220 research outputs found
Los factores internacionales del colapso de los Estados
En este artĂculo, el autor aborda el complejo fenĂłmeno de la decadencia, ocaso y colapso de los Estados-naciĂłn, Basado en lo que Ă©l mismo denomina el "juego triangular", el autor define los cornos de tal proceso, asĂ como los quiĂ©nes de su causa: la propia "vĂctima", el Estado y sus "victimarios", los actores y flujos transnacionales, asĂ como tambiĂ©n los empresarios identitarios (entrepreneurn identitaire). BasĂĄndose primordialmente en ejemplos contemporĂĄneos de naciones africanas, el autor va desglosando cada uno de los protagonistas del triĂĄngulo, hasta llegar a la conclusiĂłn de que las tĂpicas lealtades ciudadanas van cediendo su "relaciĂłn cĂvica que los vincula al Estado", y se convierten en solidaridades identitarias de escala transnacional.This arricie examines the complex phenomenon of the decadence, disappearance and collapse of State-nations. Relying on what he calis the "triangular game", the author defines the ways these processes come about, as well as their origins: the very "victim" and the "victimizer", the actors and transnational movements as well as their identity entrepreneurs (entrepreneur identitairĂ©). Primarily based upon contemporary examples of African nations, the authors spells out each of the protagonists of the triangle, drawing the conclusiĂłn that typical citizens loyalties relinquish their "civic relationship which links them tĂł the State", becoming identity solidarities on a transnational scale
A CRISE DA POTĂNCIA E A DESORDEM INTERNACIONAL
O debate teĂłrico, desde o fim da bipolaridade e da Guerra Fria, girou em torno dos conceitos de âsuperpotĂȘnciaâ, âhiperpotĂȘnciaâ ou unipolaridade. No entanto, nĂŁo se tem dado bastante atenção e importĂąncia Ă crise que atinge o universo hobbesiano: sem dĂșvida, a potĂȘncia Ă© hoje atacada em sua prĂłpria essĂȘncia, demonstrando-se frĂĄgil sempre que utilizada como princĂpio de ação internacional, isso sem considerar as vicissitudes por que passa a prĂłpria primeira potĂȘncia mundial. No jogo pĂłsbipolar, um paradoxo empĂrico se impĂ”e: nunca um Estado acumulou tantos recursos caracterizadores da potĂȘncia quanto os Estados-Unidos nos dias de hoje; jamais, no entanto, esta potĂȘncia teve tĂŁo pouco controle sobre os problemas com os quais se confronta. Tal contradição Ă© essencial na teoria das relaçÔes internacionais, visto que perturba os paradigmas clĂĄssicos, questionando frontalmente a prĂłpria concepção do power politics que serviu de pedra angular nĂŁo somente ao realismo e ao neorealismo, mas tambĂ©m Ă teoria neoinstitucional ou ainda aos diferentes estruturalismos. Neste artigo, o autor emite a hipĂłtese de que uma certa forma de protest politics, tomando a potĂȘncia como alvo e nĂŁo mais a considerando como princĂpio organizador da ordem mundial, ocupa doravante o lugar da noção de power politics, abalando a teoria clĂĄssica da âestabilidade hegemĂŽnicaâ. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: relaçÔes internacionais, teoria, PĂłs-Guerra Fria, crises de superpotĂȘncia, novos atores.THE CRISIS OF THE POWERS AND THE INTERNATIONAL DISORDER Bertrand Badie Since the end of the Cold War and the bipolarity, there has been a theoretical debate around the concepts of âsuperpowerâ, âhiperpowerâ or unipolarity. However, not enough attention and importance has been given to the crisis that reaches the hobbesian universe: doubtlessly, the superpower is attacked today its own essence, shown as fragile whenever used as a principle of international action, without considering the which the first world power undergoes. In the post-bipolar game, an empiric paradox is imposed: never has a State accumulated so many resources peculiar to a superpower as the United States nowadays; never, however, has this superpower had so little control on the problems she faces. Such contradiction is essential to the theory of international relations, because it disturbs its classic paradigms, frontally challenging the conception of power politics that served as a cornerstone not only to the realism and the new realism, but also to the neoinstitutional theory or still to the different structuralisms. In this paper, the author hypothesizes that a certain form of protest politics, taking the