Non-Aligned Movement: Challenges and Way Forward

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Aswasthama Bhakta Kharel
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Peace ◽  
International Forum ◽  
The World ◽  
Present Context ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Constant Support

 Non-Aligned Movement commonly known as NAM has played a useful role in the common cause of World peace and prosperity. It has succeeded in steadily emerging as a central international forum. The newly independent nations of the world that have come into the one fold of this Movement have determined their own and resist the coercion of the World powers and their attempt to exploit them. During the cold war and in the present context, the Non-Aligned Movement examines its objectives and achievements in both periods. The main goals of NAM during block policy of more extraordinary powers, the structure of bipolar in international relations, the constant support and through its conferences and in the United Nations for World peaceful environment, détente, and disarmament, and prevention of the world into the block division (East and West). Despite these changes, several others new challenge that are arising, and its member states for the achievement of peace and security for humankind.

A coming Age of Micro Game of Power

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-112
Author(s):  
Zhang Jiadong
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
The Other ◽  
Traditional Theory ◽  
Competitive Advantages ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
The World ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War

The traditional theory of international relations, whether it is realism, liberalism, constructivism, or scientific behaviorism, define sovereign states as a unified body in international arena. It has consistent interests, and naturally also has consistent foreign policy goals and means. In the 20th century, and especially during the two World Wars and the Cold War, this conceptual abstraction was very accurate. But after the end of the Cold War, especially in the 21st century, this concept gradually went against the reality of international relations. On the one hand, the comprehensive strength of a country cannot directly transform competitive advantages in specific areas; on the other hand, the main resistance of many countries, including superpowers, may not be another power, but different domestic interest groups as well as international non state actors. This has caused traditional international relations theories, from hypotheses to conceptual and inferential levels, to be unable to explain the world today.

The 1945 World Order – Process with «Open» Continuation

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 52-79
Author(s):  
V. T. Yungblud
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
International Order ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Bipolar Structure ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The World ◽  
Post War ◽  
The Cold War

The Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations, established by culmination of World War II, was created to maintain the security and cooperation of states in the post-war world. Leaders of the Big Three, who ensured the Victory over the fascist-militarist bloc in 1945, made decisive contribution to its creation. This system cemented the world order during the Cold War years until the collapse of the USSR in 1991 and the destruction of the bipolar structure of the organization of international relations. Post-Cold War changes stimulated the search for new structures of the international order. Article purpose is to characterize circumstances of foundations formation of postwar world and to show how the historical decisions made by the leaders of the anti-Hitler coalition powers in 1945 are projected onto modern political processes. Study focuses on interrelated questions: what was the post-war world order and how integral it was? How did the political decisions of 1945 affect the origins of the Cold War? Does the American-centrist international order, that prevailed at the end of the 20th century, genetically linked to the Atlantic Charter and the goals of the anti- Hitler coalition in the war, have a future?Many elements of the Yalta-Potsdam system of international relations in the 1990s survived and proved their viability. The end of the Cold War and globalization created conditions for widespread democracy in the world. The liberal system of international relations, which expanded in the late XX - early XXI century, is currently experiencing a crisis. It will be necessary to strengthen existing international institutions that ensure stability and security, primarily to create barriers to the spread of national egoism, radicalism and international terrorism, for have a chance to continue the liberal principles based world order (not necessarily within a unipolar system). Prerequisite for promoting idea of a liberal system of international relations is the adjustment of liberalism as such, refusal to unilaterally impose its principles on peoples with a different set of values. This will also require that all main participants in modern in-ternational life be able to develop a unilateral agenda for common problems and interstate relations, interact in a dialogue mode, delving into the arguments of opponents and taking into account their vital interests.

scholarly journals Installation “Breakthrough”, Implementation and Memorialisation of the “Cold War” in the USA

2021 ◽  
pp. 58-64
Author(s):  
V.E. Dergacheva ◽  
Yu.G. Chernyshov
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Rhetoric ◽  
The United States ◽  
Berlin Wall ◽  
Politics Of Memory ◽  
Archival Documents ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Cold War

