Понятие “сила” в международных отношениях: основные подходы, анализ, интерпретация
1552 661
Ключевые слова:
сила, категории силы, структурная сила, неореализм в мировой политикеАннотация
Сила сегодня остается одним из действенных средств современной мировой политики. С понятием силы свя- зана одна из центральных проблем международных отношений – проблема войны и мира, проблема конфликта и его разрешения, проблема безопасности. На основе «силы» акторы судят о возможностях друг друга, строят планы своего взаимодействия, принимают решения, оценивают степень стабильности международной систе- мы. Категория «сила» выполняет значительную методологическую роль в науке о международных отношениях, являясь важным инструментом их научного анализа: о значении «силового фактора» ведутся дискуссии между различными научно-теоретическими школами. Сила выступает критерием многообразных моделей систем меж- дународных отношений. На практике это означает, что различные государства в своих интересах используют различные модели с использованием «жесткой» либо «мягкой» силы.Библиографические ссылки
1 Gilpin R. War and Change in World Politics. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. – P. 13
2 Goodman Jay S. The Concept of «System» in International Relations Theory, Background. – 1965. -Vol.
8, No. 4 (Feb.). – P. 257-268 // The International Studies Association, by Wiley, Article Stable URL: http:// www.jstor.org/stable/3013730
3 Waltz K. N. Refl ection on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics // Neorealism and its Critics / Robert O. Keohane (ed.). – New York: Columbia University Press, 1986. – P. 333
4 Gallie W.B. Essentially Contested Concept // Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. – 1959, 56. – P.167-93
5 See: Weber M. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization; Wight M. Power Politics. – New York:Holmes and Meier, 1978
6 Spykman N. American Strategy and World Politics: The United States and the Balance of Power. – New York: Harcourt-Brace, 1942
7 Morgenthau H.J. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace / Alfred A. Knopf. – New York, 1948
8 Waltz K. N. Theory of International Politics / Addison-Wesley. – Melno Park, 1979. – P. 120-121; Waltz K. N. Realist Through and Neorealist Theory // Journal of International Affairs. – 1990. N 44(1). – P. 21-37
9 See: Keohanve R.O., Nye J. S. Power and Interdependence. – Harper Collins 1989; Guzzini S. Structural power: the limits of neorealist power analysis // International Organization. – 1993. – No 47. – P. 443-78; Lukes
St. Power and the Battle for Hearts and Minds: on the Bluntness of “Soft Power” // Power in World Politics /Ed. F. Berenskoetter, M. Williams. – New York: Routledge, 2007
10 Galtung J. East-West Interaction Patterns // Journal of Peace Research. – 1966. – No. 2. – Pp. 146-77
11 Knorr K. The Power of Nations: The Political Economy of International Relations. – New York: Basic Books, 1975. – Pp. 9-10
12 Pruitt D.G. National Power and International Responsiveness. Background. – 1964. – Vol. 7, No. 4
(Feb.). – P. 165-178 // The International Studies Association, by Wiley, Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3013643
13 Nye J. S. Soft Power // Foreign Policy. – 1990. – No. 80 (autumn). Twentieth Anniversary. – P. 153-171;
Nye J. S. Soft Power and American Foreign Policy // Political Science Quarterly. – 2004. – Vol. 119. -No. 2
(Summer). – P. 255-270; Nye J. S. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power // Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science. – 2008. – Vol. 616 (Public Diplomacy in a Changing World). – P. 94-109
14 Singer J. D., Small M. Alliance Aggregation and the Onset of War // Quantitative International Politics
/J. David Singer (ed.). – New York: Free Press, 1968. P.249
15 Hart J. Three Approaches to the Measurement of Power in International Relations // International
Organization. – 1976. – Vol. 30, No. 2 (Spring). – P. 289-305 // University of Wisconsin Press, URL: http:// www.jstor.org/stable/2706260; Holsti K. J. The Concept of Power in the Study of International Relations.
Background, 1964. – Vol. 7, No. 4 (Feb.). – P. 179-194 // The International Studies Association, URL: http://
www.jstor.org/stable/3013644; Dahl R. The Concept of Power // Behavioral Science. – 1957. – N 202, 2 July; Tellis A. J., Bially J., Layne Ch., McPherson M. Measuring National Power in the Postindustrial Age. – Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2000. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1110
16 See: Art R. J. The fungibility of force // The use of force: Military power in international politics /Ed.
R. Art and K. Waltz. – Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefi eld, 1996; Campbell K., O’Hallon M. Hard power:
The new politics of national security. New York: Basic Books, 2006; Cooper R. Hard power, soft power and the
goals of diplomacy. I American power in the 21st century / ed. D. Held and M. Koenig-Archibugi, Cambridge,2004. -167-80
17 Barnett M., Duvall R. Power in International Politics // International Organization. – 2005. – No 59 (1).– P. 39-75
18 Bachrach P., Baratz M. Two Faces of Power // American Political Science Review. – 1962. – No 56 (4).– P. 947-52
19 Pollack M. Engines of European Integration: Delegation, Agency and Agenda Setting the EU. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003; Zartman W., Rubin J. Power and Negotiation /Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000
