Facets of Interdependency in Russia-US Relations

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Y. Nadtochey
{"title":"Facets of Interdependency in Russia-US Relations","authors":"Y. Nadtochey","doi":"10.17994/IT.2020.18.2.61.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The appliance of interdependence concepts in the International Relations studies can hardly be regarded as something new. However, slowing down globalization and rising international tensions even among partner or allied states make rethinking of these concepts relevant. The notion that interdependence may ease tensions was put under question and opposed by the idea that interdependence may become a source of conflict. Scholars also missed their focus on conceptualization of interdependence forgetting that it was not a product of globalization, rather a result of the Cold War era. Thus, it can be applied to relations not only between partner countries, but also rivals, as was in the case of the U.S.-Soviet relations. The dense fabric of bilateral agreements, institutions, and regimes in various fields (primarily in security domain) prevented superpowers from a destructive conflict. After the collapse of the bipolar world, both states tried to consolidate the legacy of interdependence by increasing cooperation, transferring relations from mutual assured destruction to sustainable partnership, from deterrence to security community. However, structural changes in world politics reshaped Russian-American relations. Unlike the Cold War period with its unique U.S.-Soviet interdependence model, which served as a necessary precondition for lasting peace, contemporary Russian, as well as American decision-makers do not tend to estimate cooperation between two countries as critical in terms of national security and conflict prevention. In contrast, they are more likely to treat bilateral relations as too costly and burdening. Moscow and Washington increasingly prefer to be unbound in achieving their short- or long-term political goals and choose the way of unilateral decisions and actions with no corresponding with the counterpart. These risky policies of mutual neglect increase the likelihood of future conflict between the two powers.","PeriodicalId":37798,"journal":{"name":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2020.18.2.61.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The appliance of interdependence concepts in the International Relations studies can hardly be regarded as something new. However, slowing down globalization and rising international tensions even among partner or allied states make rethinking of these concepts relevant. The notion that interdependence may ease tensions was put under question and opposed by the idea that interdependence may become a source of conflict. Scholars also missed their focus on conceptualization of interdependence forgetting that it was not a product of globalization, rather a result of the Cold War era. Thus, it can be applied to relations not only between partner countries, but also rivals, as was in the case of the U.S.-Soviet relations. The dense fabric of bilateral agreements, institutions, and regimes in various fields (primarily in security domain) prevented superpowers from a destructive conflict. After the collapse of the bipolar world, both states tried to consolidate the legacy of interdependence by increasing cooperation, transferring relations from mutual assured destruction to sustainable partnership, from deterrence to security community. However, structural changes in world politics reshaped Russian-American relations. Unlike the Cold War period with its unique U.S.-Soviet interdependence model, which served as a necessary precondition for lasting peace, contemporary Russian, as well as American decision-makers do not tend to estimate cooperation between two countries as critical in terms of national security and conflict prevention. In contrast, they are more likely to treat bilateral relations as too costly and burdening. Moscow and Washington increasingly prefer to be unbound in achieving their short- or long-term political goals and choose the way of unilateral decisions and actions with no corresponding with the counterpart. These risky policies of mutual neglect increase the likelihood of future conflict between the two powers.
俄美关系中相互依存的几个方面
相互依存概念在国际关系研究中的应用并不是什么新鲜事物。然而,全球化的放缓和甚至在伙伴或盟国之间日益加剧的国际紧张局势使得重新思考这些概念变得有意义。相互依赖可以缓解紧张局势的观念受到质疑,并受到相互依赖可能成为冲突根源的观念的反对。学者们也忘记了他们对相互依存概念化的关注,忘记了它不是全球化的产物,而是冷战时代的结果。因此,它不仅适用于伙伴国家之间的关系,也适用于竞争对手之间的关系,就像美苏关系一样。在各个领域(主要是安全领域),双边协议、机构和制度的密集结构阻止了超级大国发生破坏性冲突。在两极世界崩溃后,两国都试图通过加强合作来巩固相互依存的遗产,将关系从相互确保毁灭转变为可持续的伙伴关系,从威慑转变为安全共同体。然而,世界政治的结构性变化重塑了俄美关系。冷战时期美苏相互依存的独特模式是持久和平的必要前提,而当代俄罗斯和美国的决策者并不倾向于认为两国之间的合作对国家安全和预防冲突至关重要。相反,他们更有可能将双边关系视为代价过高和负担过重。莫斯科和华盛顿越来越倾向于不受约束地实现他们的短期或长期政治目标,并选择单方面决定和行动的方式,而不与对方相对应。这些相互忽视的危险政策增加了两个大国未来发生冲突的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy
Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊介绍: “International Trends” (“Mezhdunarodnye protsessy”) was established in 2002 as the first Russian TIR journal. As of the early 2010s, it holds a strong position among the top three Russian thematic academic journals (according to the Russian Science Citation Index). The Journal’s key mission is a theoretical comprehension of the world as a whole, of international tendencies and the planetary political environment, and of the world-integrity our country finds herself in and develops with.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信