International relations of the 21st century briefly. Events of the late XX - early XXI century that changed the world

After the Second World War, the most important issue was the post-war order of the world. To solve it, it was necessary to coordinate the positions of all countries participating in the anti-Hitler coalition. It was necessary to implement the measures recorded in the documents signed in Yalta and Potsdam. The preparatory work was entrusted to the Council of Foreign Ministers established at the Potsdam Conference. In July-October 1946, the Paris Peace Conference was held, which considered the draft peace treaties prepared by the Minister of Foreign Affairs with the former European allies of Nazi Germany - Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Romania, and Finland. On February 10, 1947 they were signed. The treaties restored the pre-war borders with some modifications. The volume of reparations and the procedure for compensation for damage caused to the allied states were also determined. Political articles obligated to provide all citizens with human rights and fundamental freedoms, to prevent the revival of fascist organizations. The USSR took an active part in resolving all issues. In general, the peace treaties were fair and contributed to the independent, democratic development of the states with which they were concluded. Nevertheless, the differences that emerged made it impossible to settle the German problem peacefully on a mutually acceptable basis. And in 1949 the split of Germany became a historical fact. Alienation between the great powers increased. Ideological differences and various doctrines began to play a dominant role in international relations. Western countries were extremely negative about totalitarian socialism. The USSR, in turn, was also hostile to capitalism. The influence of the parties on international relations and on their weaker subjects increased more and more. The USA and the USSR considered themselves leaders placed by the course of history at the head of forces defending various social and economic systems.

The geopolitical situation changed dramatically. The revolution of the 40s in Eastern Europe, the conclusion by the Soviet Union with the states of this region of treaties on friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance formed a new system of international relations. This system was limited by the framework of states, the development of which proceeded under the conditions of the operation of the Stalinist model of socialism with all its integral features.

The aggravation of relations and the complication of the political situation in the world also occurred in connection with the support of the Soviet Union for the just struggle of the colonial and dependent countries for their liberation. The metropolises in every possible way hindered the national liberation movement. In 1949, the people's revolution in China won, leading to a radical change in the geopolitical situation in Asia, which increased the anxiety of the United States and other Western countries. All this strengthened the distrust of the two superpowers in each other, exacerbated all the existing contradictions.

A global rivalry between the USSR and the USA emerged. Both Churchill's speech in Fulton on March 5, 1946, and the Truman Doctrine put forward in March 1947 were perceived in the USSR as an open proclamation of a "cold war" that lasted more than 40 years. During all this time, the rivalry between the two great powers did not develop into a hot war, which gave reason to call this period the "cold war". It has drawn the whole planet into itself, split the world into two parts, two military-political and economic groups, two socio-economic systems. The world has become bipolar. A peculiar political logic of this global rivalry has arisen – “whoever is not with us is against us”. In everything and everywhere, each side saw the insidious hand of the enemy.

The Cold War brought militarism in politics and thinking to unprecedented proportions. Everything in world politics began to be evaluated from the point of view of the correlation of military force, the balance of armaments. Western countries adopted a bloc strategy that kept confrontation in international relations for many years. Most of the states that accepted the Marshall Plan signed the North Atlantic Treaty (NATO) in April 1949. A unified armed force was created under the command of American military leaders. The creation of a closed military-political grouping of an ideological nature, directed essentially against the USSR and its allies, had a negative impact on the development of international relations.

The US policy "from a position of strength" met with a harsh response from the USSR and caused an aggravation of international tension. In 1949, the US nuclear monopoly was abolished. After the creation of thermonuclear weapons in the 50s, and after that the means of delivering them to the target (intercontinental ballistic missiles), the USSR made every effort to achieve military-strategic parity with the United States, which was realized at the turn of the 60s-70s. The number of military blocs grew. In 1951, the ANZUS military-political group arose. A "security treaty" was concluded between the US and Japan. In 1954, the SEATO bloc was created. In 1955, another closed group was formed - the Baghdad Pact. After Iraq left it, this bloc became known as CENTO. Fearing for their security, the USSR and the countries of Central and South-Eastern Europe, in response to the agreement of Western countries on the remilitarization of the FRG and its admission to NATO, concluded in May 1955 in Warsaw a multilateral Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance. The signatory states provided for the provision of immediate assistance by all means in the event of an armed attack in Europe against one or more of the Warsaw Treaty member states.

A huge danger to peace on Earth was fraught with international conflicts in various regions, which threatened to escalate them into war. In June 1950, the Korean War broke out and lasted three years. For eight years after the war, France waged war in Indochina. In the autumn of 1956 Great Britain, France and Israel committed aggression against Egypt. In 1958, the United States undertook an armed intervention in Lebanon, and Great Britain - in Jordan. The most dangerous international crisis arose in the autumn of 1962 in connection with the situation around Cuba, which brought mankind to the brink of nuclear war. The Caribbean crisis was resolved thanks to a compromise between the USSR and the USA. The US aggression in Indochina has become protracted. It was the most brutal war of the second half of the 20th century. Vietnam has become a testing ground for the most sophisticated means of warfare, created by highly developed US industrial technologies. The US attempt to involve its allies in the war and give it the character of an international action failed. However, some countries participated in the war on the side of the United States. The enormous assistance rendered to Vietnam by the USSR, the support of the heroic Vietnamese people by all peace-loving forces forced the United States to conclude an agreement on ending the war and restoring peace in Vietnam. The Middle East remained a dangerous hotbed of conflict. The complex contradictions and intransigence of the parties led to several Arab-Israeli wars and for a long time ruled out the possibility of a peaceful settlement in this region.

However, in these difficult decades, mankind has become more and more clearly aware that a new world war is not inevitable, that the efforts of progressive forces can stop mankind's slide into a nuclear catastrophe.

The 1950s and 1960s were marked by an arms race on an unprecedented scale. Huge material, intellectual and other resources were wasted on the development and production of ever new means of warfare. At the same time, there was an extremely acute shortage of them to solve socio-economic problems in most countries of the world. In 1960, the USSR proposed to the Session of the UN General Assembly to consider the main provisions of the treaty on the general and complete disarmament of states under strict international control. Western countries rejected this initiative, however, the first step towards warming international relations was taken. In August 1963 Great Britain, the USSR and the USA signed in Moscow the Treaty Banning Nuclear Tests in the Atmosphere, Outer Space and Under Water.

The ever-increasing arms race, especially nuclear arms, was bringing humanity to a fatal point, and huge efforts were needed to stop this negative process. The active position of the USSR and its allies aimed at improving the international situation, the efforts of the non-aligned movement, the political realism of the leaders of a number of Western countries have brought positive results. From the beginning of the 1970s, international relations entered a phase of detente. In March 1970, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons came into force. By the beginning of the 1990s, more than 135 states had signed it. For the European region, the Treaty between the USSR and the FRG, concluded in August 1970, was of great importance.

In 1972–1974, intensive negotiations were held at the highest level between the USSR and the USA, which led to the signing of a number of important political documents. "Fundamentals of Relations between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America" ​​contained a platform for transferring bilateral relations to a qualitatively new level of their radical improvement.

In the same period, the Treaty between the USSR and the United States on the limitation of anti-missile defense systems (ABM) was concluded, and the Interim Agreement on Certain Measures in the Field of Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (OCB-1) was signed.

The improvement of relations between the two superpowers created the prerequisites for strengthening security and developing interstate cooperation on the European continent. The initiatives of the USSR and other socialist countries played a big role in this. Of no small importance was the change in the position of the FRG on questions of European policy. The coalition government of the Social Democrats, headed by Chancellor Willy Brandt, proposed a "new eastern policy", the core of which was the recognition of the post-war realities that had developed in Europe and the normalization of relations with the USSR and the countries of Eastern Europe. This gave impetus to the development of the process of strengthening pan-European security. In 1973, Helsinki hosted multilateral consultations of 33 European states, the United States and Canada on the preparation of a pan-European Conference. On July 30 - August 4, 1975, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) was held in Helsinki. The leaders of 35 states signed the Final Act, which fixed the agreed principles of relations between the countries participating in the Conference, determined the content and forms of cooperation between them, and measures to reduce the risk of armed conflicts. Growing interest in developing the process started in Helsinki was shown by subsequent meetings of the CSCE participating states in Belgrade (1977-1978), Madrid (1980-1983), Stockholm (1984-1987), Vienna (1986-1989). d.), Paris (1990), Helsinki (1992).

The 1970s and 1980s were marked by an unprecedented growth in industrial, scientific and technical ties between Western countries and the USSR and other socialist countries. France, Great Britain, Austria, Italy, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, Greece, the Federal Republic of Germany and a number of other states concluded promising programs and agreements with the USSR. However, it should be noted that in the late 1970s and early 1980s the international situation escalated. The political course of the United States towards the USSR sharply tightened with the coming to power in January 1981 of the administration of R. Reagan. In March 1983, he launched the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Tensions culminated in the fall of 1983 when a South Korean airliner with passengers on board was shot down over Soviet territory.

The growth of international tension was also associated with the foreign policy of the United States and other Western countries. Almost all regions of the planet have been declared a sphere of vital US interests. Many have experienced political, economic, and often military pressure from the United States. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Grenada and other countries became objects of intervention. Tensions also increased in connection with the introduction of a limited contingent of Soviet troops into Afghanistan.

The changes that took place in the USSR with the coming to power in 1985 of new leaders made it possible to substantiate the foundations of new political thinking at the state level and begin their practical implementation. This led to a radical renewal of the foreign policy of the USSR. The central ideas of the new political thinking were: the idea of ​​the priority of universal human interests over class, national, social; the idea of ​​the interdependence of mankind in the face of the threat of rapidly impending global problems; the idea of ​​freedom of choice of social structure; the idea of ​​democratization and de-ideologization of the entire system of international relations.

The new philosophy of the world made its way through concrete steps. Real confirmation of this was the development and deepening of the political dialogue between the USSR and the USA on all key issues of world politics and bilateral relations.

The Soviet-American talks at the highest level in Geneva (1985), Reykjavik (1986), Washington (1987) and Moscow (1988) led to an important result. In December 1987, the ROSMD Agreement was signed, and in June 1988, the ROSMD Agreement came into effect. This is the first agreement in history to provide for the destruction of two classes of nuclear weapons under strict international control. The result was a significant improvement in Soviet-American relations. Their further qualitative development took place as a result of negotiations at the highest level in Washington (May-June 1990) and in Moscow (July 1991). Of exceptional importance was the signing of a bilateral treaty on the limitation and reduction of strategic offensive arms. The balance of the treaty was in the interests of strengthening strategic stability and reducing the likelihood of a nuclear conflict. However, in this direction there are huge opportunities for moving forward and a more significant reduction in strategic offensive arms.

The settlement of Germany's relations and the signing of the corresponding agreement on September 10, 1990 played an important role in eliminating tension in international affairs both on the planet as a whole and in Europe. In practice, this treaty drew the final line under the results of the Second World War.

Subsequently, new acute problems arose in international affairs. The collapse of the Yugoslav Federation, and then the USSR, led to the emergence of new regional conflicts that have not been resolved to date. The geopolitical situation in the world has changed, the system of international relations between the socialist states has ceased to exist. The countries of Eastern Europe reoriented towards the West. In July 1997, at the NATO summit in Madrid, it was decided to expand the alliance to include three states of the former Warsaw Pact - the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary. Bringing NATO's military structure closer to most of the CIS states could change the geopolitical situation and could undermine the system of arms limitation treaties. Such a development of events may complicate the creation of a new European structure and destabilize the entire system of international relations. The war in the Balkans, other conflicts in the European region, the difficulties of the transition period in the countries of Eastern Europe and in the post-Soviet space pose a threat to security in Europe. This threat is complemented by aggressive nationalism, religious and ethnic intolerance, terrorism, organized crime, and uncontrolled migration. In recent years, the struggle for control over decision-making on a global scale has intensified. The greatest attention "centers of power" focus on activities that allow you to control the main financial, intellectual and information flows. The importance of control over economic processes and the development of the entire social sphere is rapidly growing. All this requires huge new efforts to preserve and strengthen peace and international security.

Entering the 21st century, humanity is faced not only with new global challenges, but also with a changed geopolitical situation. Remaining the only superpower in the world, the United States presents its leading role as a necessity, dictated not only by American national interests, but also by the desire of the world community.

The use of force in Iraq and Yugoslavia, the expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance, the use of force in other regions of the planet demonstrate the desire to establish absolute US hegemony in the world. China, Russia, India, and many independent states that are and will continue to resist hegemonism will hardly agree with this. In the current situation, the true security of mankind is not connected with the deepening of confrontation between countries and peoples, but with the search for new ways and directions of comprehensive and mutually beneficial cooperation that can ensure the preservation and flourishing of human civilization.

The disintegration of the bipolar system to its full height has raised by no means an idle question: what's next? Until now, the process of changing one model of international relations to another has been accompanied by the deepest military-political cataclysms. This time the scenario was different.

Tectonic shifts in the international arena were caused by the disappearance from the political map of the world of one of the two centers of power on which the framework of the bipolar system was attached. This determined a number of features of the process of establishing a new model of international relations. Firstly, the landslide nature of the collapse of the bipolar system and the absence of any formal legal documents fixing this situation erodes the character of the basic parameters of the emerging model of international relations to the utmost. Secondly, because of this, the phase of the formation of a new model is becoming volatile - a decade is ending, and there is no need to talk about the end of this process. Thirdly, there has never been such a situation before that the formation of a new model, its parameters depended to such an extent on the only remaining superpower - the United States. Finally, never before has this process been accompanied by such an abundance of acute regional crises, during which the mode of relations between the main centers of power is being worked out, and a new structure of the system of international relations is being formed. Today, by far, the number one power is the United States. They do not hide their desire to turn the 21st century into an "American century", when the whole world will be arranged according to the model and likeness of the United States, when American values ​​will acquire a universal character, and America itself will become the center of the universe. They cook! to use for this all the means at their disposal, including military force. The 1990s have already given many examples confirming this thesis. Events in the Balkan Peninsula, the Persian Gulf, Haiti and Somalia demonstrate the readiness of the US ruling elite to use military force not just to resolve regional conflicts, but to impose American will on the warring countries. Such aspirations of the United States come into clear and very severe contradiction with the growing process of pluralization of the world community, which we spoke about earlier. Another question arises: will the US have enough resources to gain a foothold in the positions of world hegemon? And if not enough (most analysts believe that this will be the case in the end), then how will this affect the state of the system of international relations? In the 90s, the clash of two trends in the development of the world community was quite clearly manifested. On the one hand, integration processes are gaining momentum in the world (in Europe), which lead to the strengthening of supranational principles in the economy and politics. However, at the same time, another process is going on - the growth of national self-consciousness, which often gives rise to bursts of nationalism, which sharply reject any attempts to infringe on state sovereignty in favor of supranational structures. The conflict between these tendencies is obvious, and so far no one has reliable recipes for removing this contradiction. Already today, quite a few geopolitical zones have developed where these tendencies clash in the most acute form. The largest such zone is the post-Soviet space. The very fact of the almost instant collapse of one of the superpowers gave rise to such a cascade of problems that will last for several decades in abundance. First of all, a huge vacuum of power has formed in the place of the USSR, because the Russian Federation is clearly not in a position to perform those functions in the international arena that were incumbent on the USSR. But the vacuum of power, as historical experience shows, is an extremely dangerous thing. Applicants immediately appear to fill it, new knots of contradiction and conflicts arise. What are the possible scenarios in the post-Soviet space? The answer to this question depends to a decisive extent on whether Russia can become a center of attraction for the new states that have formed on the ruins of the USSR. In other words, what will prevail in the post-Soviet space - integration or disintegration tendencies. The rapid disintegration of the bipolar system has destroyed the usual balance of power and has put before almost all states the difficult task of adapting their state interests to new realities. The first thing that is immediately obvious to everyone is that you no longer have to follow the hard choice - to join any of the opposing blocs. Now the big powers have the opportunity to play a more or less independent role. First of all, this applies to the Western European states. Within Europe itself, a regional superpower has emerged - a united Germany, whose potential is quite sufficient to play the role of one of the centers of power in a multipolar world in the future. Japan aspires to become an independent and, moreover, a very influential center of power, even to a greater extent than Western Europe. It has been quite a long time since the area that the “Land of the Rising Sun” claims to control is the Asia-Pacific region. Having got rid of the need to constantly look back, due to the presence of the USSR, at its strategic partner - the United States, Japan, relying on a powerful, dynamically developing economic potential, undoubtedly has every chance of becoming a recognized leader in the Asia-Pacific region in the near future. If this happens, then the US claims to form a unipolar system of international relations will be buried. However, there is one obstacle on the way to the realization of this scenario - China, which is rapidly progressing and possessing gigantic potential. This is an obvious contender for becoming a superpower in the full sense of the word in 10-15 years. Both the United States and Japan are equally interested in creating a certain counterbalance to it, and this slows down the collapse of the Japanese-American alliance. It is important to emphasize one more feature of the emerging model of international relations. It is already obvious that the principle of Eurocentrism, the erosion of which began at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, by the end of this century, has almost completely lost its significance as the main system-forming principle. Obviously, the new model of international relations will not be Eurocentric in any case. Almost the entire line of applicants for joining the "club of great powers" consists of states located outside of Europe. So, in the process of establishing a new model of international relations, LISE will encounter two trends. On the one hand, the United States is obviously striving to create a world order in which it will be the main and only center of power, on the other hand, there are a number of significant factors that prevent this and stimulate the formation of a multipolar world.

Political parties in Europe and America in the interwar period

Political parties of the Third Republic (France).

CL.FKP(French Communist Party)

Basis of the world communist movement;

The building of socialism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, for Soviet France.

L.SFIO(French Socialist Party) .

RPRRS(party of radicals and social radicals) support: Wednesday. bourgeoisie

C.YES ( Democratic Alliance) support: liberal intelligentsia, Wednesday. and prom. bourgeoisie.

P.RF(republican federation) support: prom. and avg. bourgeoisie, Catholic Church, army circles (conservative)

KP.FD action franchise(French action); support: clerical circles (clergy, middle and higher officers), big and financial bourgeoisie

Replacement by a monarchical device

British political parties in the interwar period There were two, two left.

Rights- The Conservative Party (former Tories) - big business, clergy, generals.

Center Left - Liberal Party(former Whigs) - part of the big bourgeoisie (those who had production on the Islands), the middle and petty bourgeoisie, the working class. They were replaced by the Labor Party.

Left - Labor. A more radical edition of liberals with the same electorate. They had individual and associative membership, the Labor Party included the BKTU (BTUC–British Trade-Union Congress), the Independent Labor Party, the British Communist Party.

The general trend - with the victory of the Conservatives, the government was formed, as a rule, by the Laborites - but was controlled by the Conservative majority of the House of Commons, which periodically dismissed the executive branch.

US political parties.

In general, the interwar period in the United States was a struggle between "isolationism" and "internationalism" ("Logism" and "Wilsonism"). The policy of internationalism was promoted by Wilson, from Democratic Party. It is a policy of participation in all European affairs. Lodge opposed him, with isolationism(neutrality and non-interference in European affairs), who was a member of the Republican Party.

Charles de Gaulle - President of France in 1959-69.

George Bush (senior) (RP) - US President 1989-1993

Liberal and conservative parties of the leading countries of the West in the post-war period and the modern period.

Post-war period, parties: from the right to the left.

UK: Conservatives, Labor.

Germany: CDU/CSU, SPD, KPD, FDP

France: MPR (People's Republican Movement), YUDSR (Democratic Socialist Union of Resistance), SFIO, PCF.

The Modern Period: From Right to Left.

USA: Republicans, Democrats.

UK: Conservatives, Labor, Liberal Democrats.

Germany: CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, FDP, Left

France: National Front (NF), Union for French Democracy (UDF), Rally for the Republic (OPR), French Communist Party (PCF), Socialist Party (SP).

E. Herriot -Frenchstate andpolitical figure , party leaderradicals and radical socialists, writer, historian, essayist, academician.

Minister of Public Works, Transport and Supply (1916-1917)

prime minister and minister of foreign affairs (1924-1925)

Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies (1925-1926)

prime minister (1926)

Minister of Public Education (1926-1928)

prime minister (1932)

minister of state of a number of governments (1934-1936)

Chairman of the Chamber of Deputies (1936-1940)

E. Eden (Conservative Party) - Prime Minister of Great Britain 1955-1957

New countries on the map of Europe after the First World War.

