Pub Date : 2021-11-30DOI: 10.15211/soveurope62021178189
Artem Barynkin, N. Mezhevich
The Second World War has undoubtedly left a deep scar on the historical memory of the Polish people. The hardest ordeal for the Polish Republic was the military confrontation with Nazi Germany, which resulted in the loss of statehood and the horrors of the German occupation regime. As a result of World War II, Poland lost almost 40% of its national wealth and about 6 million of its people. The issue of political interpretations of historical events in contemporary Polish historical and political discourse is of particular importance. Reflected in educational literature, it is no less important than the positions set out in academic journals. Yesterday's schoolboy and student today is a minister's assistant and an officer, tomorrow a minister and a general. At the same time, there is no certainty that they will again turn to systemic education. One should also take into account the current status of the Polish Republic, its fundamental economic achievements and the apparent desire for an independent line in the European Union. All this makes the dialogue actual even in the current extremely difficult conditions.
{"title":"Genesis of the Second World War in Contemporary Polish Historical and Political Discourse","authors":"Artem Barynkin, N. Mezhevich","doi":"10.15211/soveurope62021178189","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope62021178189","url":null,"abstract":"The Second World War has undoubtedly left a deep scar on the historical memory of the Polish people. The hardest ordeal for the Polish Republic was the military confrontation with Nazi Germany, which resulted in the loss of statehood and the horrors of the German occupation regime. As a result of World War II, Poland lost almost 40% of its national wealth and about 6 million of its people. The issue of political interpretations of historical events in contemporary Polish historical and political discourse is of particular importance. Reflected in educational literature, it is no less important than the positions set out in academic journals. Yesterday's schoolboy and student today is a minister's assistant and an officer, tomorrow a minister and a general. At the same time, there is no certainty that they will again turn to systemic education. One should also take into account the current status of the Polish Republic, its fundamental economic achievements and the apparent desire for an independent line in the European Union. All this makes the dialogue actual even in the current extremely difficult conditions.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44137296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-30DOI: 10.15211/soveurope62021133143
D. Bazarkina
This article aims to identify the main components of the EU approach to countering hybrid threats. To achieve this goal, research questions were posed: 1) How does the theory of hybrid warfare define hybrid threats, what are its strengths and weaknesses? 2) How is the approach to combating hybrid threats regulated in the EU? 3) What changes are taking place in this approach under the influence of trends in recent years, including the crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic? The author concludes that the “open architecture” of the hybrid war theory, the wide possibilities of interpreting the definition of hybrid threats allow us to improve practical measures and theoretical approaches to security problems. However, as economic competition and political contradictions under geopolitical rivalry deepen, the approach to countering hybrid threats is hyper politicized, being used to justify sanctions pressure, strengthening military blocs or massive psychological campaigns against a political adversary. The EU tries to develop and improve a systemic approach to ensuring security in the context of the growth of hybrid threats. However, this approach is increasingly deformed under the influence of above-mentioned hyperpoliticization. This is especially evident in the EU’s attitude towards Russia and China, which are constantly accused of creating hybrid threats. The excessive use of the rhetoric of the hybrid war theory in the EU discourse jeopardizes the security of Europe.
{"title":"Evolution of Approaches to Countering Hybrid Threats in the European Union’s Strategic Planning","authors":"D. Bazarkina","doi":"10.15211/soveurope62021133143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope62021133143","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to identify the main components of the EU approach to countering hybrid threats. To achieve this goal, research questions were posed: 1) How does the theory of hybrid warfare define hybrid threats, what are its strengths and weaknesses? 2) How is the approach to combating hybrid threats regulated in the EU? 3) What changes are taking place in this approach under the influence of trends in recent years, including the crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic? The author concludes that the “open architecture” of the hybrid war theory, the wide possibilities of interpreting the definition of hybrid threats allow us to improve practical measures and theoretical approaches to security problems. However, as economic competition and political contradictions under geopolitical rivalry deepen, the approach to countering hybrid threats is hyper politicized, being used to justify sanctions pressure, strengthening military blocs or massive psychological campaigns against a political adversary. The EU tries to develop and improve a systemic approach to ensuring security in the context of the growth of hybrid threats. However, this approach is increasingly deformed under the influence of above-mentioned hyperpoliticization. This is especially evident in the EU’s attitude towards Russia and China, which are constantly accused of creating hybrid threats. The excessive use of the rhetoric of the hybrid war theory in the EU discourse jeopardizes the security of Europe.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44708680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope52021190198
Aleksandr Nadzharov
The Horn of Africa has gained strategic importance due to its transit location and the rapid growth of regional economies. The French Republic, historically is presented in the region through its military base in Djibouti and seeks to consolidate and expand its influence. Paris seeks to gain a foothold in the energy, infrastructure, and arms markets and to expand its cooperation with key Middle Eastern partners. The Djibouti base itself serves as the northwestern flank of the French presence in the IndoPacific. Nevertheless, the French policy faces several challenges: regional destabilization, the rise of great power rivalry, and the lack of a broad foreign policy toolkit. Nevertheless, Paris seeks to overcome the challenges and its own financial limitations by building networks of presence through its cultural and humanitarian institutions. Moreover, due to Brexit, Paris is the only power representing the EU in the IndoPacific through its military bases, which may facilitate the europeanization of French foreign policy in the region.
{"title":"French Foreign Policy in the Horn of Africa Region","authors":"Aleksandr Nadzharov","doi":"10.15211/soveurope52021190198","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope52021190198","url":null,"abstract":"The Horn of Africa has gained strategic importance due to its transit location and the rapid growth of regional economies. The French Republic, historically is presented in the region through its military base in Djibouti and seeks to consolidate and expand its influence. Paris seeks to gain a foothold in the energy, infrastructure, and arms markets and to expand its cooperation with key Middle Eastern partners. The Djibouti base itself serves as the northwestern flank of the French presence in the IndoPacific. Nevertheless, the French policy faces several challenges: regional destabilization, the rise of great power rivalry, and the lack of a broad foreign policy toolkit. Nevertheless, Paris seeks to overcome the challenges and its own financial limitations by building networks of presence through its cultural and humanitarian institutions. Moreover, due to Brexit, Paris is the only power representing the EU in the IndoPacific through its military bases, which may facilitate the europeanization of French foreign policy in the region.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46325344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope520213244
T. Romanova
Emmanuel Macron‟s 2017 speeches gave start to the discourse on the European Union‟s (EU‟s) sovereignty. This discourse has been advanced by the national and supranational elite of the EU as well as by its expert community. The article identifies key characteristics of this discourse and its potential consequences for the EU and its relations with Russia. The four ways (attributes) in which sovereignty has been used as identified by Stephen Krasner are used as the theoretical basis of the analysis. With the help of discourse analysis, the author identifies three dimensions in the EU‟s discourse on sovereignty: these are Westphalian, interdependence and domestic sovereignties. The first and the second manifest themselves in the economic field (in particular, in the regulation of the digital sphere), the third one is linked to the discussion on cooperation in the field of security and defence. The discussion on strengthening of the supranational level in the field of security and defence substitutes the absence of the discussion on citizens as holders of domestic sovereignty; it limits the potential of the EU‟s sovereignty. De facto, the discourse on the EU‟s sovereignty is a response to global processes, where the EU finds challenges and threats for itself. References to values and to the EU as its agent form an important component of the discourse on the EU‟s sovereignty. Externally the EU as a result demonstrates both its wish for more independence from external players and its determination to maintain its participation in the globalization processes. The rhetoric of sovereignty also conceptually means the EU‟s refusal of ambitions to be a normative power. Sovereignty has also been an integral part of EU-Russian discussions. Yet the EU‟s discourse on sovereignty does not create any prospects for improving this relationship.
