On May 29, 2006, the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences hosted a scientific conference "The Asian Arc of Instability at the beginning of the XXI century", organized by the Department of Complex Problems of International Relations of the Institute.

The conference was attended by researchers, diplomats and teachers of higher educational institutions. About 20 people made presentations. A wide range of topical issues related to the current state and prospects for the development of the system of international relations in Asia were discussed, with a change in the essence and priorities of the main problems and threats existing on this continent.

Opening the conference, Head of the Department of Complex Problems of International Relations of the Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences A. M. Khazanov said that the conference is dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the department. The foundation of the department and the first 20 years of its existence are associated with the name of the world-famous orientalist G. L. Bondarevsky. During the existence of the department, its staff published a large number of fundamental monographs, many of which were included in the golden fund of Russian Oriental studies.

A. M. Khazanov in his report "A new configuration of forces in Asia" noted that the truly tectonic shifts taking place before our eyes in the global system of international relations have forced scientists around the world to look for new approaches to studying the transformation of international relations both at the global and regional levels. In particular, the consequences of globalization and the frequent manifestations of intercivilizational and intra-civilizational conflicts are attracting increasing attention of scientists. According to A. M. Khazanov, one of the consequences of globalization was radical changes in relations between countries and groups of states. New geo-economic and geopolitical forces have clearly emerged in the global geopolitical and economic system, including, first of all, such super-large Asian countries as China and India.

[I. A. Latyshev] (IB RAS) in the report " Tokyo Summit. Territorial concessions or an economic invasion of the Kuril Islands by the Japanese? " analyzed the results of Vladimir Putin's visit to Japan on November 20-22, 2005. As the speaker noted," on the surface " in the territorial dispute, there seems to be no progress. Koizumi has not withdrawn his demands for the" return " of the four islands to Japan, and Putin has not abandoned his claims that the islands claimed by Japan belong to Russia and are under its sovereignty. For this reason, both sides chose not to publish any joint final communiques. And this is already a significant fact. Representatives of the Sakhalin public, for example, regarded it as evidence of a certain "hardening" of the position of the Russian side, which makes it possible to suspend the " erosion of Russian sovereignty in the Kuril direction." However, it remains unclear to the public of both countries whether the Russian side reneged on Khrushchev's ill-advised promise to hand over the Habomai and Shikotan Islands to Japan (the Soviet-Japanese declaration of 1956), and whether Vladimir Putin's words about Russia's sovereignty over the Kuril Islands should be understood as confirmation of his renunciation of the aforementioned promise. The Tokyo summit did not clarify this issue.

V. P. Titov (Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation) in the report " The Asian Arc of instability at the beginning of the XXI century . New theoretical approaches to the problems of world politics " put forward a hypothesis about the growth of the knowledge intensity of political practice at the beginning of the XXI century. Knowledge of specific historical processes and phenomena in world politics in recent years has been increasingly based on theoretical knowledge. According to the speaker, theoretical studies of world politics and political practice are in a certain systemic interaction. It is built according to the scheme: macrotheory-middle-level theories-empirical research - political practice. V. P. Titov suggested that in the Asian "arc of instability" of the new stage of world history after 11.09.2001, new non-state factors began to play a very important role-transnational terrorist networks and radical international terrorist organizations, which were easily mastered in a changing world with permeable borders and eroding territorial sovereignty, V. P. Titov concluded that the era of neoclassical relativism is approaching.-

page 160

They do not fit into the usual theories and identification schemes that corresponded to the conditions of the XIX and XX centuries.

V. I. Gusarov (Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences) in his report "The Arab World in the XXI century: hotbeds of tension and the arc of instability" analyzed the socio-economic and geopolitical situation in the Arab world at the beginning of this century. He stressed that the Arab countries entered the 21st century with extremely differentiated results of the previous development. The speaker convincingly (based on a large amount of factual and statistical material) showed that the lower the level of GDP per capita, the higher the socio-political and military-strategic tension in a particular country or region. As shown by V. I. Gusarov, this pattern can be clearly traced on the example of Arab countries involved in conflict situations (Mauritania, Western Sahara, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Palestine). The speaker made a thorough and in-depth analysis of the main hotbeds of tension in the Arab world and came to the conclusion that the hotbeds of tension in the Arab world in the coming century remain as a legacy of the past century; they cannot yet be resolved and thus preserve the Arab-Asian arc of instability.

K. V. Markov (Institute of Political Science of the Russian Academy of Sciences) in his report "The ruling elite of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the problem of liberalizing the theocratic regime" set himself the task of finding out whether it is possible to democratize the current regime in Iran. In his opinion, Ahmadinejad's victory in the presidential election shows the inability of the theocracy to reform itself. The speaker supported this conclusion by analyzing two key factors - the reasons for the success of the conservatives in the fight against the liberal onslaught and the fundamental unwillingness of the reform wing to dismantle the regime. An in-depth and comprehensive analysis of these factors led the rapporteur to conclude that the liberal reforms implemented by the Iranian Government should be viewed exclusively in the context of adapting the theocracy to the domestic and foreign political environment. This situation creates big problems for Iran. On the one hand, the ruling clergy is faced with the need to neutralize the Iranians ' discontent with the infringement of their freedoms, on the other hand, the regime is forced to get rid of its extremist image in order to gain international support in the fight against US expansionism in the Middle East.

Sergey Chernyavsky (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation) in his report "Geopolitical Shifts in Central Asia" examined the influence of external factors on the situation in Central Asia, including the American, European, Chinese and Turkish factors. Speaking about the prospects for the internal political development of the countries of the region, the speaker noted that since the new elite in the Central Asian countries was in no hurry to destroy the old political system, hoping to adapt it as much as possible to the new conditions, there was no real restructuring of the authorities in the direction of their democratization. Common to all CIS countries are the underdeveloped political structure, the absence of centrist parties, serious problems with the practical implementation of human rights, as well as a high degree of corruption in government structures. All this, he concluded, creates objective conditions for social explosions that, if actively supported from outside, can develop into a revolutionary situation.

Uysal Gul (IB RAS) in her report "The Caspian problem in Turkish-Russian relations" analyzed the problems and difficulties that exist in Turkish-Russian relations in connection with the Caspian problem. She noted that there was a kind of diplomatic competition between Russia and Turkey on the issue of the pipeline. Turkey, with the support of the United States, has stepped up its diplomatic lobbying in favor of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, taking advantage of the difficulties in implementing the CPC (Caspian Pipeline Consortium) project, the Chechen factor,and fanning the hype around the problem of strait throughput. Assessing the prospects of Russian-Turkish relations, the speaker noted that now there is a lot of talk and writing about the formation of two opposing alliances in the region: Azerbaijan-Turkey, supported by the United States, and Armenia-Iran, supported by Russia. At the moment, in her opinion, we can only talk about mutual attraction, and real unions are still far away. However, a number of interstate agreements, including military ones, allow us to speak about trends towards real confrontation. Naturally, this may cause tension in relations between Russia and Turkey.

The report "Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China in the system of Asian "arcs of instability"", presented by O. V. Zotov (IB RAS), examined the historical and geopolitical aspects of the problem of Xinjiang as a hidden but important node of instability

page 161

in Asia. The speaker drew the audience's attention to the intersection of lines and arcs of instability in Asia. According to him, the most noticeable overlap is the US military line of penetration across the Islamic arc of instability. On closer inspection, all the most important geopolitical contact lines within Eurasia and arcs of instability in the most important areas include Xinjiang or run into it. Here the arcs of Mackinder and Brzezinski converge, and Islamic extremism and the expansion of the United States "stumble" over it. The importance of Xinjiang in global geopolitics is evaluated one-sidedly and insufficiently, since China itself is called only a "regional superpower"in the West. This would be true if China did not own Xinjiang and, thanks to Xinjiang, did not have the power of the four regions of Asia - East, South, Central and West. Anticipating China's global role, the speaker noted, General Snesarev assigned Xinjiang the role of "the key to world politics" a hundred years ago.

K. R. Urazova (Tashkent State University of Oriental Studies) in her report "The role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in shaping a new economic Security policy in Central Asia" showed the SCO's place among international organizations that contribute to strengthening stability in Asia. The speaker stressed that the Central Asian countries have high hopes for the SCO, which is seen as an effective mechanism for international cooperation. According to her, the SCO actively advocates a new concept of security through the development of cooperation, for a new type of relations, the core of which is partnership, for a new model of regional cooperation, characterized by joint efforts of large and small countries. According to K. R. Urazova, participation in the SCO has opened up new opportunities for Uzbekistan's economic integration with the organization's member countries. In particular, the strengthening of cooperation with countries such as Russia and China has a positive impact on the further expansion of ties with the regions of Europe and Southeast Asia. The speaker expressed confidence that the use of the economic potential of these countries within the SCO, including their opportunities in the field of transport communications and investment, will have a positive impact on Uzbekistan.

R. M. Ziganshin (Institute of Internal Affairs of the Russian Academy of Sciences) in his report "Factors of instability in Central Asia" made an attempt to find out the underlying causes and hidden springs of conflicts and instability in Central Asia. In his opinion, the main factor of instability in this region is the clash of interests of various states and political groups. And the low standard of living, ethnic and religious contradictions, and terrorism are exacerbated by this main factor, i.e. they are largely its derivatives. According to the speaker, the SCO is currently a deterrent against three threats to the modern world: terrorism, religious extremism and separatism. To these can be added a fourth - hegemonism in all its manifestations, from whomever this threat comes. The SCO is viewed as an organization designed for a multipolar world and emerged as a result of the formation of a multipolar system. Whether it will meet such expectations, time will tell.

Summing up the conference, A. M. Khazanov noted that the discussion made it possible to identify a wide range of opinions of international Orientalists on the issues discussed. The exchange of ideas that took place at the conference, he said, was very productive and will undoubtedly serve as an impetus for new research on the state and prospects of international relations in Asia.

Permanent link to this publication: