, candidate of political sciences, senior researcher, leading researcher of the State institution "Institute of World History of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
The article is devoted to the analysis of continuing destabilisation of the post-Cold War international security regime. Contemporary destructive and destabilizing trends indicate a deep crisis within the Euro-Atlantic community, which is manifested by the aggravation of political contradictions in the U.S. politics, the British decision to leave the EU, as well as the stalemate of European integration project, the decline of traditional systemic political parties, the triumphant rise of different radicals and populists, etc.
Comparing the Russia’s ‘hybrid war’ against Ukraine with the aggression of Nazi Germany in 1938-1939 the author draws parallels between the contemporary international situation and the events of the eve of the Second World War. It is approved that the so called ‘diplomatic isolation’ approach to the aggressor is unrealistic and dubious while the soft form of freezing sanctions are substantially ineffective. It is alleged that the assets of Russian oligarchs and high-ranking officials, as well as the property rights, legal abilities and banking accounts of the members of their families were not limited in the majority of EU jurisdictions.
Such kind of a soft treatment resembles the ‘spirit of Munich’ as a notorious phenomenon of European mass political consciousness in the 1930s. It seems wrong that the responsibility for the policy of appeasement was laid exceptionally on a group of stupid and short-sighted politicians, whose decisions let to the occupation of many countries and millions of deaths. On the basis of historical facts the author proves the thesis that the 1938 Munich agreement was the result of a consensus of the French and British ruling elites, which was supported by an overwhelming majority of the population in these countries. The current European international situation also clarifies the failure of legal fetishism, dubious efficacy of international guarantees and makes evident the inefficiency of collective security mechanisms. Analysing the probability of termination of appeasement policy approach towards Russia it is likely that the European public leaders still reject the more principled and realistic containment strategy. It reminds the European reaction on Danzig incidents and denial of allied guaranties under the pretext that some people were “quarreling among themselves in a distant country about which we know almost nothing”.
Keywords : Munich conference, international security, ‘spirit of Munich’ war, security guarantees, appeasement, international peace
Language of the article : Ukrainian
1. Гончаренко Р. Грустные итоги Мюнхенской конференции по безопасности. – [Электронний ресурс]. – Режим доступа: https://p.dw.com/p/3DXfv
2. Солженицын А. Нобелевская лекция по литературе, 1972. – [Электронний ресурс]. – Режим доступа: http://lib.ru/PROZA/SOLZHENICYN/s_nobel.txt
4.Трамп і Макрон домовились повернути Росію до G8 наступного року. – [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/news/2019/08/21/7099893/
6.Довідник НАТО / Public Diplomacy Division. – Bruxelles, 2006. – 384 с.
7.Taylor T. Munich: The Price of Peace. N.Y.: Doubleday Books/Hodder and Stoughton, 1979. – 1084 p.
8.Табуи Ж. Двадцать лет дипломатической борьбы. – М.: Издательство иностранной литературы, 1960. – 464 с.
9. Kissinger H. A world restored; Metternich, Castlereagh and the problems of peace 1812-22. – Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1957. – 354 р.
10.От Мюнхена до Токийского залива: взгляд с Запада на трагические страницы истории Второй мировой войны. – М.: Политиздат, 1992. – 448 с.
11. Facebook Pavlo Klimkin. – [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: https://www.facebook.com/pavloklimkin.ua/posts/822634838083874