Concerning theoretical approaches to the formation of post-bipolar regions: is there a risk of deregionalization of the Black Sea political system?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31558/2617-0248.2024.9.13Keywords:
: Black Sea region, Black Sea political system, «new regionalism», «region-building», deregionalization, BSEC, Ukraine, RussiaAbstract
A new paradigm of interstate relations in the Black Sea basin in the conditions of the collapse of the bipolar system led to the emergence of the Black Sea region as a political system. The article analyzes the theoretical background of the process of «new regionalization» in the works of certain theoreticians-regionalists who studied the peculiarities of the formation of international regions after 1991. The conceptualization of the phenomenon of «new regionalism», in particular in the works of the Swedish researcher Björn Hettne, fundamentally revealed the essence of the creation of spaces of post-bipolar interdependence of the states of a certain geographical region. The article, with the involvement of the tools of the system analysis method, models a scientific approach to understanding the process of regional development on the example of the Black Sea system of international relations as a political alter ego of the structural nature of the Black Sea region as a geographical space in the BSEC system. It is argued that the acquisition of systematicity in the relations between the BSEC member countries within the political boundaries of the Black Sea region was aimed at maximally stabilizing regional relations based on common democratic values in the direction of forming the general regional interest of the states to create a crisis-free space of economic interaction in the Black Sea basin. However, the article states that the systemic balance of the newly created Black Sea regional system was called into question almost from the very beginning by the aggressive policy of the Russian Federation in the region in relation to other international actors. The level of conflict in the Black Sea basin after 1991 turned out to be directly proportional to the departure of the Russian leadership from the course of democratization of socio-political relations. It is concluded that with the beginning of the conventional war against Ukraine in 2014, the authoritarian Putin’s regime leads to the deregionalization of the Black Sea political system and the deconstruction of the Black Sea region as a product of post-bipolar regionalism. In turn, this leads to the further escalation of regional and global chaos in conditions of paralysis of international law with the gradual disappearance of the post-bipolar world order in a situation of unpredictable developments in the global field of force confrontation.
References
Глебов С. В. Зовнішня політика України в Чорноморському регіоні. Стратегічна культура та зовнішня політика України. Монографія / за заг. ред. І.М. Коваля, О.І. Брусиловської. Одеса: Одеський національний університет імені І.І. Мечникова, 2017. С. 79-99. URL: https://dspace.onu.edu.ua/bitstreams/c8413e98-15b1-4354-a987-1e53993876cf/download
Глебов С. В. Демократія в безпеці, безпека в демократії: внутрішні та зовнішні виклики для України. Міжнародні відносини та зовнішня політика в еру «пост-правди». Монографія / О. Брусиловська та інші. К.: Вадекс, 2018. С. 137-176. URL: https://dspace.onu.edu.ua/bitstreams/64fb6811-2517-4674-ba56-d3304354dc00/download
Глебов С.В. Постбіполярний регіоналізм як політична, світоглядна і функціональна парадигма. Міжнародні відносини та політика держав в умовах глобальних трансформацій: аналіз сучасної політичної думки. Монографія / Під ред. Брусиловської О. Одеса: ОНУ імені І.І. Мечникова, 2016. С. 48-71. URL: https://dspace.onu.edu.ua/bitstreams/f31a9ab8-dd45-4547-b295-c8baed4fe92d/download
Декларацiя про чорноморське економiчне спiвробiтництво, прийнята на найвищому рiвнi. Полiтика i час. 1993. № 1. С. 85-87.
Кононов И. Социология и проблемы пространственной организации общества. Социология: теория, методы, маркетинг. 2004. № 4. С. 57-78.
Кукулка Ю. Проблемы теории международных отношений. М.: Прогресс, 1980. 320 c.
Макарычев А. С. Пространственные характеристики трансграничной безопасности: концептуальные контексты. Безопасность и международное сотрудничество в поясе новых границ России / Под ред. Л.Б.Вардомского и С.В. Голунова. Волгоград: НОФМО, 2002. 572 с. URL: http://www.obraforum.ru/book/chapter1.htm
Цит. по: Tsantoulis Y. Subregionalism in the Black Sea and the EU’s Role: Incentives, Obstacles and the EU’s Role. Bonn: Center for European Integration Studies, 2008. 35 p.
Charter of the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Organization. BSEC official web-site. URL: https://www.bsec-organization.org/UploadedDocuments/StatutoryDocumentsAgreements/CHARTERFourthEdition.pdf
Gilpin R. War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge, 1983. 354 pp.
Harrison J. Re-reading the New Regionalism: A Sympathetic Critique. Space and Polity. 2006. Vol. 10. № 1. P. 21-46.
Hettne B. Globalization, the New Regionalism and East Asia. Globalism and Regionalism. Selected Papers, delivered at the United Nations University Global Seminar ’96 Shonan Session, 2-6 September, 1996, Hayama, Japan / Edited by Toshiro Tanaka and Takashi Inoguchi. URL: http://www.unu.edu/unupress/globalism.html
Holsti K.J. Change in the international system: essays on the theory and practice of international relations. Aldershot: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 1991. 253 pp.
Jones M. Towards ‘Phase Spatiality’: Regions, Regional Studies, and the Limits to Thinking Space Relationally. Paper Presented at the Regional Studies Association ‘Regional Growth Agendas’ Conference, Aalborg, Denmark, 28th – 31st May 2005. URL: www.regional-studies-assoc.ac.uk/events/aalborg05/jones.pdf
Keating M. Forging a successful regional development project and inserting the region into the European and Rethinking the Region. Culture, Institutions and Economic Development in Catalonia and Galicia. Paper, presented at ECPR Workshop “Regionalism Revisited. Territorial Politics in the Age of Globalization”, Mannheim, March 1999. ECPR web-site. URL: www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/jointsessions/paperarchive/mannheim/w23/keating.pdf
King Ch. The Wider Black Sea Region in the Twenty-First Century. The Wider Black Sea Region in the 21st Century: Strategic, Economic and Energy Perspectives / Hamilton D. and Mangott G. (eds.). Washington, D.C.: Center for Transatlantic Relations, 2008. P. 1-22.
Maciejewski W. On the emergence of the Baltic Sea region and the reading of the book. The Baltic Sea Region. Cultures, Politics, Societies. Uppsala, 2002. Цит. по Клемешев А.П. Регион в условиях глобализации. Вестник ВГУ. Серия Гуманитарные науки. 2005. № 2. С. 22-38.
Morgenthau H. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. N.Y., 1973. 680 pp.
Russet B. Delineating International Regionsю Quantitative International Politics: Insights and Evidence / Edited by J. David Singer. New York: The Free Press, 1968. P. 317-352.
Söderbaum F. Introduction: Theories of New Regionalism. Theories of New Regionalism. A Palgrave Macmillan Reader / Edited by Fredrik Söderbaum and Timothy M. Shaw. Houndmills and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. 272 p.
Vayrynen R. Regionalism: Old and New. International Studies review. Volume 5. Issue 1. March 2003. P. 25-51.
Winrow G. Dialogue with the Mediterranean: The Role of NATO’s Mediterranean Initiative. New-York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 2000. 261 pp.
Wunderlich U. New Regionalism and European Studies: Towards a Comprehensive Approach to Regionalisation and Region. UEA Papers in European and International Studies. WP 1/2005. 29 pp.
