Competition and Cooperation in International Relations: the Shifting Politics of History Education and Identity Making

يتناول هذا البحث النقاش[1] بين الواقعية الجديدة وبين الليبرالية الجديدة في إطار حقل العلاقات الدولية ويسلط الضوء على أهم طروحات النظريتين، وخاصة فيما يتعلق بوجهات نظرهما حول هيكل العلاقات الدولية وهل يحكمه الفوضى والصراع أم التعاون. كانت، ولا زالت، دراسة الصراع والتعاون في العلاقات الدولية من المهام الرئيسية للبحث والتحليل بالنسبة لمنظري وباحثي العلاقات الدولية، وأصبح هذا الترابط بين الصراع والتعاون القضية الرئيسية في النقاش بين النظريتين السائدتين في العلاقات الدولية. تعتبر تظريتي الواقعية الجديدة والليبرالية الجديدة من أكثر النظريات تأثيرا على العلاقات الدولية، ويعتبر النقاش بين النظريتين من أكبر واهم النقاشات في حقل العلاقات الدولية. يسعى هذا البحث إلى بيان وشرح الاسهامات النظرية لكل من النظريتين فيما يتعلق بالصراع والتعاون في العلاقات الدولية، ومدى مساهمة طروحات الليبرالية الجديدة، خاصة فيما يتعلق بدور المؤسسات الدولية في زيادة التعاون الدولي، وفي التقليل من هيمنة الرؤية الواقعية في العلاقات الدولية وخاصة فيما يتعلق بسيادة الفوضى والصراع من أجل القوة. تناقش هذه الدراسة أن النقاش بين الواقعية الجديدة وبين الليبرالية الجديدة لم يساهم بشكل كبير في تطوير نظرية العلاقات الدولية، حيث لم يساهم هذا النقاش بشكل كبير في التقليل من هيمنة سياسات القوة في العلاقات الدولية وحل المشاكل الدولية الناتجة عنها.
 [1] المقصود ب (النقاش) هنا هو النقاش النظري بين الواقعية الجديدة وبين الليبرالية الجديدة. وهو أحد (النقاشات الكبرى) أو (الحوارات العظمى)، حسب استخدام الباحثين، في العلاقات الدولية والمؤخوذة من الاصل الانكليزي (Great debates)، والتي تركز على النقاشات النظرية في تطور حقل العلاقات الدولية منذ بداية القرن العشرين. وهي تشمل، في الغالب، ثلاثة نقاشات كبرى: النقاش بين الواقعية وبين المثالية-الليبرالية، والنقاش بين الواقعية وبين السلوكية، والنقاش بين الواقعية الجديدة وبين الليبرالية الجديدة. وهناك من يضيف نقاشا رابعا مهما وهو النقاش بين الوضعية وما بعد الوضعية (انظر مثلا، تيم دان وآخرون، ترجمة ديما الخضرا، 2016؛Lake, 2013; Lapid, 1989 ).

The aim of this paper is to dissect the causal nexus between trust, institutions and cooperation in international relations (IR) and to highlight the theoretical and empirical potential of bringing trust from the periphery to the centre of our debates about international cooperation. My central argument is that the concept of trust allows us to explain particularly risky forms of international cooperation where the costs of being exploited outweigh the potential gains of cooperation, actors have an incentive to defect if others cooperate, and uncertainty about others' preferences and constraints cannot be fully reduced by international institutions. As most institutions in IR remain incomplete, scholars of international cooperation should hence pay more attention to trust-based forms of risk absorption. Moreover, the paper argues that the creation of trust is best conceptualised as a process of costly signalling. In order to test the causal link between trust and cooperation, the paper analyses Germany's consent to give up the Deutschmark and to create a common European currency in 1989. Germany's initial mistrust regarding France's trustworthiness in monetary affairs could be overcome by the exchange of costly signals. I show that the creation of trust was a necessary part of a causal mechanism bridging the analytical gap between Germany's general preferences for monetary cooperation and the actual creation of European Monetary Union under conditions of risk and uncertainty.

An examination of the ways cyberspace is changing both the theory and the practice of international relations. Cyberspace is widely acknowledged as a fundamental fact of daily life in today's world. Until recently, its political impact was thought to be a matter of low politics—background conditions and routine processes and decisions. Now, however, experts have begun to recognize its effect on high politics—national security, core institutions, and critical decision processes. In this book, Nazli Choucri investigates the implications of this new cyberpolitical reality for international relations theory, policy, and practice. The ubiquity, fluidity, and anonymity of cyberspace have already challenged such concepts as leverage and influence, national security and diplomacy, and borders and boundaries in the traditionally state-centric arena of international relations. Choucri grapples with fundamental questions of how we can take explicit account of cyberspace in the analysis of world politics and how we can integrate the traditional international system with its cyber venues. After establishing the theoretical and empirical terrain, Choucri examines modes of cyber conflict and cyber cooperation in international relations; the potential for the gradual convergence of cyberspace and sustainability, in both substantive and policy terms; and the emergent synergy of cyberspace and international efforts toward sustainable development. Choucri's discussion is theoretically driven and empirically grounded, drawing on recent data and analyzing the dynamics of cyberpolitics at individual, state, international, and global levels.

The question addressed in this analysis is whether endowing agents with various forms of asymmetric power makes cooperation more likely across a variety of structural settings of conflict and cooperation present in international relations. To address this question, an agent-based model incorporating asymmetric power among agents in a set of (2×2) games that represent different forms of conflict and cooperation prevalent in international relations (Chicken, Stag, Assurance, Deadlock, and Prisoner's Dilemma) is developed and analyzed via simulation. Simulation results indicate that the introduction of asymmetric power substantially increases the chances that both cooperative agents survive and cooperative worlds evolve. This is particularly the case when agents are endowed with the ability to selectively interact with other agents. Also, anticipated variations in outcomes across the game structures regarding the likelihood of cooperation are supported.

This article is a re-examination of cooperation in international relations through the example of Franco-Syrian relations between 2001 and 2004. I explore how cooperation fulfils – or not – a function of recognition, especially in the case of countries under unequal terms. Based on archival research and interviews, the article analyses three concrete moments of cooperation between Syria and France during this time. While traditional Franco-Syrian cooperation, prior to 2000, was based on a mutual recognition of partners, in the aftermath of presidential change in Syria in 2000 and within the shifting regional context, the Franco-Syrian relationship seemed to be marked by an inequality. Therefore, the article aims to capture the symbols of this recognition between France and Syria, and to study the role of cooperation not only in deepening a bilateral relationship, but – in a new perspective in international relations – in undermining it.

There seems to exist a general consensus on how to conceptualize cooperation in the field of international relations (IR). We argue that this impression is deceptive. In practice, scholars working on the causes of international cooperation have come to implicitly employ various understandings of what cooperation is. Yet, an explicit debate about the discipline's conceptual foundations never materialized, and whatever discussion occurred did so only latently and without much dialog across theoretical traditions. In this paper, we develop an updated conceptual framework by exploring the nature of these differing understandings and situating them within broader theoretical conversations about the role of cooperation in IR. Drawing on an array of studies in IR and philosophy, our framework distinguishes between three distinct types of cooperative state interactions – cooperation through tacit policy coordination (‘minimal’ cooperation), cooperation through explicit policy coordination (‘thin’ cooperation), and cooperation based on joint action (‘thick’ cooperation). The framework contributes to better theorization about cooperation in two main ways: it allows scholars across theoretical traditions to identify important sources of disagreement and previously unnoticed theoretical common ground; and the conceptual disaggregation it provides grants scholars crucial theoretical leverage by enabling type-specific causal theorization.

On October 4—7, 2021, the world's first World Congress of School History Teachers was held in Moscow. The initiative to hold the Congress came from the Academy of the Ministry of Education of Russia, the Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the All-Russian Public Organization “Association of Teachers of History and Social Studies” and the State Academic University for the Humanities. The European Association of History Teachers “Euroclio” acted as a co-organizer of the Congress. During the Plenary session of the Congress and 7 sections, Russian and foreign history teachers discussed the most pressing issues of pedagogical practice: the experience of creating concepts for teaching history at school in different countries, issues of the correlation of national and world history in school curricula, the feasibility of dividing the educational process into basic and advanced levels, problems and prospects of the distance form of teaching history in schools, the format and structure of modern school textbooks. Special attention was paid to the discussion of teaching the history of the Second World War in different countries of the world and the history of revolutions. Also during the work of the Congress, the IV Congress of Russian History Teachers was held. Within the framework of the congress, the participants discussed topical issues and problems of teaching history in Russian secondary schools: expanding ties and exchange of experience between teachers from different regions of Russia, experience and further prospects for the introduction of the Historical and Cultural Standard as part of the concept of teaching history at school, issues of synchronization of national and of general history in the school curriculum, improvement of evaluation procedures in history, methodological support and development of programs for teaching regional history as part of the course of national history.

The current international processes and events, world politics at the beginning of the 21 century have once again clearly demonstrated that their meaning often emerges through the historical context without which the understanding of what is happening is hardly possible. Rector of MGIMO A.V. Torkunov in his talk on International relations as an educational discipline remarked that "as for sciences the basis of professionalism is mathematical skills and competencies, for international relations such a basis is history". Historical disciplines are taught at MGIMO from the very start of education process. MGIMO is one of the leading centers of research in the fields of history, political sciences and humanities. Here, in different years academics E.V. Tarle, L.N. Ivanov, V.G. Trukhanovskiy, A.L. Narochnitskiy and other prominent scholars and historians taught. Historical School of MGIMO has united important areas of historical science: the history of political processes in the twentieth century, modern history, the history of international relations and diplomacy, historical regional studies and cultural studies, oriental, philosophy and theory of history. The best traditions of the MGIMO historical school incorporated by its founders, make the foundation of its development at present. In 1992, the Department of MGIMO world and national history was established. The principle innovation was the combination of two components - historical education and historical science. This made it possible to present the story of Russia as an important part of the world history, opened up prospects for the implementation of comparative history, the synthesis of specific historical approaches and generalized global vision of civilization and human development. The historical school has realised a number of research projects, including "Alexander Nevsky" and the multi-volume "Great Victory", the work continues on a research project "Russia in the Modern World", and on a project "Synchronous History", etc.

