Internal policy of the state. Directions of domestic policy

Question No. 63: Domestic and foreign policy of the state.

The relationship between domestic and foreign policy.

The problem of the relationship and mutual influence of domestic and foreign policies is one of the most complex problems, which has been and continues to be the subject of heated debate between various theoretical directions of international political science - traditionalism, political idealism, Marxism and such modern varieties as neorealism and neo-Marxism, theories dependencies and interdependencies, structuralism and transnationalism. Each of these directions proceeds in the interpretation of the problem under consideration from its own ideas about the sources and driving forces of policy.

So, for example, for supporters political realism, Foreign and domestic policies, although they have a single essence, which, in their opinion, ultimately boils down to a struggle for power, nevertheless constitute fundamentally different spheres of state activity. But according to G. Morgenthau, foreign policy is determined by national interests. National interests are objective, since they are associated with unchanging human nature, geographical conditions, sociocultural and historical traditions of the people. They have two components: one constant - this is the imperative of survival, the immutable law of nature; another variable, which is the specific form that these interests take in time and space. The definition of this form belongs to the state, which has a monopoly on communication with the outside world. The basis of national interest, reflecting the language of the people, their culture, the natural conditions of their existence, etc., remains constant. Therefore, the internal factors of a country’s life (political regime, public opinion, etc.), which can and do change depending on various circumstances, are not considered by realists as capable of influencing the nature of national interest: in particular, national interest is not related to the nature of the political mode. Accordingly, domestic and foreign policy have significant autonomy in relation to each other. On the contrary, from the point of view of representatives of a number of other theoretical directions and schools, domestic and foreign policies are not just connected with each other, but their connection is determined. There are two versions of their determination. According to orthodox Marxism , foreign policy is a reflection of the class essence of the internal political regime and ultimately depends on the economic relations of society that determine this essence. Hence, international relations in general are of a “secondary” and “tertiary”, “transferred” nature.

According to the version of supporters of geopolitical concepts , theories of the “rich North” and “poor” South”, as well as neo-Marxist theories of dependence, “world center” and “world periphery”, etc., the exclusive source of domestic politics is external coercion. So, for example, in order to understand the internal contradictions and political struggle in a particular state, I. Wallerstein considers it necessary to consider it in a broader context; in the context of the integrity of the world, which is a global empire, which is based on the laws of the capitalist mode of production - the world-economy.” The “center of the empire” is a small group of economically developed states, consuming the resources of the “world periphery”, and is a producer of industrial products and consumer goods necessary for the existence of the underdeveloped countries that comprise it. Thus, we are talking about the existence of relations of asymmetrical interdependence between the “center” and the “periphery,” which is the main field of their foreign policy struggle. Developed countries are interested in maintaining this state (which, in essence, is a state of dependence), while the countries of the “periphery,” on the contrary, strive to change it, to establish a new world economic order. Ultimately, the main interests of both lie in the sphere of foreign policy, on the success of which their internal well-being depends. The significance of internal political processes, the struggle of parties and movements within a particular country, is determined by the role that they are able to play in the context of the “world-economy”.

For representatives of such theoretical directions in international political theory as neorealism And structuralism(acquiring relatively independent significance), foreign policy is a continuation of domestic policy, and international relations are a continuation of intra-society relations. However, in their opinion, the decisive role in determining foreign policy is played not by national interests, but by the internal dynamics of the international system. In this case, the changing structure of the international system is of main importance: being, ultimately, an indirect result of the behavior of states, as well as a consequence of their very nature and the relations established between them, it at the same time dictates its laws to them. Thus, the question is: whether the internal policy of a state is determined by its foreign policy or, on the contrary, is decided in favor of foreign policy.

Representatives concepts of world interdependence in the analysis of the issue under consideration, they proceed from the thesis according to which domestic and foreign policies have a common basis - the state. In order to get a correct idea of ​​world politics, one should, as, for example, professor at the University of Montreal L. Dudley believes, return to the question of the essence of the state. Any sovereign state has two monopolies of power. Firstly, it has the recognized and exclusive right to use force within its territory, and secondly, it has the legitimate right to levy taxes here. Thus, the territorial boundaries of the state represent the framework within which the first of these power monopolies - the monopoly of violence - is exercised - and beyond which the field of its foreign policy begins. Here the right of one state to violence ends and the right of another begins. Therefore, any event that could change what a state views as its optimal boundaries can cause a whole series of unrest and conflicts. The limits of the use of force within a state have always been determined by its ability to control its remote territories. This possibility depends on the level of development of military technology. Since the modern level of development of transport and weapons makes it possible to significantly reduce state costs of control over territory, the optimal size of the state has also increased. Thus, for supporters of the described positions, the question of the primacy of domestic policy in relation to foreign policy or vice versa is not of fundamental importance: in their opinion, both are determined by factors of a different, primarily technological nature.

Supporters of the school go even further in this regard transnationalism. In their opinion, nowadays relations between states are no longer the basis of world politics. Diversity of participants (intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, enterprises, social movements, various types of associations and individuals), types (cultural and scientific cooperation, economic exchanges, family relationships, professional connections) and “channels” (inter-university partnerships, denominational connections, cooperation of associations etc.) interactions between them displace the state from the center of international communication and contribute to the transformation of such communication from “international” (i.e. interstate) to “transnational” (i.e. carried out in addition to and without the participation of states). For new actors, the number of which is almost infinite, there are no national boundaries. Before our eyes, a global world is emerging in which the division of politics into internal and external loses all meaning.

This approach was significantly influenced by the ideas put forward by J. Rosenau back in 1969 about the relationship between the internal life of society and international relations, about the role of social, economic and cultural factors in explaining the international behavior of governments, about “external” sources that can have purely “ internal,” at first glance, events. Rosenau was one of the first to talk about the “bifurcation” of the world: modernity is characterized by the coexistence, on the one hand, of the field of interstate relations, in which the “laws” of classical diplomacy and strategy operate; and on the other, the field in which “actors outside sovereignty” collide, i.e. non-state actors. Hence the “two-layer” nature of world politics: interstate relations and the interaction of non-state actors constitute two separate, relatively independent, parallel worlds of “post-international” politics.

Continuing this idea, the French political scientist B. Badie dwells on the problem of the import of Western political models by the countries of the “South” (in particular, the state as an institution of political organization of people). In a broad sense, he believes, we can state a clear failure to universalize the Western model of political structure.

First, deterministic explanations of the relationship between domestic and foreign policy are unfruitful. Each of them - whether we are talking about the “primacy” of domestic policy in relation to foreign policy or vice versa - reflects only part of the truth and therefore cannot claim universality; moreover, the very duration of this kind of polemic - and it lasts virtually as long as it exists political science - indicates that in fact it reflects the close connection between endogenous and exogenous factors of political life. Any significant events in the internal political life of a country immediately affect its international position and require it to take appropriate steps in the field of foreign policy. The opposite is also true: important decisions made in the sphere of foreign policy entail the need for adequate measures in the domestic political sphere. Thus, the Russian Federation’s intention to become a member of the Council of Europe required its leadership to change its attitude towards the problem of human rights, which in post-Soviet Russia, according to international and domestic human rights organizations, were everywhere violated.

