Упрощенная HTML-версия
Электронное приложение к журналу «
Международная жизнь
»
Authors: Andrey Kortunov, Director General, Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), Candidate
of Science (History)
Alexander Frolov, Leading research associate, Institute of World Economy and International Relations,
Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Science (Political Science)
A. Frolov (A.F.): The U.S. foreign policy today has fallen
on hard times. The world is entering a new era with a
lot of totally new challenges, including untraditional
challenges that the U.S. leadership is faced with. In some
instances, Washington manages to fit into ongoing
processes while in others, the situation starts to follow
a different scenario and then this policy, which is based
on a number of important and fundamental principles,
begins to founder.
A. Kortunov (A.K.): World history shows that any country or group of countries that are losing
their former positions in the international system find this hard to stomach. They try to do all
they can to maintain the status quo, freeze the ongoing changes and, as far as possible, not share
their positions and status with new powers. This is precisely what we are seeing today. I will cite
just one example - the ongoing struggle for the future of international financial institutions.
However, in my opinion, it would be wrong to dramatize the relative decline of the United States:
The U.S. economy has a significant safety margin.
A.F.: Generally, it is good that processes are not moving along so quickly. However, even the
most developed state still should have some groundwork done for the future.
A.K.: I would say that investment of resources in education and science is investment not only
in the future but also in the present. Today, the global market of scientific and educational serv-
ices is comparable to the world arms market, and to many countries, the export of these services
is a wide-ranging and profitable business.
A.K.:On the other hand, the convenience of the U.S. system of governance is that it makes it
possible always to dissociate each new administration from its predecessors. This sets it apart
from the Soviet system, with the CPSU Central Commission Politburo at the top, which operated
in longer cycles. In the United States, a new president can always say that all those who were in
his position before were incompetent, badly informed and unprofessional people and that he is
not responsible for their action.
A.F.: I believe that many professionals, as well as Americans who are close to foreign policy mat-
ters, see a certain measure of senselessness in Obama's Middle East policy. There is a feeling
that he does not know what to do. Sen. McCain is the only one who knows: in response to Russ-
ian airstrikes in Syria. Perhaps this is the reason for the recent conversation between the U.S. and
Russian defense ministers. Evidently, there is a need to consult each other.
A.K.: I would like to point out that the appeal of liberal democracy is waning not only in the
U.S. Policy in a Changing World