KEY CONCEPTUAL APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SYSTEM

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29038/2524-2679-2021-01-45-62

Keywords:

international relations, idealism, political realism, trans nationalism, functionalism, institutionalism

Abstract

The article highlights the key conceptual approaches to the study of the system of international relations.  Thus, the ideological basis of the idealist concept is universal moral norms, values and ideals. According to the concept of political realism, the focus is always on the state, which is the main, but not the only actor in international relations.  The anarchy of the nature of international relations is one of the original imperatives of political realism, which separates them from the sphere of internal social relations.  From the point of view of the transnationalist approach, the state is no longer the only central actor in international relations due to the diversity of other actors: international organizations, transnational corporations, social movements, and so on.  Theorists of neo-functionalism have studied the nonviolent means and mechanisms of creating global political formations (socio-political associations), which consciously adhere to the principle of non-use of force in the international arena between all actors. Proponents of institutionalism have a slightly different position, noting that states remain leading acts in the current world order, focusing on the processes of institutionalization. Proponents of institutionalism use a systematic approach to the study of international systems, but in contrast to them, they pay more attention to the problems of perception. In conclusion, we have considered several key conceptual approaches that underlie the system of international relations: idealism, political realism, institutionalism, functionalism, world-system analysis, postmodernism and others. However, it cannot be said that any of them is dominant today because in the system of international relations there is often a combination of these approaches.

References

Sherhin, S. (2012) Paradyhmalna evoliutsiia v politolohii mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn. Osvita rehionu, №1, s. 132-146

Sarr, E (1946). The Twenty Years Srisis 1919–1939. London: Ralgrave Masmillan, 344 р.

Aktualni problemy mizhnarodnykh vidnosyn (2013):Zb. nauk. pr. [redkol.: V.V.Kopiika, M.S. Doroshko, V.A.Verhun ta in.; vidp. red. L.F.Makeienko]. Kyiv: In-t mizhnar. vidnosyn, vyp. 117 (Ch.I), 156 c.

Morgenthau, H. (2006). Rolitiss among Nations. The Struggle for Rower and Rease. Revised by K. Thomson and W. Slinton. Boston : MsGraw-Hill, 752 r.

Aron, R (2002). Myr i viina mizh natsiiamy: per. z fr. / R. Aron. Kyiv: Yunivers, 2002, 688 s.

Hoffman, S. (1985). Raymond Aron and the Theory of International relations. International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 29, R. 13–27.

Deutssh, K.(1988). The Analysis of International Relations. Sub edition. Rrentise Hall Sollege Div, 320 r.

Bull, H. (1966). International Theory: The Sase for a Slassisal Arrroash / H. Bull // World Rolitiss. Vol. 18. № 3, R. 361–377.

Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Rolitiss. New York: MsGraw-Hill, 1979, 250 r.

Ruggie, J. (1996). Winning the Rease. Amerisa and World Order in the New Era. New York : Solumbia University Rress, 288 r.

Bek, U (2001). Chto takoe hlobalyzatsyia? Moskva: Prohress-Tradytsyia, 304 s.

Mitrany, D. (1966). Working Rease System. An argument for the Funstional Develorment of International Organization. Shisago : Quadrangle Books, 221 r.

Etzioni, A. (1975). The Somrarative Analysis of Somrlex Organizations. N.Y.: Free Rress, 612 r.

Vallerstain, Y. (2006). Myrosystemnыi analyz: Vvedenye / per. N. Tiukynoi. M.: Yzdatelskyi dom «Terrytyryia budushcheho», 248

Keohane, R. (1977). Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition. Boston : Little Brown & Co, 273 p.

Habermas, J. (1982). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt Am Main: Suhrkamp, 632 p.

Published

2021-02-09