美国对全球领导地位的争夺以及塞尔维亚的战略选择

Mladen Lišanin
{"title":"美国对全球领导地位的争夺以及塞尔维亚的战略选择","authors":"Mladen Lišanin","doi":"10.5937/spm80-44288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary turbulence regarding the issue of global leadership (referred to by some authors as \"primacy\" or \"hegemony\") takes place within a specific context, manifested through a single fundamental rift: the one based on key actors' attitudes towards the necessity of structural revision of the world system, contrasted with aspirations to maintain the status quo. In other words, the struggle for global leadership not only has different goals, but also a different logic altogether, if it is observed from the aspect of a declining hegemon, or from the aspects of its challengers. At the same time, the fact that the hegemon is usually a status quo power, seeking to maintain the basic global parameters of power distribution, does not mean that it will not behave in a revisionist manner in various subsystem (regional and sub-regional) frameworks. One of the sub-regions in which the inverse logic of the actions of the global hegemon and those of its challengers on the status quo - revisionism spectrum is apparent, is the Western Balkans. Such behavior, as well as the conditions of increased complexity of foreign policy determinants from the system and regional levels, have consistently incentivized Serbia to opt for the strategy of hedging, in order to compensate the costs incurred in some areas by gains in others. The field of defence and security in the form of joint exercises and arms procurement, has been of particular importance in this regard, as Serbia has been pursuing close and dynamic relations with a wide range of partners, including the US, Russia, China, Israel, France and other European countries, NATO members and non-members alike. In terms of Serbian-American relations, NATO remains a crucial catalyst; however, the US is increasingly engaged in a more straightforward, bilateral manner - e.g. with regard to the Kosovo and Metohija issue, which is yet another motive for Serbia to maintain its hedging strategy. The trends of global primacy competition, dramatically accelerated at the beginning of the third decade of the 21st century, particularly as the war in Ukraine keeps unfolding, will remain a determinant which strategic options of Serbia largely depend upon. Hedging is most likely to remain the key feature of Serbia's strategic posture, although there is a possibility this might change in light of a potentially renewed transatlantic and intra-European political coherence.","PeriodicalId":34288,"journal":{"name":"Srpska Politicka Misao","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"American struggle for global leadership and the strategic options of Serbia\",\"authors\":\"Mladen Lišanin\",\"doi\":\"10.5937/spm80-44288\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Contemporary turbulence regarding the issue of global leadership (referred to by some authors as \\\"primacy\\\" or \\\"hegemony\\\") takes place within a specific context, manifested through a single fundamental rift: the one based on key actors' attitudes towards the necessity of structural revision of the world system, contrasted with aspirations to maintain the status quo. In other words, the struggle for global leadership not only has different goals, but also a different logic altogether, if it is observed from the aspect of a declining hegemon, or from the aspects of its challengers. At the same time, the fact that the hegemon is usually a status quo power, seeking to maintain the basic global parameters of power distribution, does not mean that it will not behave in a revisionist manner in various subsystem (regional and sub-regional) frameworks. One of the sub-regions in which the inverse logic of the actions of the global hegemon and those of its challengers on the status quo - revisionism spectrum is apparent, is the Western Balkans. Such behavior, as well as the conditions of increased complexity of foreign policy determinants from the system and regional levels, have consistently incentivized Serbia to opt for the strategy of hedging, in order to compensate the costs incurred in some areas by gains in others. The field of defence and security in the form of joint exercises and arms procurement, has been of particular importance in this regard, as Serbia has been pursuing close and dynamic relations with a wide range of partners, including the US, Russia, China, Israel, France and other European countries, NATO members and