2 Goodman Jay S. The Concept of «System» in International Relations Theory, Background. – 1965. -Vol.
8, No. 4 (Feb.). – P. 257-268 // The International Studies Association, by Wiley, Article Stable URL: http:// www.jstor.org/stable/3013730
3 Waltz K. N. Refl ection on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics // Neorealism and its Critics / Robert O. Keohane (ed.). – New York: Columbia University Press, 1986. – P. 333
4 Gallie W.B. Essentially Contested Concept // Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. – 1959, 56. – P.167-93
5 See: Weber M. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization; Wight M. Power Politics. – New York:Holmes and Meier, 1978
6 Spykman N. American Strategy and World Politics: The United States and the Balance of Power. – New York: Harcourt-Brace, 1942
7 Morgenthau H.J. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace / Alfred A. Knopf. – New York, 1948
8 Waltz K. N. Theory of International Politics / Addison-Wesley. – Melno Park, 1979. – P. 120-121; Waltz K. N. Realist Through and Neorealist Theory // Journal of International Affairs. – 1990. N 44(1). – P. 21-37
9 See: Keohanve R.O., Nye J. S. Power and Interdependence. – Harper Collins 1989; Guzzini S. Structural power: the limits of neorealist power analysis // International Organization. – 1993. – No 47. – P. 443-78; Lukes
St. Power and the Battle for Hearts and Minds: on the Bluntness of “Soft Power” // Power in World Politics /Ed. F. Berenskoetter, M. Williams. – New York: Routledge, 2007
10 Galtung J. East-West Interaction Patterns // Journal of Peace Research. – 1966. – No. 2. – Pp. 146-77
11 Knorr K. The Power of Nations: The Political Economy of International Relations. – New York: Basic Books, 1975. – Pp. 9-10
12 Pruitt D.G. National Power and International Responsiveness. Background. – 1964. – Vol. 7, No. 4
(Feb.). – P. 165-178 // The International Studies Association, by Wiley, Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3013643
13 Nye J. S. Soft Power // Foreign Policy. – 1990. – No. 80 (autumn). Twentieth Anniversary. – P. 153-171;
Nye J. S. Soft Power and American Foreign Policy // Political Science Quarterly. – 2004. – Vol. 119. -No. 2
(Summer). – P. 255-270; Nye J. S. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power // Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science. – 2008. – Vol. 616 (Public Diplomacy in a Changing World). – P. 94-109
14 Singer J. D., Small M. Alliance Aggregation and the Onset of War // Quantitative International Politics
/J. David Singer (ed.). – New York: Free Press, 1968. P.249
15 Hart J. Three Approaches to the Measurement of Power in International Relations // International
Organization. – 1976. – Vol. 30, No. 2 (Spring). – P. 289-305 // University of Wisconsin Press, URL: http:// www.jstor.org/stable/2706260; Holsti K. J. The Concept of Power in the Study of International Relations.
Background, 1964. – Vol. 7, No. 4 (Feb.). – P. 179-194 // The International Studies Association, URL: http://
www.jstor.org/stable/3013644; Dahl R. The Concept of Power // Behavioral Science. – 1957. – N 202, 2 July; Tellis A. J., Bially J., Layne Ch., McPherson M. Measuring National Power in the Postindustrial Age. – Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2000. http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1110
16 See: Art R. J. The fungibility of force // The use of force: Military power in international politics /Ed.
R. Art and K. Waltz. – Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefi eld, 1996; Campbell K., O’Hallon M. Hard power:
The new politics of national security. New York: Basic Books, 2006; Cooper R. Hard power, soft power and the
goals of diplomacy. I American power in the 21st century / ed. D. Held and M. Koenig-Archibugi, Cambridge,2004. -167-80
17 Barnett M., Duvall R. Power in International Politics // International Organization. – 2005. – No 59 (1).– P. 39-75
18 Bachrach P., Baratz M. Two Faces of Power // American Political Science Review. – 1962. – No 56 (4).– P. 947-52
19 Pollack M. Engines of European Integration: Delegation, Agency and Agenda Setting the EU. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003; Zartman W., Rubin J. Power and Negotiation /Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000
Загрузки
Как цитировать
Губайдуллина, М. Ш., & Инсебаева C. A. (2016). Понятие “сила” в международных отношениях: основные подходы, анализ, интерпретация. Вестник КазНУ. Серия международные отношения и международное право, 62(2). извлечено от https://bulletin-ir-law.kaznu.kz/index.php/1-mo/article/view/315
Выпуск
Раздел
Современные проблемы внешней политики и международных отношений
