politicalscienceВестник РГГУ. Серия “Политология. История. Международные отношения.”RSUH/RGGU Bulletin Series "Political Science. History. International Relations"2073-6339Издательский центр Российского государственного гуманитарного университета10.28995/2073-6339-2019-4-23-36politicalscience-265Research ArticleМЕЖДУНАРОДНЫЕ ОТНОШЕНИЯ: ИСТОРИЯ, ТЕОРИЯ, СОЦИОКУЛЬТУРНАЯ ПРАКТИКАINTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: HISTORY, THEORY, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL PRACTICES AND METHODOLOGY«Старая-новая холодная война» в интерпретации Английской школы международных отношений“Old-new Cold War” in interpretation of the English school of international relationsМироновВ. В.MironovV. V.

Виктор В. Миронов, кандидат исторических наук, доцент

Россия, Омск, 644077, пр. Мира, д. 55а

Victor V. Mironov, Cand. of Sci. (History), associate professor

bld. 55 a, Mira Av., 644077, Omsk, Russia

vvm_512@rambler.ruОмский государственный университет им. Ф.М. ДостоевскогоРоссияOmsk State University named after F.M. DostoevskyRussian Federation201905032020042336Copyright © Миронов В.В., 20202020Миронов В.В.Mironov V.V.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://politicalscience.rsuh.ru/jour/article/view/265

Статья посвящена Английской школе международных отношений – автономному сообществу исследователей международной политики, преимущественно работающих в Великобритании. Историки Г. Баттерфильд, М. Уайт, А. Уотсон, М. Ховард, философы Д. МакКиннон и Х. Булл приняли активное участие в создании этой школы, сформировавшейся в конце 1950-х – 1970-х гг. Понятие «международное общество» стало ее символом благодаря работам Х. Булла в 1970–1980-х гг. Сегодня Б. Бузан, К. Навари, Р. Джексон и другие исследователи продолжают работу школы. Ключевыми факторами окончания холодной войны ее представители считают становление глобального международного общества, изменение институциональной структуры современного мира и процесс формирования мирового общества. Кроме того, особое внимание уделяется вопросам справедливости в международных отношениях в 1970–1980-х гг. Все эти аспекты демонстрируют специфику подхода школы к изучению окончания «старой холодной войны». Современный этап противостояния России и Запада объясняется разнородностью международного общества, отсутствием международной легитимности, эрозией базовых международных институтов. При этом понятие «новая холодная война» приобретает метафорический смысл.

This article is devoted to English school of International relations – autonomous community of scientists of International policy, who work mainly in Great Britain. It formed in the end 1950–1970. Historians H. Butterfield, M. Wight, A. Watson, M. Howard, philosophers D. McKinnon and H. Bull took an active part in the creation of this community. Concept “International Society” become a symbol and different mark this scientific community thanks to the books by H. Bull in 1970–1980. B. Buzan, C. Navary, R. Jackson and others scientists continue work of the school now. Such objectives factors as the development of Global International Society, the change of institutional structure of the modern world and the formation process of the World Society explain the end of Cold War into the school. Besides, English school of International relations pays special attention to the problems of justice in international relations in 1970–1980. All this aspects are demonstrating the specific school’s approach to the study of end of “Old Cold War”. Modern period of confrontation between Russia and West explained in school through heterogeneity of modern International Society, absence of international legitimacy, erosion of basic institutes of International Society. However, concept “New Cold War” takes on metaphorical meaning.

Английская школа международных отношениймеждународное обществохолодная войнаEnglish School of International RelationsInternational SocietyCold WarReferencesBull 1977 – Bull H. The anarchical society. A study of order in world politics. New York, Columbia University Press, 1977. 335 p.Bull, H. (1977), The Anarchical Society. A Study of Order in World Politics, Columbia University Press, New York, USA.Bull 1973 – Bull H. War and international order // The bases of international order. Essay in honour of C.A.W. Manning / Ed. by A. James. London: Oxford University Press, 1973. P. 116–132.Bull, H. (1973), “War and International Order”, in: James A. (ed.), The Bases of International Order. Essay in honour of C.A.W. Manning, Oxford University Press, London, UK, pp. 116–132.Bull 1984 – Bull H. The revolt against the West // Bull H., Watson A. The expansion of international society. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984. P. 217–228.Bull, H. (1984), “The Revolt against the West”, in: Bull, H., Watson, A. (eds.), The Expansion of International Society, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 217–228.Buzan 2004 – Buzan B. From International to world Society. English School Theory and Social Structure of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 295 p.Buzan, B. (2004), From International to World Society. English School Theory and Social Structure of Globalization, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Buzan, Waever 2002 – Buzan B., Waever O. Powers and regions. The structure of international security. Cambridge, 2002. 387 p.Buzan, B. and Waever, O. (2002), Powers and Regions. The Structure of International Security, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Clark 2001 – Clark I. The post-cold war order. The spoils of peace. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. 276 p.Clark, I. (2001), The Post-Cold War Order. The Spoils of Peace, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Clark 2005 – Clark I. Legitimacy in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. 278 p.Clark, I. (2005), Legitimacy in International Society, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Donnelly 1998 – Donnelly J. Human rights: a new standard of civilization? // International Affairs. 1998. Vol. 74. No. 1. P. 1–23.Donnelly, J. (1998), “Human rights: a new standard of civilization?”, International Affairs, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 1–23.Finnemore 1996 – Finnemore M. Constructing norms of humanitarian intervention // The culture of national security. Norms and identity in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996. P. 153–185.Finnemore, M. (1996), “Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention”, in: The Culture of National Security. Norms and Identity in World Politics, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 153–185.Holsti 1901 – Holsti K.J. Peace and war: Armed conflicts and international order 1648– 1989. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991. 379 p.Holsti, K.J. (1991), Peace and War: Armed Conflicts and International Order 1648–1989, Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.Jackson 1993 – Jackson R. Quasi-state: sovereignty, international relations and the Third World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. 225 p.Jackson, R. (1993) Quasi-State: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Jackson 2000 – Jackson R.H. The global covenant: human conduct in a world of states. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. 464 p.Jackson, R.H. (2000), The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Kaldor 1999 – Kaldor M. New and old wars. Organized violence in a global era. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999. 224 p.Kaldor, M. (1999), New and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.Kaldor 2000 – Kaldor M. Cosmopolitism and Organized Violence. Paper prepared for Conference on “Conceiving Cosmopolitism”, Warwick, 27–29 April 2000 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: https://www.insumisos.com/lecturasinsumisas/Mary%20Kaldor%20%20sobre%20violencia.pdf (дата обращения 16 июня 2019).Kaldor, M. (2000), Cosmopolitism and Organized Violence: Paper prepared for conference on “Conceiving Cosmopolitism”, Warwick, UK, 27–29 April, [Online], available at: https://www.insumisos.com/lecturasinsumisas/Mary%20Kaldor%20%20sobre%20violencia.pdf (Assessed 16 June 2019).Little 2007 – Little R. The balance of power in international relations. Metaphors, myth and models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 317 p.Little, R. (2007), The Balance of Power in International Relations. Metaphors, Myth and Models, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Manning 1975 – Manning C.A.W. The nature of international society. L.: London School of Economics and Political Science. 1975. 280 р.Manning, C.A.W. (1975), The Nature of International Society. London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.Northedge 1976 – Northedge F.S. The international political system. London: Faber and Faber, 1976. 336 p.Northedge, F.S. (1976), The International Political System, Faber and Faber, London, UK.Vincent 1986 – Vincent J.R. Human rights and international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. 237 p.Vincent, J.R. (1986), Human Rights and International Relations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Watson 1992 – Watson A. The evolution of international society. A comparative historical analysis. London; New York, 1992. 337 p.Watson, A. (1992), The Evolution of International Society. A Comparative Historical Analysis, London, UK, New York, USA.Wheeler, Dunne 1998 – Wheeler N.J., Dunne T. Good citizenship: A third way for British foreign policy // International Affairs. 1998. Vol. 74. No. 4. P. 847–870.Wheeler, N.J. and Dunne, T. (1998), “Good Citizenship: A Third Way for British Foreign Policy”, International Affairs, vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 847–870.Wight 1949 – Wight M. Power politics. London: Royal Institute of International Relations, 1949. 68 p.Wight, M. (1949), Power Politics. Royal Institute of International Relations, London, UK.Wight 1977 – Wight M. The international legitimacy // Bull H. System of State. Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1977. P. 153–172.Wight, M. (1977), “The International Legitimacy”, in: Bull, H. (ed.), System of State. Leicester University Press, Leicester, UK, pp. 153–172.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.