International conflict and cooperation are subjects of crucial concern to all of us. This paper attempts to put these parameters in an existential frame of reference in which the fluidities of space, time, and meaning alter or make significant the rhythmical interactions that avoid conflict and lead to successful negotiation and cooperation in international relations. A number of devices employed in these may also be useful to understanding in other communicative contexts.

This article attempts to provide a correction to the exclusive realist interpretations of Thomas Hobbes. It makes the point that Hobbes is not as close to a realist understanding of international relations as has been prevalently held. Given Hobbes's conception of man and the state of nature, the formation of Leviathan and the law of nature, it is here argued that Hobbes gives us a perception of international relations which is not always conflictual and comprises the adjustments of conflicting interests, leading to the possibility of alliances and cooperation in international relations.

Credibility has been used to explain theories of deterrence and cooperation in international relations. In the peacekeeping environment, for what purposes should credibility be built and how can it be signaled? Despite being listed by the UN as a success factor in peace operations, our understanding of credibility in peacekeeping remains limited and focused on deterrence. This article argues that credibility in peace operations must be built for both deterrence and cooperation purposes. Drawing on the international relations, civil war, and peacekeeping literatures, it conceptualizes credibility in peacekeeping by identifying the purposes for which credibility must be built and signaled: deterrence and cooperativeness. It contends that while a peace operation’s ability to deter is limited, signaling cooperativeness - credibility in cooperation—enables a force to cultivate cooperation with national and subnational audiences. This helps to create a more predictable security environment by enabling the force to function on a daily basis.

The rise of digital technologies has changed how countries interact, offering new ways to promote peace and solve global conflicts. Digital diplomacy is a modern approach that uses information and communication technologies to improve dialogue, cooperation, and understanding between nations, organizations, and citizens. This article looks at how digital tools and platforms support peacebuilding, especially by connecting different groups, fighting misinformation, and resolving conflicts. Digital diplomacy allows governments and non-governmental actors to communicate in real time, giving marginalized communities a voice and encouraging inclusive participation in peace efforts. By increasing transparency and accountability, it modernizes traditional diplomacy and provides tools to address conflicts early. Digital platforms also play an important role in encouraging cultural exchange and aiding humanitarian initiatives in conflict zones. Despite its potential, digital diplomacy faces serious challenges. Cybersecurity risks, unequal access to digital resources, and the misuse of technology to spread disinformation threaten its success. This paper highlights the need for global agreements, ethical guidelines, and programs to strengthen digital capacity to minimize these risks and ensure that digital diplomacy supports peace rather than creating new tensions. Using real-world examples and theoretical perspectives, this research explains how digital transformation is changing diplomacy in the 21st century. It argues that integrating technology into diplomatic practices is crucial for building long-lasting peace and ensuring global stability. This approach opens new opportunities for innovation and cooperation in international relations.

Diplomats in Science Diplomacy: Promoting Scientific and Technological Collaboration in International Relations**

In this article the issues of interest and national interests in the context of globalization and regional cooperation are analyzed. This work tries to socio-philosophically analyze the undeveloped mechanisms of mutually beneficial cooperation in international relations and the inequality in supplying the national interests as the case of several problems. It is also emphasized, paying attention to a new form of cooperation in Central Asia, is indicated as a qualitative basis for addressing the need and accelerating regional cooperation, to create a sphere of good neighborly relations in the new development environment.

Proposed here is a reorientation of the study of international security from its traditional emphasis on conflict to a new emphasis on cooperation. International cooperation, understood here to refer to coordinated and joint initiatives among two or more nations, has the potential of providing a new basis for international security, understood here to refer to the absence of interstate violence or hostility. Indeed, a shift from a focus on international conflict to a focus on international cooperation has the potential of providing a productive and innovative reorientation of scholarly and policy discussion in the area of international security. Past studies have emphasized potential conflict and mechanisms for conflict resolution, such as military preparedness to forestall an attack by a potential enemy; the formation of alliances; deterrence, including but not limited to nuclear deterrence; and defense, whether passive or active and whether defense of the population or defense of retaliatory weapons systems. Future studies, by contrast, might appropriately emphasize potential cooperation, such as joint and cooperative approaches to international security issues and cooperation in a wide variety of areas, including, among others, political, economic, and scientific and technical cooperation. Cooperation is, in many respects, the neglected “other side of the coin” of conflict. Many scholars have noted that international relations is not a zero-sum game, implying that there are elements of both conflict and cooperation in international relations. They then, however, typically will go on to study the conflictual aspects of international relations, whether political conflict, military confrontation, or trade disputes, ignoring actual or potential cooperative aspects of international relations, including political integration, cooperative solutions to security problems, or trade agreements and expansion.