<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">comparativepolitics</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Сравнительная политика</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Comparative Politics Russia</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">2221-3279</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2412-4990</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Издательская группа «Юрист»</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18611/2221-3279-2016-7-3(24)-17-24</article-id><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">comparativepolitics-477</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ КОНЦЕПЦИЙ И ИНСТИТУТОВ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CONCEPTS AND INSTITUTIONS</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>НОВЫЙ РИМ В НОВОМ МИРЕ: К ВОПРОСУ О РОЛИ США В КОНСТРУИРОВАНИИ НОВОГО МИРОПОРЯДКА</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>THE U.S. AS THE NEW ROME: DISPUTING THE NEW WORLD ORDER</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Ивонина</surname><given-names>О. И.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Ivonina</surname><given-names>O. I.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>д.и.н., профессор Кафедры отечественной и всеобщей истории НГПУ</p></bio><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Dr. of History, Professor, Department of Russian and World History, Novosibirsk State Education University</p></bio><email xlink:type="simple">ivonina@ngs.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Новосибирский государственный педагогический университет, г. Новосибирск, Россия</institution><country>Россия</country></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Novosibirsk State Education University, Novosibirsk, Russia</institution><country>Russian Federation</country></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2016</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>02</day><month>08</month><year>2016</year></pub-date><volume>7</volume><issue>3(24)</issue><fpage>17</fpage><lpage>24</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Ивонина О.И., 2016</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2016</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Ивонина О.И.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Ivonina O.I.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://www.sravpol.ru/jour/article/view/477">https://www.sravpol.ru/jour/article/view/477</self-uri><abstract><p>В статье рассматривается эволюция понимания современного международного правопорядка в зарубежной глобалистике. Делается вывод о том, что утрата эпистемологического и социально-политического оптимизма современных исследователей сопровождается критикой ими линейно-прогрессистских концептов развития системы международного права, открывая дорогу принципам альтернативности, синергетики, транзитивности исторического развития. Неоконсенсус представителей школы Realpolitik (неоконсерваторов) и институционального либерализма (неолибералов) основывается на допущении иной природы международной правосубъектности в условиях возникновения новых угроз национальной и всеобщей безопасности со стороны транснационального терроризма и несостоятельных государств. Практическим воплощением такого нео-неоконсесуса становится легитимация гуманитарных интервенций и превентивного сдерживания «преступных режимов» на периферии мир-системы.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The starting point of the conclusions of politicians and experts was the recognition of the changed nature of threats to the New World Order. In post-Westfalia system of international relations the main actors are not sovereigns, but transnational actors of world politics, including transnational terrorist and criminal networks. In this situation, the support of global security threat serves the underground world – terrorists, shady business structures, failed states. The unconventional nature of the threat to peace and stability of the New World Order requires an equally innovative response which transcends the formal constraints of international law and the traditional doctrine of deterrence. An analysis of the U.S. foreign policy concepts suggests that today’s academic and political community has promoted consensus of neoliberals and neoconservatives, supporters of the institutional functionalism and representatives of the school of Realpolitik. This consensus was based on the recognition of the admissibility of pre-emptive strikes on the territory of failed states, sponsoring international terrorism, or the implementation of open interference in the internal affairs of “rogue states” for human rights and democratic freedoms guarantee.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>мультипликация мир-системы</kwd><kwd>конкурирующие идентичности</kwd><kwd>неоконсерватизм</kwd><kwd>неолиберализм</kwd><kwd>новый мировой порядок</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>world-systems</kwd><kwd>competing identities</kwd><kwd>neo-conservatism</kwd><kwd>neo-liberalism</kwd><kwd>new world.</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Global Leadership. N.Y., 2004. 256 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Brzezinski, Zbigniew. The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. N.Y., 2004. 256 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Brzezinski, Zbigniew; Scowcroft, Brent; Ignatius, David. America and the World: Conversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy. N.Y.: Basic Books, 2008. 304 p.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Brzezinski, Zbigniew; Scowcroft, Brent; Ignatius, David. America and the World:  Conversations on the Future of American Foreign Policy. N.Y.: Basic Books, 2008. 304  p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Chace, James. Avoiding Empire // The National Interest, No. 69, Fall 2002, pp. 19-25.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Chace, James. Avoiding Empire // The National Interest, No. 69, Fall 2002, pp. 19-25.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Drezner, Daniel. The New “New World Order” // Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86, No.2, March-April 2007, pp. 34-46.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Drezner, Daniel. The New “New World Order” // Foreign Affair, Vol. 86, No.2, March-April 2007, pp. 34-46.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Glennon, Michael J. Why the Security Council Failed? // Foreign Affair, May-June 2003.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Fukuyama, Francis. Konets istorii i poslednii chelovek (The End of History and the  Last Man). Moscow: Izd-vo AST, 2004.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hassner, Pierre. Defi nitions, Doctrines and Divergences // The National Interest, Fall 2002, pp. 30-34.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Glennon, Michael J. Why the Security Council Failed? // Foreign Affair, May-June 2003.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hendrickson, David C. Toward Universal Empire. The Dangerous Quest for Absolute Security // The World Policy Journal, Vol. 19, No.3, Fall 2002, pp. 9-36.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hassner, Pierre. Defi nitions, Doctrines and Divergences // The National Interest, Fall 2002, pp. 30-34.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Ikenberry, John. America’s Imperial Ambition // Foreign Affairs, Vol. 81, No. 5, September-October 2002.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hendrickson, David C. Toward Universal Empire. The Dangerous Quest for Absolute  Security // The World Policy Journal, Vol. 19, No.3, Fall 2002, pp. 9-36.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Krauthammer, Charles. The Unipolar Moment Revisited // National Interest, Winter 2003, pp. 5-17.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hobsbaum, Eric. Epokha krainostei: Korotkii dvadtsatyi vek (1914-1991) (The Age of  Extremes: a History of the World (1914-1991)). Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Nezavisimaia Gazeta, 2004. 632 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Kupchan, Charles A. Misreading September 11th // The National Interest, Fall 2002, pp. 26-29.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Ikenberry, John. America’s Imperial Ambition // Foreign Affairs, Vol. 81, No. 5, September-October 2002.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Nye, Joseph. U.S.Power and Strategy after Iraq // Foreign Affairs, Vol. 82, No. 4, July-August 2003.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Keigan, Robert. O rae i sile: Amerika i Evropa v novom mirovom poriadke (On Paradise  and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order). Moscow: ROSSPEN,  2004. 160 p.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Slaughter, Anne-Marie. Security, Solidarity and Sovereignty: The Grand Themes of UN Reform // American Journal of International Law, Vol. 99, July 2005, pp. 619-631.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kennedy, Paul. Vzlet i padenie velikikh derzhav (The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers). Moscow, 2000.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Кейган Р. О рае и силе: Америка и Европа в новом мировом порядке. – М.:РОССПЭН, 2004. 160 c.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kissinger, Henry A. Nuzhna li Amerike vneshniaia politika? K diplomatii XXI veka  (Does America Need a Foreign Policy? Towards a Diplomacy of the 21st Century).  Moscow, 2002.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Кеннеди П. Взлет и падение великих держав. М., 2000.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Krauthammer, Charles. The Unipolar Moment Revisited // National Interest, Winter 2003, pp. 5-17.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Киссинджер Г. Нужна ли Америке внешняя политика? К дипломатии ХХI века. М., 2002. 352 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Kupchan, Charles A. Misreading September 11th // The National Interest, Fall 2002, pp. 26-29.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Фукуяма Ф. Конец истории и последний человек. М.: Изд-во АСТ, 2004.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Nye, Joseph. U.S.Power and Strategy after Iraq // Foreign Affairs, Vol. 82, No. 4, July-August 2003.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Хобсбаум Э. Эпоха крайностей: Короткий двадцатый век (1914-1991). М.: Издательство Независимая Газета, 2004. 632 с.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Slaughter, Anne-Marie. Security, Solidarity and Sovereignty: The Grand Themes of UN  Reform // American Journal of International Law, Vol. 99, July 2005, pp. 619-631.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
