Lübnan’da Ortak Kimliğin Oluşumunda Sedir Devrimi’nin Rolü

The Lebanese lands, which hosted many different ethnic and religious identities under the Ottoman Empire's rule, could not bring together the plural and distinctive differences within it on common ground. The most crucial factor for the lack of common ground is the Mutasarrifate system established with the interference of France and other European states under the Ottoman rule in the country. The Mutasarrifate system's institutionalization and the building of administrative changes on this system in Lebanon's historical breaking moments brought the fragmented structure to the present day. As a result, this political system based on ethnic and religious differences prevented a Lebanese state citizen identity based on common rights and responsibilities. In the continuation and afterward of the demonstrations that started right after the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri in Lebanon in 2005, a broad social consensus ground could not be established. Considered as the reflection of color revolutions in the Middle East, the Cedar Revolution could not produce more democratic and inclusive results as claimed.

The connection between the «color revolutions» and the strategic doctrines of the United States (late 20th century — 2014)

After the collapse of the USSR, fundamentally new phenomena appeared on the world arena, which became a watershed separating the bipolar order from the monopolar order associated with the establishment of the US global hegemony. Such phenomena were the events that are most often called «revolutions» in connection with the scale of the changes being made — «velvet revolutions» in the former Eastern Bloc, as well as revolutions of a different type, which ended in a change in the current regimes with such serious consequences that we are also talking about revolutionary transformations. These are technologies of «color revolutions» that allow organizing artificial and seemingly spontaneous mass protests leading to the removal of the legitimate government operating in the country and, in fact, to the seizure of power by a pro-American forces that ensure the Westernization of the country and the implementation of "neoliberal modernization", which essentially means the opening of national markets and the provision of natural resources for the undivided use of the Western factor (TNC and TNB). «Color revolutions» are inseparable from the strategic documents of the United States, in which, from the end of the 20th century, even before the collapse of the USSR, two main tendencies were clearly traced: the expansion of the right to unilateral use of force up to a preemptive strike, which is inextricably linked with the ideological justification of «missionary» American foreign policy, and the right to «assess» the internal state of affairs in countries and change it to a «democratic format», that is, «democratization». «Color revolutions», although they are not directly mentioned in strategic documents, but, being a «technical package of actions», straightforwardly follow from the right, assigned to itself by Washington, to unilateral use of force, which is gradually expanding from exclusively military actions to a comprehensive impact on an opponent country, i.e. essentially a hybrid war. Thus, the «color revolutions» clearly fit into the strategic concept of Washington on the use of force across the entire spectrum (conventional and unconventional war) under the pretext of «democratization». The article examines the period of registration and expansion of the US right to use force (which, according to the current international law, is a crime without a statute of limitations) in the time interval from the end of the twentieth century until 2014, filling semantic content about the need for «democratic transformations» of other states, with which the United States approached the key point of the events of the «Arab spring» and «color revolutions» in the post-Soviet space, the last and most ambitious of which was the «Euromaidan» in Ukraine in 2014. The article presents the material for the preparation of lectures and seminars in the framework of the training fields «International Relations» and «Political Science».

Reconciling the element of freedom with the element of power and law: “protective liberalism” of K. Kavelin - B. Chicherin

The article is devoted to the genesis of the Russian “liberalism”. It is shown that Russian liberalism of the 19th century, represented in its classical form by the works of Kavelin and Chicherin, whose essence consists “in reconciling the element of freedom with the element of power and law”. Is difficult to compare it with the classical bourgeois liberalism of the West. Kavelin-Chicherin liberalism is better defined as “nationally oriented”, “conservative”, “protective”. This means that Kavelin, Chicherin and their supporters were opponents not only of feudal vestiges, but also of capitalist “ulcers”. They advocated political reforms without “shaking the whole society” and carried out in the existing legal area. This is their fundamental difference from the liberal ideologists of modern “color revolutions”.