The collapse of Austria-Hungary led to the creation of new states: Austria, Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Serbia, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.

W. Churchill (Conservative Party) - Prime Minister of Great Britain in 1940-1945, 1951-1955.

George Bush Jr. - American Republican politician, 43rd President of the United States in 2001-2009

At the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. Humanity has entered a new era for its development - the era of imperialism. The development of capitalism, consolidation and the search for new markets for selling products and pumping out resources forced a person to take a fresh look at the world around him. The development of science and technology, the emergence of new means of communication and transportation - all this contributed to the industrial leap forward, pushing some countries to the forefront and leaving others behind. This lesson is devoted to the relationship between countries at the turn of the century and their characteristics.

International Relations at the Beginning of the 20th Century

In the first years of the 20th century, the growing contradictions between the leading world powers continued, which eventually led to the First World War.

background

Causes of the Crisis in International Relations

In the second half of the 19th century, the political map of the world changed significantly. A united Italy and a united Germany appear, striving to participate in the colonial division of the world. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire continues, as a result of which Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia gain independence.

By the beginning of the 20th century, the major world powers had divided most of Africa and Asia, either turning these territories into their colonies, or placing them in economic and political dependence on themselves. Colonial conflicts and disputes led to the aggravation of international relations.

The rise of nationalism. In the Balkans, the formation of nation-states continued; he was opposed by multinational empires - the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian.

In the countries of Europe, the approach of war was felt; states sought to find allies in a future war. By the end of the 19th century, the Triple Alliance took shape, which included Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy.

Events

1891 - Russo-French alliance.

1904 - creation of an alliance between France and England, called the Entente.

1907 - Russia joins the Entente. Two powerful military-political blocs - the Entente and the Triple Alliance - finally took shape.

Conclusion

Every year the contradictions between the states became stronger. This is largely due to the emergence of a united Germany - a militaristic state that sought to remake the colonial system: to press the leading colonial powers (Great Britain and France). The German threat became a stimulus for the creation of the Entente, which in many respects had the character of a defensive alliance.

The aggravation of the situation was also influenced by the interests of the economic elites of the largest states, which had levers of pressure on the authorities. They were interested in expanding sales markets and economic expansion, which meant a clash with the interests of competing states. War at that time was still considered the normal way to resolve such contradictions.

Governments foresaw an imminent war. They spent significant funds on the development of the army, increasing its strength and creating new weapons.

Abstract

By 1900, several countries began to stand out in the world political system, which played a leading role in various spheres of society - political, economic, social and spiritual. These states were: in Europe - Great Britain, France, Germany and the Russian Empire; in Asia - Japan; in the Western Hemisphere - USA. If earlier the influence of these countries was limited only by their location, their regionality, then with the development of the colonial system and the advent of the era of imperialism, the influence of these powers began to spread to the whole world, depending on the so-called. "zones of influence"(See Fig. 1). In fact, the above states became the engines of progress, which later determined the course of world history.

As you know, politics and economics closely interact with each other. By the beginning of the 20th century, large commercial and industrial companies began to transform into giant companies, into transnational monopolies, which are becoming crowded in the conditions of the domestic market and which seek to move beyond the borders of not only the state borders of their country, but also beyond the continents. Such companies, with huge capitals, gradually became monopolies, dictating their terms to weaker countries and weaker governments, thereby being in many ways the unofficial conductors of the foreign policy of their state. In fact, at the beginning of the 20th century, the big capitalist bourgeoisie merged with the highest bureaucratic state apparatus, which influenced the domestic and foreign policy of the state.

As mentioned above, the advanced countries of the world at the beginning of the 20th century had their own zones of influence. Such “zones” could be colonies, like those of Great Britain and France, scattered around the world, or economically dependent territories, like those of the United States in Latin America and Russia in Mongolia, Northeast China and Northern Iran. Only two of the leading powers increasingly gaining strength and power - Germany and Japan - did not have their own zones of influence and colonies. This was due to the fact that it was these two countries that embarked on the path of capitalist development late, “opened up” to the world late, and therefore were late for the division of the globe. The big national bourgeoisie of these states could not reconcile themselves to this state of affairs, and therefore, increasing their military-technical potential day by day, they began to assert their rights to different parts of the world more and more loudly and more often, strove for its new redistribution, which irreversibly led to new, full-scale war.

Based on the emerging situation, the leading powers began to unite into military-political blocs and alliances (see Fig. 2). Of course, this practice existed as early as the end of the 19th century, but it has acquired special power now. In Europe, a rising Germany united in Triple Alliance with Austria-Hungary, Italy, and then with Turkey. In turn, in 1907 the military-political bloc finally took shape - Entente("consent"), which included the UK, France and Russia.

In the Far East, Japan's aggressive policy led to Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905, which Russia lost, and to the capture of the Korean Peninsula, as well as part of China, which jeopardized the territorial claims of European powers in the Asian region.

In the New World, the United States, which lived since 1820 in some isolation from the outside world, using the so-called. The Monroe Doctrine, by the beginning of the century, began to penetrate more and more into the Eastern Hemisphere, playing if not the first, then one of the main roles, especially since the merging of big business and the political elite took place there at a rather accelerated pace.

Regional crises - the Anglo-Boer War of 1899-1902, the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, economic conflicts in Asia and Africa, the Bosnian Crisis of 1908-1909, the two Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 and 1913. - were a kind of dress rehearsal for a worldwide armed conflict.

The economic and political contradictions of the leading powers of the world, the struggle for new markets and the intensified competition of large companies, the struggle for new zones of influence, the clash of interests in various regions of the world, the formation of military-political blocs - all this could not but lead to a major military conflict between these countries .

Bibliography

1. Shubin A.V. General history. Recent history. Grade 9: textbook. For general education institutions. - M.: Moscow textbooks, 2010.
2. Soroko-Tsyupa O.S., Soroko-Tsyupa A.O. General history. Recent history, 9th grade. - M.: Education, 2010.
3. Sergeev E.Yu. General history. Recent history. Grade 9 - M.: Education, 2011.

Homework

1. Read §1 of A.V. Shubin's textbook. and answer questions 2 and 3 on p. fifteen.
2. What were the reasons for the new redistribution of the world?
3. Were regional conflicts the forerunners of the First World War?

1. Internet portal Lib2.podelise.ru ().
2. Internet portal Likt590.ru ().
3. Internet portal Nado.znate.ru ().

International relations arise with the appearance of the first states, with the establishment of contacts between the countries of the Near and Far East, Ancient Greece and Rome. In Europe, international relations are established in the Middle Ages simultaneously with the creation of centralized states.

The field of international relations has long been an object of research in various scientific disciplines: history (an important place is occupied by such concepts as "time" and "geographical place"), international law (concentrates on the study of forms and principles governing the system of international relations), philosophy , sociology, geography, economics, demography, military sciences, etc. Each of them highlights its own aspect and object of study. In political science, the study of international relations is one of the most important areas. Its purpose is to analyze the main parameters and criteria for defining international relations as a single system with its own system-forming characteristics, structural components and functions.

Starting with Plato and Aristotle, philosophers tried to create a system of concepts, categories and principles that would allow them to explore and analyze such a complex area of ​​human communication as international relations.

I. Kant made a great contribution to the development of this problem. Condemning the predatory, predatory war, he advocated the observance of international treaties and agreements, non-interference in the internal affairs of the state. Kant put forward a project to establish "eternal peace" through an all-encompassing federation of independent states with equal rights, built according to the republican type.

In his opinion, the formation of such a cosmopolitan union is inevitable in the end. Enlightenment and goodwill of the rulers, as well as the economic, commercial needs of the nations, were to be the guarantee of this.

In our time, such prominent scientists as G. Kahn, R. Aron, G. Morgenthau and others have been and are engaged in the problems of international relations.

There are several theories of foreign policy.

1. Theory political realism in foreign policy was developed in the middle of the twentieth century. G. Morgenthau is a recognized authority in this direction.

International politics is understood by "realists" as a struggle of forces waged by a sovereign state in pursuit of superiority and power. At the same time, power is the relationship between two subjects of world politics, when one of them can influence the other (up to complete destruction). The “political determinism” of world processes is derived from the struggle for power.

Realists believe that if politics always expresses generally significant or group interests, then in international politics, mainly national interests are expressed.

Specifically, national interests are:

- "interests of national security" (defense of the country);

- "national economic interests" (maintaining ties with partners, building up export potential and foreign investment, protecting the domestic market);

The interests of maintaining world order (strengthening the international authority and positions of the state).

"International politics, like any other, - G. Morgenthau emphasizes, - is a struggle for power ... The goals of foreign policy must be determined in terms of national interest and supported by appropriate force."

2. Modernist theories created in opposition to the traditional theory of realism approach the consideration of the foreign policy of the state differently. If realists considered states as integral units that determine their course on the basis of national interests, then modernists consider the state as systems subject to various factors, influences from outside and inside (individual factors, role factors, etc.).

According to J. Rosenau, the central task of foreign policy is "the political (at the level of state power) strengthening of the capabilities of the national society to maintain constant control over its external adversary."

If, from the traditional point of view, the threat of force is the most effective means of foreign policy, then modernists focus on stimulating or hindering the development of processes of mutually beneficial cooperation.

3. Introduction to the scientific circulation of the term " geopolitics” is associated with the name of the Swedish scientist and politician R. Kjellen. He characterized geopolitics as "a science that considers the state as a geographical organism or phenomenon in space."

The central place in the determination of the international relations of a state in geopolitics is assigned to its geographical position. The meaning of geopolitics was seen in bringing to the fore the spatial, territorial principle.

The significance of geographical factors for the historical destinies of peoples is noted by almost all researchers of international politics.

The subject of geopolitics research is global and national interests, their correlations, priorities and methods of foreign policy of states as subjects of international relations and world politics, territorial and demographic imperatives, as well as the power potential of various countries.

The disadvantage of this and other models is the absolutization of one of the various components.

As you can see, most scientists interpret international relations as any practical relations between states and other participants in international life, i.e. it is any activity outside the states.

International relationships, therefore, is a system of political, economic, cultural, military, diplomatic and other relationships between states and peoples. In a narrower sense, international relations are reduced, first of all, to the sphere of political relations, which are called world politics.

Thus, world politics is the total activity of states on the world stage.

Human activity is based on interests and needs. Foreign policy is no exception in this respect. Its basis is national interests as an integral expression of the interests of all members of society. These interests are realized through the political system and foreign policy.

In political science, two levels of political interests are distinguished: the level of main or strategic interests and the level of specific or tactical interests. The first level covers interests in the field of foreign policy, which are associated with ensuring the security and integrity of the country as a certain socio-economic, political, national-historical and cultural community, with the protection of the economic and political independence of the country, the assertion and strengthening of its sovereignty in the system of international relations. And since interests at this level are connected with the very existence of the state, they are provided and protected by the state in the international arena by all means - diplomatic, economic, ideological, military.

The level of specific interests covers individual, partial interests of the state in the system of international relations. This, for example, may be the desire of the state to consolidate its influence in various international organizations, to take part in the resolution of regional conflicts, to develop cultural ties with other states, etc.

Foreign policy goals are determined on the basis of foreign policy interests. Among them the main ones are:

Ensuring the national security of the country;

Increasing the power of the state;

Growth of prestige and strengthening of the international position of the state.

Foreign policy performs three main functions: security, representation and information, negotiation and organizational. In fact, these functions of foreign policy are a specification of the external functions of the state: defense, diplomatic and cooperation.

The difference in interests and needs of modern states (and this is already almost 200 countries) inevitably leads to international disputes and conflicts. Therefore, this issue occupies an extremely important place in the problems of international relations.

The practice of international relations shows that disputes and conflicts can be resolved both by military means and by peaceful means. With regard to war, no special explanation is needed here, but peaceful means include:

A system of negotiations, mediation (but this form is not mandatory),

International arbitration (mandatory nature),

Activities of various non-governmental organizations.

The nature of the resolution of international disputes and conflicts can be classified in another way. It can have a legal aspect (i.e., the dispute is resolved with the help of international law) or political (and here such a thing as “force” arises).

In the system of international relations, the concept of "power" is considered in three aspects.

Military strength (i.e. military power). Sometimes it is enough just to "play with military muscles", i.e. send your warships to the shores of a certain power, and it will become much more accommodating.

Economic strength (level of economic development, financial stability). Arguing now between Ukraine and the United States is like entering the ring for athletes of different weight categories. (The budget of Ukraine is the budget of New York).

Considering “strength” in the broadest sense of the word, G. Morgenthau lists among the main components: the geographical position of the country, natural resources, industrial potential, population size and even national character, the strength of the national spirit, which is especially visibly manifested in war conditions (for example, in the USSR during World War II).

The system of interstate relations includes various forms of relations between states and interstate associations: coalitions of unions, intergovernmental organizations, etc. At the regional level they are represented, for example, by the Arab League, at the global level by the UN. As a unique instrument of world politics, the United Nations, established in 1945, has made and is making a significant contribution to strengthening international peace and security. True, recently the UN has not been fully fulfilling its peacekeeping mission, especially in conditions when only one superpower, the United States, has appeared on the political stage. Taking advantage of its economic and military weight, this monster may not reckon with the UN at all.

Among other specialized agencies and subsidiary bodies of the UN, the most authoritative is the Commission on Education, Science and Culture - UNESCO (created in 1946). Of the international intergovernmental organizations, the International Monetary Fund should be singled out, and of the non-governmental associations and organizations of the international level, the well-known Club of Rome can be mentioned.

