Multipolarity

Based on over seventy interviews with diplomats and experts from all five MIKTA member countries, we find that MIKTA is used as a value-for-money minilateral mechanism for the world’s lesser powers grappling with the heightened global uncertainty and deepening interdependency. MIKTA foreign ministries have used the group as an ad hoc capacity-building and network-sharing scheme; and as a low-cost toolkit to diversify their traditional diplomatic channels and increase global visibility in various multilateral forums. However, MIKTA’s flexible, but precarious, institutional realities also suggest that minilateral arrangements that share MIKTA’s operational characteristics are likely to be short-lived and suffer from weak member commitment, resource constraints, forum-shopping risks, and a leadership vacuum.

In this paper, I’ll try to examine the ideas and the approach of Strange and will try to point out the advantages and disadvantages of a multipolar world to the governance of international trade, finance, production and technology.  Strange has argued that structural power within the international political economy (IPE) has four dimensions; security, production, finance, and knowledge. Understanding these four dimensions is crucial to comprehend Susan Strange. Therefore, in the first subtopic, I’ll try to explain the main theme of Strange’s ideas and will explain the four structure. Later on, I’ll try to classify the advantages and disadvantages of these structures. I’ll be building the grounds of this research paper from the sources such as Strange’s books and other’s work about her. And as the last subtopic, I will try to build a framework about the expanding strategies of multinational corporations after the covid-19 period.

If we are talking about geopolitics, we must apply an integrated an complex approach that combines power (primarily hard power-military strength and economic) and a certain view on the territory issues. The key concepts in geopolitics are Land Power, Sea Power and Manpower. The first two categories relate to geographical determinism and people are more likely to adjust and adapt to environmental conditions, trying to extract from this rational use-mountains, deserts, rivers and seas can serve both as natural boundaries and as a source of well-being. Man Power refers to the field of pure politics-the human will can determine how to develop the territory, whether to use military force, what to do for development and strengthening the national economy, as well as what ideological factors can serve-religions and other forms collective identity, such as nationalism. In this article, we will look at geopolitical factors, including those numerous drivers that push the centripetal and centrifugal forces of the region. Also we will analyze the perception of South Asia from three positions. To do this, it will be necessary to understand the interests of not only the countries of the region, but also others global players. And Russia's interests cannot be understood without Western opposition, especially in the context of current international relations. At the same time, we must take into account global geopolitical turbulence and the tectonic shift from a unipolar to a multipolar world order. Global positioning of the region There are different definitions of South Asia. Some refer to this region as the territories that were previously controlled British empire. 1 According to the most common version, South Asia includes eight States: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. If we consider the region from a global position, South Asia is the Rimland zone-the coastal zone of Eurasia, characterized by active dynamics, which is confirmed by the historical facts of the presence of the centers of ancient civilizations, trade and migration routes, as well as the banality that more than 70% of the World's population lives off the banks of rivers, seas and oceans. The history of the last two centuries shows that this Rimland has become a place of intense pressure from Sea Powers-early Britain, then the United States. The logic of Land Power forced the Russian Empire, and then the Soviet Union to respond in a manner based on instruments of deterrence and then ideology. If the US had once followed the doctrine of Henry Kissinger's rollback and used the myth of the Communist threat, now Washington has a more difficult time justifying its presence in the 1 Michael Mann. 2014. South Asia's Modern History: Thematic Perspectives. Taylor & Francis. pp. 13-15.

This University of Bristol (UOB) dissertation analysed the role of BRICS in regional and global governance. 
It theorises BRICS and explains how it views the militarisation of disputes, its desired role in the financial system and outlines its response to climate change.  Presented information in this theoretically informed documentary analysis is extracted from extensive research of literature, academic and think thank reports, media articles and official information.

It concludes that in the researched areas, BRICS applies a grand strategy to soft balance the United States and neoliberalism as an ideological competitor and applies realpolitik in the Global South.  By framing themselves as developing nations who has capital to make change, BRICS makes a case to be connected to Southern development problems like poverty and the climate and along make gains to increase soft power, capital and broader recognition as a credible partner. 