The Destruction of Statehood and the Color Revolutions under Russian International Law Doctrine

Has Russian international law doctrine changed in relation to the post-Soviet states since the annexation of Crimea? This paper analyses two interdependent concepts of the contemporary Russian international law doctrine - the ‘color revolutions’ and the ‘destruction of statehood’ - in the context of geopolitical competition over the post-Soviet space. In brief, the term color revolution is used by Russia to describe events that it categorizes as illegal regime-changes used to remove pro-Russian politicians from power under the guise of democracy. In the same context, Russia has developed another key concept, i.e. the ‘destruction of statehood’. First referred to in 2008, it has since 2014 become a more encompassing and innovative legal doctrine to counter color revolutions in Russia’s neighboring states. Under this doctrine, Russia reserves a right to ‘un-recognize’ a target state if it categorizes the situation as an illegal regime change that has destroyed the target’s statehood. Controversially, this results in Russia no longer being bound by its treaty obligations with this state. Especially since 2014, Russia has developed political and legal tools in multilateral documents to counter future color revolutions. While it has been unable to convince the international community to accept its new interpretations, it has been more successful within its closest allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and, to a lesser extent, in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). This may have significant political consequences in the future.

Corruption and Social Tension in the Cause System “Color Revolutions”

This article discusses the causes of social tension and the conditions conducive to “color revolutions”. The individual, society and the state are considered as the main objects of security. The shortcoming in the sphere of preliminary investigation and operational-search activity of law enforcement agencies, the lack of proper interaction between them were analyzed. Comprehensive measures to reduce social tension in society and counteract “color revolutions” based on the study are proposed.

Transformation in Eastern Europe — democracy or nationalism

The transformation process began in Eastern Europe with the “velvet” revolutions and continued after the “color” revolutions. There is much in common between these two types of transformational revolutions, starting with the fact that both are mass protest movements based on the mixing of ideological elements of democracy and nationalism. However, elements of nationalism usually emerge not immediately after the collapse of communism, but after the first democratic changes, even if these nationalist movements are still timid and unsuccessful. That is, nationalists are taking the initiative not from communists, but from democrats.

Modern color revolutions: from Belarus to Venezuela

This article is devoted to the evolution of modern technologies of color revolutions and the peculiarities of their hybridization (on the example of Venezuela and Belarus). The authors note that modern color revolutions are a combined (hybrid) technology that combines the classic Maidan, worked out during the fi rst and second color revolutions in Ukraine (in 2004–05 and 2013–14); the latest technologies of confl ict mobilization (for an initially non-political agenda), developed during several “electromayans” in Armenia; technologies of communication and coordination of the activity of protest groups, taken from the organizers of mass protests in Hong Kong (2019–20); and technologies of organizing a coup d'état that almost put an end to the existence of the Chavist regime in Venezuela in 2019.

SPECIFICS OF THE INFORMATIONAL ENVIRONMENT OF SUBCULTURES AND ITS ROLE IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS OF MEMBERS OF TERRORIST AND EXTREMIST GROUPS

The phenomenon of the informational environment of subcultures is reviewed as the aggregate of a specific set of knowledge, evaluations of the outside environment, terminology and slang that may be formed in its potential carriers, including artificially, which is important to raise efficiency of prevention of the involvement of citizens in extremist and terrorist organizations. It is noted that the minimum required set of attributes is more often formed artificially for gradual involvement of citizens in this or that subculture. The threshold of resistance to the involvement in a subculture is significantly lowered following gradual habituation to the use of a specific set of attributes by their imposing or inducement for voluntary use. This phenomenon is successfully tested by political strategists in many countries of the world including on the example of color revolutions. Mass media and telecommunications often act as a guiding force for such actions. The mechanism of manipulation of historical and other events, distortion of actual events is used to reinforce the required suggestions and raise the impact of attributes. The authors justify the need for timely identification of attributes of extremism and terrorism subcultures in the informational environment including mass media. As one of practical measures, it is suggested to increase the liability of mass media and other public informational resource owners for reliability of distributed data, disallowing intentional distortion of historical facts, events, phenomena of public life and their unproven and especially intentionally distorted interpretations.