PRACA POGLĄDOWA
A paradigm shift in international security as a consequence of the Russia-Ukraine war
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ukraine
2
University of Gdańsk, Poland
Data nadesłania: 22-07-2024
Data akceptacji: 10-10-2024
Data publikacji: 16-10-2024
Autor do korespondencji
Dmytro Dzvinchuk
Ivano-Frankivsk National Technical University of Oil and Gas, Ukraine
JoMS 2024;59(Numer specjalny 5):54-72
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
DZIEDZINY
STRESZCZENIE
This article presents the main features of the historical genesis of the international security paradigm shift from its institutionalisation to the present day. It is shown that such genesis is sinusoidal in nature and related to the well-known 'Kondratiev waves', except that, unlike the latter, it is not economic in nature, but security in nature. In a historical and geopolitical context, five successive shifts in the international security paradigm (Pre-Systemic, Westphalian, Vienna, Versailles, Yalta-Potsdam, Unipolar) are distinguished as a normatively recognised system of international relations of war and peace, based on all countries' adherence to universally recognised principles and norms of international law, as enshrined in relevant international treaties.
The main factors of the end of the era of the unipolar world and the growing role of 'fragile' states in the international security environment as potential objects of international military interventions and spaces for the deployment of local conflicts and wars were characterised. It was concluded that the war in Ukraine is a key trigger for a new paradigm shift in international security and the emergence of a new system of international relations, and that the outcome of the Russian-Ukrainian war will determine the 'starting positions' and strong arguments in the hands of the United States of America and its allies against China and its allies during the inevitable new global security conference on the creation of a new world order.
REFERENCJE (19)
1.
Asaturov S., Martynov A. (2022). Hlobalizatsiia i hlokalizatsiia v umovakh kryzy svitovoi systemy mizhnarodnoi bezpeky. Acta de Historia & Politica: Saeculum XXI, 4, 119-127.
2.
Blyzniuk T. (2005). Teoretychni aspekty teorii dovhykh khvyl M.Kondratieva. Ekonomika promyslovosti, 1, 11–18.
3.
Brock, L., Holm, H.-H., Sorenson, G. & Stohl, M. (2012). Fragile States: Violence and Failure of Intervention. Polity Press, 54(3), 46-95.
4.
Council of the European Union. (2007). Council Conclusions on an EU response to situations of fragility (2831st External Relations Council meeting Brussels, 19-20 November 2007 URL : //europa.eu/capacity4dev/public-fragility/documents/council-conclusions-eu-response-situations-fragility.
5.
Feduniak, S. (2022). Vplyv rosiisko-ukrainskoi viiny na diialnist providnykh instytutiv bezpeky v konteksti formuvannia novoi modeli mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn. Mediaforum: analityka, prohnozy, informatsiinyi menedzhment, 11, 131–140.
6.
Ficek, R. (2022). Państwa rachityczne jako wyzwanie dla współczesnej koncepcji bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego. Rocznik Bezpieczeństwa Międzynarodowego, 16(1), 23–53.
8.
Gryz, J. (2019). Współczesny paradygmat bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego. Rocznik Bezpieczeństwa Międzynarodowego, 1, 11–27.
9.
Haass, R.-N. (2003, January 14). Sovereignty: Existing Rights, Evolving Responsibilities: Remarks to the School of Foreign Service and the Mortara Center for International Studies. Georgetown University. URL :
https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/....
10.
Horovenko, S. (2023). Instytualizovani mizhnarodni aliansy bezpeky: na zakhysti osnovopolozhnykh prav liudyny. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia : Pravo, 75(3), 234–240.
12.
Podraza, M. (2023). Rosyjska aneksja ukraińskich terytoriów okupowanych w świetle prawa międzynarodowego. Biuletyn Stowarzyszenia Absolwentów I Przyjaciół Wydziału Prawa Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 18(20 (2), 219–233.
13.
Rzhevska, V. (2012). Elementy kolektyvnoi bezpeky u zmisti vestfalskoho myru 1648 r. Aktualni problemy mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn, 108(1), 206–211.
14.
Schramm, Т. (2016). System wersalski i jego rozkład. Studia Maritima, 29, 115–125.
15.
Shapovalova, O. (2013). Systemnyi perekhid vid Yaltynsko-Potsdamskoi do postbipoliarnoi systemy mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn: nezavershena dekonstruktsiia. Naukovyi visnyk Dyplomatychnoi akademii Ukrainy, 20(2), 94–107.
16.
Tsivatyi, V. (2016). Videnskyi konhres 1814-1815 rr.: instytutsionalnyi verdykt yevropeiskoho polityko-dyplomatychnoho ta suspilno-istorychnoho rozvytku. Mizhnarodni zviazky Ukrainy: naukovi poshuky i znakhidky, 25, 229–246.
18.
Wiktor, Z. (2023). Wojna w Ukrainie – przyczyny i skutki po ponad roku trwania. Studia Orientalne, 3(27), 30–59.
19.
Zahola, T. (2022). Teoretychni pidkhody do doslidzhennia spivvidnoshennia poniat mizhnarodna bezpeka, kolektyvna bezpeka ta hlobalna bezpeka. Visnyk Khersonskoho natsionalnoho tekhnichnoho universytetu, 4, 133–137.