The dissertation reconfirms the view that BRICS uphold Westphalian sovereignty to decide its own trajectory in international affairs.  It implies that strong initiatives to change current political-economical structures are not directly expected, but with its initiative BRICS adds further ideological competition to libertarian agendas, questions current development models and adds on further decay in coorporation with the Global North.

It is assumed that China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and the international developmental financing institutions (IDFIs) recently created in order to support it, are going to challenge the Bretton Woods institutions and, as a consequence, the liberal order, contributing to a global shift in power from the United States to China. The aim of this article is to understand whether this is the case. After introducing the main Chinese financial institutions that are going to support the BRI, the article looks at the key differences between the BRI related IDFIs and the Bretton Woods institutions, focusing in particular on the equality of representation, conditionality and the internationalisation of the renminbi. The paper then looks at how the BRI’s IDFIs fit within the existing international legal order. By comparing the mission and principles of the BRI with those of Bretton Woods, it is argued that the BRI related IDFIs are nested in the current international legal system and that they can contribute to the realisation of some of its objectives. The paper concludes by arguing that, despite the fact that the rise of the BRI’s IFDIs poses new normative questions that in
the long run might challenge the Bretton Woods system, the zero-sum game that characterises much of the literature about them and the BRI, hampers our understanding of these institutions. These should, instead, be understood as Bretton Woods’ healthy competitor in a context of increasing multipolarity. There is no Fukuyama ‘end of history’, neither in its original sense, as the liberal order will be increasingly complemented by other centres of power, nor in an opposing sense, as China’s BRI and its related financing institutions are not only nested in the liberal institutional framework, but are also still far from being capable of replacing it.

Russia’s vetoes expressed at the UN Security Council coupled with the military intervention in the Syrian civil war have been harshly criticised by the Western community. While there is widespread agreement about the fact that Putin wants to support Assad, it is less clear why the Kremlin has adopted such stance.
The goal of this dissertation is to explore the reasons behind Moscow’s decision to intervene in the conflict. The main conclusion is that Russia’s involvement has been dictated by its attempt to establish a multipolar world order, as opposed to a unipolar one dominated by the U.S. In turn, such objective stems from a given conceptualisation of Russian identity proposed by Russian officials.
With its stress on ideational variables, constructivism offers a more plausible account of Russia’s intervention compared to structural realism.

Czwarta Teoria Polityczna" (dalej: 4TP) to idea współczesnego rosyjskiego myśliciela Aleksandra Dugina (ur. 1962), wyłożona w dziele pod tym samym tytułem 11 . Dugin to pisarz polityczny, filozof i socjolog, praktyk i teoretyk stosunków międzynarodowych, odnowiciel nauki geopolityki. Syn sowieckiego generała. W przeszłości (do 1998 r.) zaangażowany był w działalność ruchu narodowo-bolszewickiego Eduarda Limonowa następnie -aż do dziś -rozwija intelektualno-polityczne zaplecze myśli eurazjatyckiej. W swoich badaniach wykorzystuje zachodnie tradycje refleksji filozoficznej i politycznej, przede wszystkim jej radykalne (faszystowskie, fundamentalistyczne, neopogańskie, nowolewicowe itd.) nurty, których znajomość sam zaszczepiał w swoim kraju. Jego osoba zajmuje ważną, choć niestałą pozycję w politycznych i wojskowych kręgach postsowieckiej Rosji 12 .

Since the Cold War ended the world has become unipolar and the United States is delighting in a hegemonic position. As the 21st century progresses the framework of international system is again moving from unipolar to a multipolar structure. Colossal economic accomplishments of a few nations like China, Brazil and India have prompted the most preservationist advocates of this civil argument of a change from unipolarity to multipolarity. As indicated by numerous researchers it appears that we are living in the realm of transition. Extension of G8 to G22, the discourse of expansion in United Nation Security Council, perceived decrease in United States influence, BRIC nations rise and the ascent of new powers all point in one course. Worth noticing is the realist Kenneth Waltz who declared at the end the Cold War that United States would not have the capacity to appreciate the products of unipolarity for long. Underestimating this it appears glaringly evident that theories explaining transition are significant for the time period we live in. This Paper is an attempt to discuss the foreign policy of Pakistan in this changing scenario.

This paper overviews European Identitarian and/or New Rightist philosophy regarding the issues of ethnicity, culture, race, and identities and politics related to these. Topics discussed in the paper include the following: the conception and sociology of collective identities, ethno-cultural identity, inter-cultural interaction, the role of racial type in identity, the problems of mixing and miscegenation, the idea of differentialism as opposed to racism, the value of community in identity, types of ethnic separatism (the class and caste System, nationalism, Traditionalist imperial federalism, Identitarian separatism or federalism), the idea of organic democracy, and the Theory of a Multipolar World. References are made especially to the writings of Alain de Benoist, Alexander Dugin, Pierre Krebs, Tomislav Sunic, Guillaume Faye, and Julius Evola.

This essay covers the main characteristics of two main schools of thought in international relations theory: classical realism and neo-realism. The essay attempts to give contemporary politics examples in order to enhance the idea that neo-realism, in fact, serves as the best representation of how modern states behave in the field of international affairs. This paper implies that state-actors have a desire for power stronger that their will to cooperate with other state-actors. This theory is seen to hold since the US left the Paris Agreement due to reasons of self-interest. In addition, countries continue to invest considerable amount of funds into their military and defence sectors in order to maintain their positions in politics. The concepts of unipolarity and bipolarity are examined and are then compared with the current US-China relations. By reviewing theory and examples, this paper concludes that, indeed, neo-realism gives a credible account of contemporary state governance.

El mundo vive una compleja y difícil transición. Emergen nuevos actores, las relaciones de poder se reconfiguran y retornan viejas narrativas para explicar las acciones de los estados. La narrativa de un mundo unipolar como sistema liberal internacional liderado por los Estados Unidos y Occidente, se agota ante estas nuevas realidades, entre otras razones por el debilitamiento de estos actores. La narrativa de un mundo bipolar retorna bajo la consigna de una "nueva Guerra Fría", esta vez entre los Estados Unidos y China. Y sin embargo, la invasión rusa de Ucrania muestra que ambas narrativas son insuficientes para servir de guía en esta transición. El mundo es más complejo y las incertidumbres son mayores y múltiples.

El 17 de diciembre de 2014 comenzaron las conversaciones bilaterales entre los Estados Unidos y Cuba luego de más de medio siglo de tensiones y hostilidades entre los dos países. Una de las interrogantes que levanta este proceso es si los gobiernos de América Latina y el Caribe contribuyeron de alguna manera a este diálogo, en el marco de su creciente autonomía de los Estados Unidos  y de los acelerados cambios en las relaciones hemisféricas y en el entorno global. Para responder a esta interrogante la presentación aborda el análisis de dos importantes factores que contribuyeron a este proceso. En primer lugar, la nueva arquitectura de la gobernabilidad regional que se estructuró luego del fin de la Guerra Fría y de los acontecimientos del 11 de septiembre de 2001, en el marco de un gradual desentendimiento estratégico estadounidense con respecto a la región. Y en segundo lugar, la cautelosa y medida estrategia que asumieron algunos actores claves latinoamericanos en influir sobre las posiciones de los Estados Unidos respecto a Cuba. Los dos factores se encuentran estrechamente vinculados, en tanto  un nuevo regionalismo latinoamericano emergió a través del enhebrado de la creación de  varias organizaciones regionales tales como el ALBA, la Unión de Naciones de América del Sur (UNASUR) y la Comunidad de Estados de América Latina y el Caribe (CELAC) que excluyeron a los Estados Unidos y Canadá , y en tanto Brasil, México y Venezuela – que habían asumido liderazgos importantes en la región en la última década – desempeñaron, para bien o para mal, un rol protagónico en este proceso. Sin embargo, tampoco debe desestimarse un tercer factor adicional de relevancia: una diplomacia experimentada y fogueada en la proyección global de Cuba en las décadas anteriores que contribuyó asimismo a desarrollar relaciones más estrechas con los países de América Latina y el Caribe y a preparar el terreno para el inicio de las conversaciones bilaterales entre los Estados Unidos y Cuba. Finalmente, el análisis de estos tres procesos y de su incidencia sobre la normalización de las relaciones Cuba-EEUU y sus implicaciones para América Latina y el Caribe se enmarca en un análisis más amplio de las transformaciones recientes del entorno internacional y de su impacto sobre la región.