Secondly, in modern conditions, the connection between “domestic” and “foreign” policies is becoming so close that sometimes the very use of these terms loses its meaning, leaving the possibility of ideas about two separate areas, between which there are insurmountable boundaries, while in reality we are talking about their constant mutual interweaving and “flowing” into each other.

In turn, priorities in the field of foreign policy are dictated by the need to advance along the path of internal political goals declared by the regime - political democracy, market economy, social stability, guarantees of individual rights and freedoms, or at least periodic declarative confirmation of commitment to the course of reforms.

Thirdly, the increase in the number of actors “outside sovereignty” does not mean that the state as an institution of political organization of people has already lost its role or will lose it in the foreseeable future. Domestic and foreign policy remain two inextricably linked and at the same time irreducible to each other “sides of the same coin”, one of which is turned inside the state, the other - to the warrior.

Fourthly, the complication of political situations and events, one of the sources and manifestations of which is the increase in the number and diversity of actors (including such as mafia groups, criminal clans, ambitious and influential informal leaders, etc.), has as a consequence the fact that their actions not only go beyond national boundaries, but also entail significant changes in economic, social and political relations and ideals and often do not fit into conventional ideas.

2 . Criteria and structure of national interest

The basis of any interest is the objective needs, the needs of the subject or social community, determined by economic, social, political, etc. situations in which they find themselves. The process of cognition of social needs is the process of shaping people's interests. Thus, interest is an objective-subjective category. Moreover, not only true, but also falsely understood interest can be objective at its core.

There are also imaginary and subjective national interests. An example of an imaginary national interest is a situation when an idea becomes a national myth, takes over the minds of people, and it is extremely difficult to prove this imaginaryness to them. A textbook example of subjective interest is the act of Herostratus, who achieved immortal “glory” by setting fire to a temple. An example of subjective “national interest” in modern international relations is the motives that guided Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1991.

Along with basic (radical, permanent) and non-basic (secondary, temporary), objective and subjective, genuine and imaginary interests, interests are also distinguished between coinciding and mutually exclusive, intersecting and non-intersecting, etc.

Based on the above, the concept of “interest” can be defined as the conscious needs of a subject (social community), which are a consequence of the fundamental conditions of its existence and activity. But interest is also the relationship of a need to the conditions for its implementation. Accordingly, the national interest is the awareness and reflection of the needs of the state in the activities of its leaders. This also applies to multinational and ethnically heterogeneous states: in fact, national interest means national-state interest.

R. Aron (and a number of his followers) considered the concept of national interest to be too ambiguous and therefore not very operational for analyzing the goals and means of international relations. B. Russet and H. Starr proposed going beyond the “foggy perception of national interest,” and K. Holsti uses the concept of “foreign policy objectives” in this regard.

The traditional concept of indigenous national-state interest is based on geographical, cultural, political and economic factors. National-state interest includes the following main elements: military security, which provides for the protection of state sovereignty (national independence and integrity), constitutional order and value system; the well-being of the country and its population, implying economic prosperity and development, a secure and favorable international environment, implying free contacts, exchanges and cooperation in the region and beyond.

Based on this, Donald Neuchterlein says that the long-term components of American national interests are determined by the following needs: 1) protection of the United States and its constitutional system; 2) growth of the economic well-being of the nation and the promotion of American goods to foreign markets, 3) creation of a favorable world order; 4) the spread of American democratic values ​​and the free market system abroad.

This classification reflects the content of the official US National Security Strategy. US national interests are divided into three categories in this document: “The first includes vital interests.” The second category involves situations in which important national interests are affected.

Similarly, SWAP experts believe that “Russia’s interests in relation to the countries of the former USSR are divided into 1) vital - in defense of which the state must be ready to use all means, including force, 2) important, and 3) less important." At the same time, they include in the first category such interests as ensuring freedom, growth in the well-being of Russians, territorial integrity and independence of Russia, preventing domination, especially military-political, of other powers in the territory of the former USSR; preventing the formation of coalitions hostile to Russia in the world, including V response to certain actions of Russia on the territory of the former USSR, etc. In the second category, the authors include ensuring access to the raw materials, labor and commodity markets of the states of the former USSR, especially to oil in the Caspian region; creating the necessary political, economic and legal conditions for this, sharing the borders, territories and part of the military potentials of neighboring states to prevent the emergence of a military threat to Russia, its further internal destabilization as a result of the influx and transit of criminals, drugs, weapons, smuggling of raw materials, nuclear materials and “dual-use” products; using the political, economic, military and other potential of the states of the former USSR to strengthen (in the event of establishing close allied relations with them) the international political positions of both Russia and these states. Finally, the third category includes such interests as: “Ensuring the democratic development of neighboring states. Strengthening the multilateral structures of the CIS”, etc.

In contrast to this document, the official Concept of National Security of Russia does not contain such a clear division of the main categories of interests, which are formulated taking into account their subjects and spheres of public life: “The national interests of Russia are a set of balanced interests of the individual, society and the state in the economic, internal political, social, international, information, military, border, environmental and other spheres. They are long-term in nature and determine the main goals, strategic and current tasks of the state’s domestic and foreign policy.”

Nowadays, the constituent elements and content of national interest as a whole are undergoing significant changes under the pressure of new fates and circumstances. The rapid development of productive forces, mass media and information, new achievements of the scientific and technological revolution, the increasing internationalization of all aspects of social life, the emergence and aggravation of global problems, the growing desire of people for democracy, personal dignity and material well-being - all this is transforming the interests of participants in international relations , leads to a reformulation of the goals of their interaction.

In such conditions, national interest cannot be ensured without such conditions for the existence of the state as internal stability, economic well-being, the moral tone of society, security not only military-strategic, but environmental, a favorable foreign policy environment, prestige and authority on the world stage. It should be borne in mind that ensuring national interest is achieved only when these conditions are balanced, representing an open system of interdependent and complementary elements. Full provision of each of them is possible only ideally. In real practice, there are often cases of the absence of any elements and conditions and their insufficient development, which is compensated by the more intensive development of others. Ensuring such a balance is the essence and art of international politics. The so-called unconscious element occupies a special place in the structure of national interest.

Globalization and national interest.

International politics is a process of clashes and struggles, negotiations and compromises between different types of power that seek to impose their preferences on each other. Today, a diverse and variegated set of impersonal market forces is increasingly intruding into this struggle, introducing its own distinctive characteristics and overcoming the resistance of traditional actors. The growth of capital flows and investments will create conditions for deeper interpenetration of national economies and more direct competition between enterprises. The expansion of interstate trade exchanges is accompanied by a significant increase in the number and volume of cross-border financial flows. It is becoming increasingly clear that the global economy is acquiring a common basis. The emerging global financial system and a single information space, transnational production and the global trade network entail the erasure of national borders and the transformation of state sovereignty. Dramatic changes have taken place in the world, among which the process of economization of politics stands out, which continues to gain momentum. All this cannot but have a significant impact on the content of national interests. What is the nature of this influence?

Some believe that, essentially, nothing fundamentally new is happening. States remain the main participants in international relations, and still, as in the time of Thucydides, they need to be able to survive and develop. The growing complexity of the world and the emergence of new global challenges does not lead to the solidarity and unity of mankind, but to the aggravation of interstate contradictions. The consequence of the reduction in the world's raw materials is the struggle for access to them using increasingly sophisticated means and technology, a struggle in which the national interests of different countries inevitably collide. The reason for the clashes remains the ongoing redistribution of world markets, which is accompanied by an arms race and the ongoing policy of military-political alliances and coalitions. The concepts of “vital interests”, “zones of influence”, “principles of state sovereignty”, etc. remain central concepts reflecting the essence of world politics in the era of globalization.

Other researchers, on the contrary, talk about a complete erosion of the content of national interests, since “new subjects of world politics are already replacing nation-states.” In their opinion, globalization leaves no room for national interests and replaces them with the interests of global civil society. The main element of these interests is ensuring individual rights and freedoms, which are still suppressed by the state, especially in countries with authoritarian political regimes. At the same time, some representatives of this point of view “separate” national and state interests so much that they even propose abandoning some state interests in favor of national ones, arguing, for example, that “the policy of maintaining sovereignty and territorial integrity in the long term leaves no chance.”

However, the reality is much more complex. Under the influence of globalization, state structures, as well as traditional social institutions, are indeed experiencing devastating shocks. New actors are undermining traditional priorities of state sovereignty. Some scholars speak of "deterritorialization" or the "end of territories" to emphasize the devaluation of the national state government. The crisis of the state is an objective reality. The state is experiencing pressure “from above”, “from below” and “from without”,

From above, state sovereignty is undermined by supranational organizations and institutions, which are increasingly interfering with its prerogatives. Peacekeeping operations under the auspices of the UN in various parts of the world - the Gulf War in 1991, the internationalization of the Yugoslav conflict in 1991-1995. and so on. In addition, states also voluntarily limit their sovereignty. This is the so-called transfer of sovereignty, i.e. transfer of part of it to the disposal of the communitarian structures of the integrating states. The most significant example in this area is the European Union.

“From below,” state sovereignty is being eroded by internal state structures and civil society structures. In developed countries in the political sphere, this is expressed, in particular, by the phenomenon of “paradiplomacy” described by Canadian specialist Pierre Soldatos, i.e. parallel (in relation to state) diplomacy.

The objective reasons for the erosion of sovereignty “from below” are that the state is too small an entity in relation to the global economy, but it is too heavy a burden for the regional economy and especially for private enterprises and firms. This phenomenon is rarely attributed to high politics, because it often affects the spheres of economics, culture, technology, etc.

“From the outside,” damage to sovereignty is caused by the activation of non-governmental groups and organizations, such as Amnesty International, human rights and environmental associations. The state is even more losing its monopoly (both in international and domestic affairs) under the pressure of transnational corporations, firms, banks and enterprises. Production activities in all sectors of the national economy are increasingly carried out outside the state. The distribution of wealth in the world now depends not so much on government policies as on transfers made by the IMF and the World Bank. TNCs are playing an increasingly important role in the fiscal sphere. Private firms and TNCs “confiscate” social management, employment policies, labor conditions and wages from states. All this is regulated not so much by state legislation as by the internal regulations of the companies themselves.

The crisis of the state looks especially dramatic in countries that are economically least developed and politically unstable. It manifests itself here in the emergence and expansion of zones that fall outside the legal space, the spread of chaotic groups and clans ungovernable by state legislation, settlements and regions falling into a state of barbarism in which only “laws” are in force, imposed on the population by criminal groups that rob people, make them hostage to their own acquisitiveness, and sometimes to their political ambitions directed against the state.

Thus, the dynamics of globalization really involve all states, ignoring their independence, the depths of political regimes and the level of economic development. The modern world is experiencing a new era of conquest, somewhat similar to the era of colonization. But if the main protagonists of previous expansions were states, then this time

Large private enterprises and corporations, as well as financial and industrial groups, strive to dominate the world. New actors are increasingly undermining the role of the state in security policy, in the spheres of economics, communications, even affecting the “holy of holies” of state sovereignty, its monopoly on violence. All egos cannot but affect the content of the national interest, its main priorities and its very existence.

Supporters of the idea of ​​renouncing sovereignty rightly emphasize that the main actor and the main driving force of globalization is transnational capital - stock exchange firms, financial associations, the largest multinational banks, media corporations, industrial associations and trade groups. However, this does not mean that globalization is reduced only to the free play of impersonal market forces. New actors do not displace states from international politics, but enter into complex interactions with them, characterized by both competition and cooperation.

Moreover, in international relations, sovereignty cannot be and never has been an absolute value. International law, as a system of obligations voluntarily assumed by a state and limiting its freedom of action, also narrows its internal political autonomy.

There is not only a tendency towards a relative decline in the traditional role of state sovereignty, but also an opposite tendency towards the creation of new independent states that zealously defend both internal and external signs of their sovereignty.

Already With late 80s different studies have led to two complementary conclusions. The first conclusion is that global enterprises that conceived their operations and their strategies on a global scale and had a truly cosmopolitan management team are exceptionally rare, although TNCs tend to benefit from their presence in many markets and from their access to diverse production facilities . The second result concerns the process as a whole: globalization is gaining momentum, but national and regional spaces retain their importance, and state authorities are not powerless in the face of the process. National governments have not lost their power of choice in the areas of economic and social policy, even if the liberal context imposes some reforms. On the other hand, various international authorities establish rules that can meet the requirements of controlling cross-border activities. This applies, in particular, to exchanges of goods and services.

At the same time, when discussing globalization, we must not forget about at least two more processes closely related to it. Firstly, about its dialectical opposite, about regionalization. In this regard, regional integration associations (EU, NAFTA, MERCOSUR ASEAN, etc.) look not only as manifestations of globalizing processes, but also as opposition to them. In fact, each of them, to one degree or another, represents an example of “closed cooperation”, and the degree of closure is higher in more advanced integration associations. We must not forget about the counter-trends of globalization:

deglobalization and preservation (albeit in updated forms) of traditional geopolitical factors in world politics. Although such trends are secondary, the significance of their consequences for national interests cannot be underestimated. The weakening role of states, particularly in the unstable zones of the post-Cold War world, is associated not only with the impact of impersonal market forces, but also with the monopolar vision of the world that often dominates US policy after the fall of an ideological enemy.

Integration processes in the context of globalization unfold against the backdrop of strong disintegration tendencies and contribute to their consolidation. According to some French scholars, one of the goals of the regionalization processes unfolding in Europe and Asia after the Cold War is the desire to avoid unbridled liberalization and thereby resist the hegemony of the only modern superpower - the United States. From a political point of view, globalization is a geopolitical reorganization, including, in particular, a revision of the policy of alliances, when belonging to the same region plays an important, but not exclusive role.

