Yalta Potsdam system of international relations. Creation, development and demolition of the Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations. See what the "Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations" is in other dictionaries

What features of the documents adopted at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences had a decisive influence on the formation of the international order?
2. What is the essence of bipolarity and confrontation? How did ideology influence the confrontation?
3. What was the significance of nuclear weapons in the Yalta-Potsdam order?
4. Why was the Yalta-Potsdam system distinguished by a high degree of manageability?
5. How do the concepts of "cold war" and "confrontation" relate?
1, The evolution of international relations after 1945 took place within the framework of two international orders - first bipolar (1945-1991), then pluralistic-unipolar, which began to take shape after the collapse of the USSR. The first one is known in the literature under the name of Yalta-Potsdam - after the names of two key international conferences (in Yalta on February 4-11 and in Potsdam on July 17-August 2, 1945), at which the leaders of the three main powers of the anti-Nazi coalition (USSR, USA and Great Britain ) agreed on basic approaches to the post-war world order.
Keyword
Section I
international order- a complex of relationships between members of the international community, based on the interaction of heterogeneous factors, the most important of which is played by the ratio of the combined potentials of individual participants and the hierarchy built on it (the mutual position of countries), as well as the principles and rules of these relationships.
The Yalta-Potsdam order had a number of features. First, it did not have a solid contractual and legal basis. The agreements underlying it were either verbal, not officially recorded and remained secret for a long time, or fixed in a declarative form. Unlike the Versailles Conference, which formed a powerful legal system, neither the Yalta Conference nor the Potsdam Conference led to the signing of international treaties.
This made the Yalta-Potsdam principles vulnerable to criticism and made their effectiveness dependent on the ability of the parties concerned to ensure the actual implementation of these agreements not by legal, but by political methods and means of economic and military-political pressure. That is why the element of regulating international relations by means of the threat or use of force was more pronounced in the post-war decades and had greater practical significance than was typical, say, of the 1920s. The Yalta-Potsdam order existed (unlike the Versailles and Washington ones) for more than half a century and collapsed with the collapse of the USSR.
2. Secondly, the Yalta-Potsdam order was bipolar. After the Second World War, the USSR and the USA sharply separated from all other states in terms of the totality of their military, political, and economic capabilities and the potential for cultural and ideological influence. If for the multipolar structure of international relations the approximate comparability of the combined potentials of several main subjects of international relations was typical, then after the Second World War only the potentials of the Soviet Union and the United States could be considered comparable.
Third, the post-war order was confrontational. Theoretically, the bipolar structure of the world could be both confrontational and cooperative - based not on confrontation, but on cooperation between the superpowers. But in fact, from the mid-1940s to the mid-1980s, the Yalta-Potsdam order was confrontational. Only in 1985-1991, during the years of M. S. Gorbachev’s “new political thinking”, did it begin to transform into a cooperative bipolarity, which was not destined to become stable due to the rapid self-destruction of one of its pillars - the USSR.
Under the conditions of confrontation, international relations took on the character of sometimes sharply conflicted interaction, permeated with the preparation of the main world rivals - the Soviet Union and
The United States - to repulse a hypothetical mutual attack and ensure its survival in the expected nuclear conflict. This gave rise in the second half of the 20th century. arms race on an unprecedented scale.
Keyword
Confrontation-type of relations between countries, in which the actions of one side are systematically opposed to the actions of the other. Does not exclude periodic cooperation between opposing subjects in certain areas of relations.
Fourth, post-war bipolarity took the form of a political and ideological confrontation between the "free world" led by the United States and the "socialist camp" led by the Soviet Union. Although international contradictions were most often based on geopolitical aspirations, outwardly the Soviet-American rivalry looked like a confrontation between ideals and moral values. The ideals of equality and egalitarian justice - in the "world of socialism" and the ideals of freedom, competition and democracy - in the "free world". Acute ideological controversy brought additional intransigence into international relations.
