Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин
У статті аналізується процес формування зовнішньої 
 політики України в умовах глобалізації в сучасному світі. Автор 
 розглядає вплив політичного процесу в Україні і Росії на 
 формування європейської системи міжнародних відносин, 
 взаємну залежність і сумісність зо...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Проблеми міжнародних відносин |
|---|---|
| Date: | 2010 |
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Ukrainian |
| Published: |
Інститут світової економіки і міжнародних відносин НАН України
2010
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/58744 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Cite this: | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики.
 Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин / Б.В. Зажигаєв // Проблеми міжнародних відносин: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: КиМУ, 2010. — Вип. 1. — С. 76-89. — Бібліогр.: 25 назв. — укр. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| _version_ | 1860125170635636736 |
|---|---|
| author | Зажигаєв, Б.В. |
| author_facet | Зажигаєв, Б.В. |
| citation_txt | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики.
 Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин / Б.В. Зажигаєв // Проблеми міжнародних відносин: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: КиМУ, 2010. — Вип. 1. — С. 76-89. — Бібліогр.: 25 назв. — укр. |
| collection | DSpace DC |
| container_title | Проблеми міжнародних відносин |
| description | У статті аналізується процес формування зовнішньої 
політики України в умовах глобалізації в сучасному світі. Автор 
розглядає вплив політичного процесу в Україні і Росії на 
формування європейської системи міжнародних відносин, 
взаємну залежність і сумісність зовнішньої політики України з 
зовнішньою політикою держав ЄС, у процесі формування 
ліберально-демократичної європейської системи міжнародних 
відносин у XXI столітті.
В статье анализируется процесс формирования внешней 
политики Украины в условиях глобализации в современном мире. 
Автор рассматривает влияние политического процесса в 
Украине и России на формирование европейской системы 
международных отношений, взаимную зависимость и 
совместимость внешней политики Украины и внешней 
политики государств ЕС, в процессе формирования либерально-демократической европейской системы международных 
отношений в XXI столетии.
In the article the process of forming of foreign policy of 
Ukraine is analysed in the conditions of globalization in the modern 
world. The author examines influencing of political process in 
Ukraine and Russia on forming of the European system of 
international relations, mutual dependence and compatibility of 
foreign policy of Ukraine and foreign policy of the states of EU, in 
the process of forming of the liberal-democratic European system of 
international relations in the XXI century.
|
| first_indexed | 2025-12-07T17:41:36Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
1
УДК [327:339.9] (4+477) (045)
Boris Zazhigaev,
Ph.D. (Political Science), professor, head of the Chair of International
Relations and Foreign Policy, pro-rector of Kiev International University (Kiev,
Ukraine)
UKRAINE ON THE CROSSROADS OF THE GLOBAL POLICY
Part 1
UKRAINE AND EUROPEAN SYSTEM OF MODERN
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS.
Occupying an important geopolitical location on Eurasian continent Ukraine
still preserves total economic (or more precise - energetic) dependence on the
Russian Federation and keeps on playing a crucial role in the transit of Russian
energy resources in the Western Europe. Ukraine found itself in the triangle of
geopolitical interests of the world leading powers: the USA, Europe and Russia.
Those are first and foremost economical and security (military and humanitarian)
interests. Practically in the modern conditions Ukraine has occupied a geopolitical
place of Western Europe and plays the role of Western Europe in the bipolar world
of the second half of the XX century. Interests of the USA, Europe and Russia are
focused on Ukraine’s territory. These interests create a corridor in which Ukraine
can pursue its foreign policy. It is worth mentioning that due to the subjective
reasons which determine the place in the structure of international relations
Ukraine is not capable to claim its own geopolitical interests even in the Baltic-
Black Sea region. According to it, the actuality of the topic offers a special interest
to a research.
2010 Presidential elections in Ukraine and the accession of power by Viktor
Yanukovich as well as regional political elite have created conditions for change of
all geopolitical spectrums in the modern global world. Change of priorities inside
the country has altered the balance of influence on Ukraine in favor of the Russian
Federation.
A tendency of shaping a single planetary civilization is appearing to be more
visible in the global policy. Its basis is a real fact of “globalization” of the societal
development, frequently being described as an increasing unity of the world.
Occupying exclusive geopolitical location, Ukraine is developing in the stream of
world global policy, practically not having the real influence levers on it by virtue
of its economical state and its political establishment. It can simply maneuver
among the political and economical interests of global political actors, thus getting
the certain momentary benefits. The author examines the internal policy of Ukraine
in the new context, as reality being shaped under the influence of powerful factors
of global international relations, as derivative of the real policy of leading
international actors.
2
A foreign policy of Ukraine in the modern world is being shaped on the
crossroad of geopolitical interests of the USA, the UE and the RF. This factor, to a
large degree, determines the vector of political process in Ukraine. Inside the
country the political forces are balancing on existing reality: Ukraine is a disrupted
nation, as deemed by Samuel Huntington.
1
A motion vector of Ukraine is located in the line depending on what kind of
value priorities Ukrainian nation would perceive and what value, within the
existing political realities, would be more beneficial and secure for Ukrainian
political elite.
The Ukrainian foreign policy vector is being influenced to a large degree by
the geopolitical interests of the USA, the EU and Russia. A level of independence
in international affairs is in a direct dependence from the balance of the level of
trust or confrontation of the USA, the EU and Russia.
Each of those states has its own geopolitical interests in Ukraine.
The Interests of the USA in Ukraine come from national geopolitical interests,
main of which is adoption by Ukraine of democratic values as a main guarantee of
maintenance of the development of democracy in the worlds, spreading a liberal-
democratic form of governance and a state system in the world. The USA
advocates the liberal-democratic values but does not impose them with the
political, economical or force arguments. The USA interests in Ukraine are directly
related to confrontation with the RF, relations with which actually shifted to the
stage of moderate “cold war”. Israeli historian, the professor of the University of
Tel-Aviv, Ph.D. in history in Oxford University Azar Gat believes: “More
important problem is rooted in the rise of big non-democratic states. It’s about old
rivals of the West in a cold war – China and Russia where remain the rule of
authoritarian, rather capitalistic than communists regimes. …today, it seems, they
are ready to return”.
2
Within existing international relations further confrontation between the West
and Russia is unavoidable. In this context the interests of the USA in Ukraine
satisfy thesis expressed by Zbigniew Bzhezinski in his work “End of cold war”,
3
that Baltic-Black Sea Union (after collapse of the USSR, possible union of
Ukraine, Byelorussia, Lithuania) is interesting to the USA as a belt locking Russia
with its expansionists intentions in Asia.
Very interesting is the opinion of Russian political scientists. As early as in
2007 Mr. Sergey Karaganov in his article “New confrontation epoch” stated:
“West and Russia have entered into the new phase of confrontation which is
different from cold war but could be even more dangerous”. He believes that:
“West has left hope to turn Russia into a friendly state and now looks at it from the
1
Huntington S. The Clash of Civilizations / S. Huntington. – М. : LLC «Izdatelstvo AST», 2003.
– P. 209-210.
2
Gat Azar. The return of great authoritarian states / Gat Azar // Russia in the global politics. –
2007. – № 4. – P. 70–83.
3
Brzezinski Zbigniew. Spadek po Zimnej Wojnie / Zbigniew Brzezinski. – Warszawa, 1993. –
P. 281.
3
stand of “new containment”.
4
Commenting the reaction on February’s speech of
the RF’s President Vladimir Putin in Munich, one of the leading specialists of
Russia on international affairs Mr. Aleksey Arbatov places the problem in this
way: “don’t we stand on the eve of a new cold war?”
5
Taking into account the presence of danger coming from morally old, thus
more dangerous nuclear potential of Russia inherited by it from the USSR, the first
place occupies a military and strategic factor which is determining the primary
geostratigical interests of the USA in Ukraine and above all in Crimea considering
its unique geopolitical location.
The USA does not see Ukraine as a strategic economic partner with all its
consequences (trade, investments, technology transfer, science development,
education etc.), but conducts in Ukraine consistent policy directed towards
adoption by its population of democratic values. This policy, slowly, but gives its
results, forms the potential fundaments for the process, the socialization of the
population and the development of civil society in Ukraine.
The Interests of the EU on Ukraine within the global terms agree with the
interests of the USA but have some substantial differences.
Choice less for the US and EU remains adoption by Ukraine of liberal-
democratic values. For 250 years America has been telling to the world: “Give to
me all your tired, poor, depressed and thirsty to breeze free”. But lately it says: “If
you’re not with us, you’re against us”.
6
The relations of Ukraine and the USA national elite cannot consider in a
different way as in the form of axiom which was formulated by a modern English
political theorist John Danni: “Democracy is a phenomena which we don’t have
but which we cannot cease to want”.
7
Public refusal of Ukrainian political elite
from democratic rhetoric inevitably will lead to the collapse of all political elite.
From the practical point of view the EU made more efforts conducting for
many years of Ukraine’s independence an open policy to its citizens, thus
demonstrating on practice attractiveness and advantages of the democracy. To a
certain extent this process could be considered as consolidated, consistent a
humanitarian expansion of democracy, justified for post-communist, in a state of
oligarchic terror Ukraine. For 20 years the EU countries are job-places for
approximately 8 millions of Ukrainian citizens which allowed avoiding a
humanitarian catastrophe in the country.
For the years of independence Ukraine has not moved on the way to
democracy. Hybrid processes of convergence of the worst traits of soviet
4
Karaganov S. New epoch of confrontation / S. Karaganov // Russian in the global politics. –
2007. – № 4. – P. 58 – 69.
5
Arbatov A. Will new cold war burst out? / A. Arbatov // Russia in the global politics. – 2007. –
№ 2. – P. 38–51.
6
Brzezinski Z. Last sovereign at the crossroads / Z. Brzezinski // Russia in the global politics. –
2006. – № 1. – P. 8–26.
7
Dani John. Cit.: P.J. Danleavy and B. O’Leary. Theories of the State: the Politics of Liberal
Democracy / P.J. Danleavy, B. O’Leary. – London: Macmillan, 1987. – P. 70.
4
totalitarianism with the worst traits of the wild capitalism took place.
8
Modern
Ukraine is a “corrupted state” and after 19 years of acquiring independence it poses
real threat to the values of liberal-democratic world. Ukraine has transited through
station called democracy and is stuck in the world called “corrupted state”
9
with all
its consequences.
Ukraine is a new state and it cannot be formed solitarily. All states emerge
and function only within the international systems uniting them. Mr. Charles Tilly
has marked that international systems act as factor of emergence and development
of states.
10
It is particularly topical, it has not just abandoned old system of the USSR, it
is completely a new state which has never been a member of any of the
international systems as an independent subject of international relations.
According to Mr. Charles Tilly the condition for emergence and functioning of
sovereign states is not only the monopolization of power within clearly outlined
territory but also the recognition of the law on similar monopoly from the side of
similar monopolists from outside of their territory and from the side of various
political actors inside their territory. In this context the factor designating the
vector of emergence and the development of the state is principal for Ukraine. Mr.
Tilly pays attention to the fact that accession of the states to international systems
does not simply turns to their recognition by other sovereigns but also affects the
processes of state building in the new members of international systems and affects
the transformation of old, since stuffing of the system of state would substantially
restrict more later the participants of state building.
11
In other words when and how this or that state entered into the commonwealth
of states, which place it took in it, what examples where offered and maybe
imposed by the international system, all this substantially has an impact on a state
building.
Ukraine has not decided into which of commonwealth of states it wants to
enter. The process of socialization is slow, society does not master the democratic
values and political elite opposes process of their “light” imposition. This
uncertainty is conditioned by the objective factors: the country remains in the old
system of collapsing military post-communist civilization of CIS countries which
stays in the illusion of one’s own infallibility, and at the same time unintentionally
8
Soros J. Press-conference in Kyiv / J. Soros // UNIAN. – 2005. – 8 Nov. – Cit.: Kniazhytskiy
N.: «Has Leonid Kuchma become the winner of the “orange revolution”?» Fakty I komentarii. –
2005. – 7 Dec.
9
Machiavelli N. Discourse on first decade of Titus Livius / N. Machiavelli. – М. : Mysl’, 1996.
– P. 155-157.
10
Tilly Ch. Reflections on the History of European State-Making. The Formation of National
States in Western Europe / [ed. by Ch. Tilly]. – Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1975. – P.
45.
11
Tilly Ch. Reflections on the History of European State-Making. The Formation of National
States in Western Europe / [ed. by Ch. Tilly]. – Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1975. – P.
45.
5
reproduces the same barbarism and evil, struggle with which was announced by
Mikhail Gorbachev at the time of the beginning of the USSR’s collapse.
Undoubtedly that the international recognition or rejection in such influences
generation or the transformation of main political institutes of the emerging state of
Ukraine, influences a political agenda, scale, pace and vector of state building. In
1990s Europe responded to the call of M. Gorbachev: “Europe can show a worthy
example. The world is at the crossroads now, and where it would go pretty much
depends on the political stand of Europe.
Nobody would be able to substitute Europe neither in a world policy nor in a
world development. The role of Europe can be and has to be constructive,
innovative and wholesome”.
12
In 1990s, the West was seriously considering the process of integration of
Ukraine into the EU. Zbigniew Brzezinski in his work “The Grand Chessboard”
wrote:
“Approximately between 2005 and 2010, Ukraine, especially when it will
reach a substantial progress inside the country reforms thus would clarify itself as a
country of Central Europe, shall be ready for the serious talks with the EU and the
NATO”.
13
Modern Ukraine is an agonizing fragment of soviet empire with all its
consequences. Under the absence of state building experience, as Z. Brzezinski
wrote: “The space which belonged to the czar empire for centuries and to the
Soviet Union for three quarters of a century, is now filled with a dozen of states,
majority of which (except Russia) is barely ready for the acquisition of true
sovereignty; the population of these states is also different: from quite big Ukraine
having 52 million”.
14
Old nomenclature system of coordinates existing in Ukraine does not allow
the transforming political institutions, re-socialization of its citizens and
accordingly to expect a place in the European system of international relations. In
its turn the EU in the condition of evolution of Ukrainian statesmanship to the level
of “corrupted state”
15
for the sake of its own security has to distance itself from
Ukraine.
Modern Ukraine is a state with the patrimonial form of governance which is
being associated with an epoch of collapse of the Roman Empire, times of
Augustus rule, where term patrimonium meant private treasury of the emperor
which he disposed of without reporting to the senate.
16
Principles of power
organization in Ukraine are described by Max Weber, where under patrimonialism
rest on administrative personnel and military formations coming forward as a
12
Gorbachev М. S. Perestroika and new thinking for our country and for the whole world / М. S.
Gorbachev. – М. : Politizdat, 1987. – P.199–219.
13
Brzezinski Z. The Grand Chessboard (The Primacy of America and Its geostrategic
imperatives) / Brzezinski Z. – M. : Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia, 1998. – P. 105-106.
14
Brzezinski Z. The Grand Chessboard (The Primacy of America and Its geostrategic
imperatives) / Brzezinski Z. – M. : Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia, 1998. – P. 111.
15
Machiavelli N. Discourses on first decade of Titus Livius / N. Machiavelli. – М. : Mysl’, 1996. – P. 155-157.
16
Kamenka E. Bureaucracy / E. Kamenka. – Oxford, 1989. – P. 63.
6
weapon of personal power of the master allows to the last ignoring direction of
tradition in some cases.
17
The shape of organization of political power in Ukraine is described by me as
a power of cliques and clans in the work “Influence of “mutation” of communism
on the global system of international relations (Extrapolation of the “evil empire”
in the environment of the global world)”.
18
Electing the President Viktor Yanukovich made patrimonial regime to lie
firmly. Appointment to state post appears to be a “mercy” of the ruler, which he
shows only to those on whose loyalty he can count. Principle of loyalty
permanently has primary meaning in patrimonial power structures.
Strengthening of Yanukovich’s power intensifies the problem of
establishment of democratic values in Ukraine. Mr. A. Toynbee draws historical
parallels: “Since the level of human prosperity is usually being estimated according
to the scale of power and wealth it happens that already learnt chapters of history
of tragic social decline in the everyday public consciousness is being perceived as
a periods of remarkable rise and fall. This sad delusion can continue for many
centuries. But sooner or later the delusion passes. Light comes, when incurably
sick society starts the war against itself. Society starts to eat itself”.
19
Modern Ukraine is a state with the highest in the world level of corruption. (In
the report of “Barometer of the global corruption 2009”, published by human
rights organization Transparency International. According to the document,
Ukraine is recognized as the most corrupted among “new independent states” and
other states included in the list).
20
As early as in 2008 Ukraine was called
“defective democracy” with a low level of social and economic development in the
“Index of transformation” of the Bertelsmann foundation.
German expert, University of Ludwig Maximilian fellow, Martin Bruises
believes that the main “defect” of Ukrainian democracy is unbalance of power
branches, permanent conflict over constitutional privileges. Absence of consensus
in this matter makes democracy in Ukraine vulnerable. It creates conditions for
erosion of democratic process and gradual restoration of authoritarian features of
the power. “Main reason for that could be establishment of present practice, when
the power in the country is being executed in circumvention of democratic
institutions, namely on the basis of informal agreements of authoritative elites”.
According to the words of Martin Bruises, further reform process in Ukraine is
impossible without employment of decisive measures to fight corruption”.
21
17
Weber M. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft / M. Weber. – Tubingen, 1976. – S.133, 134.
18
Zazhygaev B.V. The influence of «mutation» of communism on global system of international
relations (Extrapolation of the “Evil empire” in the global world)» / B.V. Zazhygaev // Vestnik
KyMU. – 2010. – Issue 10. – P. 20 – 73.
19
Toynbee А. J. A Study of History / [transl. from Eng.] – М. : Progress, 1991. – P. 347.
20
Barometer of the global corruption – 2009: [E-resource]: Access:
http://tsn.ua/ua/ukrayina/ukrayinu-viznano-naibilsh-korumpovanoyu-krayinoyu-svitu.html
21
Brusis Martin. German experts called Ukrainian democracy “defective” [E-resource] /
Deutsche Welle. – Access: http://www.dw-world.de/
http://tsn.ua/ua/ukrayina/ukrayinu-viznano-naibilsh-korumpovanoyu-krayinoyu-svitu.html
http://www.dw-world.de/
7
In the expert rating of “failed” states of the world - Failed States Index 2009,
which reflects ability (and inability) of government to control the unity of the
territory and also demographic, political and economic situation in the state,
Ukraine occupies 110
th
place and is in the orange zone – dangerous risks level.
According to a line of points it is in the critical level. This first of all concerns the
following:
Point 3. Stable and permanent migration of people;
Point 4. Presence of unsatisfied and revengeful groups;
Point 5. Uneven economic development;
Point 6. Sharp deterioration of state of economy;
Point 7. Lawlessness and criminalization of the country;
Point 11. Strengthening of group and/or clan elites;
Point 12. Interference of other states or external players.
Especially dangerous are such tendencies as presence of unsatisfied and
revengeful groups, lawlessness and criminalization of the state, strengthening of
group and/or clan elites which are reaching top values.
In comparison with EU these indicators are incomparable and exceed EU
countries by times. Virtually all EU countries are within the zone of “stable and
the most stable countries”.
22
American political scientist Noam Chomsky summed up several typical
features of failed state in the following way:
firstly, its inability or unwillingness of the state to protect its
citizens from violence and even from death.
secondly, inclination of the power to consider itself above the rule
of law – both national and international.
and, thirdly, such state is suffers from serious “deficit of
democracy which leaves formally acting democratic institutions without
real maintenance”.
23
There are no democratic transformations in Ukraine. In accordance
with the law of Parkinson “a tree simply stopped to grow due to end of
biological cycle development” of empire.
24
A. Toynbee calls such
civilizations stoned. “Stoned civilizations are static because they have lost
life in a result of unfortunate try to move from one state to another. They
are dead. And their death can be neither refute nor overcome. Their fate is
collapse, but they would be decaying with different speed: some like body,
some like tree trunk and others like a stone on the wind”.
25
22
Homsky Noam. Rating of “failed” states of the world. [E-resource]. – Failed States Index
2009. http://gtmarket.ru/news/state/2009/06/24/2045
23
Homsky Noam. Rating of “failed” states of the world. [E-resource]. – Failed States Index
2009. http://gtmarket.ru/news/state/2009/06/24/2045
24
Parkinson S. The Law of Parkinson and other pamphlets / S. Parkinson. – М., 1976. – P. 299.
25
Toynbee А. J. A Study of History / [transl. from Eng.] – М. : Progress, 1991. – P. 100.
http://gtmarket.ru/news/state/2009/06/24/2045
http://gtmarket.ru/news/state/2009/06/24/2045
8
Transformation of Ukraine into the EU on the modern stage is
impossible. George Soros, as far back as in 2004, expressed an opinion that
Ukraine “… is not ready to join the EU”.
26
Trust to Ukraine during
Yushchenko government was undermined, and Yushchenko himself
“during the visit in Brussels at the end of 2009 agreed to strike off as
unrealistic from the agenda of Ukraine-EU summit a question of signing an
agreement on association between Ukraine and EU”.
27
Such stand of EU is
prolonged after shift of power in Ukraine: “Previously President of
European Commission Jose Manuel Barrossou and President of Ukraine
Yanukovich agreed that Association agreement between EU and Ukraine
shall be signed not earlier than in 2011”.
28
In its modern view Ukraine represents real humanitarian threat to EU.
Credibility’s lost.
It is not about membership of Ukraine in EU but about a construction
of virtual, but quite real “Berlin wall” and at this time by West aiming to
preserve its way of life, barrier from collapsing, corrupted state,
embodying real threat to emerging world poles according to
N. Machiavelli.
29
26
Soros J. Press-conference in Kyiv / J. Soros // UNIAN. – 2005. – 8 Nov. – Cit.: Kniazhytskiy
N.: «Has Leonid Kuchma become the winner of the “orange revolution”?» Fakty I komentarii. –
2005. – 7 Dec.
27
Annual forecast “Russian and the world: 2010”, prepared by IMEMO RAN and FTPP in
cooperation with CCI RF. – [E-resource]. – http://www.imemo.ru
28
Yanukovich: Ukraine steadily moves towards Eurointegration [E-resource] // Korrespondent. –
http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/1118963
29
Machiavelli N. Discourse on first decade of Titus Livius / N. Machiavelli. – М. : Mysl’, 1996.
– P. 269.
http://www.imemo.ru/
http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/politics/
|
| id | nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-58744 |
| institution | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| language | Ukrainian |
| last_indexed | 2025-12-07T17:41:36Z |
| publishDate | 2010 |
| publisher | Інститут світової економіки і міжнародних відносин НАН України |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | Зажигаєв, Б.В. 2014-03-30T20:17:51Z 2014-03-30T20:17:51Z 2010 Україна на перехресті глобальної політики.
 Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин / Б.В. Зажигаєв // Проблеми міжнародних відносин: Зб. наук. пр. — К.: КиМУ, 2010. — Вип. 1. — С. 76-89. — Бібліогр.: 25 назв. — укр. https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/58744 [327:339.9] (4+477) (045) У статті аналізується процес формування зовнішньої 
 політики України в умовах глобалізації в сучасному світі. Автор 
 розглядає вплив політичного процесу в Україні і Росії на 
 формування європейської системи міжнародних відносин, 
 взаємну залежність і сумісність зовнішньої політики України з 
 зовнішньою політикою держав ЄС, у процесі формування 
 ліберально-демократичної європейської системи міжнародних 
 відносин у XXI столітті. В статье анализируется процесс формирования внешней 
 политики Украины в условиях глобализации в современном мире. 
 Автор рассматривает влияние политического процесса в 
 Украине и России на формирование европейской системы 
 международных отношений, взаимную зависимость и 
 совместимость внешней политики Украины и внешней 
 политики государств ЕС, в процессе формирования либерально-демократической европейской системы международных 
 отношений в XXI столетии. In the article the process of forming of foreign policy of 
 Ukraine is analysed in the conditions of globalization in the modern 
 world. The author examines influencing of political process in 
 Ukraine and Russia on forming of the European system of 
 international relations, mutual dependence and compatibility of 
 foreign policy of Ukraine and foreign policy of the states of EU, in 
 the process of forming of the liberal-democratic European system of 
 international relations in the XXI century. uk Інститут світової економіки і міжнародних відносин НАН України Проблеми міжнародних відносин Сучасні міжнародні відносини Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин Украина на перекрестке глобальной политики . Часть 1: Украина и европейская система современных международных отношений Ukraine on the crossroads of the global policy. Part 1: Ukraine and European system of modern international relations Article published earlier |
| spellingShingle | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин Зажигаєв, Б.В. Сучасні міжнародні відносини |
| title | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин |
| title_alt | Украина на перекрестке глобальной политики . Часть 1: Украина и европейская система современных международных отношений Ukraine on the crossroads of the global policy. Part 1: Ukraine and European system of modern international relations |
| title_full | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин |
| title_fullStr | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин |
| title_full_unstemmed | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин |
| title_short | Україна на перехресті глобальної політики. Частина 1: Україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин |
| title_sort | україна на перехресті глобальної політики. частина 1: україна та європейська система сучасних міжнародних відносин |
| topic | Сучасні міжнародні відносини |
| topic_facet | Сучасні міжнародні відносини |
| url | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/58744 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT zažigaêvbv ukraínanaperehrestíglobalʹnoípolítikičastina1ukraínataêvropeisʹkasistemasučasnihmížnarodnihvídnosin AT zažigaêvbv ukrainanaperekrestkeglobalʹnoipolitikičastʹ1ukrainaievropeiskaâsistemasovremennyhmeždunarodnyhotnošenii AT zažigaêvbv ukraineonthecrossroadsoftheglobalpolicypart1ukraineandeuropeansystemofmoderninternationalrelations |