Thus, the nation-state, its sovereignty and its interests as an analytical concept and as a criterion for the behavior of a state in the international arena continue to retain their significance. But this does not mean that globalization does not bring any changes to national interests. On the contrary, national interest changes significantly in its content and direction. New priorities arise related to With the need to take advantage of globalization through adaptation To the opportunities it opens, on the one hand, and on the other, the fight against the damage it brings to national development.

The most important priority of national interest is the inclusion of the country in the process of world economic development, since in the process of globalization “an almost absolute pattern has emerged: no country is able to achieve serious economic growth and growth in the well-being of the population without increasing involvement in the world economy.” In the structure of national interest, the desire to possess advanced technologies that ensure compatibility with the most modern means of information, communication and transport also comes to the fore. As for the military factor and the strategies associated with it (balance of power, alliances), they will be mixed in the hierarchy of national interests from the first place, but not to the last. The survival of a nation-state today depends not so much on the ability to withstand traditional military threats (although it is still too early to discount them), but on the ability to find adequate responses (by creating appropriate means for this) to new challenges of economic, technological, environmental, demographic and informational nature.

Globalization gives rise to an effect that is characterized by the term “weak” or “ineffective state”. It primarily affects the underdeveloped countries of the South, threatens states with economies in transition and those that are politically unstable, but to some extent affects all countries.

“National” and “state” interests not only deny, but also presuppose each other, therefore, the infringement or “surrender” of one of these components inevitably leads to the weakening and degradation of the second. The consequence of the state's refusal to renounce its territorial integrity will be its inevitable weakening and degradation. A weak state is not able to adequately respond to the challenges associated with using the opportunities of globalization and curbing its destructive consequences for the standard of living, security and freedom of society and individuals.

That is why “a strong Russia, capable of effectively defending its interests and the interests of its citizens, remains the main goal of politics.”

Protecting national interests from external and internal threats, i.e. National security still has an important place in international relations. At the same time, globalization is making its changes in this sphere, the sphere of national and international security.

National interests and security problems of Russia.

Russian national interests are the most essential needs of Russian society and the state, the satisfaction of which can ensure their sustainable development. Therefore, national interests are the most important tasks of domestic and foreign policy.

Undoubtedly, priority among national interests is security Russian state. In the recent past, security was understood as protecting the country from enemy attacks, espionage, and attacks on the state system. From the second half of the 20th century, demographic, technogenic and environmental factors began to be taken into account. In the 90s, new security parameters began to play an important role, which are related to the economic and financial situation of countries, the scientific and technological revolution, the development of information and communication systems, cross-border crime, international terrorism, drug and arms trafficking, illegal migration, wars provoked by by order of one or another political force.

However, we must not forget about the traditional components of the balance of power and military-political relations between centers of power.

At the same time, at the beginning of the 21st century, information level. The fact is that the modern information revolution is unfolding against the backdrop of information wars, whose main goal is precisely to undermine the national security of states. Information warfare is a comprehensive, holistic strategy designed to recognize the importance and value of information in governing and implementing national policies. Information warfare targets vulnerabilities that inevitably arise in conditions of increasing dependence on information. The primary focus is on information systems, including associated transmission lines, processing centers and human factors in these systems, as well as information technologies used in weapons systems.

It is no secret that information weapons played a decisive role in the US victory over the USSR in the Cold War. Since then, the concept of information warfare has been continuously improved. Today it assumes the following key points: in the administrative and economic fields, the targets of attack can be the management systems of enterprises, settlements, cities and regions. In this case, the following are possible: destruction of these systems

or manipulation of the information contained in them, which can slow down the pace of development of the country as a whole or individual industries; reorienting the development of industries in a direction beneficial to the party that used information weapons; introducing misinformation into the financial and banking sectors; distortion of national statistical reporting, on the basis of which management decisions are made, including those of a strategic nature.

In the scientific and technical field, it is possible: changing or blocking certain areas of research, the continuation of which is unprofitable for the attacking side, targeting research on unpromising areas; input of misinformation; distribution of propaganda materials; formation of public opinion in order to exert the necessary influence on the largest research centers and individual scientists.

Today, in the information war, methods of the secret services are widely used, in particular the anonymous dissemination of necessary information over the Internet, the targeted sending of electronic publications to well-known journalists and public figures, allegedly coming from respectable and independent sources. Russian military experts believe that Russia remains one of the main targets of electronic intelligence and special operations. American electronic espionage systems "Echelon" and "Carnivore" are a disease of monitoring Russian cyberspace. Almost all electronic messages leaving Russia are subject to analysis.

From time to time, scandals leak into the press about how secret information from strategic Russian centers is pumped abroad through special “electronic bookmarks” in imported computer equipment. These and other similar cases indicate that information wars are now actively being waged on Russian territory and seriously undermine the country’s national security at the most important secret information facilities.

The new approach to ensuring information security is called “network structures”. We are talking about creating “segmented, polycentric, ideologically driven information networks.”

The concept of national security includes military doctrine. It represents a system of officially accepted views on wars, armed conflicts and clashes, their role in foreign policy strategy, on the ways, forms and means of their prevention, on military development, and preparing the country to repel real and potential threats to its security. Russian military doctrine was approved on November 2, 1993 by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation. One of its main tasks was - preventing war and military conflicts and maintaining peace. Russia brings to the fore political means of preventing conflicts both in the international arena and within the country, considering all countries whose policies do not harm its interests and do not contradict the UN Charter as a partner.

Today, military doctrine is rightly criticized by many military experts for its openly pacifist nature in the face of increased military threats in the modern world. Russia today is really against fighting with anyone; it also has no territorial claims to surrounding states. But one cannot help but notice that a huge number of states have territorial claims against Russia along almost the entire perimeter of its borders.

In addition, military doctrine should also cover new - information - directions in the conduct of military operations.

Russian military doctrine must answer the question of how Russia views information wars and what goals and means it sets for itself in the information space. This direction in the development of military art forms the basis of the concept of building the American armed forces “Unified Vision 2010” and is associated with the transformation of threats in the new century. It is necessary to give an adequate Russian response to these threats, formulated by leading Russian experts in the military field.

Russian military experts predict the country's economic and military growth for 10-15 years ahead (economic and military development are interconnected). A forecasting study conducted in recent years at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO RAS) shows that the current US share of global GDP is approximately 21%. European Union -21%, Japan - about 8%, China - about 7%, Russian Federation - 1.7%. According to the forecast for 2015, despite the dynamics of such relationships, Russia’s position in this hierarchy will not fundamentally change. It is expected that the United States, together with Canada and Mexico, will have approximately 19% of world GDP, the European Union - 16%, China will overtake Japan, its share will reach 10%, Japan's share will be approximately 7%. New groups of states will come to the fore, such as the ASEAN countries, which are likely to have 7%, and the famous Asia-Pacific “tigers” - South Korea and Taiwan, whose share together may be about 5%,

The maximum that the Russian Federation can count on is approximately 2% of world GDP, and under the most favorable, optimistic forecasts of economic development, i.e. if annual economic growth averages 5-6%. Together with the CIS countries, provided that there is the same economic growth there, we can count on 2.5-3%

Experts predict that if Russia spends about 3.5% of GDP on military purposes (in 2000 we spent 2.8%) and if economic growth reaches 5-6% per year, then it will be able to maintain its status one of the two leading nuclear superpowers, i.e. maintain its strategic forces approximately at the level of the START-2 treaty (about 3 thousand nuclear warheads). However, in order not to lose this status, Russia will have to allocate up to 40-50% of the military budget only to strategic nuclear forces and their information support, warning and control systems. If Russia allocates enough funds for general-purpose forces, then no more than 20% of the military budget will remain for strategic nuclear weapons, and in 15 years our strategic forces will amount to a maximum of 1000-1500 warheads. And this means a threefold lag behind the United States. Currently, in terms of military spending, Russia lags not only behind the leading NATO states, but also behind India, Japan and China.

It is no secret that strategic nuclear forces are the main pillar of Russia's defense capability, and will remain the most important factor in the international influence of our country. But it is necessary to take into account that in the 90s the spread of nuclear weapons increased significantly, and it is quite possible that in the next 10-15 years this process will develop further. The forecasts of experts are quite alarming: against the backdrop of the expected reduction of the strategic nuclear forces of Russia (up to 1,500 warheads) and the United States (up to 3,500), the forces of other nuclear powers are increasing and in the aggregate may not only be comparable to the forces of Russia, but in the worst case scenario, in the foreseeable future they will exceed their.

The following option is also predicted: in addition to England, France, China, India and Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Taiwan will join the nuclear club. If Japan also joins the list of nuclear countries, the global nuclear balance will change completely. At the same time, potentially nuclear forces of third countries could be directed at Russia, since all states that have or could possess nuclear weapons are located much closer to Russia than to the United States. Therefore, Russian territory immediately finds itself within the reach of new members of the nuclear club.

The intentions of the United States of America to begin deploying a national missile defense system could also seriously weaken Russia's nuclear deterrent potential.

defense, the need for which is justified by the need to protect against third nuclear powers. Today, due to budgetary constraints, the Russian Federation has much less funds to deploy a missile defense system on its territory than the United States. In addition, the situation is further complicated by the fact that the classic scheme of mutual deterrence that developed between Russia and the United States during the Cold War may not work in relations with third nuclear countries, which may be headed by adventurist, fundamentalist leaders. For them, the threat of losing a significant part of their population in the event of a Russian retaliatory strike will not be a sufficient deterrent.

Experts' information about the reduction of general-purpose armed forces is also alarming. In the 90s, the Russian army was reduced by about 30%. Now our country is the third largest country in the world in terms of armed forces after China and the United States. But economic difficulties, most likely, will not allow us to maintain an army of the same size (approximately 1.2 million people) for 10-15 years. Supporters of the reduction of the armed forces emphasize that if the army is not reduced, this will lead to the complete degradation of its technical equipment, because about 70% of the funds are spent on the maintenance of military personnel, while R&D, the purchase of weapons and military equipment, and capital construction remain less than 30%. Already, in the Russian armed forces the share of modern weapons and equipment is less than 20%, If military spending remains at the same level, in five years this share may be reduced to 5%, In militarily advanced states the share of modern weapons reaches 50-60% .

Apparently, a choice will have to be made in the near future. However, it must be emphasized that NATO states in Europe already surpass Russia in general-purpose forces by three to four times, and on the southern borders, the Turkish armed forces make up approximately 50% of the Russian armed forces. At the same time, our army is dispersed throughout the country, including its Asian part. Military experts believe that, together with Iran, Turkey has approximately equal armed forces with Russia, and taking into account the military power of Pakistan, it has one and a half superiority. In the Far East, China, which currently has approximately twice the military budget of Russia, will in 10-15 years, even having reduced its army but improved its technical and quality characteristics, be able to have approximately twofold superiority over our armed forces. And if we take into account only that part of them that is located in the Far East, then the PRC will have a tenfold superiority. Japan is already one and a half times larger than Russian general-purpose forces in the Far East.

In conclusion, it is necessary to dwell on the analysis of the new concept of national security of Russia, which was approved on January 10, 2000 by Decree of the President of Russia. The concept as a whole focuses on cooperation and integration of Russia into the global political, economic and financial systems, although it emphasizes the need to resist various forms of external pressure. There is also an “increased level and scale of threats in the military sphere” associated with changes in NATO’s military strategy and Russia’s lag behind the leading countries of the world V areas of high technology. For the first time in the post-Soviet period, in an official state document, the policies of Western countries are openly called a “potential threat to Russian security” and the use of nuclear weapons is considered legal not only in response to their use by the aggressor, but also in the case of “large-scale aggression using conventional weapons in critical situations for the national security of the Russian Federation and its allies."

Many Russian experts consider states such as China and Iran to be Russia's allies. India. But expert forecasts indicate that in 10-15 years, relations with China may worsen because disputes will arise over the raw material reserves of the Far East and Siberia, as well as in connection with China’s demographic expansion in the Far East. Maps according to which Primorye belongs to China, like a number of other areas of this region, may be returned to the practical policy agenda.

Russian military experts emphasize that today it is pointless to compare enemy forces by the number of divisions, tanks and artillery, since a new generation of ultra-precise weapons has appeared. Today it is important to compare the capabilities of using weapons that troops have. The criteria here are intelligence and information. But the information level for ensuring Russia’s national security was not developed in the new security concept, which is perhaps the main evidence of Russia’s “lag” in the leading strategic direction. In the era of transition to the information society, the concept of national security must be consistent with information paradigm - This is a strategically important formulation of the issue of security, without which it is impossible to solve all other problems in this area.

Finally, there is another level of protection of national interests - it lies in the area of ​​morality, ethics and culture. The concept of national security must fulfill the function consolidation of society around basic values, which would be shared by the majority of citizens, despite the social, ideological and religious differences between them. It would be a serious mistake to believe that only professionals should protect the country's national interests. The concept of national security should be addressed to every citizen of the country - after all, we are talking about the security of the nation.

Today Russian society is split both economically and ideologically. In order to consolidate it, national security must be based on the ideas of reviving national traditions, historical and spiritual values ​​of Russia, created by the fruits of the labor of all previous generations. In the information society, this problem can only be solved state media. They are the ones who should talk about the achievements of Russian culture, promote Russian art and respect for national traditions. For our country to be respected throughout the world, we must respect ourselves, our own history and culture. Undoubtedly, this is also the information aspect of the concept of national security, which needs to be activated in the mass consciousness.

Politics is the purposeful activity of the state to solve public problems, set and implement generally significant goals for the development of society or its individual spheres. At the same time, policy is also a means that allows the state to achieve certain goals in a specific area.

There are many classifications of politics. According to the criterion of directionality, they distinguish, as you know, internal

internal and external politics. Domestic policy is related to solving problems within the country, and foreign policy is related to solving problems in the international arena. Depending on what sphere of social life is affected, the following are distinguished: directions of domestic policy: eco-comic, social, state-legal, cultural. Sometimes cultural policy is seen as a component of social policy. Each of the areas of domestic policy is divided, in turn, according to industry. So, economic policy includes industrial, agricultural, tax, monetary, etc. policies.

Social politics represented by health policy, demographic, national, youth policy, etc. Components public policy are legislative, administrative, judicial, personnel, legal policies. Cultural policy- this is a policy in the field of education, cinema, theater, etc. Based on the completeness of coverage and impact on society, the following types of policies are distinguished: scientific and technical, environmental, information. They permeate all spheres of public life and therefore do not belong to any of them. Policy directions have their own structure and objects of influence. For example, agricultural policy includes the following elements: agricultural policy, agro-industrial policy, foreign agricultural policy. The objects of agricultural policy are agro-industrial associations, farms, etc.

Foreign policy also has areas: defense, foreign (between individuals and legal entities of different states), foreign economics, etc.

Structural detailing of state policy allows for more targeted implementation of programs and projects in a specific area.

According to the criterion of longevity there are strategic and tactical (current) policy. Strategic policy by time interval can be long-term (10-15 years), medium-term (3-5 years) and short-term (1.5-2 years). Tactical policy is an activity aimed at achieving the intended strategic goals.

In the modern world, domestic policy is greatly influenced by an external factor - international politics.

The process of development of public policy includes four main stages, representing a unique political cycle: identification of public problems and policy goals; development (formation) of policy; implementation

creation of public policy; assessment of the results of public policy.

At the first stage socially significant problems and their causes are identified. For example, the deterioration of the demographic situation in Russia is associated with two factors: low fertility and high mortality, which, in turn, depend on other factors (remember the facts you know). To develop policy in this area, it is necessary to understand the main reasons for this situation: the ineffectiveness of domestic healthcare, poverty, poor ecology, the growth of alcoholism, drug addiction, etc.

Second phase. Based on the analysis, goals (tasks) are determined. Thus, in the given example of a demographic situation, policy objectives are aimed at eliminating these causes. A hierarchy of goals is built in each area of ​​public life. State institutions play a certain role in this process. For example, the general strategy of foreign and domestic policy is determined by the President of the Russian Federation. He also sets general goals for the federal executive authorities, which is reflected in his annual Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on the situation in the country and the main directions of the state’s domestic and foreign policy. The Government of the Russian Federation determines general specific goals, as well as a state policy strategy in individual areas. The main document of the Government is the medium-term program for the socio-economic development of the Russian Federation. Parliament also takes part in policy formation by discussing current issues, during the adoption of the budget, and legislative acts related to individual areas of public policy. The complexity of social problems leads to the fact that when developing policies, public authorities (political leaders) resort to the help of not only professional officials (experts, analysts, speech writers, etc.), but also special research organizations - “think tanks” aimed at developing new ideas, approaches or programs.

Third stage. With the adoption of government programs, the policy development phase ends and the implementation phase begins. Here the executive authorities, primarily ministries, services and agencies, come to the fore. Their work is coordinated by the Government of the Russian Federation and the President of the Russian Federation. Federal ministries adopt by-laws (directives, orders, regulations, etc.). Federal services exercise control and supervision over their implementation. They are also involved in issuing permits

tions (licenses) to carry out certain types of activities for legal entities and citizens, register acts and documents. Federal agencies exercise the powers of owners in relation to state property, provide services to other federal bodies (for example, in the development of standards), legal entities, and citizens. Providing quality services to the population is one of the pressing problems of public administration in all countries, including Russia. The main thing in the provision of services is continuous service and speed of response to the needs of the population. Disruptions in the work of transport, criminal police, housing and communal services, etc. are unacceptable. Currently, many states are guided in their work by the list of basic services adopted in the European Union countries. It provides, for example, For citizens, payments from the social insurance fund (student scholarships, family benefits, etc.), actions in response to applications for assistance (in particular, theft, car theft), issuance of documents (passports, driver's licenses), civil registration. Public services for business include registration of new companies, etc.

In general, the policy implementation stage is a system of results-oriented activities, which is reflected in the work plans of ministries. They think through in advance a program of action for the implementation of assigned tasks: activity goals, main performers, standards of implementation (technical specifications), distribution of resources, standards and criteria for performance results. When implementing plans, various methods are used, primarily legal. Social-psychological (persuasion, agreements) and administrative (control, restrictions, quotas) methods are also widely used. Economic (taxes, tariffs, subsidies) and organizational methods acquired greater importance. For example, to identify suppliers of goods or performers of works and services, open competitions are held to help improve government orders.

At the fourth stage the results and consequences of government policy are analyzed. A final assessment of the ongoing policy (program) and the work of government bodies is given. Thus, the activities of UK ministries are assessed on the basis of a unified methodology in the following areas: efficiency, effectiveness and economy. In the USA, it is recommended to evaluate the work of the city administration according to such indicators as the implementation of planned goals, unplanned effects, volume of services, time to complete the work, and the degree of satisfaction of the population.

It should be noted that various interest groups, including lobbying groups, whose activities will be disclosed in subsequent paragraphs, have a great influence on public policy.

FOREIGN POLICY - the activities of the state in the international arena,

regulating relations with other subjects of foreign policy

activities: states, foreign parties and other public

organizations, world and regional international organizations.

V.p. relies on economic, demographic, military, scientific

technical and cultural potential of the state; combination of the latter

determines the capabilities of V.p. activities of the state on certain

directions, hierarchy of priorities in the formulation and implementation of V.p. goals.

The form of traditional implementation of V.p. is to establish

diplomatic relations (or reduction in their level, suspension, rupture and

even a declaration of war when relations with former partners worsen) between

states; opening of state representations at global and

regional international organizations or state membership in them;

Domestic policy is a set of activities of the state, its structures and institutions for the organizational, concrete and meaningful expression of the interests of the people in order to create conditions for normal human life; maintaining or reforming the existing social and government system.

Domestic policy is based on real human interests, fundamental constitutional principles:

▪ the exercise of human rights and freedoms should not violate the rights and freedoms of others;

▪ the rights and freedoms of man and citizen are directly applicable;

▪ everyone is equal before the law and court;

▪ the state guarantees equality of rights and freedoms of man and citizen, regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership of public associations, as well as other circumstances;

▪ personal dignity is protected by the state;

▪ citizens have the right to participate in the management of state affairs, both directly and through their representatives;

▪ elect and be elected to state and local government bodies, participate in referendums, etc.

18. Constitutional and legal regulation of religious relations and the status of churches.

In democratic regimes, constitutions proclaim ideological pluralism, freedom of belief and expression (Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, etc.). In accordance with the International Covenants on Human Rights, the law prohibits only calls for violence, terror, racial and national hatred. Some prohibitions are related to the moral values ​​of society (for example, limiting or completely banning pornographic publications in a number of countries), with the need to protect public health (for example, banning or limiting the promotion of alcohol or tobacco products).

