Some General Manifestations of Transition Periods of International Relations System
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46991/BYSU.D/2024.15.3.005Keywords:
system of international relations, world politics , armed conflicts , genocide , crimes against humanity , international legal system , structures of international cooperation , interests of superpowersAbstract
During the period of operation of the international relations system (IRS), the main actors of international relations (superpowers) that formed that system, despite the deep contradictions that exist among themselves, have a common interest in maintaining the current system, because it provides them with a privileged position in world politics. Guided by this common interest, the superpowers restrain each other and, with joint efforts, restrain actions of other actors in international relations that could undermine the existing system.
During the transition period of the IRS, on the one hand, the deterrence mechanism ceases to function, and on the other hand, the superpowers seek to use or provoke processes that will strengthen themselves and weaken the positions of their opponents in the struggle for the new IRS. The expression of the transformation of the interests of the superpowers are the general manifestations of the transition periods of the IRS 1 - an increase in the number of local and regional armed conflicts and their intensity; 2 - increase of genocide and other crimes against humanity; 3 - disregard of international law by actors of international relations and non-state organizations; 4 - discrediting of universal structures of international cooperation and decline in effectiveness of activities; 5 - a world war in which the victorious superpowers establish a new IRS. The listed manifestations, so far with the exception of the world war, are also characteristic of the current transitional period from Yalta-Potsdam to the new IRS.
References
Sheehan, Michael. 2000. “The Balance of Power: History and Theory.” London and New York: Routledge.
Brzezinski, Zbigniew. 1997. “The grand chessboard: American primacy and Its geostrategic imperatives.” New York: Basic Books.
Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. “The end of history and the last man”. New York: Free Press.
Hantington, Samuel. 1996. “The clash of civilizations and remarking of world order”. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Karaganov, Sergej. 2024. “An age of wars? Article two. What is to be done.” Russia in Global Affairs 22(2): 5-8.
Kissinger, Henry. 2014. “World order: Reflections on the character of nations and the course of history”. London: Allen Lane.
Mearsheimer, John. 2014. “The tragedy of great power politics. Updated.” New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Randall, L. Schweller and Xiaoyu, Pu. 2011. “After unipolarity: China’s visions of international order in an era of U.S. decline.” International Security 36(1): 41–72.
Sakwa, Richard. 2024. “The international system and the clash of world orders.” China Int Strategy Rev. 6: 39–57.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2004. “World-systems analysis: An introduction." Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.
Mearsheimer, John. 2010. “The gathering storm: China's challenge to US power in Asia.” Chinese Journal of International Relations 3(4): 381–96.
Modelski, George. 1995. “The evolution of global politics.” Journal of World-Systems Research 1(7): 424-467.
UN Charter. 1945. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter
Universal declaration of human rights. 1948. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
Convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide. 1948. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Author(s) and the Journal Political Sciences:Bulletin of Yerevan University

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