La estrategia occidental frente a la profundización del conflicto entre Rusia y Ucrania puso al descubierto que los dispositivos de cancelación pueden operar a escala planetaria en la disputa geopolítica y hasta tener por objetivo -en este caso- una nación entera. El objetivo hacia el que se dirige el arsenal de medidas en curso apuntan mucho más que a sancionar a un estado: el horizonte es la cancelación de un país,  su sociedad, su cultura, su cosmovisión.
A pedido de la OTAN, en 2020 François Cluzel presentó un artículo denominado “Guerra Cognitiva”. En la misma se detallan las características de lo que implica un “nuevo” dominio de combate. A la guerra marítima, terrestre, aérea, cibernética y espacial, se le suma lo cognitivo como nuevo espacio de medición de fuerzas y de lucha. En dicho documento se vaticina la importancia de profundizar los desarrollos científicos y técnicos en ciberpsicología. Allí se afirma que para la OTAN “el desarrollo de capacidades para dañar las habilidades cognitivas de los oponentes será una necesidad”.
En el marco de la actual crisis sistémica y encrucijada civilizatoria que atraviesa la humanidad, lo que está en juego es si vamos hacia la profundización de un ordenamiento unipolar global neoliberal o hacia un ordenamiento multipolar con la confluencia de procesos que hacen hincapié en la triada estado-producción-trabajo. En otras palabras, si el capital sigue siendo quien ordene el devenir de los pueblos del mundo (con el recrudecimiento de las desigualdades y los impactos ecosistémicos que ello conlleva), o bien los estados logran imponerse por encima del mismo y caminar hacia una convergencia que haga viable a la humanidad y todas sus naciones en el tiempo.

El presente trabajo se propone describir las principales características de la Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta (IFR) lanzada por el presidente chino Xi Jinping en el año 2013, haciendo hincapié no solo en sus dimensiones económicas o en sus obras de infraestructura, sino también en sus aspectos políticos, culturales y sociales.
De esta manera, caracterizamos a la IFR como una propuesta que expresa una forma particular de entender el mundo, caracterizadapor la propia República Popular China como diálogo de civilizaciones o comunidad de destino compartido para la humanidad.
Esta mirada sobre el orden mundial, entendemos, supone y expresa una nueva territorialidad del poder, no ya centrada exclusivamente en los Estados nacionales, sino que nos obliga a pensar los nuevos actores del sistema internacional y las nuevas formas en las que se expresa el poder en el mundo actual.
Haremos una descripción de las principales características de la IFR, recuperando las aristas que van más allá de lo estrictamente económico, y poniéndolas en relación con las teorías del sistema-mundo, los teóricos de la dependencia y los autores decoloniales. Estos abordajes nos permitirán pensar las propuestas pluriversales y multipolares que abren a partir de la crisis mundial integral que transitamos actualmente.
El presente trabajo forma parte de las investigaciones realizadas a partir de la Beca Doctoral otorgada por CONICET, centradas en las disputas de proyectos estratégicos a nivel mundial luego de 2008, centrándonos en el BRICS como bloque que se propone la conformación de una propuesta de mundo multipolar.

DOĞU PERİNÇEK ABD nereye gidiyor 3 ALEKSANDR DUGİN Büyük Yeniden Başlatma ve Büyük Uyanış 11 PROF. DR. SEMİH KORAY ABD hakkında dört tez 29 DR. MEHMET PERİNÇEK ABD üzerine tezler 32 PROF. DR. CÜNEYT AKALIN ABD'nin Musaddık Darbesi 37 HAKAN TOPKURULU ABD ekonomisinde yolun sonu göründü mü 47 Trump'ın 1776 Danışma Komisyonu Raporu (Ocak 2021) 55 Şİ JİNPİNG Asıl hedefimize ve ÇKP'nin kuruluş amaçlarına sadık kalmak 59 DİMİTRİS KONSTANTAKOPOULOS Enformasyon devrimleri ve karşı devrimler 68

En la presente ponencia, intentaremos hacer una caracterización del estado de situación geopolítica mundial en la actualidad, para luego analizar cómo se inserta América Latina en este proceso. Para ello, abordaremos los acuerdos a los que se arribaron en la Cumbre de los BRICS realizada en Brasil en 2014, entre los países miembros del BRICS y los gobiernos de nuestra región. Finalmente, intentaremos reflexionar sobre cómo inciden en la relación con los BRICS los cambios en las orientaciones políticas de los gobiernos de algunos de los gobiernos de América Latina (principalmente los casos de Argentina y Brasil).

