{"title":"俄美关系中相互依存的几个方面","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":"{\"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}","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}
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.
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.