{"title":"The EU’s Discourse on Sovereignty: Content and Consequences","authors":"T. Romanova","doi":"10.15211/soveurope520213244","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope520213244","url":null,"abstract":"Emmanuel Macron‟s 2017 speeches gave start to the discourse on the European Union‟s (EU‟s) sovereignty. This discourse has been advanced by the national and supranational elite of the EU as well as by its expert community. The article identifies key characteristics of this discourse and its potential consequences for the EU and its relations with Russia. The four ways (attributes) in which sovereignty has been used as identified by Stephen Krasner are used as the theoretical basis of the analysis. With the help of discourse analysis, the author identifies three dimensions in the EU‟s discourse on sovereignty: these are Westphalian, interdependence and domestic sovereignties. The first and the second manifest themselves in the economic field (in particular, in the regulation of the digital sphere), the third one is linked to the discussion on cooperation in the field of security and defence. The discussion on strengthening of the supranational level in the field of security and defence substitutes the absence of the discussion on citizens as holders of domestic sovereignty; it limits the potential of the EU‟s sovereignty. De facto, the discourse on the EU‟s sovereignty is a response to global processes, where the EU finds challenges and threats for itself. References to values and to the EU as its agent form an important component of the discourse on the EU‟s sovereignty. Externally the EU as a result demonstrates both its wish for more independence from external players and its determination to maintain its participation in the globalization processes. The rhetoric of sovereignty also conceptually means the EU‟s refusal of ambitions to be a normative power. Sovereignty has also been an integral part of EU-Russian discussions. Yet the EU‟s discourse on sovereignty does not create any prospects for improving this relationship.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46162344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope520214555
M. Entin, D. Galushko
The article explores the legal consequences of the UK's withdrawal from the European Union. The scope of personal data protection was taken as an example. The purpose of the article is to study and analyze the legal aspects of the termination of the UK's membership in the European Union, its impact on the cross-border transfer of personal data between the parties, as well as the development of legal regulation in this area. The article shows that, despite the signing of the Withdrawal Agreement, as well as the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, there is a complication of legal regulation, as well as the emergence of potential contradictions and threats to the interests of interested parties. The sphere of personal data protection clearly demonstrates that despite the desire for the sovereignization of legal regulation on the part of the UK, its legal system remains dependent on the legal order of the European Union. The UK's national regulation on personal data will be under constant monitoring by the competent EU authorities, which indirectly confirms the failure to achieve the goals of the full return of the UK's delegated sovereign powers. It is concluded that the EU Court of Justice still retains its jurisdiction over the United Kingdom, in particular, in connection with possibility to challenge decisions on adequacy, as well as through the adoption of its own practice on issues related to personal data protection.
{"title":"On the Legal Consequences of Brexit (on the example of personal data protection)","authors":"M. Entin, D. Galushko","doi":"10.15211/soveurope520214555","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope520214555","url":null,"abstract":"The article explores the legal consequences of the UK's withdrawal from the European Union. The scope of personal data protection was taken as an example. The purpose of the article is to study and analyze the legal aspects of the termination of the UK's membership in the European Union, its impact on the cross-border transfer of personal data between the parties, as well as the development of legal regulation in this area. The article shows that, despite the signing of the Withdrawal Agreement, as well as the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, there is a complication of legal regulation, as well as the emergence of potential contradictions and threats to the interests of interested parties. The sphere of personal data protection clearly demonstrates that despite the desire for the sovereignization of legal regulation on the part of the UK, its legal system remains dependent on the legal order of the European Union. The UK's national regulation on personal data will be under constant monitoring by the competent EU authorities, which indirectly confirms the failure to achieve the goals of the full return of the UK's delegated sovereign powers. It is concluded that the EU Court of Justice still retains its jurisdiction over the United Kingdom, in particular, in connection with possibility to challenge decisions on adequacy, as well as through the adoption of its own practice on issues related to personal data protection.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46009272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope52021100112
V. Belov
The author continues the study of the impact of the coronavirus crisis on the economic and political space of Germany. The second article outlines the features of the double transition ‒ energy and digital ‒ to a climate-neutral economy. Germany is carrying it out within the framework of the European Green Deal, the adoption of which almost coincided with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The coronavirus crisis has become a catalyst for the transformation processes in the field of energy and digitalization, many of which Berlin began to implement long before the onset of its consequences. Lockdowns have led to a reduction in industry's primary energy and electricity consumption, motivated businesses to relocate employees to home-based work, and accelerate the introduction of new digital technologies. The coronavirus crisis has become a challenge for government departments, healthcare institutions, secondary and higher education, which management and employees were not ready for a quick use of distance technologies. The author analyzes the structural policy of the coalition government, the contribution of German-French initiatives and projects to the implementation of the double transition in the field of energy, cloud technologies and artificial intelligence, assesses the role of a new Climate Protection Law
{"title":"Impact of the Coronacrisis on Germany's Transition to a Climate-neutral Economy","authors":"V. Belov","doi":"10.15211/soveurope52021100112","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope52021100112","url":null,"abstract":"The author continues the study of the impact of the coronavirus crisis on the economic and political space of Germany. The second article outlines the features of the double transition ‒ energy and digital ‒ to a climate-neutral economy. Germany is carrying it out within the framework of the European Green Deal, the adoption of which almost coincided with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The coronavirus crisis has become a catalyst for the transformation processes in the field of energy and digitalization, many of which Berlin began to implement long before the onset of its consequences. Lockdowns have led to a reduction in industry's primary energy and electricity consumption, motivated businesses to relocate employees to home-based work, and accelerate the introduction of new digital technologies. The coronavirus crisis has become a challenge for government departments, healthcare institutions, secondary and higher education, which management and employees were not ready for a quick use of distance technologies. The author analyzes the structural policy of the coalition government, the contribution of German-French initiatives and projects to the implementation of the double transition in the field of energy, cloud technologies and artificial intelligence, assesses the role of a new Climate Protection Law","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42222259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope52021113125
A. Bazhan
The author examines the problems of economic growth of the EU in the period before the coronavirus pandemic, as well as during the 2020 economic crisis and gradual recovery. It is argued that the decrease in 2017‒2019 was caused by a number of long-term reasons, i.e. slow technological renewal of production base and narrowing of trade surplus due to loss of competitive advantages over producers from Southeast Asia. The author analyses the mechanics of pandemic’s impact on EU production volume, caused by decline in general demand and supply of goods and services. The EU economic policy is viewed as an appropriate instrument to protect citizens and companies from bankruptcy. It is outlined that the recovery will stem not from the economic policy, but from countering the pandemic with vaccines and sanitary restrictions. The author forecasts that economic growth rates in the region will slow down due to the reasons that emerged before the pandemic. Moreover, the growth will be negatively affected by the current EU policy of greater use of clean energy and technologies that preserve the environment, but inflate the production costs.
{"title":"Slowing Economic Growth and Falling Production in EU","authors":"A. Bazhan","doi":"10.15211/soveurope52021113125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope52021113125","url":null,"abstract":"The author examines the problems of economic growth of the EU in the period before the coronavirus pandemic, as well as during the 2020 economic crisis and gradual recovery. It is argued that the decrease in 2017‒2019 was caused by a number of long-term reasons, i.e. slow technological renewal of production base and narrowing of trade surplus due to loss of competitive advantages over producers from Southeast Asia. The author analyses the mechanics of pandemic’s impact on EU production volume, caused by decline in general demand and supply of goods and services. The EU economic policy is viewed as an appropriate instrument to protect citizens and companies from bankruptcy. It is outlined that the recovery will stem not from the economic policy, but from countering the pandemic with vaccines and sanitary restrictions. The author forecasts that economic growth rates in the region will slow down due to the reasons that emerged before the pandemic. Moreover, the growth will be negatively affected by the current EU policy of greater use of clean energy and technologies that preserve the environment, but inflate the production costs.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47942422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope520210518
M. Nosov
COVID-19 pandemic started one century after Spanish flu epidemic that killed about 40 million people. It ended as unexpectedly as it began, and was followed by the Paris Conference of 1919, which gave start to the Versailles system, planned as a new system of eternal peace, but collapsed 20 years later. The same happened with the Yalta system at the end of XX centure. Today, the configuration of the world is in the process of changes. The USSR disappeared from the political map of the world, and new world centers appeared with different views on global politics. The interests of the United States, Russia, China, and EU-27 do not coincide, and often contradict each other. Today, with a certain degree of probability, one can speak of the formation of a "new bipolarity", where the United States? NATO and the EU enter into an economic, political and potentially a military confrontation with China and Russia. The future of this system will largely depend on both the outcome of economic competition between the West and China and the level of development of relations between China and Russia. The current pandemic, let's hope, will also end someday, and humanity will be able to create a system of bipolar or multipolar interstate relations that will reliably protect the world from epidemics and wars. This article examines the prospects for the formation of a multipolar world and the future role of Russia
{"title":"The World in the XXI Century: the Dilemmas of Polarity","authors":"M. Nosov","doi":"10.15211/soveurope520210518","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope520210518","url":null,"abstract":"COVID-19 pandemic started one century after Spanish flu epidemic that killed about 40 million people. It ended as unexpectedly as it began, and was followed by the Paris Conference of 1919, which gave start to the Versailles system, planned as a new system of eternal peace, but collapsed 20 years later. The same happened with the Yalta system at the end of XX centure. Today, the configuration of the world is in the process of changes. The USSR disappeared from the political map of the world, and new world centers appeared with different views on global politics. The interests of the United States, Russia, China, and EU-27 do not coincide, and often contradict each other. Today, with a certain degree of probability, one can speak of the formation of a \"new bipolarity\", where the United States? NATO and the EU enter into an economic, political and potentially a military confrontation with China and Russia. The future of this system will largely depend on both the outcome of economic competition between the West and China and the level of development of relations between China and Russia. The current pandemic, let's hope, will also end someday, and humanity will be able to create a system of bipolar or multipolar interstate relations that will reliably protect the world from epidemics and wars. This article examines the prospects for the formation of a multipolar world and the future role of Russia","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":"34 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41295978","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope52021137149
Alexey Sindeev
. This article opens a series of research papers dedicated to the former Foreign Minister of the USSR Andrei Gromyko. His contribution to the development and implementation of the security policy is highlighted. The détente policy is understood as part of the security policy. The first article defines the security policy. The most important stages of A. Gromyko diplomatic career are highlighted. Problems of foreign policy continuity, the role that the personal factor plays, and the relationship between strategy and tactics are particularly important in the research the security policy. A distinction must be made between strategy and tactics in politics and diplomacy. This has an essential practical meaning because a correct balance of tactical and strategic approaches is a prerequisite for the success of the security system, which can be built within the framework of a certain paradigm. The author argues that the descriptive story (Part 4 of the article) is one of the possible variants of historiography explaining the role of the personal factor. Much more important, however, is to supplement traditional history with research, because this can lead to the «Gromyko rules» (Part 3 of the article). This helps to better articulate the lessons of history. The article contributes to the author's earlier works on the role of A. Gromyko and his diplomatic school.
{"title":"A.A. Gromyko and the Security Policy (1963‒1964)","authors":"Alexey Sindeev","doi":"10.15211/soveurope52021137149","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope52021137149","url":null,"abstract":". This article opens a series of research papers dedicated to the former Foreign Minister of the USSR Andrei Gromyko. His contribution to the development and implementation of the security policy is highlighted. The détente policy is understood as part of the security policy. The first article defines the security policy. The most important stages of A. Gromyko diplomatic career are highlighted. Problems of foreign policy continuity, the role that the personal factor plays, and the relationship between strategy and tactics are particularly important in the research the security policy. A distinction must be made between strategy and tactics in politics and diplomacy. This has an essential practical meaning because a correct balance of tactical and strategic approaches is a prerequisite for the success of the security system, which can be built within the framework of a certain paradigm. The author argues that the descriptive story (Part 4 of the article) is one of the possible variants of historiography explaining the role of the personal factor. Much more important, however, is to supplement traditional history with research, because this can lead to the «Gromyko rules» (Part 3 of the article). This helps to better articulate the lessons of history. The article contributes to the author's earlier works on the role of A. Gromyko and his diplomatic school.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43934325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-31DOI: 10.15211/soveurope520215667
N. Litvak, N. Pomozova
The article presents a comparative interdisciplinary study of approaches to the problem of human rights in relations between the European Union and the People’s Republic of China. This factor is traditionally used by the EU and the West to criticize the policies of other countries, combining pressure and encouragement in order to Westernize them ‒ to accept and practicallyl implement the Western concept of human rights.However, modern China, having carried out rapid socio-economic and scientific-technological development, not only did not change its political system, but also began to reform the international sphere of human rights in accordance with their understanding. Ideological inertia and simplification of the problem do not contribute to understanding in Europe how, while retaining the socialist ideology, China became the second economy in the world, acquiring global primacy and promoting its model, without setting, like the West, special political conditions.At the same time, there are contradictions between the Western countries, and international law, including the field of human rights, which have a historical, dynamic character, and a very diverse implementation. In the socio-philosophical sense, the competition between the constructivist and functional approaches in the forms of the liberal-bourgeois and socialist systems is developing between the EU and the PRC.
{"title":"Conceptual Approaches to Human Rights in the European Union and the People’s Republic of China","authors":"N. Litvak, N. Pomozova","doi":"10.15211/soveurope520215667","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15211/soveurope520215667","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents a comparative interdisciplinary study of approaches to the problem of human rights in relations between the European Union and the People’s Republic of China. This factor is traditionally used by the EU and the West to criticize the policies of other countries, combining pressure and encouragement in order to Westernize them ‒ to accept and practicallyl implement the Western concept of human rights.However, modern China, having carried out rapid socio-economic and scientific-technological development, not only did not change its political system, but also began to reform the international sphere of human rights in accordance with their understanding. Ideological inertia and simplification of the problem do not contribute to understanding in Europe how, while retaining the socialist ideology, China became the second economy in the world, acquiring global primacy and promoting its model, without setting, like the West, special political conditions.At the same time, there are contradictions between the Western countries, and international law, including the field of human rights, which have a historical, dynamic character, and a very diverse implementation. In the socio-philosophical sense, the competition between the constructivist and functional approaches in the forms of the liberal-bourgeois and socialist systems is developing between the EU and the PRC.","PeriodicalId":42204,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Europe-Sovremennaya Evropa","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2021-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47379181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：