Subject of sociology of international relations
A more precise set of tools for the sociology of international relations can be extracted from its subject field, which is configured by key concepts. The combination of activity and behavioral approaches makes it possible to define the subject of the sociology of international relations as a set of significant cross-border links fixed by public consciousness, agreements or other forms of interaction.
The proposed definition takes into account the fundamental categories of space, space and movement, emphasizes the characteristic features of the current stage of development of international processes through transborderness, makes the object of study visible and does not reduce contacts across borders exclusively to interstate interactions.
In sociology of international relations, the key concept of the theory of international relations is the international order , which is a set of rules, procedures and styles aimed at maintaining stability, regulating intergovernmental and transnational relations. The international order and regime are established by sovereign states. The regimes may be formal (the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the Kyoto Protocol, the WTO), but may exist informally (G-8, Greenpeace, regional populations labeled in the public consciousness - Scandinavia, the Middle East, etc.). In practice, they differ in format - global coverage (the Bretton Woods system, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and the regional range (CSTO - the collective security regime of the CIS member states, the OSCE is a cooperative security regime covering the countries of North America, the EU and the CIS , the agreement between the countries of Benelux and Scandinavia, the GCC - the regime of cross-border cooperation of the Persian Gulf states, SAARC - the regime of regional cooperation for the countries of South Asia, etc.). Such agreements can accommodate many territorial systems or create new spatial reliefs, as do Russia, Brazil, India, China and South Africa (BRICS), which form a transnational order of links within the new intercontinental structure. The need to establish order or regime arises from the desire of partner states to avoid conflicts or to organize a regional system of international relations.
Participation in international regimes is a voluntary act. Non-participation indicates that it is more important for the state to maintain independent behavior and the way of making a decision in this or that area. This, for example, dictated the position of Israel, India and Pakistan on the regime of non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. Ordinal relations, as a rule, are established through multilateral agreements in the form of international organizations.
The theoretical content of the notion international organization took shape in the theory of international relations after the creation of the United Nations. On the basis of the United Nations model, a "universal community that transcends individual states and includes all of them in its composition" arose.
Socio-political processes of the late XX century. violated the international equilibrium, one of the conditions of which was the "cold war" between the two confrontational blocs. The radical changes in the environment of international contacts have put to the test seemingly unshakable ideas about the central role of the state and the "secondary" multilateral structures. At the same time, the assumptions that many more players participate in international processes than only the state and interstate organizations have been recognized as empirically proven.
The introduction of non-state actors into the subject field of international relations was fixed in the paradigm of world politics, establishing the irreducibility of international relations to interstate contacts (see 2.3.1). Today, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have consultative status within the UN system. Their legal inclusion in international processes is one of the new characteristics of international relations. While material resources become the property of transnational companies, and control over financial flows passes to banks and territorial systems that have the greatest activity, non-governmental organizations strive to become familiar with the role of civil society builders. In general, international NGOs act as intermediaries, providing assistance to their founder.
In the world-wide studies, a large volume is occupied by the study of transboundary processes, in which states, economic and financial organizations, informal associations take part. The most active in these processes are commercial structures and NGOs. To denote the phenomenon described by the term transnational company (TNC), the terms transnational ( transnational ), multinational ( multinational), global ( global ), international ( international ) corporation. TNK is a tool of the global market. According to the UN criteria, a TNC is a firm that performs certain formal procedures:
- the presence of production cells in at least two countries;
- implementation of the coordinated economic policy with centralized management;
- active interaction of production cells with each other (exchange of resources and responsibility).Experts identify transnational banks (the World Bank, international development banks, etc.) as a special kind of transnational company engaged in lending business and arranging cash settlements on an international scale.
In world politics studies, a study of the world mass communication system has been developed in a separate direction, allowing you to observe the behavior of various social groups and control the "market of ideas" with the help of influential media. Social networks - Odnoklassniki, Vkontakte, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter , etc., in which people communicate with each other and exchange various information in the form of forwarded texts, photos, videos, become participants in forms, get acquainted, etc.
The paradigm of world politics is oriented towards a global (global) order. Currently, the subject of the discussion are three models of the international order: the unipolar (pyramid of American centrism), the polycentric (goes back to the model of the "European concerto", but with the more complex architecture of influences) and the multi-level dependence of states on each other, which at the beginning of the century Yu. V. Klyuchnikov described how "close interdependence". The methodological meaning of the term dependence is developed in the writings of Western researchers of international relations.
All models assign an active role to international organizations as an instrument of multilateral cooperation.
International organizations include both developed and developing states, contribute to the development of their contacts, try to close the lines of division into the "first", "second", "third" and fourth worlds, but also institutionalize differences. They operate on all levels of the system of international relations and have the ability to create mechanisms for contacts (networks, negotiations, etc.), establishing procedures and norms for global and regional life.
international region. In the international environment, the region acts as a level concept and is a form of localization and the way to control the nodal problem, The well-known United States scientist Nikolai Kosolapov (IMEMO RAN) emphasizes that the leading countries of the world are usually involved in the design of international regions. Practice makes this observation. So, only in the last decade the United States initiated the creation of the Greater Middle East and Greater Central Asia, France - the construction of the Mediterranean region, Russia announced its intention to transform the Customs Union into the Eurasian.
In the solution of international and domestic problems (territorial and ethnopolitical conflicts, the identification of social and regional hierarchies, the establishment of political boundaries, the creation of markets, communications, migration, security, etc.) the region acts as a territorial attractor, sometimes described as "target space & quot ;. In the works of the Academician of the United States Academy of Sciences Vasily Ivanovich Zhukov, the region was considered as an experience of "territorial globalization" (see 2.3.3).
The line of active participation in multilateral activities, which includes regional integration, is clearly traced in the foreign policy of the United States. Strengthening its positions in traditional associations, Russia initiated and implemented the creation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Eurasian Economic Cooperation, the Customs Union - three regional international organizations within the CIS, became one of the founding members of the SCO, the BRICS intercontinental integration group.
At present, the priority project within the CIS is the creation of the Customs Union, in which three countries participate, which envisage its development into the Eurasian economic integration, where conditions for the construction of the Eurasian Union, including socio-cultural aspects of integration, will be created.
New tendencies are intertwined with international politics by the cooperation of international organizations with international organizations (EU-ASEAN, UN-OSCE, CIS-UN, etc.).
Global transformations, a vector of interdependent development of social processes in the international environment, were interpreted in the accepted concept of sustainable development. In the context of globalization, interdependence of states and peoples, arsenals of weapons of mass destruction, limited vital natural resources, the safety of social relations becomes indivisible. At the same time, discussions revealed the need for a broadening of the notion "international security", associated with the understanding of security as a specific social relationship characterized by mutual trust, the parties lacking aggressive goals and aspirations . This led to the decision to reform the structures of multilateral activities, including the UN, the OSCE, etc. However, when in the early 1990s, "It became clear that the fundamental restructuring of the world politics of the Cold War will be a difficult, costly and politically painful", on the basis of some assumptions, a forced choice was made in favor of the preservation of the old system in which security issues were separated from development issues. In the opinion of Igor Sergeyevich Ivanov, president of the United States Council for International Affairs (INFDC), it will be possible to overcome the separation barrier by the "regime approach" to issues of regional and global security. The development and implementation of a variety of security regimes in international practice should be accompanied by measures to improve the efficiency of international organizations.
At the same time not all international institutions have tools for solving social problems. This direction is being developed by the ILO, the World Health Organization, UNESCO, the United Nations Development Program, and the World Bank, which has developed model programs for pension reform and university education. In 2004, the ILO established the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization. The ILO and the World Bank come from different assessments of the global social situation and, in fact, offer different models of globalization and interstate cooperation.
P. A. Tsygankov, developing a sociological approach to the concept of interstate cooperation, highlights three elements in the hundred content: the general objectives of partner countries, the expectation of them benefits from the situation, the reciprocal nature of these benefits. This understanding is important because it makes it possible to distinguish cooperation from non-cooperation as unilateral behavior, in which actors do not take into account the consequences of their actions for others, as well as from inaction if it does not reduce the negative consequences for each party's policy. Developing criteria for the sociological analysis of international relations, Galtung, for example, proposed applying the appropriate theory to each object, and when constructing an object, the isomorphism principle should be applied. At a later stage E. Giddens complicated research tasks, emphasizing the need for conceptualization of processes, the disclosure of social concepts of international relations. According to P. A. Tsygankov, empirical studies of the international environment (state, transnational and sociocultural spheres) are able to give effectiveness to the cooperation of the CIS member states. In this regard, he suggests "to take a closer look at the spiritual and psychological dimensions of the newly independent states, such as national memory, identity, the nature of the national perception of external threats".
Thus, the fundamental problem of the theory of international relations - the prevention of war and the colossal human sacrifices - helps to see the sociological scientist not as a registrar of social reality through a representative sample of individuals, but as an integrator of processed facts that verifies individual theoretical positions of the exercises that formed a common the context of the globalist paradigm.
SMO is devoid of prescription in the choice of an object inherent in the theory of international relations, and the limitations imposed on its object by classical sociology. In this sense, the proposed by the domestic sociologist Zh. T. Toshchenko, the life paradigm displays the development of the United States sociology of international relations from the methodological deadlock, introducing the category "Paradox" is a specific form of contradiction, requiring a profound identification of cause-effect relationships between mutually exclusive attitudes and orientations of people.
The indicated approaches only increase the interest in constructing a scale of concepts of the sociology of international relations. This interest is strengthened by the fact that classical theories of international relations - the foundation of the sociology of international relations - were created according to the current situation and their study is more in line with the tasks of the history of sociology.
Using the theory of realism, the image international relations established in the belligerent European conglomerate of societies of the 17th-20th centuries, but its one-factorial nature does not explain the current state of international relations. Although the importance of military force in international relations has not ceased to be relevant, war is not an exhaustive form of political violence or the only event in international life. Appealing to the pre-global assessments of realism, the researcher loses some freedom of choice to conceptualize his approach, does not find places in his analyzes of such phenomena as tolerance, partnership, negotiation process, narrows the basis of stability. Without analysis and conceptualization of changes, new knowledge is not being incremented, requiring and including new categories for diagnosing the current situation.
