Ryazantsev S.V., Ruban L.S. Dilemma: globalizm or sovereignism. Their distinction in terminology and analitical discussion. Bulletin of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 2021. Vol. 5, No. 393 (2021). Pp. 120-128.

Òåêñò ñòàòüè íà ñàéòå æóðíàëà URL: http://www.bulletin-science.kz/assets/2021-5/14.%20120-128.pdf (äàòà îáðàùåíèÿ 11.01.2022)

Abstract

The authors study a dilemma: globalism or sovereignism making a distinction between them in terminology. The preface highlights a historical evolution of the world order taking into account all the changes from creating the Westphalian system, which had accepted the principle of national sovereignty as a key one and provided development to a state-centric model of the world with its mechanisms and managerial apparatus, political and legal regulations. When analyzing the processes of globalization and global governance, the article emphasizes the economic aspect of globalization. The author focuses on the fact that Europe in the 20th century was characterized by a strong tendency to integration having led to the establishment of the European Union as well as in the second half of the 20th century – early in the 21st century there was an increase in functioning the global governance institutions (the major international organizations such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and others), but the European integration is facing a crisis for the moment. The authors also highlight the development of one of the political aspects of global governance, that is, the decline in a number of nation-states and the reduction of their sovereignty, which had happened due to the development of the countries’ relations from the Westphalian system whose basis was the principle of national sovereignty and was based on a state-centric model of the world to a polycentric model one. Outlining and analyzing scientists’ analytical discussion as to develop nation-states and their role under current society makes up the central part of the article. The first group of scientists insisted on collapsing and disappearing nation-states (A. Giddens, K. Jaspers, H. Arendt and others), the second group insisted on nation-states’ inviolability and their development (J. Habermas, S. Huntington and others). There pointed out to G. Delannoi’s centrist position who calls to avoid conservative traditionalism (“the nation is eternal”) and destructive progressivism (“the nation must disappear”) as well as B. Davydov’s neutral position who emphasizes that there is a strengthening of a state’s functions in some cases (the example of China, India and Brazil). The group of researchers such as I. Wallerstein, M. Gefter, Kh.E. Marinosyan and V.L. Sheinis note that the future of the world and nation-state is in uncertain environment. The article concludes by analyzing the current global cooperation stating that the regulatory model through international organizations is not properly working for the moment, and the world community has to engage in interfacing globalism and sovereignism in connection with the COVID-2019 pandemic.

Àâòîðû: