Magic of cold warthis March anniversary: 65 years of Fultonsky speech of Winston Churchill from which it is reckoned the epoch of cold war stretched on much decades. However and and with the term, seemingly, it is time to say goodbye to memoirs on it: the world became absolutely to another
Cold war buried repeatedly. It solemnly finished Gorbachev and Reagan in 1988 in Moscow. Then again Gorbachev, but already with Bush - the senior in 1989 - m on Malta. Again Bush - the senior with Yeltsin in Kemp - David in 1992 - m. Yeltsin and Clinton in 1997 - m in Helsinki. Bush - younger and Putin in Crawford in 2001 - m. They in Moscow in 2002 - m. They in Kennebankporte in 2007 - m. And again they in Sochi in 2008 - m. the Last - five months prior to the Caucasian war which has rejected (truth, for a short while) atmosphere of relations of the Kremlin and the White house to dogorbachevskim to times.
for certain it is possible to remember and other, less pathos declarations. Well and, of course, George Bush`s well-known phrase - the senior in the annual reference to the congress in January, 1992: “ Favour Divine America has won cold war “. Actually, this statement was adjusting as has placed points over i. Not Moscow and Washington under the arrangement have finished opposition as believed Gorbachev and Yeltsin. At war, as well as it is necessary, there was a winner. Anyway, America felt itself as that, and practically anybody then did not call it into question.
since then has passed almost 20 years. But on - former any friction between Moscow and the western capitals immediately cause the cascade of comments of journalists and politicians about mentality of cold war, about returning of its spirit, revival of opposition and etc. Why after stolkih funeral ceremonies the dead man will not go in any way definitively to the world other and will not take a place among the other historical phenomena which are of interest for researchers, but politicians not defining behaviour? Certainly, it is possible to speak about inertia of thinking, about cargo of stereotypes and even about conscious political gamble. But, apparently, the reasons are deeper.
in the Soviet cinema there was often meeting type - the war hero (Civil or the Great Patriotic War) which, having returned to peace life, cannot find the place in the confused system of mutual relations and with nostalgia remembers the recent past: “ At the front all was clear - here the, there enemies. And here... “ the Same and with cold war. It possesses insuperable charm of clearness of a design.
strictly speaking, no war, of course, existed. Simply in 40 - h - 80 - h years of the last century in the world there was a steady system of the international relations which was based on balance of forces of two superstates - the USSR and the USA. This model created a field of ideological and political pressure, it was accompanied by local crises and regional wars of different scale, showdowns between two main countries sometimes (seldom) reached dangerous line behind which there was a risk of self-destruction, but never crossed it. During this period the unique weapon which has been not intended for application, - nuclear has been created and put on arms. The fact of its presence and understanding of consequences of use played disciplining role. It constrained not only the opponent, but also the owner who had to mean always, than any adventure can end.
Costs of cold war were compensated by one big advantage - the conceptual symmetry much higher was which consequence, than to or after, ability to operate the international processes. The bipolar system in which control over the world phenomena is distributed between two centres, has appeared more effective, than other possible variants - interaction of many centres of influence or hegemony of one superstate. The first model sends to a XIX-th century, to realise the second have tried after disintegration of the USSR.
the world 1990 - h and the more so 2000 - h has started to dispel years at once almost expectations and to deny the forecasts sounding on an outcome of the past epoch. All quickly got confused. Former lines of opposition have disappeared, but on their place the new have started to arise. The vacuum formed on a place of ideologies, is filled with much more archaic forms of consciousness - religions (first of all in the Muslim world, but not only) and nationalism. At one time it seemed that on change to the conflict the East - the West (in understanding of cold war) goes global confrontation the North - the South, the developed world against not developed. But then and it has got under doubt, because both parties “ oppositions “ are stratified. The uniform North does not exist (as, however, already and the uniform West), and the South is presented by the countries and the groups of the countries sharply differing on the economic situation and dynamics, political models and aspirations. Occurrence of not state players, most “ loud “ from which there were transnational terrorist networks, brings in the international system still bolshy a discord.