It led to the mutual demonization of the images of rivals - Soviet propaganda attributed to the United States plans for the destruction of the USSR, just like the American one - convinced the Western public of Moscow's intention to spread communism to the whole world. Ideologization had its strongest effect on international relations in the 1940s and 1950s.
Later, the ideology and political practice of the superpowers began to diverge in such a way that, at the level of official attitudes, the global goals of rivals were still interpreted as irreconcilable, and at the level of diplomatic dialogue, the parties learned to negotiate using geopolitical arguments rather than ideological concepts.
Fifth, the Yalta-Potsdam order took shape in the era of nuclear weapons, which, while introducing additional conflict into world processes, simultaneously contributed to the emergence in the second half of the 1960s of a mechanism for preventing a world nuclear war - the “confrontational stability” model. Its unspoken rules, which took shape between 1962 and 1991, had a restraining effect on international conflicts at the global level. The USSR and the USA began to avoid situations that could provoke an armed conflict between them. During these years, the concept of mutual nuclear deterrence and the doctrines of strategic stability based on it based on the "balance of fear" were formed. Nuclear war has come to be regarded only as the most extreme means of resolving international disputes.
Sixth, the Yalta-Potsdam order was distinguished by a high degree of controllability of international processes. As a bipolar order, it was built on the agreement of the opinions of only two powers, which simplified the negotiations. The USA and the USSR acted not only as individual states, but also as group leaders - NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Bloc discipline allowed the Soviet Union and the United States to guarantee the fulfillment of "their" part of the obligations assumed by the states of the respective bloc.
The listed characteristics of the Yalta-Potsdam order determined the high competitiveness of international relations. Thanks to mutual ideological alienation, the competition between the two strongest countries was in the nature of deliberate hostility. Since April 1947, the expression “cold war” appeared in the American political lexicon at the suggestion of the American businessman and politician Bernard Baruch, which soon became popular thanks to the articles of the American publicist Walter Lippmann.
"Cold War" is used in two senses. In a broad sense - as a synonym for the word "confrontation" and is used to characterize the entire period of international relations from the end of World War II to the collapse of the USSR. In a narrow and precise sense, the concept of "cold war" implies a particular type of confrontation, its most acute form in the form of confrontation on the brink of war. Such a confrontation was characteristic of international relations from the first Berlin crisis in 1948 to the Caribbean crisis in 1962. The meaning of the expression "cold war" is that the opposing powers took steps hostile to each other and threatened each other with force, but at the same time they were careful not to find themselves in a state of "hot" war with each other.
The term "confrontation" is "more universal" in meaning. High-level confrontation was, for example, inherent in the situations of the Berlin or Caribbean crises. But as a confrontation of low intensity, it took place during the years of detente in the mid-1950s, and then in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The term "cold war" is not applicable to periods of detente and, as a rule, is not used in the literature. On the contrary, the expression "cold war" is widely used as an antonym for the term "détente". That is why the entire period 1945-1991. using the concept of "confrontation" can be described analytically correct, but using the term "cold war" - no.
Minimum knowledge
1. The Yalta-Potsdam order was notable for its legal vagueness, connected, in particular, with the absence of strict legal grounds. In reality, relations were regulated with the help of economic and military-political force.
2. The Yalta-Potsdam order took shape in the conditions of a bipolar system, which was characterized by a sharp separation of the capabilities of the USA and the USSR from the rest of the world. The relationship between the USSR and the USA during this period was characterized by confrontation (when the parties systematically opposed their actions to each other). Political-ideological confrontation was an integral characteristic of the order: the struggle of the ideals of equality and egalitarian justice with freedom, competition and democracy.
3. The most important feature of the order was the possession of nuclear weapons by the superpowers, which added conflict to relations between countries, but at the same time contributed to the stabilization of international relations.
4. The controllability of the bipolar system was based on strict bloc discipline and the relative simplicity of decision-making, which required the coordination of only two subjects - the USA and the USSR.
5. Confrontation is a general term describing the period from 1945 to 1991, while "cold war" is a specific term describing brinkmanship in certain periods of confrontation.

G., where already at that time the strengthening of the position of the two powers - the USSR and the USA, was clearly manifested, to which the decisive role in determining the parameters of the post-war world was increasingly taking over. That is, even during the war, the prerequisites for the formation of the foundations of the future bipolar world are emerging. This trend was fully manifested already at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences, when the main role in solving key problems related to the formation of a new model of international relations was played by the two, now already superpowers, the USSR and the USA.

The Potsdam era set a historical precedent, because never before had the whole world been artificially divided into spheres of influence between two states. The bipolar alignment of forces quickly led to the beginning of the confrontation between the capitalist and socialist camps, referred to in history as the Cold War.

The Potsdam era is characterized by an extreme ideologization of international relations, as well as the constant threat of a direct military confrontation between the USSR and the USA.

The end of the Potsdam era was marked by the collapse of the world socialist camp, following a failed attempt to reform the economy of the Soviet Union, and was sealed by the 1991 Belovezhskaya Accord.

Peculiarities

• The multipolar organization of the structure of international relations was liquidated, and a bipolar structure of post-war international relations arose, in which the two superpowers, the USSR and the USA, played the leading role. A significant separation of the military, political, economic, cultural and ideological capabilities of these two powers from other countries of the world led to the formation of two main, dominant "centers of power" that had a system-forming influence on the structure and nature of the entire international system.
• Confrontational character - a systemic, complex confrontation in the economic, political, military, ideological and other spheres, a confrontation that from time to time acquired the character of an acute conflict, crisis interaction. This type of confrontation in the format of mutual threats of the use of force, balancing on the brink of a real war, was called "cold war".
• Post-war bipolarity took shape in the era of nuclear weapons, which led to a revolution in both military and political strategies.
• The distribution of the world into the sphere of influence of two superstates both in Europe and on the periphery, the emergence of "divided" countries (Germany, Korea, Vietnam, China) and the formation of military-political blocs under the leadership of the USSR and the USA led to globalization and in-depth geopolitical structuring of systemic confrontation and confrontations.
• Post-war bipolarity took the form of a political and ideological confrontation, an ideological confrontation between the "free world" of Western democracies led by the United States and the "socialist world" led by the USSR. The United States wanted to establish American hegemony in the world under the slogan
  Pax Americana, the USSR asserted the inevitability of the victory of socialism on a world scale. Ideological confrontation, the "struggle of ideas", led to the mutual demonization of the opposite side and remained an important feature of the post-war system of international relations. The Soviet-American confrontation looked primarily as a rivalry between a system of political and ethical ideals, social and moral principles.
• The post-war world has ceased to be predominantly Eurocentric, the international system has turned into a global, worldwide one. The destruction of colonial systems, the formation of regional and subregional subsystems of international relations was carried out under the dominant influence of the horizontal spread of the systemic bipolar confrontation and the trends of economic and political globalization.
• The Yalta-Potsdam order did not have a strong contractual and legal basis. The agreements that formed the basis of the post-war order were either oral, not officially recorded, or fixed mainly in a declarative form, or their full implementation was blocked as a result of the severity of contradictions and confrontation between the main subjects of post-war international relations.
• The UN, one of the central elements of the Yalta-Potsdam system, became the main mechanism for coordinating efforts to exclude wars and conflicts from international life by harmonizing relations between states and creating a global system of collective security. Post-war realities, the intransigence of confrontational relations between the USSR and the USA significantly limited the ability of the UN to realize its statutory functions and goals. The main task of the UN was mainly to prevent an armed clash between the USSR and the USA both at the global and regional levels, that is, to maintain the stability of Soviet-American relations as the main prerequisite for international security and peace in the post-war period.

see also

Notes

References and literature

• Systematic history of international relations in four volumes. 1918-1991// Edited by Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor A. D. Bogaturov. Moscow: "Moscow Worker", 2000
• distance course “Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations. 1945-1991"// RAMI. The team of authors of MGIMO (y) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation under the leadership of Doctor of Historical Sciences. prof. M. M. Narinsky. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2004.
• Dubinin Yu. A., Martynov B. F., Yurieva T. V. History of international relations (1975-1991): MGIMO(U). - M.: ROSSPEN, 2006.
• Foreign policy of the USSR. Collection of documents. Vol. 5 (June 1941 - September 1945)/ Rev. ed. B. E. Shtein. Comp. A. S. Tisminets. M.: [b/i], 1947.
• Foreign policy of the USSR. Collection of documents. Vol. 6 (September 1945 - February 1947)/ Comp. A. S. Tisminets. M.: [b/i], 1947.
• Narinsky M. M. History of international relations. 1945-1975: Textbook.- M.: ROSSPEN, 2004.
• S. V. Kortunov, Head Department of World Politics, SU-HSE, prof. The collapse of the Westphalian system and the new world order- "Golden Lion" No. 125-126, 2006.
• Drobot G. A., Ph.D. prof. History of world politics.
• Yurchenko S. V., Decisions of the Crimean (Yalta) Conference of 1945 and the “Yalta System” in Historical Retrospective // ​​Bakhchisarai Historical and Archaeological Collection. Issue 2. - Simferopol: Tavria-Plus, 2001.
• Shevchenko O.K. "Borders of Yalta" socio-cultural section of Silesia, annexed to Poland in 1945 // "Yalta system" and the modern world order: problems of global and regional security / Proceedings of the international scientific conference held in Yalta in 2010 - Simferopol, 2010.
• The program of the state exam in the specialty 350200 "International Relations" of the Faculty of History of Altai State University, 2004.
• State Committee of the Russian Federation for Higher Education. State requirements for the minimum content and level of training of a graduate in the specialty 021200 "INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS" - 1996.
• Constantine Cellini. The problem of globalization in international relations. Unrecognized Geopolitics. - «Russia in Global Affairs». № 1, January - March 2006
• Horowitz D. From Yalta to Vietnam: American Foreign Policy in the Cold War.- N.Y. 1967.
• Richard Holbrooke. America, A European Power. - Foreign Affairs, March/April 1995.

