Theory of International Relations and Image of Desired Future

The article seeks to utilize potential of International Relations Theory (IRT) for revealing and promoting national values and national interests. As demonstrated by the example of the United States, IRT develops in a particular social context and expresses national and historical characteristics. Critical dialogue among American realist, liberal, and constructivist theories is based on ideological beliefs in progressive nature of US values, understanding of global security, world order, economic development and human rights. Russia also possesses a rich experience of images of a desired future. Three traditions of Russian international theory – Westernism, Statism, and Civilizationism – have emerged from the country’s historical experience and may serve as foundations for formulating a vital image of a future. At the same time, progress of Russian IRT in the direction of development and empirical justification of such image meets with two serious obstacles. The first one has to do with lacking empirical research and new expert analyses of realities that must underpin a realistic national image of a future. The second obstacle results from weaknesses of Russian contemporary IRT. What is required for developing Russian IRT is a dual critical dialogue at both national and global levels. An idea of desired future formed on the basis of such dialogue will have strong national roots and will be protected from possible foreign interferences. Today, the image of a desired future must integrate an idea of strong Russia capable of defending its interests and values from outside interferences. In a longer run, such image must also include an idea of internal development in coordination with global trends and conditions. Russia must solve tasks of internal development under conditions of global instability and Western pressures. It should also continue the practice of limited cooperation with those who do not share its interests and values. Finally, such image should assume Russia that is both culturally autonomous and open to the outside world.

1. Barnett M., Finnemore M. (2004). Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 226 p.

2. Bogaturov A.D. (2004). «Strategiya peremalyvaniya» v mezhdunarodnyh otnosheniyah i vneshnej politike SSHA [‘Strategy of Milling’ in International Relations and in the U.S. Foreign Policy]. M.: Editorial Urss. 48 p.

3. Bremmer I. (2018). Us vs. Them: The Failure of Globalism. New York: Portfolio. Penguin. 208 p.

4. Brooks S.G., Ikenberry G.I., Wohlforth W. C. (2013). Don’t Come Home, America. International Security. Vol. 37. No. 3. P. 7–51.

5. Drezner D.W. (2014). The System Worked. How the World Stopped Another Great Depression. New York: Oxford University Press. 288 p.

6. Finnemore M. (2009). Legitimacy, Hypocrisy, and the Social Structure of Unipolarity: Why Being a Unipole Isn't All It's Cracked up to Be. World Politics. Vol. 61. No. 1. P. 58–85.

7. Hoffmann S. (1995). An American Social Science: International Relations. In Der-Derian J. (ed.) International Theory: Critical Investigations. New York: New York University Press. 407 p.

8. Ikenberry J., Mastanduno M., Wohlforth W. (2011). International Relations Theory and the Consequences of Unipolarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 392 p.

9. Katzenstein P. (Ed.). (2009). Civilizations in World Politics: Plural and Pluralist Perspectives. London: Routledge, 2009. 248 p.

10. Kortunov A. (2016). Neizbezhnost' strannogo mira [Inavitability of strange world]. Rossiiskii sovet po mezhdunarodnym delam. URL: http://old.russiancouncil.ru/inner/?id_4=7930#top-content (accessed 03.08.2019).

11. Lieber R.L. (2016). Retreat and Its Consequences: American Foreign Policy and the Problem of World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 152 p.

12. Mezhuev B. (2017). «Ostrov Rossiya» i Rossijskaya Politika Identichnosti [“Island of Russia” and Russian Identity Policy]. Rossiia v global'noi politike. URL: http://www.globalaffairs.ru/number/Ostrov-Rossiyai-rossiiskaya-politika-identichnosti-18657 (accessed 03.08.2019).

13. Miller A., Luk'yanov F. (2016). Otstranennost' Vmesto Konfrontacii. [Distraction instead of Confrontation]. Rossiia v global'noi politike. URL: http://www.globalaffairs.ru/number/Otstranennost-vmestokonfrontatcii--18477 (accessed 03.08.2019).

14. Monteiro N. (2014). Theory of Unipolar Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 294 p.

15. Nikonov V. (2017). Nazad, k Koncertu [Back to concert]. Rossiia v global'noi politike. URL: http://www. globalaffairs.ru/number/Nazad-k-Kontcertu-19191 (accessed 03.08.2019).

16. Tsygankov A.P. (2015). Otlozhennyi Politsentrizm [Deferred Policentrism]. Rossiia v global'noi politike. URL: https://globalaffairs.ru/number/otlozhennyi-politcentrizm-16924 (accessed 03.08.2019).

17. Tsygankov A.P. (2015). Sil'noe Gosudarstvo: Teoriia i Praktika v 21 Veke [Strong State: Theory and Practice in 21 century]. Mezhdunarodnyi Diskussionnyi Forum Valdai. URL: http://ru.valdaiclub.com/a/ valdai-papers/valdayskaya-zapiska-15/ (accessed 03.08.2019).

18. Tsygankov A.P. (2018). Russkaya Mezhdunarodnaya Teoriya: Tri Tradicii [Russian International Theory: Three Traditions]. Moscow: Rusains. 334 p.

19. Tsygankov A.P., Tsygankov P.A. (2015). Rossijskaya teoriya mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij: put' k nacional'nomu samoopredeleniyu [Russian Theory of International Relations : the Pathway to National SelfDetermination]. In : Gaman-Golutvina O.V. (ed.) Strukturnye transformatsii i razvitie otechestvennyh shkol politologii. Moscow: Aspekt Press. (Seriya «Rossijskaya politicheskaya nauka: Istoki i perspektivy». Pod obshch. red. O.V. Gaman-Golutvinoj). P. 257–274.

20. Tsygankov A.P., Tsygankov P.A. (2017). Prosveshchennoe Derzhavnichestvo (A.D. Bogaturov i Rossijskaya Teoriya Mezhdunarodnyh Otnoshenij) [Enlightened Statism (A.D. Bogaturov and Russian International Relations Theory)]. Polis. No. 4. P. 175–185.

21. Zakaria F. (2012). The Post-American World. Release 2.0. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 336 p.