世界秩序形成的历史和政治学背景下形成边境地区的条件

І. Б. Озадовський
{"title":"世界秩序形成的历史和政治学背景下形成边境地区的条件","authors":"І. Б. Озадовський","doi":"10.31558/2519-2949.2023.3.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Borderlands, as spaces where two or more spheres of hegemony intersect, seeking to control resources and extend their sphere of influence, are formed in various chronological and spatial contexts with different initial conditions, with historical factors having a key role. This leads to the fact that borderlands are not homogeneous in nature, essence, and forms of interaction with political actors.The process of borderlands formation is non-linear: the peculiarities of this process depend on spatial and temporal factors. Borders in the same region have different functions and meanings in different periods. Consequently, borders and borderlands in modern Africa, Asia, and Europe also significantly differ.Before the establishment of nation states, geographical factors contributed to the formation of border areas, which largely determined the initial conditions for these regions: resource potential, access to migration routes, natural preconditions for protection from external aggression, and to some extent, the specifics of political institutions. In the modern era, Eurasian frontier regions that failed to acquire full-fledged statehood became buffer zones of empires and objects of expansion. At the same time, the empires within which these territories were located tried to consolidate their power by violence. The limited opportunities for expansion on the European continent stimulated the \" export\" of violence to other parts of the world, where borders and frontiers were formed not on the basis of local specifics, but as a result of decisions made in the empire centers.The world wars, which largely erupted due to attempts to redistribute borderlands, both in Europe and on the periphery of empires, were the culmination of attempts to establish power over certain regions by force. The outcome of the World War II was attempted to be consolidated by introducing the inviolability of borders as one of the basic principles of international relations. However, in fact, this principle worked only in Europe and North America, while the world hegemons continued to \"export\" violence to other regions, using them as a battlefield. In addition, for new and weak sovereignties, \"hard borders\" proved to be a factor that did not contribute to the development of state institutions. Due to the influence of negative factors, the borders of these countries are transforming into conflict spaces, where the level of violence is constantly growing. In some cases, these conflicts are already destabilizing the states as a whole.At the same time, under the pressure of globalization, borders around the world are losing their importance and are eroding. Cross-border cooperation and free movement of capital are intensifying, and political power is gradually \"migrating\" from the state to supranational and subnational actors.In such circumstances, borderlands can claim their own subjectivity. Depending on the history of their formation and current state, border areas can be transformed into zones of international conflicts, creating threats to international security, or into spaces of intercultural dialogue, contributing to the stabilization of the global political system.","PeriodicalId":477981,"journal":{"name":"Політичне життя","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Умови формування прикордонних територій в історико-політологічному контексті становлення світопорядку\",\"authors\":\"І. Б. Озадовський\",\"doi\":\"10.31558/2519-2949.2023.3.16\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Borderlands, as spaces where two or more spheres of hegemony intersect, seeking to control resources and extend their sphere of influence, are formed in various chronological and spatial contexts with different initial conditions, with historical factors having a key role. This leads to the fact that borderlands are not homogeneous in nature, essence, and forms of interaction with political actors.The process of borderlands formation is non-linear: the peculiarities of this process depend on spatial and temporal factors. Borders in the same region have different functions and meanings in different periods. Consequently, borders and borderlands in modern Africa, Asia, and Europe also significantly differ.Before the establishment of nation states, geographical factors contributed to the formation of border areas, which largely determined the initial conditions for these regions: resource potential, access to migration routes, natural preconditions for protection from external aggression, and to some extent, the specifics of political institutions. In the modern era, Eurasian frontier regions that failed to acquire full-fledged statehood became buffer zones of empires and objects of expansion. At the same time, the empires within which these territories were located tried to consolidate their power by violence. The limited opportunities for expansion on the European continent stimulated the \\\" export\\\" of violence to other parts of the world, where borders and frontiers were formed not on the basis of local specifics, but as a result of decisions made in the empire centers.The world wars, which largely erupted due to attempts to redistribute borderlands, both in Europe and on the periphery of empires, were the culmination of attempts to establish power over certain regions by force. The outcome of the World War II was attempted to be consolidated by introducing the inviolability of borders as one of the basic principles of international relations. However, in fact, this principle worked only in Europe and North America, while the world hegemons continued to \\\"export\\\" violence to other regions, using them as a battlefield. In addition, for new and weak sovereignties, \\\"hard borders\\\" proved to be a factor that did not contribute to the development