Yalta. In early 1945, when the victory over Germany was no longer in doubt, the Allies decided to meet in order to finally determine the main features of the post-war world order in the light of the new political and military situation. These issues became the subject of negotiations at the Yalta Conference (February 4-11, 1945). During the week, a number of fundamental issues were resolved:

the conference decided to establish the United Nations to maintain peace and ensure the security of peoples;

a decision was made on the eastern border of Poland, so important for the Soviet Union;

agreed on the principles and forms of implementation of the unconditional surrender of Germany and the occupation of its territories; it was decided to destroy the Wehrmacht, liquidate or take control of the German military industry; try all war criminals; disband fascist organizations and their institutions;

It was decided to recover from Germany war losses in the amount of 20 billion dollars.

At this conference, Stalin achieved the desired results for the Soviet Union. The principle of the military occupation of Germany did not cause controversy, but at the same time the USSR rejected the proposal of the USA and England to divide Germany into three to seven states. It was decided to consider Germany as a single state. In exchange for the opening of hostilities against Japan three months after the surrender of Germany, the USSR joined the Kuril Islands and southern Sakhalin, as well as the right to rent Port Arthur and operate the railway complex in Manchuria. The Yalta Conference adopted the "Declaration on Liberated Europe", which provides for the implementation of a coordinated policy of the three powers in the liberated European countries, the formation of democratic institutions, the creation of conditions for internal peace, and the provision of assistance to the liberated peoples.

Potsdam. The question of Germany occupied a central place in the work. "Political and economic principles to guide the treatment of Germany in the initial control period" were signed. The supreme power in Germany was to be exercised by the Control Council, composed of the commanders-in-chief of the occupying armed forces of the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France. The Control Council was to carry out the complete demilitarization of Germany, to liquidate industry that could be used for war production. The liquidation of the entire system of the Nazi state, the fascist party and all its organizations, the means of Nazi militaristic propaganda was envisaged. War criminals were subject to arrest and trial. The conference considered a number of territorial and political issues. The USSR was transferred to Koenigsberg, the territory of Poland expanded significantly in the west at the expense of Germany. The foundations were laid for the signing of a series of peace treaties, taking into account the geopolitical interests of the USSR and confirming its borders that had developed in 1939.

Potsdam's decisions were only partially implemented, since in late 1945 and early 1946 there was a significant divergence of the former allies. Since 1946, the era of the Cold War began in international relations - the so-called "Iron Curtain" appeared, an aggravated confrontation between the two socio-political systems.

One of the main results of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences was the establishment of the geographical boundaries of states in Eastern Europe. These boundaries were confirmed in 1975 by the Helsinki Agreement.

For the first time, the issue of a post-war settlement at the highest level was raised during the Tehran Conference in 1943, where even then the strengthening of the position of the two powers - the USSR and the USA, which were increasingly taking a decisive role in determining the parameters of the post-war world. That is, even during the war, the prerequisites for the formation of the foundations of the future bipolar world are emerging. This trend was fully manifested already at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences, when the two superpowers of the USSR and the USA played the main role in solving the key problems associated with the formation of a new model of Defense Ministry.

The Potsdam era set a historical precedent, because never before had the whole world been artificially divided into spheres of influence between two states. The bipolar alignment of forces quickly led to the beginning of the confrontation between the capitalist and socialist camps, referred to in history as the Cold War.

The Potsdam era is characterized by extreme ideologization of international relations, as well as the constant threat of a direct military confrontation between the USSR and the USA.

The end of the Potsdam era was marked by the collapse of the world socialist camp, following a failed attempt to reform the economy of the Soviet Union, and was sealed by the 1991 Belovezhskaya Accords.

Peculiarities

see also

Notes

References and literature

• Systematic history of international relations in four volumes. 1918-1991// Edited by Doctor of Political Sciences, Professor A. D. Bogaturov. Moscow: "Moscow Worker", 2000
• distance course “Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations. 1945-1991"// RAMI. The team of authors of MGIMO (y) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation under the leadership of Doctor of Historical Sciences. prof. M. M. Narinsky. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2004.
• Dubinin Yu. A., Martynov B. F., Yurieva T. V. History of international relations (1975-1991): MGIMO(U). - M.: ROSSPEN, 2006.
• Foreign policy of the USSR. Collection of documents. Vol. 5 (June 1941 - September 1945)/ Rev. ed. B. E. Shtein. Comp. A. S. Tisminets. M.: [b/i], 1947.
• Foreign policy of the USSR. Collection of documents. Vol. 6 (September 1945 - February 1947)/ Comp. A. S. Tisminets. M.: [b/i], 1947.
• Narinsky M. M. History of international relations. 1945-1975: Textbook.- M.: ROSSPEN, 2004.
• S. V. Kortunov, Head Department of World Politics, SU-HSE, prof. The collapse of the Westphalian system and the new world order- "Golden Lion" No. 125-126, 2006.
• Drobot G. A., Ph.D. prof. History of world politics.
• Yurchenko S. V., Decisions of the Crimean (Yalta) Conference of 1945 and the “Yalta System” in Historical Retrospective // ​​Bakhchisarai Historical and Archaeological Collection. Issue 2. - Simferopol: Tavria-Plus, 2001.
• Shevchenko O.K. "Borders of Yalta" socio-cultural section of Silesia, annexed to Poland in 1945 // "Yalta system" and the modern world order: problems of global and regional security / Proceedings of the international scientific conference held in Yalta in 2010 - Simferopol, 2010.
• The program of the state exam in the specialty 350200 "International Relations" of the Faculty of History of Altai State University, 2004.
• State Committee of the Russian Federation for Higher Education. State requirements for the minimum content and level of training of a graduate in the specialty 021200 "INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS" - 1996.
• Constantine Cellini. The problem of globalization in international relations. - "Bulletin of Europe" 2002, No. 6
• Lebedeva M. M., Ph.D., prof., head. Department of Political Processes at MGIMO. The Political Structure of the World at the Turn of the Century: New Problems and Challenges- Center for Post-Industrial Society Studies, 2001
• Yuri Tsarik. Crisis of international law. - "Noopolis", March 15, 2007
• Sergei Berets. Yalta. Universe system.- bbcrussian.com, February 4, 2005
• Yaroslav Butakov. Spirits of Yalta: changing options for globalization- "APN", February 4, 2005.
• Planned History: World Order as Russia's Area of ​​Responsibility- "National Laboratory of Foreign Policy", 2002.
• Sergei Markedonov. Unrecognized Geopolitics. - «Russia in Global Affairs». № 1, January - March 2006
• Horowitz D. From Yalta to Vietnam: American Foreign Policy in the Cold War.- N.Y. 1967.
• Richard Holbrooke. America, A European Power. - Foreign Affairs, March/April 1995.

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what the "Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations" is in other dictionaries:

This article lacks links to sources of information. Information must be verifiable, otherwise it may be questioned and removed. You can ... Wikipedia

The system of international relations created after the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648. Contents 1 Description 2 Basic principles 3 Notes ... Wikipedia

Several systems stand out in the theory of international relations: The Westphalian system of international relations (after the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648). It has the idea of ​​a balance of power; Vienna system of international relations (after graduation ... ... Wikipedia

Geopolitics History Geopolitical schools German: Ratzel, Haushofer, Kjellen English: Mackinder French: Gottman, Lacoste, la Blache American: Kennan, Mahan, Spykman Russian sh ... Wikipedia

Geopolitics History Geopolitical schools German: Ratzel, Haushofer, Kjellen English: Mackinder French: Gottman, Lacoste, la Blache American: Kennan, Mahan, Spykman Russian sh ... Wikipedia

Geopolitics History Geopolitical schools German: Ratzel, Haushofer, Kjellen English: Mackinder French: Gottman, Lacoste, la Blache American: Kennan, Mahan, Spykman Russian sh ... Wikipedia

International relations are a set of economic, political, legal, ideological, diplomatic, military, cultural and other ties and relationships between entities operating on the world stage. Contents 1 Criteria 2 ... ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Cold War (meanings). Cold War Date March 5, 1946 1991 Place World Pritch ... Wikipedia

Books

• History of international relations In three volumes Volume III Yalta-Potsdam system Textbook, Torkunov A., Narinsky M. (ed.). The textbook covers the main events and problems of the history of international relations of the period after the end of the Second World War and before the collapse of the bipolar system of the world order. In the book…

The Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations is the designation of the system of international relations adopted in historiography, fixed by the treaties and agreements of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences.

For the first time, the issue of a post-war settlement at the highest level was raised during the Tehran Conference in 1943, where even then the strengthening of the position of the two powers - the USSR and the USA, which were increasingly taking a decisive role in determining the parameters of the post-war world. That is, even during the war, the prerequisites for the formation of the foundations of the future bipolar world are emerging. This trend has already been fully manifested in Yalta ((February 4–11, 1945) - the second multilateral meeting of the leaders of the three great powers of the anti-Hitler coalition - the USSR, the USA and Great Britain)and Potsdam(from July 17 to August 2, 1945) conferences, when the two superpowers of the USSR and the USA played the main role in solving the key problems associated with the formation of a new model of the Defense Ministry.

The Potsdam era set a historical precedent, because never before had the whole world been artificially divided into spheres of influence between two states. The bipolar alignment of forces quickly led to the beginning of the confrontation between the capitalist and socialist camps, referred to in history as the Cold War.

The Potsdam era is characterized by an extreme ideologization of international relations, as well as the constant threat of a direct military confrontation between the USSR and the USA.

The end of the Potsdam era was marked by the collapse of the world socialist camp, following a failed attempt to reform the economy of the Soviet Union, and was sealed by the 1991 Belovezhskaya Agreement.

Peculiarities:

1. The multipolar organization of the structure of international relations was liquidated, a bipolar structure of the post-war MODs arose, in which two superstates, the USSR and the USA, played the leading role. A significant separation of the military, political, economic, cultural and ideological capabilities of these two powers from other countries of the world led to the formation of two main, dominant "centers of power" that had a system-forming influence on the structure and nature of the entire international system.

2. Confrontational nature - a systemic, complex confrontation in the economic, political, military, ideological and other spheres, a confrontation that from time to time acquired the character of an acute conflict, crisis interaction. This type of confrontation in the format of mutual threats to use force, balancing on the brink of a real war, was called the Cold War.

3. Post-war bipolarity took shape in the era of nuclear weapons, which led to a revolution, both in military and political strategies.

4. The distribution of the world into the sphere of influence of two superstates both in Europe and on the periphery, the emergence of "divided" countries (Germany, Korea, Vietnam, China) and the formation of military-political blocs, under the leadership of the USSR and the USA, led to globalization and deep geopolitical structuring systemic confrontation and confrontation.

5. Post-war bipolarity took the form of a political and ideological confrontation, an ideological confrontation between the "free world" of Western democracies led by the United States and the "socialist world" led by the USSR. The USA wanted the establishment of American hegemony in the world under the slogan "Pax Americana", the USSR - asserted the inevitability of the victory of socialism on a world scale. The Soviet-American confrontation looked primarily as a rivalry between a system of political and ethical ideals, social and moral principles.

6. The post-war world has ceased to be predominantly Eurocentric, the international system has turned into a global, global one. The destruction of colonial systems, the formation of regional and subregional subsystems of international relations was carried out under the dominant influence of the horizontal spread of the systemic bipolar confrontation and the trends of economic and political globalization.

7. The Yalta-Potsdam order did not have a strong contractual and legal basis. The agreements that formed the basis of the post-war order were either oral, not officially recorded, or were fixed mainly in a declarative form, or their full implementation was blocked as a result of the sharpness of contradictions and confrontation between the main subjects of post-war international relations.

8. The UN, one of the central elements of the Yalta-Potsdam system, became the main mechanism for coordinating efforts to exclude wars and conflicts from international life by harmonizing relations between states and creating a global system of collective security. Post-war realities, the intransigence of confrontational relations between the USSR and the USA significantly limited the ability of the UN to realize its statutory functions and goals. The main task of the UN was mainly focused on the prevention of an armed clash between the USSR and the USA both at the global and regional levels, that is, on maintaining the stability of Soviet-American relations as the main prerequisite for international security and peace in the postwar period.

Theoretical schools in international studies. Real-Political School of International Relations Studies (Realism and Neorealism)

Realism

The main provisions of classical realism boil down to the following:

International relations are

interaction between states that are essentially homogeneous, are unitary participants and, as people,

selfish in their aspirations.

The interaction of states is carried out chaotically, since

there is no "supranational power center". As a result international relations are "anarchic".

· Striving for power, in particular to military superiority

stuyu, which guarantees the security of states, is the main

tiv their activities.

· States first of all proceed from their own interests. At

In this they may take into account moral considerations, but not a single

of them does not have the right to determine "what is good,

abuse of moral speculation.

The political reality is different from the economic one: for

power is the main thing for politics, wealth is for the economy.

In the world of international relations dominated by power

factor, states should always be on full alert.

Morgenthau's Six Principles of Political Realism:

1. the probabilistic nature of political activity in the field of international relations.

2. the principle of national interests, understood in terms of power and might.

3. Foreign policy cannot be viewed through psychological phenomena.

4. political realism recognizes the moral significance of political action

5. Political realism denies the identity of the morality of a particular nation and universal moral laws.

6. The political sphere is autonomous;

Common to representatives of political realism are the following key provisions:

1. The main participants in international relationsare sovereign states. The realists believe what strong states do what they can, and weak states do what the strong allow them.
2 . "National interests" - the main category theories of political realism, the main motive and key incentive for state policy in the international arena.

As for the state of peace between states, it is ideal, because it always has a temporary character.
3 . The main goal of the state in international politics is to ensure its own security. However, they can never feel safe and are constantly striving to increase their own resources and improve their quality.

4. The power of the state is inseparable from its strength, which is one of the decisive means of ensuring national security in the international arena

The most famous representatives- Reinhold Niebuhr, Frederick Schumann, George Kennan, George Schwarzenberger, Kenneth Thompson, Henry Kissinger, Edward Carr, Arnold Wolfers and others - determined the paths of the science of international relations for a long time. Hans Morgenthau and Raymond Aron became the undisputed leaders in this direction.

5. Is it possible to change the nature of international relations? Realists regard this question as central to the study of international politics. However, in their opinion, as long as states exist, they will remain the main participants in international politics, functioning according to their own immutable laws.

6. In other words, according to supporters of political realism, it is possible to change the configuration of political forces, mitigate the consequences of international anarchy, establish more stable and more secure interstate relations, but the nature of international relations cannot be changed.

neorealism

The main provisions of neorealism:

§ International relations are considered as an integral system functioning in accordance with certain laws. Only system analysis can reveal the nature of international relations.

§ Neorealism shifts the center of explanation of international behavior to the level of the international system. Relations between the great powers and other states are not unequivocally anarchic, as they depend mainly on the will of the great powers.

§ In addition, Waltz identified three basic principles of the structure of international relations ("structural triad"). First, states are primarily driven by the motive of survival. Secondly, only states remain participants in international relations, since other actors have not caught up and have not surpassed the leading powers in terms of the presence of powers and power capabilities. Thirdly, states are heterogeneous, and differ in capabilities and potential.

§ Neorealism seeks to find and isolate economic relations from political ones.

§ striving for methodological rigor.

§ The main actors are states and their unions.

§ Them main goals - protection of national interests, the security of the state and the preservation of the status quo in international relations.

§ The main means of achieving these goals are force and alliances.

§ The driving force of international relations lies in the harsh, deterrent effect of the structural constraints of the international system.

Similarities between neorealism and political realism:

§ Both realists and neorealists believe that, since the nature of international relations has not changed for thousands of years, there is no reason to believe that they will acquire any other character in the future.

§ Both theories believe that all attempts to change the international system, based on liberal-idealistic grounds, are doomed to failure in advance.