Although international relations originated in ancient times, throughout history they were essentially relations between states, and not between peoples. And only in our time, when peoples are becoming more and more visibly subjects of history, do these relations acquire their original meaning, i.e. become relations not only between states, but above all relations between peoples.

Current international relations are to a certain extent a product of the balance of power that developed after the Second World War (domination and subordination, cooperation and support, the presence of "double standards", etc.).

After the Second World War, the world developed a geopolitical division of the world community into three large groups of countries, which were designated respectively by numbers: the first, second and third world.

The first world consisted of the countries of Western Europe, North America and Australia. These are countries of democratic regime and market economy.

The second world consisted of the USSR, China, the countries of Eastern Europe and some countries of northeast Asia, as well as Cuba - the dominance of the communist political regime and a centrally planned economy. The confrontation between the first and second world entered world history under the name of the "cold war".

The third world included the developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, which found themselves on the geopolitical periphery (mainly suppliers of raw materials and cheap labor).

This global geopolitical system was often called bipolar, bipolar, since it had two centers of power, two superpowers (the United States and the USSR), respectively, two military-political blocs: NATO and the Warsaw Pact (which, in addition to the USSR, included the countries of central Europe "socialist sample": Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria).

This confrontation and brinkmanship continued for several decades. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, a new balance of power emerged in the world: in fact, only one superpower remained - the United States and the NATO military-political bloc, which already includes not only the former members of the Warsaw Pact, but also the former republics of the Soviet Union (the Baltic states).

The third world is also undergoing significant changes. It singled out "new industrial countries" (South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, etc.), which, in terms of their economic level, approach the most developed countries. The less developed countries of the third world (some states of Central Africa and Asia) were called the "fourth world".

Thus, we can conclude that at the beginning of the XXI century the world geopolitical structure is significantly transformed. According to many experts, the world community is moving towards the creation of a multipolar world. This idea is actively supported by Russia, China and India. Among the future centers of power, geopoliticians name: the United States, a united Europe, as well as China and Japan, among such centers they name Russia and India (the demographic giant of the coming century).

The position of the only superpower with a huge economic and military potential could not but give rise to a desire in the United States to dictate its terms to other countries. This is how the bombings (including with depleted uranium) of Yugoslavia were carried out, even without UN sanction. That's what they did with Iraq.

It is also disturbing that world arms spending is on the rise again after 10 years of decline during and after the end of the Cold War. These expenditures far exceed aid to poor countries. Approximately 40% of global military spending comes from the United States.

In these geopolitical conditions, the understanding of its national interests and spheres of influence, adequate to the realities of the modern world, is of great importance for determining the foreign policy of Ukraine.

The main goals and priorities of Ukraine's foreign policy are formulated in the Act of Independence of Ukraine of August 24, 1991 and in the appeal of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to parliamentarians and peoples of the world of December 5, 1991. The main vectors of modern Ukrainian foreign policy are also determined by the Constitution of Ukraine and a number of documents adopted by the Verkhovna Rada. In practice, this means a strategic partnership with Russia, cooperation with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

Over the past years, Ukraine has become an important subject of world politics; as an independent state, it is recognized by more than 150 countries. Ukraine is a member of many international, regional and other organizations. She takes part in the work of the UN, UNESCO, the Council of Europe, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, the International Monetary Fund, etc.

The formation of a new independent state of Ukraine was marked by the establishment of a non-bloc status and a non-nuclear power. This opened wide opportunities for our country to establish friendly relations with all countries of the world, and first of all, of course, with its closest neighbors: the countries of Europe and those who formed the CIS.

Moreover, one foreign policy vector does not at all imply a deterioration in relations in another direction. Ukraine's entry into the European economic and political space does not contradict the strengthening of relations with Russia. Moreover, the development of this space will be the more successful, the more joint projects there will be, in which Ukraine, Russia, European countries, and those CIS countries that are now creating a single economic space will be involved.

Europe is interested in seeing a prosperous democratic Ukraine nearby, which also meets our interests. And for such a successful development, Ukraine has, along with other factors (fertile lands, hardworking people, intellectual potential, etc.) and geopolitical opportunities - on the main path between West and East.

2. Political global studies: main content

In the mid-1980s, international relations reached a critical point, and the atmosphere of the "cold war" was revived in the world. The USSR found itself in a difficult situation: the Afghan war continued, a new round of the arms race began, which the exhausted economy of the country could no longer withstand. The technical backwardness in the main sectors of the economy, low labor productivity, the cessation of economic growth - all this became evidence of a deep crisis in the communist system. Under such conditions, another change in the political leadership of the USSR took place. In March 1985, N.S. was elected General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Gorbachev, whose name is associated with fundamental changes in the foreign policy of the USSR.

Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev (born 1931) - Soviet party and statesman. Z1955 at the Komsomol and party work in the Stavropol region of the RSFSR. U1978-1985 Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Z1980r. member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU, since 1985 General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. 1988-1990 Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. In 1990-1991 the president of the USSR. The initiator of "perestroika", which led to significant changes in the economic and political spheres of life in Soviet society, as well as in international relations. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate for 1990 On August 19-21, 1991, Gorbachev was removed from power by orthodox top officials who, in an effort to preserve the Union unchanged, carried out a coup d'état. He remained president of the USSR until December 25, 1991, but did not have real power and could not stop the process of the final collapse of the USSR. Since December 1991, President of the International Foundation for Social, Economic and Political Research ("Gorbachev Foundation"). In 1996, he took part in the presidential elections in the Russian Federation, but received less than 1% of the vote.

The main directions of Moscow's new policy were to soften relations with the West and promote the settlement of regional conflicts. Having proclaimed a course towards the implementation of new political thinking in international relations - the recognition of the priority of universal human interests over class interests, as well as the fact that a nuclear war cannot be a means of achieving political, ideological and other goals, the Soviet leadership entered into an open dialogue with the West. A series of meetings took place between G. Gorbachev and G. Reagan. In November 1985, at the first meeting in Geneva, the two leaders discussed the pressing problems of international relations and came to the conclusion that a nuclear war should not be unleashed, because there would be no winners in this war. In subsequent meetings (Reykjavik, 1986; Washington, 1987; Moscow, 1988;

New York, 1988) laid the foundations for mutual understanding between the USSR and the USA with the achievement of concrete decisions aimed at curtailing the arms race. A particularly important result of this was the signing on December 8, 1987 of an agreement on the elimination of new nuclear missiles of medium and shorter range (500-5000 km) from the European territory. It was assumed the complete destruction of two classes of missiles by the USSR and the USA. For the first time in the post-war period, the USSR agreed to control over the elimination of weapons. In 1987, Soviet-American negotiations began on limiting and ending nuclear tests.

In April 1988, an agreement was signed in Geneva to settle the conflict in Afghanistan. The USSR and the USA signed the Declaration on International Guarantees and a Memorandum of Understanding. Gradually - until February 15, 1989. - Soviet troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan. The most shameful war of the Soviet Union ended, in which it lost more than 13 thousand killed.

The American-Soviet peace dialogue continued during the presidency of George W. Bush (1989-1993), in particular, there were negotiations on the reduction of strategic offensive arms (START). An important step in this direction was the first visit of M.S. Gorbachev as President of the USSR until Washington in 1990 and his negotiations with George W. Bush. Here, the main provisions of the START treaty were agreed, and an agreement was concluded on the elimination of the vast majority of chemical weapons and the refusal to produce them. The documents noted that the period of confrontation between the West and the East is giving way to partnership and cooperation.

The negotiation process has captured a wide range of weapons. In 1989, multilateral negotiations began in Vienna on the reduction of armed forces and conventional weapons in Europe. At a meeting of 22 member countries of the Conference on Security and Cooperation (CSCE) in November 1990. In Paris, the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was signed, which determined the radical reduction of conventional forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

At the turn of the 1980s and 1990s, the USSR pursued an active international policy. Moscow contributed to the settlement of a number of regional conflicts with the involvement of the UN, which for the first time in its history began to play the role of a guarantor in maintaining peace. After G. Gorbachev's visit to Beijing in 1989, the normalization of Soviet-Chinese relations began. But even greater changes have taken place in European politics. During 1988-1989. In the European states of the Warsaw Pact, the economic crisis worsened sharply. Almost everywhere there was a stagnation of production and a decline in the level of real incomes of the population. Growing budget deficits. The population of the countries of Eastern Europe resolutely rose to fight against the totalitarian communist regimes. The ruling circles of Poland and

The transition to political pluralism in Yugoslavia took place in 1990 against the backdrop of aggravated ethnic conflicts that led to the collapse of the federation. Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia proclaimed 1991. independence. The Communists retained power only in Serbia and Montenegro. These two republics announced the restoration of the Yugoslav federation. The Serbian population of Croatia (11%) and Bosnia and Herzegovina demanded the annexation of their areas of compact residence in Serbia. An interethnic war broke out in the former Yugoslavia, which became especially brutal in Bosnia and Herzegovina. To resolve these contradictions, the UN military contingent, which included a Ukrainian unit, had to intervene.

The final end of the Cold War period was marked by the unification of Germany. In February 1990, the four powers - the victors in World War II - the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France - agreed with two German states - the FRG and the GDR - on the creation of a 2 + 4 negotiating mechanism for the unification of Germany. In September 1990, the Treaty on the Final Settlement of the German Question was signed in Moscow, according to which the united Germany recognized the existing borders in Europe, renounced weapons of mass destruction, and pledged to reduce its armed forces. The Soviet Union undertook to withdraw its troops from German territory and did not deny its entry into NATO.

Changes in the political climate in Eastern Europe led to the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991 and the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Germany in subsequent years. The powerful state of the communist bloc - the USSR - also collapsed. Back in November 1988, the Supreme Soviet of the Estonian SSR proclaimed Estonian state sovereignty. 1989-1990 pp. For the first time in the republics of the USSR, elections were held on a multi-party basis. The national-patriotic forces pushed the communists out of the helm of power. On July 16, 1990, the newly elected Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted the Declaration on the State Sovereignty of Ukraine. Declarations on state sovereignty were also proclaimed by the parliaments of Lithuania, Latvia, Belarus, Russia, Moldova and other republics. After an unsuccessful attempt by conservative forces to carry out a coup d'état in the USSR (August 19-20, 1991), the Communist Party, a participant in the rebellion, was outlawed. On August 24, 1991, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted the Act of Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, and on December 1, 1991, in an All-Ukrainian referendum, more than 90% of the votes approved it. December 8, 1991 p. in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus announced the termination of the existence of the USSR as a subject of international law. A new association was created - the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), which is more of a political declaration than a real treaty. Russia declared itself the heir of the USSR and responsible for all the agreements signed by Moscow. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan became nuclear powers, having concluded an agreement in 1992 in Lisbon that they, in addition to Russia, would lose their nuclear weapons within 7 years. Based on these agreements, the presidents would. Yeltsin and George W. Bush in Washington signed in the same year the text of the START-1 treaty, according to which the USA and the states of the former USSR reduce strategic offensive weapons by 50% for 7 years, which symbolized the end of the confrontation between the USSR and the USA.

The end of the Cold War is considered to be:

o the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan (February 1989);

o the fall of totalitarian regimes in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (1989);

o the destruction of the Berlin Wall (November 1989 p.);

o the unification of Germany and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact (July 1991 p.).

February 1, 1992 G. Bush and By. Yeltsin signed an agreement at Camp David under which the United States and Russia ceased to consider each other potential adversaries, laying the foundation for the development of partnerships between them. However, in the late 1990s, the crisis in Kosovo and the events in Chechnya revived mutual distrust between the two major nuclear powers.

In January 1993, in Moscow, Yeltsin and Bush signed a new START-2 treaty halving strategic offensive arms to the level of the START-1 treaty. Under a tripartite agreement between the United States, Russia and Ukraine dated January 14, 1994, Ukraine agreed to transfer 200 nuclear warheads to Russia for dismantling. Moscow pledged to provide Ukraine with nuclear fuel, and the United States to finance this deal.

With the collapse of communism, the bipolarity of the world and the East-West confrontation disappeared, but the number of international conflicts did not decrease. Particularly dangerous was the conflict in the Persian Gulf, which began in August 1990 with the attack by the troops of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein on Kuwait. The UN Security Council, having condemned the aggression, set a final date for the withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait - January 15, 1991. The multinational armed forces under the leadership of the American command carried out Operation Desert Storm against Iraq and liberated Kuwait.

The changes that took place in international life in the early 1990s led to a new alignment of forces in the world. Russia proved unable to support "pro-Soviet" regimes in Asia and Africa. This contributed to the resolution or deepening of dialogue in resolving regional conflicts, in particular the Arab-Israeli one. Although the process of normalizing Israel's relations with the Arab countries is constantly hampered, the ways to resolve this longest conflict are outlined quite clearly. On the whole, the conflicts in Cambodia, Angola, and Mozambique were resolved; in 1990, the apartheid regime in Swedish Africa was liquidated. However, a just and secure world community is still a long way off. On the territory of the former USSR and the camps of socialism, local conflicts have arisen and continue to smolder (the war of Russia against Chechnya, the Abkhazian-Georgian conflict, the Armenian-Azerbaijani clashes in Karabakh, the unsettled relations after the bloody clashes between Moldova and the so-called Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic, interethnic conflicts on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, etc.).

An important element of international relations was the acceleration of Western European and pan-European integration. In 1992, in Maastricht (Netherlands), the member countries of the European Economic Community signed a new agreement on the European Union, on the basis of which, in 1999, the creation of an economic and monetary union should be completed. The Community also plans to develop a common defense security policy and introduce a single European citizenship. In 1997, the EU introduced a single European citizenship, which does not cancel national citizenship. On January 31, 1999, a single currency, the euro, was introduced for non-cash transactions in 12 of the 15 EU countries (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain.

