 2–3. P. 299–315.

56. Panke D., Petersohn U. (2016). Norm challenges and norm death: The inexplicable? Cooperation and Conflict. Vol. 51. No. 1. P. 3–19.

57. Pape R.A. (2012). When duty calls: A pragmatic standard of humanitarian intervention. International Security. Vol. 37. No. 1. P. 41–80.

58. Price R. (1998). Reversing the gun sights: transnational civil society targets land mines. International organization. Vol. 52. No. 3. P. 613–644.

59. Risse T., Risse-Kappen T., Ropp S.C., Sikkink K. (Eds.). (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 291p.

60. Rosert E., Sauer F. (2019). Prohibiting autonomous weapons: Put human dignity first. Global Policy. Vol. 10. No. 3. P. 370–375.

61. Ross L. (1998). China: Environmental protection, domestic policy trends, patterns of participation in regimes and compliance with international norms. The China Quarterly. No. 156. P. 809–835.

62. Rutherford K. (2000). The evolving arms control agenda: Implications of the role of NGOs in banning antipersonnel landmines. World Politics. Vol. 53. No. 1. P. 74–114.

63. Salmi J. (2009). The challenge of establishing world-class universities. Washington D.C.:World Bank Publications. Published online: http://publications.worldbank.org/ecommerce/catalog/product?item_id=8973956

64. Schmidt A., Sikkink K. (2019). Breaking the ban? the heterogeneous impact of US contestation of the torture norm. Journal of Global Security Studies. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 105–122.

65. Schneiker A. (2021). Norm Sabotage: Conceptual Reflection on a Phenomenon That Challenges WellEstablished Norms. International Studies Perspectives. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 106–123.

66. Singh A.(2013). Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition. New York: Open Society Justice Initiative. Texas University Press. 216p.

67. Sjoberg L. (2020). Permutations and Combinations in Theorizing Global Politics: Whither Realist Constructivism? The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism, 193 p.

68. Smith K.E. (2014). The UK and ‘genocide’ in Biafra. Journal of Genocide Research. Vol. 16. No. 2–3. P. 247–262.

69. Sorensen G. (2008). The case for combining material forces and ideas in the study of IR. European Journal of International Relations. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 5–32.

70. Sterling-Folker J. (2004). Realist-constructivism and morality. International Studies Review. Vol. 6. No. 2. P. 341–343.

71. Verhoeven S., Wouters J. (2005). The Prohibition of Genocide as a Norm of Ius Cogens and its Implications for the Enforcement of the Law of Genocide. International Criminal Law Review. Vol. 5. No. 3. P. 401–416.

72. Wei C.H. (2020). Coercive Engagement: Lessons from US Policy towards China. The Social Construction of State Power: Applying Realist Constructivism. 123 p.

73. Wendt A. (1987). The Agent-Structure Problem. International Organization. Vol. 41. No. 3. P. 335–70.

74. Wiener A. (2014). A theory of contestation. Springer. Berlin. 95 p.

75. Yang L., Yang J., Wang C. (2021). The research-intensive university in a glonacal higher education system: the creation of the world-class university in China. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. P. 1–20.