In a group of countries, there is an officially recognized ideology (for example, Rukunegaru in Malaysia, Pancha Power in Indonesia), but it is not enforced and evasion does not entail punishment. However, significant advantages are created for its promotion. The same can be said about Islam, the ideas of “Arab socialism”, and the caliphate in a number of Muslim countries. For non-believers, these views are not obligatory, but for Muslims they represent part of the Sharia, and in those countries where the canons of Islam are most zealously observed, the expression of other views can even lead to punishment, including from the special morality police (mutawas) .

Finally, in countries with totalitarian political systems, there is, as already mentioned, a virtually or even formally obligatory ideology. Speeches criticizing Marxism-Leninism, Maoism (in China), Juche ideas, the works of Kim Il Sung in North Korea, etc. entailed punishment.

3. The essence of the state’s domestic and foreign policy.

Connected by one chain.

Let us dwell in more detail on the domestic and foreign policies of the state.

DOMESTIC POLITICS - a set of areas of economic, demographic, social integration, socio-cultural, repressive, etc. activities of the state, its structures and institutions aimed at preserving or reforming the existing socio-political system. In the implementation of domestic policy goals. the state uses a wide range of means: consolidating existing property relations or transforming them on its territory; tax levers and benefits; creation of socially prestigious and socially non-prestigious social statuses by economic, propaganda, ideological and repressive means; regulation of employment by creating jobs in the public sector of the economy; targeted organization of social education, general and special education; events in the field of health and sports; organization of investigative, judicial and penitentiary systems; regulation of the readaptation service for persons observed in deviant behavior, etc. The foundation of domestic policy. is the correlation of socio-economic structures that has developed at a given stage of development of society, and the resulting correlation of the dominant classes and other social groups in society, which determines the priority of goals, the choice of methods and means, and the degree of satisfaction with the intermediate results of internal political development.

FOREIGN POLICY - the activities of the state in the international arena, regulating relations with other subjects of foreign policy activities: states, foreign parties and other public organizations, world and regional international organizations. Foreign policy is based on the economic, demographic, military, scientific, technical and cultural potential of the state; the combination of the latter determines the foreign policy capabilities of the state in certain areas, the hierarchy of priorities in setting and implementing foreign policy goals. The form of traditional implementation of foreign policy is the establishment of diplomatic relations (or a decrease in their level, suspension, rupture, and even a declaration of war when relations with former partners worsen) between states; opening of state representations at world and regional international organizations or state membership in them; cooperation with state-friendly foreign political parties and other public organizations; implementing and maintaining at various levels episodic and regular contacts with representatives of states, foreign parties and movements with which a given state does not have diplomatic relations or friendly ties, but with which it is interested in dialogue for one reason or another. The presence of stable channels of communication with foreign partners allows the state to diversify the combination of methods and means of foreign policy activities: regular exchange of information, exchange of visits at different levels; preparation and conclusion of bilateral and multilateral treaties and agreements on a wide range of issues, including treaties and agreements of a confidential and secret nature; promoting the development of opportunities for the domestic and foreign policy activities of some states and blocking similar opportunities for others (in one direction or another); preparation and implementation of partial or complete blockade; preparation for war and ensuring favorable conditions for conducting military operations, etc.

In general, the foreign policy course of a given state is determined by the character, class nature of its domestic policy. At the same time, the foreign policy situation significantly influences domestic policy. Ultimately, both foreign and domestic policies solve one problem - to ensure the preservation and strengthening of the existing system of social relations in a given state. But within the framework of this fundamental community, each of the two main policy directions has its own important specifics. Methods for solving internal political problems are determined by the fact that the state - even with pronounced opposition - has a monopoly on political power in a given society. But in the international arena there is no single center of power; there are states that are, in principle, equal in rights and relations between them are formed as a result of struggle and negotiations, various kinds of agreements and compromises.

4. Subjects and objects of policy, characteristics of functional components of policy. Subjective about objective.

Politics as a social activity is aimed at gaining, retaining and realizing power, and is associated with relationships between people. Therefore, the objects and subjects of politics are people with their own experience, needs, interests, ideals and value orientations.

In the political practice of the authoritarian-bureaucratic system, the individual was not recognized as an independent and free subject of political action. Only the masses, classes, and parties could act as political subjects. An individual had the right to participate in political life only as a member of an official structure with strict regulation of the political function. This stereotype of political behavior was propagated by all institutions of political socialization, starting with school politicized organizations: the Pioneer, Komsomol, and ending with the party.

Alienated from politics, Soviet people were so shaped by the system that they were not ready for the changes that began in the country in 1985 and were associated with the hope of democratizing society, its renewal, and a way out of stagnation. People are not accustomed to the situation of choice, diversity of interests, and multiple solutions. The state decided a lot for them: it provided them with wages, work, housing, education, etc., taking away in return the opportunity to independently establish themselves in life. The habit of living under a strict regime with a certain level of social security atrophied the sense of freedom for many and gave rise to a readiness for voluntary slavery. The passivity and apoliticality that have spread in society indicate that the personal level of democratization in society remains low and does not meet the requirements of the time. The problem of the individual as a subject of political activity is becoming increasingly relevant.

In political science, a political subject is understood as a carrier of objective-practical activity, a source of activity aimed at an object. In politics, subject and object are divided into individual and group: person, collective, social group, organization, class, state, society. They are interconnected and interdependent, capable of changing places. In relation to politics, a person can be both an object and a subject. The problem of the individual as a subject of politics is to determine the possibility and degree of its influence on political power, as well as the possibility of achieving power and methods of its implementation.

The measure of a person’s political subjectivity is his political activity, participation in political life. It is amenable to quantitative measurements, therefore it is studied using sociological methods. For example, in recent years, public opinion polls on current political events have become widespread in our country, the results of which give an idea of ​​the degree of politicization of the masses and their readiness for certain political actions. Participation in political life is the norm of democracy. A person becomes a true subject of political relations only in a democratic society, where a person is given broad political rights and opportunities to satisfy his political needs and for full-fledged political activity.

The conditions for the formation of an individual as a political subject also include: the development of political consciousness, level of education, culture, political thinking, collective activity, etc.

But the term “political process” is often used not only by researchers; it is used both in the media and in everyday speech. In Russia, the political process is often understood as a series of events in political life associated with the use of the judicial and punitive apparatus by the authorities. This is due to the fact that in everyday consciousness this phrase has long been associated with Stalin’s political trials, with show trials of dissidents, with repressions in Hitler’s Germany, etc. When describing such phenomena, political scientists also use this expression, but in political science the concept of political process is used, as a rule, to designate one of the basic categories of political analysis.

The activities of political institutions, citizens, interested groups (subjects or actors), associated with the implementation of power interests, form political reality. In the process of activity, subjects interact with each other.

Sometimes the interactions of political subjects can be purely random, sometimes natural. As a result of such “expected” actions, stable connections and relationships are created, rules, norms, organizations, etc. arise, that is, political institutions are created and reproduced. The actions and interactions of political subjects are carried out in time and space - as a result, an ordered sequence of actions and interactions appears that has a certain meaning. This sequence can be designated by the term “political process”.

Therefore, the political process can be defined as an ordered sequence of actions and interactions of political subjects associated with the implementation of power interests and goal achievement and, as a rule, creating and recreating political institutions. The political process is the unfolding of policy in time and space in the form of an ordered sequence of actions and interactions.

In political science, there are different points of view on what the political process is. Thus, some researchers believe that the concept of a political process can have two meanings depending on what level of policy deployment we are talking about - the micro level, that is, directly observable activity or even individual actions of individuals, or the macro level, that is, the phases of functioning institutions, for example, parties, states, etc. In the first case, the political process is understood as a certain resultant activity of socio-political subjects. In the second case, the political process is defined as a cycle of political changes, a consistent change in the states of the political system.”

Conclusions regarding the nature and content of the political process are made on the basis of who researchers or analysts choose as the main subjects of interaction, what the nature of the interaction of these subjects is, and also on the basis of what time unit is taken as the basis for measuring this process. It also matters whether the influence of the environment on the interaction of political subjects is taken into account, and if so, which one (social, cultural, economic, political) and how.

Thus, the political process is a dynamic characteristic of politics.

Mastery of opportunities for political action; b) the ability to guess, grope, and grasp the correct method of action; c) the ability to maneuver and find ways to compromise. Politics as an art involves the timely detection of contradictions and finding the most effective ways to resolve them. Quick response to changes in the political situation, adoption...

Benefits for doing work. 6) Catholic (Latin America). 7) Paternalistic). 8) Nordic. 9) Anglo-Saxon. 12. Forms and methods of social work. SF (International Federation of Social Workers) - a set of activities of professional or non-professional social workers, the result of which is: ensuring every person's social well-being and...

Functions. For politics, these functions are the implementation of relations of power/subordination, maintaining order, managing social processes, streamlining social interactions. The definition of politics as a social institution places emphasis on the sustainability of politics; this definition allows us to understand why politics arose, and why the need for it is constant, constantly renewed...

Data collection and processing, information analysis techniques. There is a need for theoretical scientific understanding of accumulated practice. 3 The English scientific school of political arithmeticians At the origins of statistics as a science, and not just a practical activity, there were two schools: the English scientific school of political arithmeticians and the German descriptive school. English scientific school of political...

Among the traditional problems of political psychology: the study of mechanisms for ensuring political influence and types of political leadership, identifying the causes of aggressiveness and violence in politics, studying the mechanism of political decision-making and models of political activity, its motivation, creating psychobiographies of famous political figures aimed at identifying those key points in their lives, which determined the peculiarities of their political character, their characteristic ways of solving political problems and establishing contacts with followers.

Interdependence of domestic and foreign policies

Every state pays attention to its domestic and foreign policies. The internal policy of the state apparatus is aimed at solving its own problems of power: optimizing the interaction of legislative, executive and judicial institutions of power, as well as solving issues of reproduction of the material and spiritual culture of society, improving the quality of life of the population, improving civil society, ensuring the internal security of the individual and society and the state itself as a country.

The foreign policy of a state is determined mainly by national interests, which in international relations can be perceived as fair or unfair, peaceful or aggressive, tolerant or ambitious, consistent or inconsistent with international law. In the course of implementing foreign policy objectives, the state strives to ensure its security and the security of the subjects of society, eliminate or neutralize external threats.

In foreign policy, many other tasks of a diplomatic, economic, social, spiritual and other nature are solved. As a result of foreign policy activities, the country's state apparatus seeks to create favorable conditions for the implementation of domestic policy. They can be important both for the well-being of citizens, society, and for the apparatus of government itself. Another important desired result of foreign policy is the international recognition and authority of the country and its leadership. The terms “great power”, “developed state”, “moderately developed state”, “tertiary state”, “collaborating state” are filled with specific content in the process of foreign policy interactions. In this case, both real internal and external successes of the state and ideological and manipulative means are used.

Depending on the specific historical cultural development of society and the characteristics of the interaction of state power with subjects of society, internal politics can have varying degrees of extension to social relations and processes. In countries where indicators of material and spiritual culture have not received developed forms, public administration, as a rule, extends to all aspects of the life of society, and often subordinates them to itself. Public administration itself is carried out in authoritarian forms, which can be based on legal norms or established subjectively. At the same time, domestic policy is carried out primarily from the top down.

In industrialized and socially developed countries, the internal policy of the state does not apply to all spheres of life of society and types of activities of its subjects. In civil society, independent sociocultural entities are emerging that are capable of reproducing material and spiritual culture without the support of the state apparatus, and even more so without its interference in their affairs. Such internal political governance requires not only an intelligent and fair, active “tsar”, a “good” government and other state institutions, but also democracy based on law, highly developed subjectivity of citizens, and their awareness of their rights and freedoms.

In the course of emerging crises and conflict in any society, the scope of state power expands. The country's state apparatus has more opportunities and means to overcome crises and conflicts in society, including violent ones on a legal basis. The long-term inability of the state apparatus to successfully manage social development and unsuccessful internal policies are also the causes of social tensions in society and lead to a change in state power and political regime.

General features of domestic and foreign policy.The foreign policy of a state is largely determined by the success or failure of its domestic policy. This is their common characteristics.

1. Both domestic and foreign policies are carried out in typical spheres of life of society and community: economic, governmental, social, spiritual, environmental, military-political. The activity, for example, of the state in the foreign economic sphere is based on internal economic policy: how public administration interacts with the financial, industrial, transport, mining, trade and other structures of the country, how it forms and uses the state budget, how it manages state property. The foreign policy legal activity of the state also depends on the state of law within the country, on the activities of legislative, law-executive and other state institutions.

We can say that what is common to the domestic and foreign policies of the state is the identity of their content and main directions of implementation. Effective internal policy for state management of spheres of social life largely determines the credibility and effectiveness of the state’s foreign policy in these areas.

2. Domestic and foreign policy have two varieties, taking into account its scale and time indicators. Both domestic and foreign policy have tactical and strategic components. Tactical (current) policy is aimed at implementing immediate goals and objectives, as well as plans and programs of political strategy. It has flexibility, a close connection with current political processes, events and situations, the use of temporary agreements, the acquisition of allies (supporters) in solving specific problems, the prompt use of methods and means of political interaction, the involvement of citizens (electorates, layers) in election campaigns, the formation of internal and foreign policy public opinion.

Strategic domestic and foreign policy is aimed at long-term interactions, at the development and implementation of long-term plans and programs, at the future of politics itself, the state and the world community. The essence of strategic policy is the selection and justification of the fundamental significant goals and priorities of the internal and foreign policy development of the state. The content of strategic policy may include: the search for political forces, logistical, financial, spiritual and other necessary resources to achieve the intended goals, the creation of new political parties and blocs within the country and in the international arena, the conclusion of agreements with other states, the forecast of intermediate and final results . Strategic policy is considered to include long-term (10-15 years) and medium-term (3-10 years) stages.