The sociology of international relations, preserving the traditional notions of the object, operationalizes the categories developed by the humanities - peace, war, cooperation, partnership, alliance , etc. With these categories, sociologist studies globalization, regionalization, modernization, transformation, transnationalization of international processes, constructs the subject field of research.
The sociology of international relations seeks to understand, explain and integrate the goals and aspirations of actors-actors operating in the international arena. Its current content is closely tied to world politics, whose influence and dissemination is characterized by a network of political interactions between the important actors of the world system. An important actor is an autonomous individual or organization that controls significant resources and participates in political relations with other actors in a transboundary environment.
By constructing your object, the sociologist decomposes network: its threads (connections, actions) are stretched from the internal field of the state; pervade the state (the activities of multinational companies); are located on top of the state (supranational functions of international organizations). The resulting virtual infinity international space is of an abstract nature, requiring it to be turned into concrete reality by means of empirical data. Thus, a sociological object that allows the most effective disclosure and ranking of an international event (situation) identifies the interacting territorial communities and individuals participating in cross-border sociocultural and economic processes.
The sociology of international relations is exploring a geopolitical world that is linked to an active whole through the interaction of intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, social groups, state bureaucracies and transnational actors. It does not focus on the issue of primary state, which characterizes representatives of political science, but clarifies all of its institutional capabilities in social practice. This circumstance is connected with the substantive and structural features of the formation of modern centers of socio-cultural attraction.Therefore, along with the categories developed in the theory of international relations (state, international organizations, international order, security, threats, etc.), the category of the SMO includes such phenomena as international region, non-governmental organization , social movements, social security, international public opinion , etc., enriching and refining the modern content of international relations.
Until recently, the construction of a social security system related to the internal functions of the state. However, in the mid-1990s, responsibility for social security is gradually assumed by the World Bank, the United Nations Development Program and other international organizations, seeking coordinated changes in social policies of states in the field of pension reform, health care and education.
Even an incomplete review of conceptual concepts shows that the system of international relations is characterized by a multivariate and multiplicity of links, each time revealing new sources of coherence, i.e. "the conditions for the formation of a vast array of types of structured collective behavior." In sociology, this phenomenon was conceptualized by Charles Cooley in the concept of "small group". Another American sociologist, Theodore Mills, included in this kind of association two or more individuals who are in contact with each other and who attach special importance to these contacts. He proceeded from the assumption that each person is a member of five or six groups, so the number of small groups exceeds the total number of mankind. And if we add to them the groups that existed in the past and the groups that will exist in the future, the total number of groups will reach many and many billions, ahead of the number and number of societies, and the number of people who have ever lived and will live on Earth. Such a vision of international processes began to gain its supporters in the 1980s, when modernists and pluralists got bogged down in terminological disputes.While modernists blamed traditionalists for the fuzziness and metaphoricity of their categorical apparatus and asked what the "balance of forces" is, and how to measure it, the reproaches of the traditionalists were connected with the rejection of concepts in which the behavioral aspect of individuals plays a key role in explaining foreign policy. They argued that the study of international relations and foreign policy can never become the same exact science as physics or mathematics. As the main argument, they used the influence of the subjective factor, which, in their opinion, is so great in international politics that international relations as an independent discipline are more an art than a spider.
The sociology of international relations used the small group as the foundation of their constructions from the very beginning of their appearance (see 3.1), having outstripped political science by about three decades.
There are autonomous directions within these schools. On the one hand, a huge number of concepts are evidence of the relevance of the phenomenon of international relations. On the other hand, the same fact compels us to recognize that, knowing how to identify the most important and significant processes, the maximum number of phenomena, to explain the phenomena of the past, the present, none of them has gained much explanatory power. The primacy of empiricism in sociology guides the researcher toward an event that has already occurred. However, this methodological specificity does not deprive, but hones the prognostic and projecting possibilities of the sociology of international relations.
All the theories are historical, appeared in certain circumstances to solve specific events. Some scientists use the deductive method, applying general provisions to particular cases. For example, economic theories proceed from the fact that people are striving for ever greater satisfaction of their needs and obtaining maximum material benefit for themselves. Other specialists build their theories on the basis of the generalization of particular phenomena, go from the particular to the general. In general, most of the theories related to international phenomena are inductive. This is due to the specifics of international life, political, cultural and personal characteristics of the objects under study, as well as the extreme dependence of international relations on political factors. Thus, the selection of facts is never free. The explanation of the phenomenon does not start from scratch. But in the reference books there are no answers to a concrete situation, it needs to be analyzed and given recommendations, in other words, conceptualized. The extraordinary demand for new approaches is due to the emergence of a new factor: at the turn of the second and third millennia, a global human community emerged. It is a reality of the 21st century that forces to design future.
In the field of international relations, different theories explain the same phenomena, interpreting their meaning differently. However, in this area, the acceptances theoretical knowledge have a function that forms further actions and even types of society (for example, the market and planned economies). The sociology of international relations does not consider the "accents", it highlights the structure of really existing social ties in the chosen fragment of international relations.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay