Countries are the maintenance of ties and stability within the country and beyond its borders. The importance of both aspects of state activity cannot be overestimated. Domestic politics provides support for the government's course, promotes peace and harmony, forms the integrity of the state.

The essence of the concept

Any state strives for self-preservation, development and stability. Therefore, the policy aimed at maintaining order in the country and uniting peoples in the world has a long history. Domestic policy as one of the most important functions of the state arises along with this social institution. In a global sense, this concept refers to the activities of the state to establish, maintain or reform the socio-political system through the solution of problems of a social, economic, cultural order. Domestic policy is designed to perform the following functions: organize the economic component, maintain the country in a state of stability, establish social justice in the distribution of benefits and rational, safe use of the country's resources, maintain law and order and preserve the unity of the state.

The Significance of the Domestic Policy of the State

Any state relies on its people in carrying out reforms aimed at developing the country and ensuring its integrity. Domestic policy in this case is a condition for the satisfaction of the population with their government. Only people who feel the care of the state about themselves are ready to work for its benefit, to connect their future with it. Human capital is the main wealth of the country, and people need to be taken care of.

This is the highest significance of domestic policy. A satisfied population will help the state achieve high results in foreign policy and in the implementation of the most ambitious plans. Domestic and foreign policy are thus closely intertwined. They influence each other and their results affect all areas of the life of the population and the state. For the population of the country, domestic policy should be understandable and close, only then it will be successful and supported. Therefore, the state must establish special communication relations with the population in order to talk about goals and plans.

Principles of domestic policy

The state in carrying out its course relies on the main law - the Constitution. In addition, internal policy is based on several principles:

• the state always and in everything protects the dignity of the individual;
• the realization of the rights and freedoms of one person must not violate the constitutional guarantees of other people;
• citizens of the country have the right to participate in the government of the country both independently and through their representatives in power;
• all people are equal before the law and the court;
• the state always guarantees the equality of citizens regardless of any circumstances, such as place of residence, race, gender, income, etc.

The internal policy of the state is built on the foundation of morality, justice and humanism. The government puts the interests of its people above everything and seeks to create the most comfortable living conditions for them.

Domestic policy structure

Numerous challenges ahead internal politics, lead to the complexity of its structure. In general, it is divided into two areas: activities at the national level and actions at the regional level. These areas have different resources: primarily financial, as well as their own areas of responsibility.

In addition, traditionally, such areas of domestic policy are distinguished as economic, social, national, demographic and the sphere of strengthening statehood. There are attempts to identify smaller areas, but in general, this typology well reflects the main goals and zones of influence of the state within the country. All directions are even documented and visible in the structure of the country's governing bodies and regional regions. They can also highlight other areas, for example, protection environment, military, agrarian, cultural and law enforcement policy.

Strengthening statehood as a base for domestic policy

Preserving the integrity and unity of the state is one of the most important tasks that domestic policy solves. This is especially important in large, multinational countries like Russia, for example. Prevention of national strife and separatist attempts to single out certain regions as independent subjects of politics is very important, especially today, in times of growing national consciousness among small peoples. Keeping a region in the country, such as Catalonia in Spain, requires complex actions at the most different levels. This area also includes the promotion of national values, symbols and history. The state implements this function together with the media and various social institutions.

Economic policy

The most important is the economic domestic policy, which guarantees the stability of the country. Ensuring free competition, strict enforcement of antimonopoly legislation is one of the aspects of economic policy. Maintaining stability is also important. financial system, this aspect includes the formation of the budget and control of its execution, as well as assistance to the national currency, promotion of business development in the country. The main indicators for economic policy is the size of the GDP of the state's external debt. Also, the policy stimulates the renewal and modernization of the country's production capacities, creates a fertile ground for attracting investment, regulates tax law. The country should create conditions for entrepreneurs who want to start their own business, as well as help retain young professionals and highly qualified personnel.

Social politics

The Department of Domestic Policy is most often associated with social policy. Indeed, it is one of the most important, as it directly concerns every person in the state and is felt by the inhabitants of the country every day. The state must provide the population with an acceptable standard of living, focusing on the protection of socially disadvantaged groups: orphans, the disabled, single parents, pensioners, the unemployed. An important part of social policy is the protection of the health of citizens, which includes the organization of a qualified medical care, providing those in need with medicines, organizing sanatorium treatment, monitoring the quality of food and the cleanliness of the environment. Social policy also includes the regulation of disproportions in the incomes of the population, mitigation of the consequences of social inequality. In addition, it includes the regulation of the education sector, the creation of a system of preschool and school education, and the control of their quality. Often, the social sphere includes the work of the state in the field of culture and ecology.

Demographic policy

The number of the population, its natural increase and decrease is the subject of concern of the state. It controls the demographics in the country, strives to achieve the optimal ratio between different age groups, the number of births and deaths of citizens. For example, for Russia it is important to increase the birth rate, since there is a decrease in the working-age population, while in China, on the contrary, it must be reduced due to too rapid population growth. The solution of demographic problems is impossible only by changing the legislation. Here it is necessary to conduct propaganda work, to use material mechanisms of influence.

National politics

The internal policy of the state pays great attention to the problems of relations between people. different nationalities and religions. Especially today, when ethnic conflicts are becoming more acute. The importance of state activity in this area is only increasing. Russia's domestic policy is primarily aimed at restoring friendly relations between people of different ethnic groups and cultures. It is also very important for the government to regulate migration processes that can provoke conflicts. Therefore, to anticipate and warn them in time is the goal. national policy. The task of the state is to create favorable conditions for the life of all citizens, regardless of their nationality, to stop possible discrimination on the basis of race and to promote the development of cultures and languages ​​of the peoples living in the country.

Question number 63: Domestic and foreign policy of the state.

The relationship between internal and foreign policy.

The problem of interconnection and mutual influence of domestic and foreign policy is one of the most complex problems that has been and continues to be the subject of acute controversy between various theoretical areas of international political science - traditionalism, political idealism, Marxism and their modern varieties such as neorealism and neo-Marxism, theories dependencies and interdependence, structuralism and transnationalism. Each of these directions proceeds in the interpretation of the problem under consideration from its own ideas about the sources and driving forces of politics.

For example, for supporters political realism, foreign and domestic policy, although they have a single essence, which, in their opinion, ultimately comes down to a struggle for power, nevertheless, constitute fundamentally different spheres of state activity. But Morgenthau believes that foreign policy is determined by national interests. National interests are objective, because they are associated with the invariable human nature, geographical conditions, socio-cultural and historical traditions of the people. They have two components: one constant is the imperative of survival, an immutable law of nature; another variable which is the particular form these interests take in time and space. The definition of this form belongs to the state, which has a monopoly on communication with outside world. The basis of the national interest, reflecting the language of the people, their culture, the natural conditions of their existence, etc., remains constant. Therefore, the internal factors of the country's life (political regime, public opinion, etc.), which can change and change depending on various circumstances, are not considered by realists as capable of influencing the nature of the national interest: in particular, the national interest is not related to the nature of the political mode. Accordingly, domestic and foreign policy have significant autonomy in relation to each other. On the contrary, from the point of view of representatives of a number of other theoretical trends and schools, domestic and foreign policy are not only connected with each other, but their connection is determined. There are two versions of their determination. According to orthodox Marxism , foreign policy is a reflection of the class essence of the domestic political regime and ultimately depends on the economic relations of society that determine this essence. Hence, international relations as a whole are of a "secondary" and "tertiary", "transferred" character.

According to the version of supporters of geopolitical concepts , “rich North” and “poor South” theories, as well as neo-Marxist theories of dependence, “world center” and “world periphery”, etc., external coercions are the exclusive source of domestic politics. So, for example, in order to understand the internal contradictions and political struggle in a particular state, I. Wallerstein considers it necessary to consider it in a broader context; in the context of the integrity of the world, which is a global empire, which is based on the laws of the capitalist mode of production - the world economy. The "center of the empire" - a small group of economically developed states - consuming the resources of the "world periphery", is a producer of industrial products and consumer goods necessary for the existence of its constituent underdeveloped countries. Thus, we are talking about the existence between the "center" and the "periphery" of relations of asymmetric interdependence, which is the main field of their foreign policy struggle. The developed countries are interested in maintaining this state (which, in fact, is a state of dependence), while the countries of the "periphery", on the contrary, seek to change it, to establish a new world economic order. Ultimately, the main interests of both lie in the sphere of foreign policy, on the success of which their internal well-being depends. The significance of internal political processes, the struggle of parties and movements within a particular country, is determined by the role they are able to play in the context of the "world economy".

For representatives of such theoretical trends in international political theory as neorealism And structuralism(acquiring relatively independent significance), foreign policy is a continuation of domestic policy, and international relations are a continuation of intrasocial relations. However, the decisive role in determining foreign policy, in their opinion, is played not by national interests, but by the internal dynamics of the international system. At the same time, the changing structure of the international system is of primary importance: being, ultimately, an indirect result of the behavior of states, as well as a consequence of their very nature and the relations established between them, it at the same time dictates its laws to them. Thus, the question of whether the internal policy of the state is determined by its foreign policy or vice versa, is decided in favor of foreign policy.

Representatives concepts of interdependence of the world in the analysis of the issue under consideration, they proceed from the thesis according to which domestic and foreign policy have a common basis - the state. In order to get a correct idea of ​​world politics, one should, as Professor L. Dudley of the University of Montreal believes, for example, return to the question of the essence of the state. Any sovereign state has two monopolies of power. Firstly, it has a recognized and exclusive right to use force within its territory, and secondly, it has a legitimate right to levy taxes here. Thus, the territorial boundaries of the state are the framework within which the first of these power monopolies is exercised - the monopoly on violence - and beyond which the field of its foreign policy begins. Here the right of one state to violence ends and the right of another begins. Therefore, any event capable of changing what the state considers as its optimal borders can cause a whole series of unrest and conflicts. The limits of the use of force within the framework of the state have always been determined by its ability to control its remote territories. This possibility depends on the level of development of military technologies. Since the current level of development of transport and weapons makes it possible to significantly reduce the state costs of controlling the territory, the optimal size of the state has also increased. Thus, for the supporters of the described positions, the question of the primacy of domestic policy in relation to foreign policy or vice versa is of no fundamental importance: in their opinion, both are determined by factors of a different, primarily technological nature.

Proponents of the school go even further in this regard. transnationalism. In their opinion, today the relations between states are no longer the basis of world politics. Diversity of participants (intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, enterprises, social movements, various kinds of associations and individuals), types (cultural and scientific cooperation, economic exchanges, family relations, professional ties) and “channels” (interuniversity partnerships, confessional ties, cooperation of associations etc.) interactions between them displace the state from the center of international communication, contribute to the transformation of such communication from “international” (i.e., interstate) into “transnational” (i.e., carried out in addition to and without the participation of states). For new actors, the number of which is almost infinite, there are no national borders. Before our eyes, a global world is emerging, in which the division of politics into internal and external loses all meaning.

A significant influence on this approach was put forward by J. Rosenau back in 1969, ideas about the relationship inner life society and international relations, about the role of social, economic and cultural factors in explaining the international behavior of governments, about "external" sources that may have purely "internal", at first glance, events. Rosenau was also one of the first who began to talk about the "bifurcation" of the world : modernity is characterized by the coexistence, on the one hand, of the field of interstate relations, in which the "laws" of classical diplomacy and strategy operate; and on the other hand, the field in which "actors outside sovereignty" collide, i.e. non-state actors. Hence the “two-layered nature” of world politics: interstate relations and the interaction of non-state actors constitute two independent, relatively independent, parallel worlds of “post-international” politics.

Continuing this idea, the French political scientist B. Badi dwells on the problem of importing Western political models by the countries of the "South" (in particular, the state as an institution of political organization of people). In a broad sense, he believes, one can state a clear failure of the universalization of the Western model of the political system.

First, deterministic explanations of the relationship between domestic and foreign policy are not fruitful. Each of them - whether we are talking about the "primacy" of domestic policy in relation to foreign or vice versa - reflects only part of the truth and therefore cannot claim to be universal, moreover, the very duration of this kind of polemic - and it actually lasts as long as it exists political science - indicates that in fact it reflects the close relationship between endogenous and exogenous factors of political life. Any significant events in the internal political life of this or that country are immediately reflected in its international position and require from it appropriate steps in the field of foreign policy. The opposite is also true: important decisions taken in the sphere of foreign policy entail the need for adequate measures in the domestic political sphere. Thus, the intention of the Russian Federation to become a member of the Council of Europe required its leadership to change its attitude to the problem of human rights, which in post-Soviet Russia, according to international and domestic human rights organizations, were violated everywhere.

Secondly, in modern conditions, the connection between "domestic" and "foreign" policies is becoming so close that sometimes the very use of these terms loses its meaning, leaving the possibility for ideas about two separate areas between which there are insurmountable boundaries, while reality we are talking about their constant mutual interweaving and "flowing" into each other.

In turn, priorities in the field of foreign policy are dictated by the need to advance along the path of the domestic political goals declared by the regime - political democracy, market economy, social stability, guarantees of individual rights and freedoms, or, at least, periodic declarative confirmation of commitment to the course of reforms.

Thirdly, the growth in the number of actors "outside sovereignty" does not mean that the state as an institution of political organization of people has already lost its role or will lose it in the "foreseeable future. Domestic and foreign policy remain two inextricably linked and at the same time irreducible to each other "sides of the same coin", one of which is turned inside the state, the other - to the warrior.

Fourthly, the complication of political situations and events, one of the sources and manifestation of which is the growth in the number and diversity of actors (including such as mafia groups, criminal clans, ambitious and influential informal leaders, etc.), has its own consequence the fact that their actions not only transcend national borders, but also entail significant changes in economic, social and political attitudes and ideals and often do not fit into the usual ideas.

2 . Criteria and structure of the national interest

Any interest is based on objective needs, the needs of the subject or social community, due to economic, social, political, etc. the situations they are in. The process of cognition of social needs is the process of forming people's interests. Thus, interest is an objective-subjective category. Moreover, not only true, but also falsely understood interest can be objective in its basis.

There are also imaginary and subjective national interests. An example of an imaginary national interest is such a situation when an idea becomes a national myth, takes possession of the minds of people, and it is extremely difficult to prove this imaginary to them. A textbook example of subjective interest is the act of Herostratus, who achieved immortal "glory" by setting fire to the temple. An example of the subjective "national interest" in modern international relations is the motives that guided Saddam Hussein when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991.

Along with the main (radical, permanent) and non-basic (secondary, temporary), objective and subjective, genuine and imaginary interests, there are also interests that coincide and mutually exclusive, intersect and non-intersect, etc.

Based on the foregoing, the concept of "interest" can be defined as the conscious needs of the subject (social community), which are a consequence of the fundamental conditions of its existence and activity. But interest is also the relation of need to the conditions for its realization. Accordingly, the national interest is the awareness and reflection in the activities of its leaders of the needs of the state. This also applies to multinational and ethnically heterogeneous states: in fact, national interest means national-state interest.

R. Aron (and a number of his followers) considered the concept of national interest to be too ambiguous and therefore ineffective for analyzing the goals and means of international relations. B. Russet and H. Starr proposed to go beyond the "vague perception of the national interest", and K. Holsti uses the concept of "foreign policy tasks" in this regard.

Geographical, cultural, political and economic factors underlie the traditional concept of a fundamental national-state interest. The national-state interest includes the following main elements: military security, which provides for the protection of state sovereignty (national independence and integrity), the constitutional order and system of values; the well-being of the country and its population, implying economic prosperity and development, a safe and favorable international environment, implying free contacts, exchanges and cooperation in the region and beyond.

Based on this, Donald Neuchterlein says that the long-term components of the American national interest are due to the following needs: 1) the protection of the United States and its constitutional system; 2) the growth of the economic well-being of the nation and the promotion of American goods to foreign markets, 3) the creation of a favorable world order; 4) dissemination abroad of American democratic values ​​and the free market system.

This classification reflects the content of the official US National Security Strategy. US national interests are divided in this document into three categories: "The first includes vital interests." The second category involves situations in which important national interests are affected.

Similarly, SWOP experts believe that "Russia's interests in relation to countries former USSR subdivided into 1) vital - in defense of which the state must be ready to use all means, including force, 2) important, and 3) less important." At the same time, they include in the first category such interests as ensuring freedom, the growth of the well-being of Russians, the territorial integrity and independence of Russia, the prevention of domination, especially military-political, of other powers on the territory of the former USSR; preventing the formation of coalitions hostile to Russia in the world, including V a response to certain actions of Russia on the territory of the former USSR, etc. In the second category, the authors include ensuring access to the raw materials, labor and commodity markets of the states of the former USSR, especially to oil in the Caspian region; creating the necessary political, economic and legal conditions for this, sharing the borders, territories and part of the military potentials of neighboring states to prevent the occurrence of military threat Russia, its further internal destabilization as a result of the influx and transit of criminals, drugs, weapons, smuggling of raw materials, nuclear materials and "dual-use" products; the use of the political, economic, military and other potential of the states of the former USSR to strengthen (in the event of establishing close allied relations with them) the international political positions of both Russia and these states. Finally, the third category includes such interests as: “Ensuring the democratic development of neighboring states. Strengthening the multilateral structures of the CIS”, etc.

Unlike this document, the official National Security Concept of Russia does not contain such a clear division of the main categories of interests, which are formulated taking into account their subjects and spheres. public life: “The national interests of Russia are a set of balanced interests of the individual, society and the state in the economic, domestic political, social, international, informational, military, border, environmental and other spheres. They are of a long-term nature and determine the main goals, strategic and current tasks of the domestic and foreign policy of the state.”

Today, the constituent elements and content of the national interest as a whole are undergoing significant changes under the pressure of new fats and circumstances. The rapid development of productive forces, mass media and information, new achievements of the scientific and technological revolution, the increasing internationalization of all aspects of public life, the emergence and exacerbation of global problems, the growing desire of people for democracy, personal dignity and material well-being - all this transforms the interests of participants in international relations , leads to a reformulation of the goals of their interaction.

Under such conditions, the national interest cannot be ensured without such conditions for the existence of the state as internal stability, economic well-being, the moral tone of society, not only military-strategic security, but environmental security, a favorable foreign policy environment, prestige and authority on the world stage. It should be borne in mind that ensuring the national interest is achieved only when the specified conditions are balanced, which are an open system of interdependent and complementary elements. Full provision of each of them is possible only ideally. In real practice, there are often cases of the absence of any elements and conditions and their insufficient development, which is compensated by the more intensive development of others. Ensuring such a balance is the essence and art of international politics. A special place in the structure of the national interest is occupied by the so-called unconscious element.

Globalization and national interest.

International politics is a process of clashes and struggles, negotiations and compromises between different types of power that seek to impose their preferences on each other. Today, this struggle is increasingly invaded, bringing into it its own distinctive features and overcoming the resistance of traditional actors, a diverse and motley set of impersonal market forces. The growth in the movement of capital and investment will create conditions for ever deeper interpenetration of national economies and more direct competition between enterprises. The expansion of interstate trade exchanges is accompanied by a significant increase in the number and volume of cross-border financial flows. The fact that the world economy is acquiring a common basis is becoming more and more obvious. The emerging global financial system and a single information space, transnational production and the world trade network entail the erasure of national borders and the transformation of state sovereignty. The world has undergone dramatic changes, among which the process of economization of politics stands out and continues to gain momentum. All this cannot but have a significant impact on the content of national interests. What is the nature of this influence?

Some believe that, in essence, nothing fundamentally new is happening. States remain the main participants in international relations, and still, as in the time of Thucydides, they need to be able to survive and develop. The complication of the world, the emergence of new global challenges does not lead to solidarity and unity of mankind, but to the aggravation of interstate contradictions. The result of the reduction of world raw materials is the struggle for access to them with the use of increasingly sophisticated means and technology, a struggle in which the national interests of various countries inevitably collide. The reason for the clashes is the ongoing redistribution of world sales markets, which is accompanied by an arms race and the ongoing policy of military-political alliances and coalitions. The concepts of "vital interests", "zones of influence", "principles of state sovereignty", etc. remain central concepts reflecting the essence of world politics in the era of globalization.

Other researchers, on the contrary, speak of a complete erosion of the content of national interests, since "new subjects of world politics are already replacing the nation-states." In their opinion, globalization leaves no room for national interests, replacing them with the interests of the world civil society. The main element of these interests is to ensure the rights and freedoms of the individual, still suppressed by the state, especially in countries with authoritarian political regimes. At the same time, some representatives of this point of view “separate” national and state interests so much that they even offer to abandon part of the state interests in favor of national ones, arguing, for example, that “the policy of maintaining sovereignty and territorial integrity leaves no chance in the long term.”

However, the reality is much more complex. Under the influence of globalization, state structures, as well as traditional social institutions, are indeed experiencing devastating upheavals. New actors undermine the traditional priorities of state sovereignty. Some scholars speak of "deterritorialization" or the "end of territories" to emphasize the depreciation of the national state government. The crisis of the state is an objective reality. The state is under pressure "from above", "from below" and "from outside",

From above, state sovereignty is being undermined by supranational organizations and institutions that are increasingly interfering with its prerogatives. Peacekeeping operations under the auspices of the UN in various parts of the world - the "Gulf War" in 1991, the internationalization of the Yugoslav conflict in 1991-1995. and so on. In addition, there is also a voluntary restriction of their sovereignty by states. This is the so-called transfer of sovereignty, i.e. transfer of its part to the communitarian structures of the integrating states. The most illustrative example in this area is the European Union.

"From below" state sovereignty is being eroded by intra-state structures and structures of civil society. IN developed countries in the sphere of politics, this is expressed, in particular, in the phenomenon of “paradiplomacy” described by the Canadian specialist Pierre Soldatos, i.e. parallel (in relation to state) diplomacy.

The objective reasons for the erosion of sovereignty "from below" are that the state is too small an entity in relation to the global economy, but it is too heavy a burden for the regional economy, and even more so for private enterprises and firms. This phenomenon is rarely considered high politics, because it often affects the spheres of economy, culture, technology, etc.

"From the outside" damage to sovereignty is caused by the activation of non-governmental groups and organizations, such as Amnesty International, human rights and environmental associations. Even more, the state is losing its monopoly (both in international and domestic affairs) under the pressure of transnational corporations, firms, banks and enterprises. Production activities in all sectors of the national economy are increasingly carried out outside the state. The distribution of wealth in the world now depends not so much on government policies, but on transfers made by the IMF and the World Bank. TNCs play an increasing role in the fiscal sphere. Private firms and TNCs "confiscate" social administration, employment policies, working conditions and wages from the states. All this is regulated not so much by state legislation as by the internal regulations of the firms themselves.

The crisis of the state looks especially dramatic in countries that are the least developed economically and politically unstable. It manifests itself here in the emergence and expansion of zones that fall out of the legal space, the spread of chaotic groups and clans that are not controlled by state legislation, settlements and regions that flow into the state of barbarism, in which only “laws” are in force, imposed on the population by criminal groups that rob people, make them hostages of their own money-grubbing, and sometimes their political ambitions directed against the state.

Thus, the dynamics of globalization really involves all states, ignoring their independence, the types of political regimes and the level of economic development. The modern world is experiencing a new era of conquest, somewhat similar to the era of colonization. But if the protagonists of previous expansions were states, then this time

large private enterprises and corporations and financial and industrial groups strive to dominate the world. New actors are increasingly undermining the role of the state in security policy, in the spheres of the economy, and communication, even affecting the “holy of holies” of state sovereignty, its monopoly on violence. The whole ego cannot but be reflected in the content of the national interest, in its main priorities and in its very existence.

Supporters of the idea of ​​abandoning sovereignty rightly emphasize that the main actor and the main driving force of globalization is transnational capital - stock companies, financial associations, major multinational banks, media corporations, industrial associations and trade groups. However, this does not mean that globalization is reduced only to the free play of impersonal market forces. New subjects do not force states out of international politics, but enter into complex interactions with them, characterized by both rivalry and cooperation.

Moreover, in international relations sovereignty cannot be and never has been an absolute value. International law, as a system of obligations voluntarily assumed by the state and limiting its freedom of action, also narrows its internal political autonomy.

There is not only a trend towards a relative decline in the traditional role of state sovereignty, but also an opposite trend towards the creation of new independent states, zealously defending both internal and external signs of their sovereignty.

Already With late 80s. different studies have led to two complementary conclusions. The first conclusion is that global enterprises that conceived their operations and their strategies on a global scale and had a truly cosmopolitan management team are extremely rare, although TNCs seek to benefit from their presence in many markets and from their access to diverse production facilities. . The second result concerns the process as a whole: globalization is gaining momentum, but national and regional spaces retain their importance, and state authorities are not powerless in the face of the process. National governments have not lost their choice in the areas of economic and social policy, even if the liberal context imposes some reforms. On the other hand, various international institutions establish rules that can meet the requirements of the control of cross-border activities. This applies in particular to exchanges of goods and services.

At the same time, when discussing globalization, one should not forget at least two more closely related processes. First, about its dialectical opposite, about regionalization. In this regard, regional integration associations (EU, NAFTA, MERCOSUR ASEAN, etc.) look not only as manifestations of globalizing processes, but also as opposition to them. In fact, each of them, to one degree or another, is an example of "closed cooperation", and the degree of closeness is higher in more advanced integration associations. We should not forget about the counter-trends of globalization:

deglobalization and preservation (albeit in updated forms) of traditional geopolitical factors in world politics. Although such trends are secondary, the significance of their implications for the national interest cannot be underestimated. The weakening of the role of states, in particular in the unstable zones of the post-Cold War world, is associated not only with the impact of impersonal market forces, but also with the unipolar vision of the world, which often dominates US policy after the fall of an ideological adversary.

Integration processes in the context of globalization unfold against the backdrop of strong disintegration trends and contribute to their consolidation. According to some French scholars, one of the goals of the regionalization processes unfolding in Europe and Asia after cold war, is to avoid rampant liberalization and thereby resist the hegemony of the only modern superpower - the United States. From a political point of view, globalization is a geopolitical reorganization, including, in particular, a revision of the policy of alliances, when belonging to the same region plays an important, but not exclusive role.

Thus, the nation-state, its sovereignty and its interests, as an analytical concept and as a criterion for the behavior of the state in the international arena, continue to retain their significance. But this does not mean that globalization does not bring any changes to national interests. On the contrary, the national interest changes significantly in its content and direction. New priorities emerge With the need to reap the benefits of globalization by adapting To the opportunities it opens up, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the struggle against the damage it brings to national development.

The most important priority of the national interest is the inclusion of the country in the process of world economic development, since the process of globalization has revealed "an almost absolute pattern: no country is able to achieve serious economic growth and growth in the welfare of the population without growing involvement in the world economy." In the structure of national interest, the desire to possess advanced technologies that ensure compatibility with the most modern means of information, communications and transport also comes to the fore. As for the military factor and related strategies (balance of power, alliances), they will move in the hierarchy of national interests from the first place, but not to the last. The survival of the nation-state today depends not so much on the ability to withstand traditional military threats (although it is still too early to dismiss them), but on the ability to find adequate responses (by creating appropriate means for this) to new challenges of economic, technological, environmental, demographic and informational.

Globalization gives rise to an effect that is characterized by the term "weak" or "inefficient state". First of all, it affects the underdeveloped countries of the South, threatens states with economies in transition and politically unstable, but to some extent affects all countries.

"National" and "state" interests not only negate, but also presuppose each other, so the infringement or "surrender" of one of these components inevitably leads to the weakening and degradation of the second. The consequence of the refusal of the state from its territorial integrity will be its inevitable weakening and degradation. A weak state is not able to adequately respond to the challenges associated with using the opportunities of globalization and curbing its devastating consequences for the standard of living, security and freedom of society and man.

That is why "a strong Russia, capable of effectively defending its interests, the interests of its citizens, remains the main goal of politics."

Protection of national interests from external and internal threats, i.e. national security still holds an important place in international relations. At the same time, globalization is making its own changes in this sphere, the sphere of national and international security.

National interests and security problems of Russia.

Russian national interests are the most essential needs of Russian society and the state, the satisfaction of which can ensure their sustainable development. Therefore, national interests are the most important tasks of domestic and foreign policy.

Undoubtedly, priority among national interests is security Russian state. In the recent past, security was understood as the protection of the country from enemy attacks, espionage, and attempts on the state system. Since the second half of the 20th century, demographic, technogenic and environmental factors. In the 1990s, new security parameters began to play an important role, which are associated with the economic and financial situation of countries, the scientific and technological revolution, the development of information and communication systems, cross-border crime, international terrorism, drug and arms trafficking, illegal migration, wars provoked by ordered by certain political forces.

However, one should not forget about the traditional components of the balance of power and military-political relations between centers of power.

At the same time, at the beginning of the 21st century, more and more definitely comes to the fore in ensuring national security information level. The fact is that the modern information revolution is unfolding against the backdrop of information wars, whose main goal is to undermine the national security of states. Information warfare is a comprehensive, holistic strategy designed to do justice to the importance and value of information in the management and implementation of national policies. The information war is aimed at the vulnerabilities that inevitably arise in an environment of increasing dependence on information. Information systems, including related transmission lines, processing centers and the human factor in these systems, as well as information technologies used in weapons systems, become the object of priority attention.

It is no secret that information weapons played a decisive role in the US victory over the USSR in the Cold War. Since then, the concept of information warfare has been continuously improved. Today, it assumes the following key points: in the administrative and economic areas, the objects of attack can be the management systems of enterprises, settlements, cities and regions. In this case, it is possible: the destruction of these systems

or manipulation of the information embedded in them, which can slow down the pace of development of the country as a whole or individual industries; reorientation of the development of industries in a direction that is beneficial for the side that used the information weapon; introducing disinformation into the financial and banking sectors; distortion of national statistical reporting, on the basis of which managerial decisions are made, including those of a strategic nature.

In the scientific and technical field, the following is possible: changing or blocking certain areas of research, the continuation of which is unprofitable for the attacking side, targeting research on unpromising areas; input of misinformation; distribution of propaganda materials; the formation of public opinion in order to provide the necessary influence on the largest research centers and individual scientists.

Today, the methods of secret services are widely used in the information war, in particular, the anonymous dissemination of the necessary information via the Internet, the targeted sending of electronic publications to well-known journalists and public figures, supposedly coming from respectable and independent sources. Russian military experts believe that Russia remains one of the main targets of electronic intelligence and special operations. The American systems of electronic espionage "Echelon" and "Carnivore" are unable to monitor Russia's cyberspace. Almost all e-mail messages that go outside of Russia are subjected to analysis.

From time to time, scandals leak into the press that secret information from strategic Russian centers is being pumped abroad through special "electronic bookmarks" in imported computer equipment. These and other similar cases testify to the fact that information wars are now actively waged on Russian territory and seriously undermine the country's national security at the most important secret information sites.

The new approach to ensuring information security is called "network structures". We are talking about the creation of "segmented, polycentric, ideologized information networks."

The concept of national security includes military doctrine. It is a system of officially accepted views on wars, armed conflicts and clashes, their role in foreign policy strategy, on the ways, forms and means of preventing them, on military development, preparing the country to repel real and potential threats to its security. The Russian military doctrine was approved on November 2, 1993 by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation. One of her main tasks was - prevention of war and military conflicts and preservation of peace. Russia puts forward political means of preventing conflicts both in the international arena and within the country, considering all countries whose policies do not harm its interests and do not contradict the UN Charter as a partner.

Today, military doctrine is rightly criticized by many military experts for its openly pacifist character in the face of increased military threats in modern world. Russia is really against fighting anyone today, and it has no territorial claims against the surrounding states. But it is impossible not to notice that a huge number of states have territorial claims against Russia along almost the entire perimeter of its borders.

In addition, the military doctrine should also cover new - informational - areas of military operations.

The Russian military doctrine should give an answer to the question of how Russia treats information wars and what goals and means it sets for itself in the information space. This direction in the development of military art is the basis of the concept of building the American armed forces "Unified Vision 2010" and is associated with the transformation of threats in the new century. It is necessary to give an adequate Russian response to these threats, formulated by leading Russian experts in the military field.