The Green New Deal, understood as a means to reestablishing US hegemony, has failed and given way to a global austerity turn. This has significant consequences for the ability of the US state to fully and hegemonically integrate China into the American Empire, because it enhances existing tensions regarding global trade and China’s state-interventionist industrial and energy policies. US foreign policy faces a dilemma. On the one hand the financial dependence on China rule out direct confrontation, on the other hand the perpetuation of US hegemony depends on
averting that the increasing regional integration in South East Asia emerges as a challenge to the US-dominated world economy and its monetary configuration. The US are therefore pursuing a risky strategy that seeks to achieve its goals through utilizing existing tensions, most notably around the South China Sea, in order to increase US military presence in the region. This strategy, however, is facing difficulties and setbacks both from protectionism at home and China’s clever economic diplomacy abroad.

Questi ultimi anni sono stati caratterizzati da profondi cambiamenti che hanno modificato il panorama economico e sociale in cui vivevamo.Le società europee sono state attraversate da una crisi venuta da oltre atlantico (quella dei subprime americani), che ha provocato una crisi del debito sovrano, seguita da disoccupazione e restrizioni di bilancio. Vi è la sensazione sempre più diffusa che il mondo in cui viviamo stia cambiando, senza però avere  gli strumenti per leggerne la direzione e la portata. E’ in questi momenti che si riscoprono autori che trattano di queste rotture storiche e che possono quindi fornire gli strumenti per comprenderle. Uno degli autori che come un fiume carsico riaffiora ad ogni crisi è Karl Polanyi, autore de La Grande Trasformazione. Nel suo libro Polanyi traccia l’origine degli sconvolgimenti di inizio Novecento nella progressiva affermazione del mercato autoregolato e del danno che questo provocava alla società umana e all’ambiente in cui essa viveva. Sebbene il fenomeno avesse portata generale, l’opposizione alla sua avanzata viene descritta come prevalentemente nazionale, in cui i vari settori della società, dall’aristocrazia ai lavoratori, si organizzavano per proteggersi e per respingerlo. Questo ha offuscato la presenza di un’analisi internazionale negli scritti di Polanyi e ha portato a dimenticarne le proposte per un sistema internazionale alternativo a quello organizzato secondo le necessità del mercato autoregolato. Le somiglianze tra le dinamiche descritte da Polanyi e gli avvenimenti attuali possono permettere di leggere meglio la realtà che attraversiamo oggi, e le sue proposte per un sistema internazionale alternativo ci aiutano a pensare nuovi equilibri che impediscano al mercato di tornare ad avere un posto centrale nell’organizzazione dell’economia e della società, come è successo dopo la Seconda Guerra Mondiale.

This paper inquires into the effects of an emerging multipolar world on the international institution of regionalism. While IR scholarship has been making a strong case for the regionalization of world politics since the 1990s, the fact that most of the rising powers are also the sole regional powers of their home regions has led some scholars to argue that the advent of multipolarity can only strengthen this general trend toward a more regionalized international order. In this contribution, I challenge these arguments by proposing an alternative way of thinking about how multipolarity is developing. The implications of this interpretation are that the emergence of multipolarity may actually generate powerful centrifugal forces within
regions, which would have adverse effects on the known forms of regionalism that regional groupings have been implementing thus far. This applies particularly to the global South, where intraregional economic interdependencies tend to be weak. The proposition is tested by examining empirical findings across several regions and through a case study.

Este artículo muestra el modelo de influencia que Rusia está utilizando en África, ya que posee diversas características que lo diferencian claramente, no solo del que utiliza en su periferia, sino de regiones más lejanas, por ejemplo, Medio Oriente. A pesar de tener muchas similitudes de lo aplicado en Siria, que marcó un antes y un después en su política exterior, también muestra divergencias, de ahí la necesidad de describir el modelo africano. El artículo muestra cómo Rusia utiliza una serie de medios y herramientas, tanto de manera abierta, como encubiertas para lograr dichos objetivos, en especial el del aumento de estatus, motivado principalmente por la competencia entre grandes potencias y la persecución de un modelo multipolar.