superpower as target and not considering her as an organizing principle of the world order, replaces the notion of power politics from now on, affecting the classic theory of âhegemonic stabilityâ KEYWORDS: international relations, theory, Post Cold War, superpower crises, new actors.CRISE DE PUISSANCE ET DĂSORDRE INTERNATIONAL Bertrand Badie Le dĂ©bat thĂ©orique a tournĂ©, depuis la fin de la bipolaritĂ© et de la Guerre froide, autour des concepts de âsuperpuissanceâ, âdâhyper-puissanceâ, ou dâunipolaritĂ©. On nâa cependant pas Ă©tĂ© assez attentif Ă la crise qui frappait lâunivers hobbesien: peut-ĂȘtre la puissance est-elle aujourdâhui attaquĂ©e dans son Ă©vidence mĂȘme, partout oĂč elle est utilisĂ©e comme principe dâaction internationale, au-delĂ mĂȘme des vicissitudes rencontrĂ©es par la premiĂšre puissance mondiale elle-mĂȘme. Dans le jeu post-bipolaire, un paradoxe empirique sâimpose au fil des Ă©vĂšne-ments: jamais un Ătat nâa accumulĂ© autant de ressources de puissance que les Etats-Unis aujourdâhui; jamais pourtant cette puissance nâa eu si peu de prise sur les enjeux auxquels elle a Ă©tĂ© confrontĂ©e. Une telle contradiction est essentielle en thĂ©orie des relations internationales, puisquâelle bouscule les paradigmes classiques, mettant directement en cause la conception mĂȘme du âpower politicsâ qui servait de pierre angulaire non seulement au rĂ©alisme et au nĂ©o-rĂ©alisme, mais aussi Ă la thĂ©orie nĂ©o-institutionnelle ou encore aux diffĂ©rents structuralismes. Dans cet article lâauteur fait lâhypothĂšse quâune certaine forme de âprotest politicsâ, prenant la puissance comme cible et non plus comme principe dâordre, vient dĂ©sormais prendre le relais, Ă©branlant la thĂ©orie classique de la âstabilitĂ© hĂ©gĂ©moniqueâ, jusquâĂ lui substituer lâhypothĂšse dâune âinstabilitĂ© hĂ©gĂ©moniqueâ. MOTS-CLĂS: relations internationales, thĂ©orie, Post-Guerre Froide, crises de superpuissance, nouveaux acteurs.Publicação Online do Caderno CRH:http://www.cadernocrh.ufba.b
Lâopinion Ă la conquĂȘte de lâinternational
Lâimpact sur le jeu international de la rĂ©volution technologique, en matiĂšre dâinformation et de communication, a sans doute Ă©tĂ© sous-estimĂ©. En sâadressant aux individus, les mĂ©dias achĂšvent un processus Ă lâĆuvre depuis le 19e siĂšcle, qui bouleverse lâidentitĂ© des acteurs internationaux et Ă©nonce une rupture de paradigmes. Auparavant strictement rĂ©servĂ©es aux Ătats, les Affaires Ă©trangĂšres sont dĂ©sormais « lâaffaire de tous ». Au sein dâun Ătat donnĂ©, les individus se mobilisent pour faire valoir leur opinion sur lâinternational (OPSI). Celle-ci agit au sein mĂȘme des frontiĂšres nationales, mais peut Ă©galement converger avec lâOPSI dâautres populations. SimultanĂ©ment, des rĂ©seaux transnationaux de mobilisation dĂ©ploient une autonomie croissante, et forgent un vĂ©ritable espace transnational de dĂ©bat, pour une opinion publique internationale (OPI).Public opinionâs international advanceThe international political impact of the information and communication revolution has no doubt been underestimated. By directly addressing individuals, the mass media are now consummating a process that has been at work since the 19th century, reshuffling the cast of international players and shifting the prevailing paradigms. Hitherto a jealously guarded reserve of State, foreign affairs are now âeverybodyâs businessâ. Individuals within a given country are joining forces to assert their opinions on international affairs â opinions that have currency within their national borders, but may well converge with those of other populaces as well. Concurrently, transnational networks are mobilizing with growing autonomy, creating a truly transnational forum for debate and for the expression of international public opinion
Introduction
Le paradoxe est puissant : les revendications territoriales n'ont jamais Ă©tĂ© si nombreuses alors que la capacitĂ© rĂ©gulatrice des territoires n'a jamais Ă©tĂ© aussi faible. Au temps des grandes guerres europĂ©ennes, les compromis territoriaux ou les dĂ©placements de frontiĂšres apparaissaient comme des sorties possibles des logiques de conflit, tandis que les espaces bornĂ©s marquaient clairement la souverainetĂ© des Ătats, tout en leur permettant de dĂ©cliner leur compĂ©tence. Souverains chez eux, les..
- âŠ