Russian military experts predict the country's economic and military growth for 10-15 years ahead (economic and military development are interconnected). A forecast study conducted in recent years at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO RAS) shows that the current US share of world GDP is approximately 21%. European Union -21%, Japan - about 8%, China - about 7%, Russian Federation - 1.7%. According to the forecast for 2015, despite the dynamics of such ratios, Russia's position in this hierarchy will not fundamentally change. It is assumed that the United States, together with Canada and Mexico, will have approximately 19% of world GDP, European Union- 16%, China will overtake Japan, its share will reach 10%, Japan's share - about 7%. New groups of states will come to the fore, such as the ASEAN countries, which are likely to have 7%, and the well-known Asia-Pacific "tigers" - South Korea and Taiwan, whose share in the aggregate may be about 5%,

The maximum that the Russian Federation can count on is approximately 2% of world GDP, and with the most favorable, optimistic forecasts for economic development, i.e. if annual economic growth averages 5-6%. Together with the CIS countries, provided that there will be the same economic growth, we can count on 2.5-3%

Experts predict that if Russia spends about 3.5% of GDP on military purposes (in 2000 we spent 2.8%) and if economic growth reaches 5-6% per year, then it will be able to maintain the status one of the two leading nuclear superpowers, i.e. maintain their strategic forces approximately at the level of the START-2 treaty (about 3 thousand nuclear warheads). However, in order not to lose this status, Russia will have to allocate up to 40-50% of the military budget only for strategic nuclear forces and their information support, warning and control systems. If Russia allocates enough funds for forces general purpose, then no more than 20% of the military budget will remain for strategic nuclear weapons, and in 15 years our strategic forces will amount to a maximum of 1000-1500 warheads. And that means three times behind the United States. Now, in terms of military spending, Russia lags behind not only the leading NATO states, but also India, Japan and China.

It is no secret that strategic nuclear forces are the main pillar of Russia's defense capability and will remain the most important factor. international influence our country. But it must be borne in mind that in the 1990s the dangers of nuclear proliferation increased significantly, and it is quite possible that this process will develop further in the next 10-15 years. Sufficient alarm is caused by the forecasts of specialists: against the background of the expected reduction in the strategic nuclear forces of Russia (to 1500 warheads) and the United States (to 3500 warheads), the forces of other nuclear powers are increasing and in the aggregate can not only be comparable to the forces of Russia, but in the worst case scenario in the foreseeable future will surpass their.

The following scenario is also predicted: in addition to England, France, China, India and Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Taiwan will join the nuclear club. If Japan also joins the number of nuclear countries, then the global nuclear balance will change completely. At the same time, the potential nuclear forces of third countries can be directed at Russia, since all states possessing or capable of possessing nuclear weapons are located much closer to Russia than to the United States. Therefore, Russian territory immediately finds itself within the reach of the new members of the nuclear club.

The intention of the United States of America to start deploying a national missile defense system could also seriously weaken Russia's nuclear deterrence capability.

defense, the need for which is justified by the need for protection from third nuclear powers. Today, due to budgetary constraints, the Russian Federation has much less funds to deploy a missile defense system on its territory than the United States. In addition, the situation is further complicated by the fact that the classic scheme of mutual deterrence that developed between Russia and the United States during the Cold War may not work in relations with third parties. nuclear countries which may be led by adventurist, fundamentalist leaders. For them, the threat of losing a significant part of their population in the event of a Russian retaliatory strike will not be a sufficient deterrent.

The information of experts about the reduction of the general-purpose armed forces is also alarming. In the 1990s, the Russian army was reduced by about 30%. Now our country is the third state in the world in terms of the number of armed forces after China and the United States. But economic difficulties, most likely, will not allow us to maintain an army of the same size (about 1.2 million people) for 10-15 years. Supporters of the reduction of the armed forces emphasize that if the army is not reduced, this will lead to the complete degradation of its technical equipment, because about 70% of the funds are spent on the maintenance of military personnel, and capital construction remains on R&D, the purchase of weapons and military equipment, less than 30%. Already now, the share of modern weapons and equipment in the Russian armed forces is less than 20%, If military spending remains at the same level, in five years this share may be reduced to 5%, In militarily advanced states, the share of modern weapons reaches 50-60% .

A choice will probably have to be made in the near future. However, it must be emphasized that even now the NATO states in Europe outnumber Russia in terms of general-purpose forces by three to four times, and on the southern borders, the Turkish armed forces make up approximately 50% of the Russian armed forces. At the same time, our army is dispersed throughout the country, including its Asian part. Military experts believe that, together with Iran, Turkey has armed forces approximately equal to those of Russia, and taking into account military power Pakistan has one and a half superiority. In the Far East, China, which now has about twice the military budget than Russia, in 10-15 years, even having reduced its army, but having improved its technical and qualitative characteristics, will be able to have approximately a twofold superiority over our armed forces. And if we take into account only that part of them, which is located in the Far East, then the PRC will have a tenfold superiority. Japan is already one and a half times superior to the Russian general-purpose forces in the Far East.

In conclusion, it is necessary to dwell on the analysis of the new concept of Russia's national security, which was approved on January 10, 2000 by the Decree of the President of Russia. The concept as a whole focuses on cooperation and integration of Russia into the world political, economic and financial systems, although it emphasizes the need to resist various forms of external pressure. There is also an "increased level and scale of threats in the military sphere" associated with a change in military strategy NATO and Russia's lagging behind the leading countries of the world V areas high technology. For the first time in the post-Soviet period, in an official state document, the policy of Western countries is openly called “a potential threat to Russian security» and application nuclear weapons is considered legitimate not only in response to its use by the aggressor, but also in the case of "large-scale aggression with the use of conventional weapons in critical situations for the national security of the Russian Federation and its allies."

Many Russian experts consider Russia's allies such states as China and Iran. India. But experts' forecasts indicate that in 10-15 years relations with China may become aggravated, because there will be disputes over raw material reserves. Far East and Siberia, as well as in connection with the demographic expansion of China to the Far East. The maps according to which Primorye belongs to China, as well as a number of other regions of this region, can be returned to the agenda of practical politics.

Russian military experts emphasize that today it is pointless to compare the forces of opponents in terms of the number of divisions, tanks and artillery, since a new generation of ultra-precise weapons has appeared. Today it is important to compare the possibilities of using the weapons that the troops possess. The criterion here is intelligence and information. But the informational level of ensuring Russia's national security was not developed in the new concept of security, which, perhaps, is the main evidence of Russia's "lag" in the leading strategic direction. In the era of transition to the information society, the concept of national security must be sustained in information paradigm - this is a strategically important statement of the question of security, without mastering which it is impossible to solve all other problems in this area.

Finally, there is another level of protection of national interests - it lies in the field of morality, ethics and culture. The concept of national security must fulfill the function consolidation of society around basic values, which would be shared by the majority of citizens, despite the social, ideological and confessional differences between them. It would be a serious mistake to think that only professionals should protect the national interests of the country. The concept of national security should be addressed to every citizen of the country - after all, it is about the security of the nation.

Today, Russian society is split both economically and ideologically. In order to consolidate it, national security must be based on the ideas of reviving the national traditions, historical and spiritual values ​​of Russia, created by the fruits of labor of all previous generations. In the information society, this problem can only be solved by state media. It is they who should talk about the achievements of Russian culture, promote Russian art and respect for national traditions. For our country to be respected throughout the world, we must respect ourselves, own history and culture. Undoubtedly, this is also the informational aspect of the concept of national security, which must be activated in the mass consciousness.

The control system, or control system, serves as an instrument for implementing the policy of the state. This is quite understandable, given that the concepts of "politics" and "political" are characterized by ambiguity. But to the question: "What is politics?" People tend to respond in different ways. There is talk, for example, of the monetary policy of the banks, the policy of the trade unions during a strike, the policy of the school authorities of the city, the policy of the management of an enterprise or school, even the policy of a clever wife who seeks to control her husband.

What is politics anyway?

What is the meaning of the term "politics"?

Politics in the proper sense of the word is, on the one hand, a sphere of people's activity, where interaction is carried out between various, often opposing or conflicting, socio-political forces regarding power and power relations between these forces. In this regard, politics is closely connected with the political world. Moreover, these terms are often used as synonyms.

On the other hand, politics is understood as the form of activity of the state and its institutions, society, political parties, organizations, movements, and even a single individual to manage various areas of public life: the economy, the social sphere, culture, education, science, healthcare, etc.

Politics in one form or another affects all citizens of the state. Huge masses of people pursuing their social, economic, cultural and other interests take part in it. The degree of complexity and versatility of politics depends on the scale of economic, social, ethno-national, confessional and other forms of pluralism in society.

The policy is designed to solve everyday and strategic problems vital to society, develop and implement programs to ensure the viability, effective functioning and further development both society as a whole and its individual subsystems. In this regard, they talk about economic, industrial, agrarian, social, military, education, health care, and so on.

In other words, with the help of a targeted policy, the management is carried out social processes. It is no coincidence that politics is sometimes called the art of government. In this sense, politics includes both conflicts, struggle and competition for power and influence, and joint actions of people in search of best ways functioning and development of society and the state. Therefore, they talk about political conflicts, political struggle, political course, political programs etc.

Of particular importance from this point of view is the resource of power. Without power, there can be no normal, effective politics. Those researchers who believe that any public problem acquires a political character if its decision is in one way or another connected with the authorities.

Politics is closely connected with decision-making. It embodies interconnection and interdependence, the dialectic of internal and external conditions and factors of development of society and the state. Therefore, it is natural that politics is divided into internal and external.

Domestic politics

Domestic policy is a set of areas of state activity in the economic, social, scientific, educational, demographic, law enforcement, military and other important areas of public life. To achieve the goals of domestic policy, the state uses wide range funds, such as the state budget, taxes, the social security system, funding for science, education, health care, judicial and law enforcement agencies.

State policy in various fields public life is by no means limited to the national level of the central authorities. As mentioned above, government in the state is carried out at three levels: national, regional and local. Accordingly, the policy is also carried out at all these three levels.

Various directions of the internal policy of the state are distinguished. They talk about the policy of economic, industrial, agrarian, social, military, employment, labor relations, education, healthcare, law enforcement, etc.

For example, the state owns the main role in the creation and maintenance in due order of infrastructure in key areas of public life: the economy, transport, energy, social sphere, science, education, etc. It serves as a guarantor of freedom of entrepreneurial activity, protection of the rights of the owner and consumer rights, etc.

Particularly indispensable is the role of the state as a guarantor of maintaining a competitive environment, where antimonopoly or antitrust legislation is of decisive importance. The state plays an indispensable role in the monetary and financial sphere, ensuring the reliability of the national currency and the stability of the monetary system. A key place in the policy of the state is occupied by the preparation, adoption and distribution of the state budget.

One of the most important activities of the state is social policy, which is a set of measures taken and implemented by the state to ensure the well-being of the general population, prevent disproportions in the incomes of various groups of the population, reduce and mitigate the consequences of social inequality, create tolerable living conditions for the poor and the poor, the elderly and the disabled, etc.

In this direction, the policy of the state in the field of science, education, and health care is of particular importance. In general, social policy performs the function of stabilizing society, preventing and overcoming social and political instability, which is crucial for the viability and effective functioning of society and the state. Obviously, social policy covers a very wide range of issues relating to almost all spheres of public life and the vast majority of citizens of a given state.

In this area, the effectiveness of policy cannot and cannot be measured in terms of profitability and competitiveness.

In this regard, the existence of such spheres and institutions is of no small importance, the results of which cannot be measured in terms of material payback or non-payback, profitability and competitiveness of products, as is customary in the field of economics. Here, the criteria for ensuring social justice and the spiritual health of society are of fundamental importance.

These are, in particular, education and health systems, social help disabled population, fundamental science, maintaining the country's defense capability, law enforcement, etc. Of particular importance is the management of various kinds of conflicts that arise in society. Here the main goal is to prevent, neutralize, settle, resolve conflicts.

Interethnic relations are an independent object of state policy. They are of particular importance in multinational states. As you know, in the modern world, most countries are multinational. In conditions when the ethno-national factor came to the fore and became a catalyst for many contradictions and even armed conflicts, this problem is gaining increasing importance.

The policy of the state in this direction is designed to provide legal, social, cultural, political regulation of interethnic relations. It is important to take into account that the state has a special responsibility for protecting and ensuring the interests of the rights and freedoms not only of an individual person or citizen, but also of ethno-national, confessional, cultural and other minorities, regardless of their social status, race, nationality, religion.

Important integral part domestic policy is a policy aimed at protecting and improving the environment, or environmental policy. It aims rational use and renewal natural resources, preservation and development of the bio- and sociosphere, which ensures normal life activity and environmental safety of a person.

Military policy is a part of the general policy of the state, which serves to ensure the national security of the country from external and internal threats, the protection and realization of national interests, territorial integrity and sovereignty, etc. Here, the main goal of state policy is the development and implementation of measures to strengthen the country's defense capability, primarily by maintaining at the proper level, and, if necessary, building up the armed forces.

The rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen are the highest value that is entrusted to the state, and the state, through its functions, is obliged to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens, the safe existence of society. The importance of this function of the state is evidenced by the fact that it is enshrined in Art. 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In this area, the key role belongs to the system law enforcement: the police, the prosecutor's office, the judiciary.

The law enforcement system is a set of state-legal means, methods and guarantees that ensure the protection of a person from illegal actions by other citizens or representatives of the state. Its task is to implement measures to prevent violations social connections and relations, protection of public order, rights and legitimate interests of citizens, their teams and organizations, reproduction and strengthening of the whole complex of institutions and relations of civil society. In this context, the effectiveness of state policy in the law enforcement sphere is determined by the degree of minimization of coercion and activation of means directly related to the promotion of positive legal behavior of citizens, their compliance with existing laws and regulations.

Of course, the internal policy of the state is by no means limited to these areas, but they can be called key ones, on the effective solution of which the state, well-being and prospects of society and the state depend. In general, it can be said that the internal policy of the state plays a decisive role in the creation and protection of social and economic infrastructure, the protection of all institutions of civil society and the provision of appropriate conditions for their viability and effective functioning.

Domestic politics

Domestic politics

a set of activities of the state, its structures and institutions for the organizational, concrete and meaningful expression of the interests of the people in order to create conditions for normal human life; maintaining or reforming the existing public and political system. The spheres of domestic policy are diverse: economic, demographic, cultural, agrarian, social, etc. One of these areas is political. Domestic policy in the political sphere is aimed at modernizing, improving the political system of society, its individual institutions, political relations and relationships between institutions, rules, norms, laws governing these interactions, and in general, at creating a stable, effective policy. This policy is based on real human interests, fundamental constitutional principles: the exercise of human rights and freedoms must not violate the rights and freedoms of others; the rights and freedoms of man and citizen are directly applicable; all are equal before the law and the court; the state guarantees equality of rights and freedoms of man and citizen, regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs, belonging to public associations, as well as other circumstances; the dignity of the individual is protected by the state; citizens have the right to participate in the management of state affairs, both directly and through their representatives; to elect and be elected to bodies state power And local government, participate in a referendum, etc. The internal policy of the state achieves success when its goals, methods and achievements are understandable, clear and approved by the majority of the population. As time has shown, Russian domestic policy, especially at the initial stage of reform, was incomprehensible to the masses, as a result of which it not only did not achieve the planned results, but the idea of ​​the harmfulness of democratic reforms, their anti-human orientation, became stronger in the minds of people. Therefore, the internal policy of many institutions of state power is alienated by people, evaluated negatively. The activities of people and the activities of institutions in different areas internal policies are organically interconnected, and only in their unity is the key to its effectiveness.

Shpak V.Yu.

Political science. Dictionary. - M: RSU. V.N. Konovalov. 2010 .

Domestic politics

the activity of the state, its institutions, which is aimed at maintaining or reforming the existing socio-political system.

Political Science: Dictionary-Reference. comp. Prof. floor of sciences Sanzharevsky I.I.. 2010 .

Political science. Dictionary. - RGU. V.N. Konovalov. 2010 .

See what "Domestic Policy" is in other dictionaries:

This page needs a major overhaul. It may need to be wikified, expanded, or rewritten. Explanation of the reasons and discussion on the Wikipedia page: For improvement / December 9, 2012. Date of setting for improvement December 9, 2012 ... Wikipedia

DOMESTIC POLICY- Politics expressing the relationship of classes, social groups and nations within the state ... Glossary of political terms

DOMESTIC POLICY- all internal affairs of the state, their conduct. This is a concept widely used in the constitutional lexicon. In the Russian Federation, the President, in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws defines the main directions of internal and ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary constitutional law

DOMESTIC POLICY- - the sphere of relations between the subjects of politics (classes, other social groups, parties, social movements, etc.), the core of which is the conquest, retention and use of power. V. p. is carried out by power structures, ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

Politics Portal: Politics Bulgaria This article is part of a series: By ... Wikipedia

Politics Portal: Politics Russia This article is part of a series: The political system of Russia The political system The Constitution of Russia ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see Politics of Ukraine. Politics Portal: Politics Ukraine ... Wikipedia

The State of Israel This article is from a series of articles: Politics and Government of Israel ... Wikipedia

The internal policy of tsarism in the 19th century.- The more the foundations of the autocratic feudal system were undermined, the clearer the reactionary nature of the policy of tsarism became. Nicholas I stubbornly guarded the dominance of the nobles in the economic, social and political life of the country throughout his ... The World History. Encyclopedia

The information in this section is out of date. You can help the project ... Wikipedia

Books

• The internal policy of Anna Ioannovna (1730-1740), N. N. Petrukhintsev. The monograph examines the process of formation of the INTERNAL POLICY OF THE TIME OF ANNA Ioannovna’s reign (1730-1740) and analyzes the largest internal political actions of Anninsky…

FOREIGN POLICY - the activities of the state in the international arena,

regulating relations with other subjects of foreign policy

activities: states, foreign parties and other public

organizations, world and regional international organizations.

V.p. relies on economic, demographic, military, scientific and

technical and cultural potential of the state; combination of the latter

determines the possibilities of V.p. activities of the state on certain

directions, the hierarchy of priorities in the formulation and implementation of V.p. goals.

The form of traditional implementation of V.p. is to establish

diplomatic relations (or reduction of their level, suspension, break and

even a declaration of war when relations with former partners are aggravated) between

states; opening of representative offices of the state at world and

regional international organizations or membership of the state in them;

Domestic policy - a set of areas of activity of the state, its structures and institutions for the organizational, concrete and meaningful expression of the interests of the people in order to create conditions for a normal human life; maintaining or reforming the existing social and state system.

Domestic policy is based on real human interests, fundamental constitutional principles:

▪ the exercise of human rights and freedoms must not violate the rights and freedoms of other persons;

▪ human and civil rights and freedoms are directly applicable;

▪ everyone is equal before the law and court;

▪ The state guarantees equality of human and civil rights and freedoms regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership in public associations, and other circumstances;

▪ the dignity of the individual is protected by the state;

▪ Citizens have the right to participate in the management of state affairs both directly and through their representatives;

▪ to elect and be elected to bodies of state power and local self-government, to participate in a referendum, etc.

18. Constitutional and legal regulation of religious relations and the status of churches.

In the conditions of democratic regimes, constitutions proclaim ideological pluralism, freedom of belief and expression of one's opinions (Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, etc.). In accordance with the International Covenants on Human Rights, the law prohibits only calls for violence, terror, racial and national hatred. Some prohibitions are related to the moral values ​​of society (for example, the restriction or complete prohibition of pornographic publications in a number of countries), with the need to protect the health of the population (for example, the prohibition or restriction of the promotion of alcohol or tobacco products).

There is an officially recognized ideology in a group of countries (for example, rukunegaru in Malaysia, pancha power in Indonesia), but it is not enforced and evading it does not attract punishment. However, significant advantages are being created for its propaganda. The same can be said about Islam, the ideas of "Arab socialism", the Caliphate in a number of Muslim countries. For non-believers, these views are not obligatory, but for Muslims they are part of the Sharia, and in those countries where the canons of Islam are most zealously observed, the expression of other views can even lead to punishment, including by a special morality police (mutawa) .

Finally, in countries with totalitarian political systems, there is, as already mentioned, a de facto or even formally obligatory ideology. Speeches criticizing Marxism-Leninism, Maoism (in China), the Juche idea, the works of Kim Il Sung in North Korea etc. brought punishment.