In the last few years, the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries have been increasingly investing in developing their cooperation and seeking to exert joint global influence. BRICS' mobilization has been visible in the cooperation of high-level officials, deeper policy coordination and investments in BRICS-related scholarship. As the BRICS intensify their pursuit of multipolarity, surprisingly little attention has been paid to the ways in which the BRICS has been received in the United States (US), which is a crucial stakeholder in creating a multipolar system. How is the BRICS represented in U.S. foreign policy circles? This article examines the state of the U.S. debate on the BRICS, drawing on the perspectives from foreign policy officials, top think tanks and academics. It argues that there is a considerable gap between BRICS' multipolar aspirations and the perceptions of the grouping's promise and potential in the US. The BRICS is often marginalized in the US as an entity, andeven if accepted as suchit is considered ineffective in terms of its results. However, the BRICS benefits U.S. foreign policy development: it challenges U.S. officials to clarify their message on multipolarity; it reframes the debate from bilateral China vs. US competition to multilateral processes of providing global public goods; and, it generates a subfield of BRICS studies, which internationalizes the production and consumption of knowledge in the field of global politics.

El presente trabajo se propone abordar los principales debates y conclusiones del II Foro de la Franja y la Ruta para la Cooperación Internacional (conocida como "Ruta de la Seda"), donde concurrieron representantes de más de 150 países, entre ellos 38 presidentes o primeros ministros, y se acordaron 283 objetivos por 64.000 millones de dólares. El mismo fue organizado por la República Popular China, y se realizó entre el 25 y el 27 de abril de 2019. El 2° Foro de la Ruta de la Seda vino a profundizar los acuerdos realizados a partir del 1° Foro realizado en 2017, y nos permite hacer un balance del curso de una de las iniciativas más importantes de la RPCh para la construcción de una propuesta pluriversal y multipolar.

Since the disintegration of USSR Eurasia has gained a new geopolitical and strategic significance. Fifteen Countries emerged as result of disintegration, among which only Russian Federation was the successor state. The post-soviet era especially the era of 1990s was a political and economic trauma for the Russian federation and the post-soviet space. But Eurasianists were well aware about the American unilateralism and American ‘Grand Chessboard strategy” that was solely aimed at encircling Russian geography. With these concerns, the Eurasianists advised the Russian political and military elites to initiate the Eurasian Union Project. This paper briefly sketches Russian historical Eurasian dream, which deeply rooted in Russian imperial history and discusses about the importance of Eurasian philosophy for the political and economic stability of Russia-Eurasia. The paper also illustrates about the challenges and opportunities for the Eurasian integration and for the establishment of multipolar world order. Moreover, the paper also briefly outlines the geopolitical rationale behind the Eurasian project as key objective of the contemporary Russian foreign policy and geopolitics.

Durante los últimos años las regiones han adquirido una creciente importancia en el sistema internacional. La Unión Europea aparece como la formación regional más consolidada de la actualidad, y ha mostrado un renovado interés por las estructuras de gobernanza global, los procesos de regionalización y las estructuras de gobernanza multinivel. En el caso particular de Suramérica, ha surgido un entramado de estructuras de autoridad tanto formales como informales (CAN, Mercosur, Celac, Unasur, entre otras) que coordinan, gestionan y reglamentan comportamientos unilaterales, bilaterales y multilaterales en la seguridad, de defensa, de derechos humanos y de desarrollo de interconexión a través de infraestructura, entre otros.

The coming 5th European Conference of African Studies (ECAS 5)
which is being held on 27-29 June 2013 in Lisbon, Portugal, of which
this book is partly a sneak preview, proposes to make the case that
African Studies are a vibrant, productive and meaningful research
and teaching area, uniquely capable of not only producing knowledge
about Africa, but of gauging the viability of the decision-making
processes, be it at grass-root or at the most macro of levels, through
detailed analysis, thoughtful understanding and – let us admit – personal
involvement.
The 2010s have witnessed the consolidation of most African states
and institutions. However, fifty years after the foundation of the Organization
of African Unity (OAU) in May 1963, the international
panorama and Africa’s position in it have changed considerably. The
world’s geopolitical and economic configuration has evolved, with new actors appearing in a new phase of globalization. Under these
conditions and given its own trajectory, the current challenges that
Africa faces include the promotion of peace and security, human
rights, democratic institutions and particularly the integration and
socio-economic development of Africans, as stated by the OAU’s successor, the 2000-established African Union.

