关于本课程 为了解释全球化是如何重构公共政策和再塑社会行为，我们将研究不同的政治、经济行为体、研究各类——公共或私人，个体或集体——社会行为体，并着眼关注到它们之间的交流和互动作用，这些行为体正在重构着国际关系。 本课程以法国社会学和历史学视角来研究国际关系。同时也提供英语版本(www.coursera.org/learn/global-studies/)、法语版本(www.coursera.org/learn/espace-mondial-fr/)和阿拉伯语版本(www.coursera.org/learn/espace-mondial-ar/)。
当代国际关系的主要转折点
Loading...
From the course by Sciences Po
世界空间、法国视角下的国际研究
4 оценки
Meet the Instructors
Bertrand BadieProfessor
Marie-Françoise DurandProfessor
[MUSIC]
Our Westphalian world is over.
This world, which was drawn during the 17th century just
after the Thirty Year War, which took place in Europe.
This world order was made of inter state competition
of power competition, of balance of power.
It was also made by very few Western states.
This world is now over, because after the Second World War,
we had to face three major turning points.
And we have to observe that the main powers, the traditional powers,
that's to say the Western powers, were not really able to take properly the bends.
What are these major turning points?
I would distinguish three major turning points
which are structuring our post World War history.
First, in the long term globalization.
The second factor, the second major turning point
is the cries of the state which took place in a middle term.
And in a short term
the third major turning point was the collapse of bipolarity.
First, globalization.
Of course, there is no date for
determining when globalization took place in our contemporary history.
That's why I mentioned long term transformation of our world order.
But we know that this globalization totally question the Westphalian order,
for several reasons, at least for five reasons.
The first one is inclusion.
For the first time in the history of humanity all the states,
all the people of the societies of the world are included
in the same system and now [INAUDIBLE] we have 193 members.
This is quite different from an international
system which was only composed of ten, even eight,
maybe 12 states and it was a case during the 19th century.
The second transformation is communication,
with the revolution of communication, the new communication technology.
Now all the individuals are able to communicate with each other.
That's to say, territory is defeated as a principle of action.
Now, territory has not the same meaning it had previously
during the Westphalian moments of our history.
But it implies a new kind of governance, which is questioning
all the traditional principles of the international law and
the main structures of the international institutions.
Third, globalization implies non state actors proliferating in our world order.
Now the world order is not only depending on states, but also on non state actors.
Economy actors, social actors, cultural actors, religious actors, and so on.
And these actors are not really integrated
in this world as far as this world is Westphalian it's not able
to integrate to include this new known state actors.
Fourth, sovereignty.
Sovereignty, it's challenged by inter-dependence.
Sovereignty was the fundamental principle of the Westphalian order.
Sovereignty is not working in a world of inter-dependence.
In a global world, sovereignty is questioned by market.
Sovereignty is questioned by communication.
Sovereignty is challenged by transnational relations.
But, this new inter-dependence is not really managed
in our present world order that's why this is one is rather unstable.
And of course, last point of this globalization is
the increasing pressure of the international social issues.
Now traditional particular issues are normal.
The main issue in the international system,
the main issue are made of social issues as to say,
anger has economy development, the environment, and so on.
This is the first break in our Westphalian order.
The second one is related to the mid term,
that is to say the crisis of this state, double crisis of the state.
First in the developing countries but
also in the developed countries, developing countries.
We have to take into account that decolonization,
which is one of the major event of our contemporary world
was badly run, was not really managed, and
was realized through a very dangerous
postulate that's to say it's possible to export the Western state,
to import the Western state inside the developing countries.
This is not working.
That's why so many states in the south are collapsing.
That's why there is a proliferation of failed states.
This is also a great change.
And the other one is the crisis of the state, even in the different countries.
Crisis of the welfare state, crisis of the economic functions of the state.
Crisis of the very notion of security, which is no more working.
Hobbes is probably dead by now, that's why we have to rethink
our world order, taking into account new parameters of regulation.
But at last there is a short term crisis,
this short term crisis is coming from the end of bipolarity.
Bipolarity was a clear principle,
a clear way of regulation of our international order.
In November 9th, in Berlin when
the wall failed down, or maybe in Lavallette one month later
when Gorbatchev met George H Bush and said to him that,
US territory is not interested in a competition with Western countries.
That was the end of bipolarity.
But, if bipolarity is no more working,
what is now presently our international system?
We don't know that.
Its currently called, post bipolar system.
But we know when we say post bipolar system, that previously we
had a bipolar system, but we don't know which kind of system we're now facing.
That's a problem, but the real problem, is that with the end of bipolarity the world
had to meet the crisis of the concept of enmity.
Who is, where is the enemy?
This is probably the main enigma of our post bipolar world
but it means also that the competition among eagles,
that's to say among states which have the same level of development is now over.
And if this competition is over, we have now to define new kind
of competitions between weak countries or between weak and strong countries.
It's quite different from the traditional vision of war.
And even alliances are now questioned, like NATO,
and so many other military alliances.
What about this post bipolar world?
Has its substitutes for taking this new functions and
this new challenges into accounts?
Or do we observe a kind of attempt to continue
to maintain this traditional Westphalian
world in a real post Westphalian moment?
This would be a grave contradiction and this contradiction is probably the main
feature of our present international order, that we will investigate together.
[MUSIC]
Ознакомьтесь с нашим каталогом
Присоединяйтесь бесплатно и получайте персонализированные рекомендации, обновления и предложения.
Coursera делает лучшее в мире образование доступным каждому, предлагая онлайн-курсы от ведущих университетов и организаций.
© Coursera Inc., 2018 Все права защищены.
