Pillorying Expansion Over Invasion: Africa’s New Neutralism, Politics of non-Alignment, and the Global (re)balancing of Power from the Russian-Ukrainian War

The changing political system of the XXI century has brought many shifts not only in the global balance of power but also in various regional balances scattered across the globe. The rise of national power in countries beforehand classified as small powers or other equivalents has forced to once again place these states in the newly created balances of power. Amongst these states is Poland, whose national power has grown substantially in the last decade. Hence, it is necessary to analyze how Poland compares to other states in the international system, on a global and regional level, and through this evaluate what Poland’s international position is. The article aims at assessing Polish national power and roles in regional initiatives to examine how Poland is placed in the global and regional balance of power.

The main task of the study is to determine the principles of the international system and world order and to conduct a detailed analysis of what constitutes the system of international relations and the main principles of world order, which main systems exist and what types of world order existed from the middle of the 17th century to the present day. The paper presents a comparative analysis of various systems and world orders. In particular, what are the main characteristics of a unipolar, bipolar, and multipolar world, and what are the differences between them? Additionally, when discussing world order, what are the characteristics of the Westphalian, Vienna, Versailles-Washington, and Yalta-Potsdam world orders, and what international system and world order can we discuss in the modern period? Accordingly, the paper discusses the modern system of international relations and the opinions of leading specialists in international relations in relation to modern international relations, etc. The topic also discusses the issue related to the diversity of political actors, in particular, the characterization of large, medium, and small countries and their role in world politics is presented, as well as the factors of various transnational actors in international relations. A significant part of the study is devoted to possible models of the world political order in the 21st century, among which the model of US world hegemony is discussed, which is based on US dominance in the economic, financial, technological, military, and commercial spheres. Then, the bipolar model of the world is discussed, according to which, based on the mentioned structure, there are two centers of global influence in the world, characterized by a confrontation between two leading countries and their allies. As for the multipolar model of the world, this model is based on the balance of power. The discussion of the polycivilizational model is very interesting. The analysis of the main characteristics of this model is related to the parallel existence of seven civilizations. These civilizations are Western, Latin American, Islamic, Slavic-Orthodox, Chinese (Confucian), Japanese (Shinto), and African. As we can see, at the beginning of the 21st century, global conflicts are taking place within the framework of the confrontation between these civilizations, one example of which is the Russian-Ukrainian war, which is not only an interstate war, but in this case, in addition to the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, there is a confrontation, first of all, between the global West and Russia, although to some extent the BRICS member states appear on the side of Russia, which represent different civilizations on their side, although the common interest of all of them is the confrontation with Western civilization. The last part of the work is devoted to the discussion of the modern international system and world order, where the opinion about the existence of a quadripolar world is presented.

The balance of power—a notoriously slippery, murky, and protean term, endlessly debated and variously defined—is the core theory of international politics within the realist perspective. A “balance of power” system is one in which the power held and exercised by states within the system is checked and balanced by the power of others. Thus, as a nation’s power grows to the point that it menaces other powerful states, a counter-balancing coalition emerges to restrain the rising power, such that any bid for world hegemony will be self-defeating. The minimum requirements for a balance of power system include the existence of at least two or more actors of roughly equal strength, states seeking to survive and preserve their autonomy, alliance flexibility, and the ability to resort to war if need be. At its essence, balance of power is a type of international order. Theorists disagree, however, about the normal operation of the balance of power. Structural realists describe an “automatic version” of the theory, whereby system balance is a spontaneously generated, self-regulating, and entirely unintended outcome of states pursuing their narrow self-interests. Earlier versions of balance of power were more consistent with a “semi-automatic” version of the theory, which requires a “balancer” state throwing its weight on one side of the scale or the other, depending on which is lighter, to regulate the system. The British School’s discussion of balance of power depicts a “manually operated” system, wherein the process of equilibrium is a function of human contrivance, with emphasis on the skill of diplomats and statesmen, a sense of community of nations, of shared responsibility, and a desire and need to preserve the balance of power system. As one would expect of a theory that made its appearance in the mid-16th century, balance of power is not without its critics. Liberals claim that globalization, democratic peace, and international institutions have fundamentally transformed international relations, moving it out of the realm of power politics. Constructivists claim that balance of power theory’s focus on material forces misses the central role played by ideational factors such as norms and identities in the construction of threats and alliances. Realists, themselves, wonder why no global balance of power has materialized since the end of the Cold War.

Power balance of neutral-beam heated divertor discharges in the ASDEX tokamak

Global energy interconnection is an effective way to exploit and utilize renewable energy all over the world, but quantitative analysis on intercontinental power production and exchange under the background of energy interconnection is lacking. This paper constructs a global energy interconnection power balance optimization method based on the sequential production simulation. Firstly, the structure of power sources and complementary characteristics of load and renewable energy between each continent are analyzed. Then, the optimization model for global energy interconnection power balance is established, and a parallel iterative algorithm is proposed to obtain the power generation of each continent and exchanged power between each continent. In case study, the proposed method is tested based on the case of 2030, and the influence of intercontinental transmission capacity on the consumption of renewable energy is also analyzed. The testing results provide useful guidance for the investment decisions, planning, and designing of the global energy interconnection.

The full scale realisation of nuclear fusion as an energy source requires a detailed understanding of power and energy balance in current experimental devices. In this we explore whether a global power balance model in which some of the calibration factors applied to the source or sink terms are fitted to the data can provide insight into possible causes of any discrepancies in power and energy balance seen in the JET tokamak. We show that the dynamics in the power balance can only be properly reproduced by including the changes in the thermal stored energy which therefore provides an additional opportunity to cross calibrate other terms in the power balance equation. Although the results are inconclusive with respect to the original goal of identifying the source of the discrepancies in the energy balance, we do find that with optimised parameters an extremely good prediction of the total power measured at the outer divertor target can be obtained over a wide range of pulses with time resolution up to ∼25 ms.

This chapter presents a conceptual framework for analysing contemporary international power and power relationships. Drawing primarily on the work of the neorealist theorist Kenneth N. Waltz, it combines traditional ‘hard’ dimensions of power, principally military and economic capabilities, with ‘softer’ elements of power like domestic political stability and competence. The chapter then analyses India’s developing relations with the two most important players in the global balance of power, the United States and China. In Waltz’s model, the international political system is ‘composed of a structure and of interacting units’. The two distinguishing characteristics of Waltz’s model of international political structure are its ordering principle—anarchy—and the distribution of capabilities across the units. Waltz’s theory also specifies how balances of power will be restored: the weaker will tend to balance the stronger. While it is destined to become a global great power, India’s immediate interests and aspirations lie within the Asia–Pacific region.

Large area radio frequency (rf) capacitive discharges have attracted recent interest for materials etching and deposition on large area substrates. A distinguishing feature is that the radial distribution of the absorbed rf power in these discharges depends on the rf voltage across the plates, independent of the radial variation of the plasma density n(r). A reduced set of steady-state fluid equations has been used to investigate the radial variation of n and electron temperature Te. The derived equations are shown to be invariant with respect to pL and pR, where p is the pressure, L is the plate separation and R is the discharge radius, and can be further reduced to the equations of the usual global balance model when R≪λε, the energy relaxation length. In this limit, the ionization frequency and Te are essentially independent of radius and n can be approximately described by the usual radial profile of a zeroth-order Bessel function. When R⩾λε, n and Te are predominantly determined by local particle and power balance, and the n and Te radial profiles are flat over most of the volume except near the radial boundary, where n falls and Te rises to account for the increased losses at the boundary. The scale length of the edge density variation in the local balance regime is shown to be proportional to the energy relaxation length.

Power balances across nation-states have changed because of the semiconductor production since 1970s. Manufacture of microchips have shifted through China, by providing higher growth, trade and competitiveness rates. Hence, the United States has begun to apply compulsory policies on trading with and investing in China. However, the rise of Chinese production in the semiconductor industry is still tremendous. Emerging discussions suggest that the current rivalry can be called as the Second Cold War. However, this definition is not completely true, since China’s socio-economic structure is not similar to USSR. Hence, this study adopts the Tech Cold War phrase, which is defined as a geopolitical rivalry between superpowers trying to achieve supremacy over critical technologies. Moreover, all these discussions show that there is an urgent need to analyse the current situation to understand the inclinations in global power balances. Therefore, the main aims of this study are twofold. The first is analyzing the current situation of both countries from the view of microchip production and trade. And, the second is foresighting power balances of new global era. Since there is a shortage about the economic-policy analyses about this issue, it’s expected to make a contribution to the related literature.

AFTER DISAPPOINTING itself for decades, India is now on the verge of becoming a great power. The world started to take notice of India's rise when New Delhi signed a nuclear pact with President George W. Bush in July 2005, but that breakthrough is only one dimension of the dramatic transformation of Indian foreign policy that has taken place since the end of the Cold War. After more than a half century of false starts and unrealized potential, India is now emerging as the swing state in the global balance of power. In the coming years, it will have an opportunity to shape outcomes on the most critical issues of the twenty-first century: the construction of Asian stability, the political modernization of the greater Middle East, and the management of globalization. Although India's economic growth has been widely discussed, its new foreign policy has been less noted. Unlike their U. S. counterparts, Indian leaders do not announce new foreign policy doctrines. Nonethe less, in recent years, they have worked relentlessly to elevate India's regional and international standing and to increase its power. New Delhi has made concerted efforts to reshape its immediate neighbor hood, find a modus vivendi with China and Pakistan (its two regional rivals), and reclaim its standing in the near abroad: parts of Africa, the Persian Gulf, Central and Southeast Asia, and the Indian Ocean

Simple analytic expressions are found for the global heating rate and the time needed to achieve global power balance with radiation and other losses, in useful agreement with large RFP transport codes. A simple condition is noted, which insures that the heating can be accomplished before appreciable resistive evolution occurs in the pinch profile. The product of poloidal beta, ..beta../sub theta/, and toroidal current, I, that characterizes a condition of global power balance is derived subject to the above-mentioned condition without making key assumptions used by earlier investigators. First, a perfectly steady state (with local power balance) is not assumed, nor is it appropriate to do so. Secondly, the cross-field resistivity is not required to be classical. Since the value of (..beta../sub theta/ I) plays a fundamental role in determining the kind of device one requires, the foundations of this value are important.

The main stages and directions of transformation of the US priority system in bilateral relations with Middle Eastern countries are determined through their retrospective and prognostic analysis in the context of regional and global international political situation. The influence of American electoral processes on the transformation of US Middle East policy strategies is clarified. The mechanisms for implementing strategies such as "reduction," "non-intervention," "distant balancing," "containment and engagement," "regime change," "engagement as integration," "engagement as bargaining," "reconciliation," "maximum pressure," "containment and involvement" in bilateral relations with Middle Eastern countries are disclosed, along with the dynamics of American-Iranian and American-Saudi relations due to the application of selected strategies. It is proven that the influence of the US as a global power capable of exercising monopolistic control over the development of events and processes both at the global and regional (Middle Eastern) levels is diminishing, reflecting a broader shift in the global balance of power. The weakening of their leadership positions is particularly evident in the Middle East region, dominance in which was one of the guarantors of US global leadership. It is substantiated that most directions of US bilateral Middle Eastern policy have experienced negative dynamics due to the influence of both global and regional factors, including the strengthening of the positions of the PRC and the RF and intra-regional changes. If during the period of bipolar confrontation, global factors were key in shaping the priority system of US bilateral relations with Middle Eastern countries, then at the present stage, the role of regional factors is increasing while maintaining the importance of global ones (the need to counteract the PRC and the RF, the Russian-Ukrainian war, the Israel-Hamas conflict, the Iran-Israel confrontation).