France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and Finland). The former Soviet bloc countries are trying to get out of Russia's sphere of influence through gradual integration into the EU and NATO. However, the level of their economic development does not allow Western Europeans to open the door to the EU for everyone. In May 2004, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovenia, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined the EU. Since January 1, 2007, Bulgaria and Romania have become full members of the EU. With regard to the North Atlantic bloc, in early 1994 the United States proposed a program within the framework of NATO "Partnership for Peace", which implies a gradual rapprochement of the countries of Eastern Europe. In 1997, the Atlantic leadership considered applications for Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary to join NATO and accepted them into NATO in 1999. In May 2004, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia became NATO members. In July 1997, in Madrid, President of Ukraine L. Kuchma signed the Charter on Special Relations between Ukraine and NATO, which provided for the expansion of relations between Kiev and Brussels in matters of European security. In 1997, the NATO Information and Documentation Center in Ukraine was opened in Kyiv, and in 1999 the NATO Liaison Office in Ukraine was established. Since 2000, Kyiv and Brussels have launched a number of initiatives that should contribute to the development of a special partnership between both sides, in particular, in 2001, the State Program of Cooperation between Ukraine and NATO for 2001-2004 was approved, and the State Council for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration was created Ukraine in 2002 and the National Center for Euro-Atlantic Integration of Ukraine in 2003, a meeting of the Ukraine-NATO Commission was held in Istanbul in 2004, etc. President V. Yushchenko declared Ukraine's accession to NATO as one of the main priorities of the new government . In April 2005, during the "Ukraine-NATO" meeting (Vilnius, Lithuania), a dialogue on Ukraine's membership in NATO was officially launched at the level of foreign ministers. However, political instability in Ukraine, foreign policy complications hinder Ukraine's European integration process.

The international situation in the post-communist era has not become more predictable and stable. In overcoming local and regional conflicts, the United Nations plays an increasingly important role, which is assigned the role of the main guarantor of international security.

The most important factor influencing the development of international relations in the post-bipolar era was the foreign policy of the United States of America. The Republican administration of George W. Bush, who was elected the 43rd President of the United States in November 2000, proclaimed the long-term goal of establishing the dominant position of the United States in the system of international relations. Washington set a course for the quantitative and qualitative strengthening of military power. The US military budget rose from $310 billion in 2001 to $380 billion in 2003 and to $450 billion in 2008. The US went beyond the limitations of the ABM Treaty by announcing in 2001 the deployment of the National System missile defense (NMD). The Bush administration has actively promoted the accession to NATO of the countries of East Central Europe and the Baltics.

An important place in US foreign policy was occupied by the fight against international terrorism, especially after the terrorist attacks against American cities on September 11, 2001. The United States created a broad anti-terrorist coalition, which in October 2001 launched a war against the Taliban government in Afghanistan, which gave refuge to terrorists Al Qaddi. One-sidedness in making decisions on international problems became a characteristic feature of the foreign policy of the administration of George W. Bush, which, in particular, was manifested in the decision in March 2003 of the war against Iraq, contrary to the position of the UN and many states. This war complicated US relations with France, Germany and other states. US-Russian relations developed ambiguously. The Russian Federation's support for US antiterrorist activities after the September 2001 events contributed to a significant improvement in relations between the two states, but the Russian leadership's condemnation of the US Iraqi war, human rights violations in Russia, Moscow's desire to play a dominant role in the post-Soviet space, which led to Russian-Ukrainian contradictions through Tuzla, the Russian-Georgian war in South Ossetia in the fall of 2008, the energy (gas) war against Ukraine in late 2008 and early 2009, soured bilateral US-Russian relations. In the Persian Gulf, international tensions caused by military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq are intensified by US-Russian contradictions over Iran's nuclear program. Russia continues to assist (sell equipment) in the construction of the Iranian nuclear power plant, the waste from which can be used to manufacture nuclear weapons, while the United States strongly opposes the development of Iran's nuclear program. The US war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which periodically develops into a crisis situation, and the like - all this turns the Near and Middle East into an explosive region.

End of XX - beginning of XXI century. associated with both the weakening and the intensification of many conflicts that have not only domestic political but also international significance. They are based on many factors: religious, ethnic, socio-economic, etc. The struggle of the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka for the formation of their own state, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the desire of a significant part of the Tibetan people for independence, the Chechen wars demanded adequate responses not only from individual countries, but also from the entire world community.

Some results of the last century and new plans for the future were formulated in the declaration and program of action of the Millennium Summit, held under the auspices of the UN on September 8, 2000 at the level of heads of state and government. One of the priorities was to overcome poverty and destitution by 2015 and improve the situation with human rights. But humanity is only standing in the way of fulfilling these tasks. Today, about half of the world's population lives below the poverty line. One of the main priorities, including in the activities of the UN, is the fight against the spread of HIV/AIDS. However, according to the United Nations Special Agency for Combating the Epidemic of this Disease, an effective response to AIDS in poor countries requires a fairly significant amount - up to 10 billion US dollars annually.

The UN is working to alleviate the plight of refugees forced to seek rescue and assistance abroad. In 2006, there were up to 10 million people who were under the patronage of the UN Refugee Agency. The organization maintains offices in Afghanistan and Sudan. Overall, out of 18 UN peacekeeping missions in 2004, seven were in Africa and two were in Asia.

Whereas the UN is an organization of global importance, whose activities cover almost all areas of mutual activity between states, at the beginning of the 21st century. an increasingly prominent role is played by various interstate formations with different functional tasks. World oil prices are formed largely under the influence of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), established in 1960. Of its twelve members, 10 belong to the countries of the Afro-Asian space.

An important role in the inter-civilizational dialogue as a representative of the Islamic world is played by the League of Arab States, formed back in 1945, which includes 22 Arab countries. This organization is an important factor influencing the international political situation in the Middle East. Despite significant disagreements in the Arab world, the All-Arab Parliament began its work in 2005, which in the future will contribute to greater consolidation of the Arab world, including in relation to key international problems.

An important systemic factor of stability and development in the Asia-Pacific region can be called the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a political and economic organization founded in 1967.

In order to overcome specific African problems, strengthening the role of Africa in the modern world in 2002, the former Organization of African Unity was transformed into the African Union (AU), within which a gradual process of political and economic integration of 53 countries of the Black Continent began. The AU plays an important role in the process of pacification (reconciliation) of long civil conflicts. In July 2007, together with the UN, the AU launched a peacekeeping operation in the Sudanese province of Darfur, in which more than 70,000 people died as a result of a conflict between the Sudanese government and the local population.

In the field of view of the informal association of the world's leading economic powers - the "Big Eight", which includes Japan, key world problems and ways to overcome them are being discussed. In particular, in 2007, the topics of the 33rd summit of the heads of state of these countries covered the issues of global warming, the situation in the Middle East and Iraq, as well as the situation in Africa, and the like.