non-members alike. In terms of Serbian-American relations, NATO remains a crucial catalyst; however, the US is increasingly engaged in a more straightforward, bilateral manner - e.g. with regard to the Kosovo and Metohija issue, which is yet another motive for Serbia to maintain its hedging strategy. The trends of global primacy competition, dramatically accelerated at the beginning of the third decade of the 21st century, particularly as the war in Ukraine keeps unfolding, will remain a determinant which strategic options of Serbia largely depend upon. Hedging is most likely to remain the key feature of Serbia's strategic posture, although there is a possibility this might change in light of a potentially renewed transatlantic and intra-European political coherence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Srpska Politicka Misao\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Srpska Politicka Misao\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5937/spm80-44288\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Srpska Politicka Misao","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/spm80-44288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当代关于全球领导力(一些作者称之为“首要地位”或“霸权”)问题的动荡发生在一个特定的背景下,表现为一个单一的根本裂痕:一个基于关键行动者对世界体系结构修正必要性的态度,与维持现状的愿望形成对比。换句话说,如果从一个衰落的霸主或其挑战者的角度来观察,争夺全球领导权的斗争不仅有不同的目标,而且有完全不同的逻辑。与此同时,霸权通常是一个维持现状的大国,寻求维持权力分配的基本全球参数,这一事实并不意味着它不会在各个子系统(区域和次区域)框架中以修正主义的方式行事。全球霸主及其挑战者在现状修正主义问题上的行动明显存在相反逻辑的次区域之一是西巴尔干。这种行为,以及系统和区域两级外交政策决定因素日益复杂的情况,一直促使塞尔维亚选择套期保值战略,以便用在其他领域的收益来补偿在某些领域所付出的代价。联合演习和武器采购形式的国防和安全领域在这方面具有特别重要的意义,因为塞尔维亚一直在寻求与广泛的伙伴建立密切和充满活力的关系,包括美国、俄罗斯、中国、以色列、法国和其他欧洲国家、北约成员国和非成员国。就塞尔维亚和美国的关系而言,北约仍然是一个关键的催化剂;然而,美国越来越多地以一种更直接的双边方式参与其中——例如在科索沃和梅托希亚问题上,这是塞尔维亚维持其对冲战略的另一个动机。全球主导权竞争的趋势在21世纪第三个十年开始时急剧加速,特别是随着乌克兰战争的持续展开,这将继续决定塞尔维亚的战略选择在很大程度上取决于。尽管考虑到跨大西洋和欧洲内部可能重新形成的政治一致性,这种情况可能会发生变化,但对冲很可能仍是塞尔维亚战略姿态的关键特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
American struggle for global leadership and the strategic options of Serbia
Contemporary turbulence regarding the issue of global leadership (referred to by some authors as "primacy" or "hegemony") takes place within a specific context, manifested through a single fundamental rift: the one based on key actors' attitudes towards the necessity of structural revision of the world system, contrasted with aspirations to maintain the status quo. In other words, the struggle for global leadership not only has different goals, but also a different logic altogether, if it is observed from the aspect of a declining hegemon, or from the aspects of its challengers. At the same time, the fact that the hegemon is usually a status quo power, seeking to maintain the basic global parameters of power distribution, does not mean that it will not behave in a revisionist manner in various subsystem (regional and sub-regional) frameworks. One of the sub-regions in which the inverse logic of the actions of the global hegemon and those of its challengers on the status quo - revisionism spectrum is apparent, is the Western Balkans. Such behavior, as well as the conditions of increased complexity of foreign policy determinants from the system and regional levels, have consistently incentivized Serbia to opt for the strategy of hedging, in order to compensate the costs incurred in some areas by gains in others. The field of defence and security in the form of joint exercises and arms procurement, has been of particular importance in this regard, as Serbia has been pursuing close and dynamic relations with a wide range of partners, including the US, Russia, China, Israel, France and other European countries, NATO members and non-members alike. In terms of Serbian-American relations, NATO remains a crucial catalyst; however, the US is increasingly engaged in a more straightforward, bilateral manner - e.g. with regard to the Kosovo and Metohija issue, which is yet another motive for Serbia to maintain its hedging strategy. The trends of global primacy competition, dramatically accelerated at the beginning of the third decade of the 21st century, particularly as the war in Ukraine keeps unfolding, will remain a determinant which strategic options of Serbia largely depend upon. Hedging is most likely to remain the key feature of Serbia's strategic posture, although there is a possibility this might change in light of a potentially renewed transatlantic and intra-European political coherence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
92
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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