This article is partly a reply to Professor Hans Kochler, who argues that the total absence of a balance of power has become the fundamental predicament of the United Nations Organization in the 21st century. He locates that problem in the veto power of the permanent five members, saying that it creates an irreconcilable normative contradiction with the doctrine of sovereign equality. On the contrary, this article takes a historical view and argues that the Framers of the United Nations (UN) Charter clearly saw the greater opportunity which greater power brings to oil the wheels of the machinery which they built. Choosing between a Security Council that could act unchecked and therefore decisively and one which evinces a separation of powers in its design, the Framers opted for the latter. The veto separates power. Finally, Professor Kochler argues that the UN has been margina- lized in recent events. This article argues that his underlying assumption, that the shift in the global power balance of 1945 to the current unipolar imbalance of power automatically controverts the power balance envisioned in the Charter, is not wholly borne out. The Charter was not simply meant to reflect the actual pat- terns of global power outside the organization but was intended to foster an enduring understanding of the need to maintain a specific power balance. By putting the veto in several hands, the Framers have required the permanent five members to continu- ously negotiate and seek agreement among themselves. It is this which, in large part, explains observable attempts by even would-be transgressors today to bring their action within the framework of Charter legality.

Background. The post-bipolar system of international relations is in a state of deep crisis: global governance institutions are ineffective, the balance of power is disturbed, the number of political, economic and cultural contradictions is only growing, and global problems of humanity are not being solved. The local conflict in Syria has grown into a systemic war, which has significantly transformed the existing international system and determined a number of subsequent events. The article examines in detail the Syrian war from the point of view of its systemic nature and impact on the global balance of power. Methods. The study was based on a combination of two scientific approaches, namely: political realism and a systemic approach. The synthesis of these two concepts makes it possible to analyze the Syrian events from different angles: on the one hand, the role of individual actors in the conflict is highlighted in accordance with their own interests, and on the other hand, the civil war in Syria is considered as a single system of interconnected elements that interact with each other. Results. The article examines in detail the concept of "systemic war" and its impact on the international system, analyzes systemic wars that have taken place in the history of international relations, and proves that the Syrian crisis is also one of the systemic wars that have significantly changed the global balance of power. Conclusions. The Syrian conflict has significantly transformed the existing system of international relations, led to a change in the balance of power and the formation of new alliances, determined further armed conflicts and allowed contenders for leadership (China, Russia) to challenge the leader of the system (the United States).

The article "Problem of world order in modern Western studies" is the study of one of the most debated issues in the science of international relations - world order. Discussion of the structure of world order is underway in various countries, both at the state level and in the expert community. Some researchers insist on the fact that after the end of the cold war, the collapse of the bipolar model of international relations, the world has become unipolar. Others argue that the increase in the number of centers of power and the need for a multilateral approach to solving global problems (terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, environmental and climate issues) talking about the formation of multipolarity. However, it should be recognized that currently no widely accepted theoretical and conceptual apparatus, which complicates not only the study of the world order, but makes it impossible to search for common approaches of the international community in solving the problems associated with global development, new challenges and threats. The author of this article seeks to research and analyze the various theoretical paradigms (neo-realism, neo-liberalism, institutionalism, neo-marxism, etc.) and concepts to form a coherent picture of the structure of the world system, its main features and to offer readers the vision of the concept of "world order". Thus, the article notes that the multidimensional structure of the modern system of international relations established after the end of the cold war is so complex that none of the concepts can claim to accurate interpretation of the world order. The modern system differs from systems of the past centuries. Characteristics inherent in it (on the one hand, the increasing global processes in economy, politics, culture, etc., on the other, the attraction to return to the concept of "nation state", the closure of borders, the disintegration), require new approaches to the study of world order, factors of its formation and its components. The world system is dynamic and none of the previously existing concepts of world order are not able to accurately describe the processes occurring in the world today. For example, a bipolar model is formed based on the principle of "balance of power", a unipolar system exists on the basis of the dictates of the powers, and a multipolar - subject to the availability of the political equilibrium. It becomes obvious that the constantly changing conditions in the global arena require a whole new approach to the formation of a genuine world order. While each country will be guided by their own ideas of the world development plan focused on their interests, often in conflict with the global balance of power, to speak of a stable, efficient, safe development is impossible.