In general, globalisation which was perceived as process exclusively positive, turns around also other parties. The states cannot be fenced off from outside influence - both positive, and negative. Besides, in the conditions of the open markets the Western world, always getting liberty trade and the capital, faces a competition of quickly developing powers, and is not clear how to resist to a pressure of Asia, without renouncing principles.
the more difficult the world, the more strongly bent for to simple schemes. When it was found out that “ the history end “ (on Frensisu to Fukuyama) has not come, feverish search of others kontseptov which would help to structure an event has begun. The academic idea “ collisions of civilisations “ (author Samjuel Huntington), in itself hopeless enough, in practice it was embodied in creation world “ a counterterrorist coalition “ on curves of administration of George Bush - younger. Actually it was attempt to transform “ the international terrorism “ in the universal enemy who would replace “ the Soviet threat “ also would play consolidating role, but now on a global scale. It has not turned out, too indistinct there was an image of the opponent, washed away to such degree that it is impossible even to give to this most international terrorism definition arranging all.
the following variant tested in the middle of 2000 - h years, has been urged to recreate simply a picture of cold war - bipolar opposition, but this time the authoritative capitalism personified by China and Russia, and capitalism liberal, that is western (the basic author of idea - neo-Conservative political scientist Robert Kejgan). As updating of such approach the idea of creation " served; the Union of democracies “ (the hot supporter - John McCain) which would be opposed other world. However, the organic impossibility to put such division of mankind into practice was clear from the very beginning, at least for the reason that on a share “ avtokratov “ it is necessary about three quarters of world mineral resources, especially hydrocarbons.
it is now more and more appreciable, how the spectrum of search of the missing opponent gradually is narrowed, being focused on China - the second economy of a planet on the size of gross national product which designate transformation into the first during 15 - 20 years. The USA and the Peoples Republic of China are connected tesnejshej by economic interdependence, and objectively confrontation is not necessary neither that, nor other party. Strictly speaking, nobody wants it, but the logic of functioning of the international system who constantly aspires to come to any steady condition, pushes to suspiciousness growth. First of all from the present leader - Americas to hypothetical - China even if last in a reality is not going to throw down a challenge to predominant force what Beijing constantly repeats.
the increase in a role of China in world politics, on the one hand, reminds movement towards habitual bipoljarnosti on the sample of cold war, with another - just means definitive leaving in the past of that system of co-ordinates which has been set by an epoch 40 - h - 80 - h years of the XX-th century.
until then while the basic political arena remained Euro - Atlantic, instincts inevitably returned to already finished opposition. However the European affairs turn in more and more peripheral as the Old World loses the leading part in world processes. Asia lives other representations. Sometimes their roots leave during much more remote historical periods, but the phobias typical for cold war, to China and its neighbours are not peculiar. Not casually Beijing took in it only indirect part, being guided by own internal motivation and in time having replaced the partner therefore it has appeared on the party of the winner. In Asia more likely it is possible to speak about not finished Second World War, too many conflicts go back to it, and it is clear that the logic of behaviour of the states will be not ideological, but traditionally geopolitical. And it too leaving from a paradigm of cold war, after all in it a bearing element was the conflict of ideologies, and as the weapon various values served. Today the valuable approach to a big-times politics is still proclaimed, but in a reality is applied ever less.
cold war on - to the present will die when it will cease to bury at any opportunity. Differently, when it will not be a reference point. Barack Obama`s presidency shows that it is possible - he better many American politicians understands, the world and how much recipes 30 - summer prescription are not applicable has how much changed. And at the same time and that fact that it is impossible to celebrate infinitely a victory in opposition with “ the Soviet monster “ referring to it as on a source of universal correctness and legitimacy. Parallel process is swept up and in Russia where disintegration of the USSR gradually ceases to serve as the generator of political inspiration and for its admirers, and for its opponents. The common sense prompts that former not to return any more, and the future is so unpredictable that it is necessary to get rid urgently of any shor, limiting ability flexibly to react to new circumstances.
Relapses are possible, for example, in case of coming to power in Washington after Obama of any version of the neoconservative, but they will be short-term, because cold war has really disappeared also it any more will not be. As, most likely, at all there will be no simple schemes which would allow leaders and to the people comfortably to settle down in a steady external framework. And veterans of ideological fights need to gather only at conferences and to remember that, as a matter of fact, they did common cause, and to be distressed: well there were times...