„SMALL STATES IN A WORLD OF REGIONS AND THE
CHALLENGES OF MULTIPOLARIZATION OF INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE 21ST CENTURY“

In academic discussions and political dicourse on multipolarity at the beginning of the 21st century, great and emerging powers are perceived as major subjects of change, as well as the users of a transforming regionalized international system of states. On the other hand, small states have been sidelined in considering of the initial phase of the process of redistribution of economic power and the effects that the resulting political status-seeking may have in an altered international system. By dominantly focusing on structural effects of power distribution, IR research fails to provide for a more nuanced understanding of state agency and dynamics that is constituted by many, more or less important, ‘pawns of international politics’ or able Lilliputians − with their positions and roles in the processes of globalization and internationalization under different political, economic and security regionalisms. Drawing from the literatures on theories of IR, small states and regional security, this paper proceeds in two directions. Firstly, by considering various meanings of multipolarity – from its materiality, to its ideational and discoursive structure – it is possible to position states vis-a-vis what meaning of this concept is dominant in their political discourses. Secondly, in the context of a wider European regionalism, and post-Yugoslav and Caucasus regions more specifically, dimensions and characters of the relations of China and Russia with the small states in the two regions are explored. On the example of Serbia and Azerbaijan and shaping of their foreign policies in relations with the European Union, Russia, and China, an assessment of the extent and constraints of the agency of small states in international context is provided.

Keywords: International Relations, multipolarity, regional security, discourse, agency, Serbia, European Union, Russia, China, Azerbaijan.

En el presente trabajo, intentaremos caracterizar el proyecto de la Nueva Ruta de la Seda, en tanto complejo productivo-comercial que abarca a más de 60 países de Asia, Europa, África y Oceanía. Para ello, tomaremos como base las conclusiones del Primer Foro “Una Franja, Una Ruta para la Cooperación Internacional”, realizado en Pekín el 14 y 15 de mayo de 2017, y al que  asistieron 28 presidentes y primeros ministros, cien representantes ministeriales y unos 1.200 delegados de más de 130 países de todo el mundo.
Como hipótesis de trabajo, sostenemos que el desarrollo de estas iniciativas ponen en evidencia la emergencia de un proyecto de nuevo orden mundial, que podría terminar con la hegemonía de los Estados Unidos en tanto Estado-Nación y potencia central unipolar. Un proyecto pluriversal cimentado sobre la producción y el trabajo, terminando con el imperio de la especulación financiera. Un proyecto de inclusión y de soberanía, contra un proyecto de exclusión económico-social y de dependencia. Un proyecto de cooperación y de paz, contra un proyecto de imposición, de guerra y de muerte. Aunque, sin embargo, no está exento de tensiones y contradicción que son importantes resaltar en el trabajo.

IV Jornadas de Sociología: Agrietar al neoliberalismo en nuestra América
MESA 18: Hegemonía, comunicación y poder. Hacia una geopolítica del siglo XXI
Universidad Nacional de Cuyo, Mendoza, Argentina
Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales

In the enthusiasm to declare a second ‘scramble for Africa’ by emerging powers, China has dwarfed the debate, fuelled by the zero-sum perception that its gain is the United States’ loss. Although middle powers such as Turkey and Brazil have equally global ambitions, their growing engagement with the continent has received little critical attention. This article identifies the roles that Turkey and Brazil have adopted in their foreign policy towards African countries, and analyses these roles against the realities on the ground. It finds that their discourses of sustained partnership and support are belied by the kinds of resource-hungry economic interests favoured by prior colonial projects, and misleadingly selective histories of affinity that amplify partial connections to a continental scale.

Russian-Algerian bilateral relations have recently gained more significance for both states. For Russia, as a (re)emerging global actor following the Soviet era decline, Algeria continues to be an indispensable partner to any global actor's strategy seeking more engagement in Africa. Regarding Russia-Africa complex, in which Algeria's component-ness is − and will continue to be central, Russia has never been a newcomer to the continent if compared with other BRICS (Brazil, India, China and South Africa). Both countries should do their utmost to take advantage of their exceptional history. This exceptionalness traces back to the hard times of the Algerian War of Independence (1954-62); USSR then generously provided Algerian revolutionaries with political, military as well as financial assistance. Therefore, diplomatic relations have been established between USSR and Algeria early on March 1962, just after Algeria proclaimed its independence. Accordingly, it is no wonder that Algeria has eventually become the first Arab country to sign recently a strategic partnership agreement with Russia (2001). Considering the multidimensionality of such partnership, this paper offers three endeavors. First, it describes recent history of Russian-Algerian relations focusing on the renaissance in such relations during the last decade. Second, it analyzes the very interrelatedness between Russia's -more crucially than the other BRICS' -re-emergence as a revisionist global actor and how it matters to Russian-Algerian relations. Third, it debates the realities and challenges of Russian-Algerian relations, particularly in the three main fields of bilateral interaction, military, energy and political.

In this paper the author argues that Russian policy-and opinion-makers, having borrowed the concept of multipolarity from the (neo)realist vocabulary, very often they use it in a much broader sense of narratives on Russian identity and subjectivity and, therefore, attach to it quite different non-realist meanings, which include issues of identity and non-state actorship. What hides beneath the pretended realist wording of Russian discourse is a much more complicated and variegated -though not always consistent-set of policy imageries. Against this background, the Russian discourse on multipolarity reminds a patchwork of scattered and loosely tied "cognitive maps", based upon -and sustained by-certain visions of the world in the diversity of its actors. Since multipolarity originates in the sphere of ideas, it would be quite logical to assume that at certain time there might be more than one pattern of multipolar arrangements. Each of them gives a different answer to the question of what poles, nation states, regions, civilizations, or integrative constructs like EU and CIS are.

Resumen: El propósito fundamental de este ensayo es abordar el estado actual y la proyección de corto plazo de la política mundial, así como observar un aspecto central como es el alcance político de la crisis económica-financiera de 2008-2012 y algunas tendencias principales que, antes de aquella y hacia el futuro, se divisan como notas sobresalientes del escenario contemporáneo. Cabe remarcar que este escrito pretende introducir una lectura de lo mencionado desde el ángulo de las relaciones internacionales y mediante una perspectiva crítica. Asimismo, es importante indicar que se busca combinar una mirada histórica y una lectura comparada, al tiempo que se intenta analizar tanto la dinámica estructural como la contingencia coyuntural. Adicionalmente, se apunta a subrayar la complejidad del entorno global; en este sentido, no se pretende enunciar una dirección determinada de la situación presente.

Soğuk Savaş boyunca, uluslar arası sistemin iki kutuplu yapısı ve bazı devletlerin elinde bulunan nükleer silahlar, sorunlu bir barışın sürdürülmesini sağladı. İki kutuplu dönem sona yaklaşırken, sistemde yaşanması muhtemel yapısal değişiklikler sorgulanmalıdır. Sovyetler Birliği’nin dağılmasının ardından, Rusya kendine yetebildiği ve başka büyük güçler henüz ortaya çıkmadığı için, iki kutupluluk, değişmiş bir biçimde de olsa sürmektedir. Rus gücünün azalmasıyla, Birleşik Devletler artık başka bir ülke tarafından denetim altında tutulmamaktadır. Güç dengesi teorisi, diğer devletlerin, kendi başlarına veya uyum halinde, Amerikan gücünü dengeleyeceklerini öngörür. Uluslararası sistemin yapısındaki muhtemel değişiklikler göz önüne alındığında, üç siyasi birimin büyük güç konumu kazanabileceği öngörülebilir: Almanya veya Batı Avrupa Devleti, Japonya ve Çin. Bu ülkelerin sağladığı ilerlemeye rağmen, Birleşik Devletler önümüzdeki dönemde hem ekonomik hem de askeri olarak lider ülke olmaya devam edecektir.