of state institutions. Due to the influence of negative factors, the borders of these countries are transforming into conflict spaces, where the level of violence is constantly growing. In some cases, these conflicts are already destabilizing the states as a whole.At the same time, under the pressure of globalization, borders around the world are losing their importance and are eroding. Cross-border cooperation and free movement of capital are intensifying, and political power is gradually \\\"migrating\\\" from the state to supranational and subnational actors.In such circumstances, borderlands can claim their own subjectivity. Depending on the history of their formation and current state, border areas can be transformed into zones of international conflicts, creating threats to international security, or into spaces of intercultural dialogue, contributing to the stabilization of the global political system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":477981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Політичне життя\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Політичне життя\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31558/2519-2949.2023.3.16\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Політичне життя","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31558/2519-2949.2023.3.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

边疆是两个或两个以上的霸权领域为控制资源和扩大势力范围而相互交叉的空间,它是在不同初始条件的不同时间和空间语境中形成的,历史因素起着关键作用。这导致了这样一个事实,即边境地区在本质上、本质上以及与政治参与者互动的形式上都不是同质的。边界地带形成的过程是非线性的,这一过程的特点取决于空间和时间因素。同一地区的边界在不同时期具有不同的功能和意义。因此,现代非洲、亚洲和欧洲的边界和边境地区也有很大的不同。在民族国家建立之前,地理因素促成了边境地区的形成,这在很大程度上决定了这些地区的初始条件:资源潜力、移民路线的可及性、免受外部侵略的自然前提,以及在某种程度上政治制度的特殊性。在现代,欧亚边境地区未能获得完全的国家地位,成为帝国的缓冲区和扩张的对象。与此同时,这些领土所在的帝国试图通过暴力巩固自己的权力。欧洲大陆有限的扩张机会刺激了向世界其他地区“输出”暴力,在那里,边界和边界的形成不是基于当地的具体情况,而是帝国中心做出决定的结果。世界大战在很大程度上是由于试图重新分配欧洲和帝国周边的边界而爆发的,是试图通过武力在某些地区建立权力的高潮。第二次世界大战的结果试图通过把边界不可侵犯作为国际关系的基本原则之一加以巩固。然而,事实上,这一原则只在欧洲和北美起作用,而世界霸权继续将暴力“输出”到其他地区,将其作为战场。此外,对于新兴和弱小的主权国家来说,“硬边界”被证明是一个无助于国家机构发展的因素。由于消极因素的影响,这些国家的边界正在变成冲突空间,暴力程度不断上升。在某些情况下,这些冲突已经破坏了整个国家的稳定。与此同时,在全球化的压力下,世界各地的边界正在失去其重要性并受到侵蚀。跨境合作和资本自由流动正在加剧,政治权力正逐渐从国家“转移”到超国家和次国家行动者。在这种情况下,边疆地区可以主张自己的主体性。根据其形成的历史和现状,边境地区可以转变为国际冲突地区,对国际安全构成威胁,也可以转变为文化间对话的空间,有助于全球政治体系的稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Умови формування прикордонних територій в історико-політологічному контексті становлення світопорядку
Borderlands, as spaces where two or more spheres of hegemony intersect, seeking to control resources and extend their sphere of influence, are formed in various chronological and spatial contexts with different initial conditions, with historical factors having a key role. This leads to the fact that borderlands are not homogeneous in nature, essence, and forms of interaction with political actors.The process of borderlands formation is non-linear: the peculiarities of this process depend on spatial and temporal factors. Borders in the same region have different functions and meanings in different periods. Consequently, borders and borderlands in modern Africa, Asia, and Europe also significantly differ.Before the establishment of nation states, geographical factors contributed to the formation of border areas, which largely determined the initial conditions for these regions: resource potential, access to migration routes, natural preconditions for protection from external aggression, and to some extent, the specifics of political institutions. In the modern era, Eurasian frontier regions that failed to acquire full-fledged statehood became buffer zones of empires and objects of expansion. At the same time, the empires within which these territories were located tried to consolidate their power by violence. The limited opportunities for expansion on the European continent stimulated the " export" of violence to other parts of the world, where borders and frontiers were formed not on the basis of local specifics, but as a result of decisions made in the empire centers.The world wars, which largely erupted due to attempts to redistribute borderlands, both in Europe and on the periphery of empires, were the culmination of attempts to establish power over certain regions by force. The outcome of the World War II was attempted to be consolidated by introducing the inviolability of borders as one of the basic principles of international relations. However, in fact, this principle worked only in Europe and North America, while the world hegemons continued to "export" violence to other regions, using them as a battlefield. In addition, for new and weak sovereignties, "hard borders" proved to be a factor that did not contribute to the development of state institutions. Due to the influence of negative factors, the borders of these countries are transforming into conflict spaces, where the level of violence is constantly growing. In some cases, these conflicts are already destabilizing the states as a whole.At the same time, under the pressure of globalization, borders around the world are losing their importance and are eroding. Cross-border cooperation and free movement of capital are intensifying, and political power is gradually "migrating" from the state to supranational and subnational actors.In such circumstances, borderlands can claim their own subjectivity. Depending on the history of their formation and current state, border areas can be transformed into zones of international conflicts, creating threats to international security, or into spaces of intercultural dialogue, contributing to the stabilization of the global political system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Теоретичні засади моделювання публічно-політичних процесів Асинхронність демократизації як глобальний тренд формування нового світопорядку Особливості тлумачення влади через панування Умови формування прикордонних територій в історико-політологічному контексті становлення світопорядку Архітектура регіонального представництва в системах багаторівневих відносин
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1