Using the installation “Breakthrough” as an example, the article examines the widespread in the United States assessments and methods of memorializing the results of the Cold War. The authors note that the thesis of a US victory in the Cold War was central to official US political rhetoric in the early 1990s. This is confirmed by the politics of memory — in particular, the creation of the installation “Breakthrough”, the establishment of the commemorative medal “Cold War Victory Medal”, etc. The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 is considered the most symbolic event of the end of the Cold War. One of the fragments of this wall is called “The Breakthrough”, it is now in Westminster College in Fulton (Missouri), where W. Churchill in 1946 pronounced his famous speech and where (in a symbolic sense) the Cold War began. Installation “Breakthrough”, being a symbol of the beginning and end of ideological confrontation, carries a certain ideological message — it is a “breakthrough to freedom” and victory in the “cold war”. However, by the early 2000s, when passions subsided in society and wider access to not only American, but also Soviet archival documents was opened up, more ba-lanced assessments of the causes and results of the Cold War began to appear in American scientific circles. Some American historians started talking about the common victory of the USA and the USSR over the ideological confrontation, which could develop into a dangerous “hot war.” Globalization also influenced the perception of the outcome of the Cold War: this confrontation is assessed by some American researchers as a natural stage in the development of international relations, which led to a new redistribution of centers of influence on the map of the “multipolar” world.

scholarly journals Constructivism in International Relations: from a theory between positivism and postpositivism to the theory of the world state

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Anwar Mohamed Faraj ◽  
Tara Taha Othman
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Theoretical Study ◽  
Cultural Factors ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
World State ◽  
Historical Processes ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War

Constructivism emerged at the end of the Cold War and entered into IR theories debate by criticizing the rationalists (neo-liberal and neo-realist) on the one hand and critics on the other, accusing them of failing to predict and explain the end of the Cold War. While rationalists focus on material and economic factors, constructivists focus on cultural factors, the influence of ideas, norms and identities on the explanation of processes of interest formation, how to define survival and defining mechanisms of international politics, and emphasize that interest and identity interact through socio-historical processes and constitute each other. Thus, constructivism belongs to the fourth debate in the theoretical study of International Relations and it is one of the post-positivist theories, but it attempts to serve as a bridge between the positivist and post-positivist approaches. For example, if post-positivist theories are criticized, because of suffering from providing a realistic alternative versus of the description and explanation offered by rational theories, constructivism tries to overcome this criticism and it is able to provide the research program required to remove the post-positivist dilemma, by providing the practical hypotheses required by the establishment of a theory to describe and explain the reality of international relations. However, constructivism is not immune from criticism, it is accused that it does not offer anything new and exaggerates the understanding of cultural factors such as norms and identities and their impact on the reality of international relations, as well as its epistemological and methodological problems and its internal divisions between modern constructivists and postmodern constructivists.

scholarly journals The United Nations is grounded on the Westphalian state system. Throughout the de-colonizationperiod, the Organization ceased to be peculiar to the West only, and soon became the prevalent model in theentire globe. The Cold War also solidified and institutionalized the Westphalian State as the fundamentalprinciple in international relations. The end of the Cold War, however, along with the collapse of theEastern bloc, the challenges of peace and security in Africa, and the failure of the states in coping withhumanitarian crises increasingly made the three fundamental principles of Westphalian state, namely the“non-interventionism”, “sovereign-equality” and “territoriality” disputable among political scientists. Newapproaches and arguments on the end of the Classical Westphalian state and the emergence of a so-called“New Medieval Age” have widely been circulated. This paper alternatively suggests that, since the end of thecold war, the world politics has gradually and decisively been evolving into a system of states that could becalled Neo-Westphalian.

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 235-266
Author(s):  
Öner Buçukcu
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
World Politics ◽  
State System ◽  
The West ◽  
Sovereign Equality ◽  
The World ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The Cold War

The United Nations is grounded on the Westphalian state system. Throughout the de-colonizationperiod, the Organization ceased to be peculiar to the West only, and soon became the prevalent model in theentire globe. The Cold War also solidified and institutionalized the Westphalian State as the fundamentalprinciple in international relations. The end of the Cold War, however, along with the collapse of theEastern bloc, the challenges of peace and security in Africa, and the failure of the states in coping withhumanitarian crises increasingly made the three fundamental principles of Westphalian state, namely the“non-interventionism”, “sovereign-equality” and “territoriality” disputable among political scientists. Newapproaches and arguments on the end of the Classical Westphalian state and the emergence of a so-called“New Medieval Age” have widely been circulated. This paper alternatively suggests that, since the end of thecold war, the world politics has gradually and decisively been evolving into a system of states that could becalled Neo-Westphalian.

Nations and Nationalism

2021 ◽  
pp. 578-592
Author(s):  
Scott Paeth
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Community ◽  
Abuse Of Power ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Cold War

This chapter examines the development of Reinhold Niebuhr’s thoughts on nationalism. Over the course of his lifetime, Niebuhr continually returned to the question of nationalism as a factor in international relations, revising his understanding in light of the particular circumstances confronting the United States and the global community. His early writings on German Americanism yielded to a more sceptical analysis of nationalism as a manifestation of collective egoism, but one which could nevertheless provide important resources to human communities. The threat of Fascist nationalism in the 1930s caused him to yet again revise his understanding of nationalism, as a revitalized form of democratic nationalism became necessary to confront it. The Cold War presented the context for Niebuhr’s mature reflection on the subject, advocating for a form of chastened nationalism, which was aware of both its responsibility to confront evil in the world, as well as its own tendencies towards self-delusion and the abuse of power.

Bringing in the New World Order: Liberalism, Legitimacy, and the United Nations

1997 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 526-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael N. Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
International Order ◽  
New World Order ◽  
Intellectual Activity ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
The World ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Normative Integration

The end of the cold war and the attendant security vacuum unleashed aflurryof intellectual activity and international commissions that reflected on the world that was being left behind and the world that should be created in its place. The reports under review are among the best and most influential of the lot. This article focuses on three issues raised by these reports. First, the portrait of the new international order offered by these reports is a liberal international order. Second, the concept of legitimacy appears in various guises, and the UN is considered the site for the legitimation of a particular order. Few international orders are ever founded or sustained by force alone, something well understood by the policymakers who drafted these reports and wisely heeded by international relations theorists who attempt to understand their actions and the international orders that they construct and sustain. Third, these reports envision the UN as an agent of normative integration. As such, it contributes to the development and maintenance of a liberal international order by increasing the number of actors who identify with and uphold its values.

scholarly journals Conceptual Fundamentals of Post-Westphalian International Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 12(48) (4) ◽  
pp. 69-85
Author(s):  
Alla Kyrydon ◽  
Sergiy Troyan
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International System ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
International Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Soviet Bloc ◽  
Structure Changes ◽  
The World ◽  
The Cold War

Conceptual approaches to understanding the current stage of the evolution of international relations were put in place during the destruction of the bipolar world of the Cold War and the formation of new foundations of the world and international order. The distinctiveness of this process is that the collapse of the postwar system took place in peaceful conditions. Most often, two terms are used to describe the interconnectedness and interdependence of world politics after the fall of the Iron Curtain: the post-bipolar (post-westphalian) international system or international relations after the end of the Cold War. Two terms, post-bipolar international system and international relations after the end of the Cold War, have common features, which usually allows them to be used as synonyms and makes them the most popular when choosing a common comprehensive definition for the modern international relations. The collapse of the Soviet bloc and the global bipolar system put on the agenda issues that cannot be resolved within the traditional terms “poles,” “balance of power,” “configuration of the balance of power” etc. The world has entered a period of uncertainty and growing risks. the global international system is experiencing profound shocks associated with the transformation of its structure, changes in its interaction with the environment, which accordingly affects its regional and peripheral dimensions. In modern post-bipolar relations of shaky equilibrium, there is an obvious focus on the transformation of the world international order into a “post-American world” with the critical dynamics of relations between old and new actors at the global level. The question of the further evolution of the entire system of international relations in the post-bipolar world and the tendency of its transformation from a confrontational to a system of cooperation remains open.

scholarly journals NON-ALIGNMENT MOVEMENT: IT’S RELEVANCE IN PRESENT CONTEXT

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 272-279
Author(s):  
Balwinder Singh
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Third World ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World Politics ◽  
World War ◽  
The Us ◽  
Present Context ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Second World

After the end of Second World War, the two power bloc was raising in world politics and the revelry between the blocs was on top. The Cold War politics emerged as a bitter experience of international relations. Both blocs were mollifying the other countries of the world. It had to become stronger because of many newly independent countries. For the sake their independence many countries choose the third path to avoiding war and keeping their independence, they framed NAM (Non-alignment Movement). Most of these countries was belong to Asia and Africa and also newly independent. The US (United States) and European countries criticized NAM and revoked it as a group of opportunist countries. The NAM emerged as an international platform as a third alternative of two power blocs. The NAM was the international phenomenon of developing and third world countries. Non-alignment grew out of the cold war bitter relationship between US and USSR. Some developing and third world newly independent countries refused to post Second World War world politics through the eyes of their erstwhile colonial rulers. Indian Prime Minister Nehru was one of the paramount leaders of NAM since its inception. After the demise of British rule in India, India also refused to join any bloc in Cold War time. Nehru did not want to enter in two bloc politics due to India’s national interests. He thought that Indian independence could diminish if India going toward any blocs and adopted Non-alignment as an instrument of foreign policy. He also made effort to discuss other world leader to formulate NAM as platform of collective voice of newly independence countries. The paper also aims to explain India’s contribution to the Non-alignment Movement. The first formal conference of NAM was in Bandung in 1961. Nehru and others NAM leaders uttered against new imperialism in Asia and Africa in Bandung Summit by the western countries. Some countries raise questions about the importance and relevance of NAM and produce it as a callous movement after the end of the Cold War. However the broader membership of NAM proved its relevance and importance. Most of the world countries adopted NAM membership due to its popularity and momentous agenda. While the Cold War strategic environment underestimates Non-alignment movement and the two power blocs tried to demoralize Non-alignment movement, however the Non-alignment movement was accomplishing their work with a greater momentum. Non-alignment, both as a foreign policy perspective of most newly independence states of Asia, Africa and Latin America and as well as an international movement was a critical factor of contemporary international relations. The Non-alignment movement was the collective voice of developing and third world countries since the first official meeting of its leaders in Belgrade in 1961. The policy of the Non-alignment has been being the issue of debate in international politics since its origin. In 1970’s, its importance and relevance had questioned, with the emergence of détente in international relations. The US and European countries did not consider the NAM movement at that time. Both power blocs were also questioned the role of NAM in cold war era. The western countries always tagged NAM as a collaboration of opportunist countries. It was such a big thing that NAM survived in fracas of cold war. The study tried to remove skepticism on Non-alignment and NAM in post-Cold War arena. It is also suggesting a new way for making the movement effective and relevant in present context.

scholarly journals THE PROBLEM OF WORLD ORDER IN WESTERN IR STUDIES

2016 ◽  
pp. 34-47
Author(s):  
M. V. Soljanova
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World System ◽  
State Level ◽  
World Order ◽  
Balance Of Power ◽  
Ir Studies ◽  
The World ◽  
Modern System ◽  
The Cold War

The article "Problem of world order in modern Western studies" is the study of one of the most debated issues in the science of international relations - world order. Discussion of the structure of world order is underway in various countries, both at the state level and in the expert community. Some researchers insist on the fact that after the end of the cold war, the collapse of the bipolar model of international relations, the world has become unipolar. Others argue that the increase in the number of centers of power and the need for a multilateral approach to solving global problems (terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, environmental and climate issues) talking about the formation of multipolarity. However, it should be recognized that currently no widely accepted theoretical and conceptual apparatus, which complicates not only the study of the world order, but makes it impossible to search for common approaches of the international community in solving the problems associated with global development, new challenges and threats. The author of this article seeks to research and analyze the various theoretical paradigms (neo-realism, neo-liberalism, institutionalism, neo-marxism, etc.) and concepts to form a coherent picture of the structure of the world system, its main features and to offer readers the vision of the concept of "world order". Thus, the article notes that the multidimensional structure of the modern system of international relations established after the end of the cold war is so complex that none of the concepts can claim to accurate interpretation of the world order. The modern system differs from systems of the past centuries. Characteristics inherent in it (on the one hand, the increasing global processes in economy, politics, culture, etc., on the other, the attraction to return to the concept of "nation state", the closure of borders, the disintegration), require new approaches to the study of world order, factors of its formation and its components. The world system is dynamic and none of the previously existing concepts of world order are not able to accurately describe the processes occurring in the world today. For example, a bipolar model is formed based on the principle of "balance of power", a unipolar system exists on the basis of the dictates of the powers, and a multipolar - subject to the availability of the political equilibrium. It becomes obvious that the constantly changing conditions in the global arena require a whole new approach to the formation of a genuine world order. While each country will be guided by their own ideas of the world development plan focused on their interests, often in conflict with the global balance of power, to speak of a stable, efficient, safe development is impossible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document