Moscow: Publishing House "International Relations". 1976. 336 p. Circulation 8000. Price 1 rub. 62 kopecks.

The interrelation of science with foreign policy practice, the influence of political thought on the conduct of a particular course in the international arena by the US ruling circles have become the subject of increased attention of Soviet researchers in recent years. The works of Soviet American historians cover the ideological and organizational foundations of US foreign policy, its formation, planning, and forecasting; some of the most important American theories of international relations; and some of the leading foreign policy concepts and their impact on Washington's official policy. At the same time, until recently, Soviet literature lacked a single generalizing picture of the research of American political science in the field of international relations and foreign policy. This significant gap was filled by the monograph published at the end of last year by Doctor of Historical Sciences V. F. Petrovsky.

The author has set himself a difficult task-to show not just the evolution of American bourgeois foreign policy thought, but to critically examine the main processes taking place in foreign policy thinking in the United States from the standpoint of Marxist-Leninist methodology. The book uses a wide range of sources, draws on a wealth of factual material, contains a lot of interesting new data, and deeply analyzes the work of leading American scientists and researchers specializing in the study of foreign policy and international relations. The undoubted merit of the author is that from the huge stream of literature published on this topic in the United States, he was able to select the most important, interesting and significant works that especially influenced official US policy.

V. F. Petrovsky is certainly right in describing the evolution of American bourgeois foreign policy thought as an integral part of the overall process of adapting the strategic line of US imperialism in national and international plans to the new balance of forces. " Changes in the world in favor of socialism, the rapid growth of the political, economic and military power of the Soviet state and the socialist community as a whole, the deepening of the general the crisis of the capitalist system and the growing difficulties in the United States itself make the ruling circles of this country face the need to review post-war foreign policy attitudes and find new, most effective ways and means to ensure the foreign policy interests of the United States, make certain adjustments to the existing ideas about the development of international relations, about the limits of what is possible and permissible in their foreign policy" (p.4).

The author analyzes the organization of foreign policy studies in the United States, their methods-analyzes the main theoretical and methodological schemes and leading concepts of international relations and foreign policy.

Considering the existing system of management of the bourgeois science of international relations in the United States, the author rightly points out the increased scale and changed nature of the use of science in the practice of foreign policy. Today we are already talking about the merging, close union of the government apparatus, big business and science, about an integral political and academic complex, which is an organizational form of "science management" generated by the prevailing system of state-monopoly capitalism in the United States, which allows the government, together with big business, to systematically and concretely manage research activities, to the maximum extent possible. to bring it closer to your practical needs " (p. 58). The author shows how foreign policy decisions are currently being made in the United States, as a result of state regulation of scientific research and, in particular, government orders (these orders in the field of international research are distributed in almost a third of the Russian regions).-

page 158

more than 2,100 universities and colleges in the country, as well as in many research centers independent of universities (about 38% of such orders are concentrated in 10 universities and a slightly larger number of research organizations), the system of subordinating science to the imperialist goals of the American state continues to improve. Using concrete examples, the author reveals the leading position in the political and academic complex of monopolistic capital and various forms of its links with research centers, and covers in general terms (unfortunately, too briefly) the activities of such centers, including those specializing in Sovietology, Sinology, and the so - called Chinese studies that have grown over the past 10 to 15 years. "factories of THOUGHT".

Considerable attention is paid to issues related to the development of a general theory of international relations, which, according to V. F. Petrovsky, is the most important area of foreign policy research in the United States. The author emphasizes that the birth of the world's first socialist state, which radically changed the entire system of international relations, prompted the US ruling circles to engage in a theoretical understanding of the events taking place in the world, developing "more sophisticated means of justifying and defending their actions in the international arena" (p. 60). The book traces the main stages of constructing a general theory of international relations in the United States, starting with the well-known "Wilson's 14 points", which served as a kind of call to start developing such a theory, to modern theoretical and methodological constructions of American researchers who see their main task in serving the practical needs of the United States ' foreign policy.

The construction of the general theory of international relations is currently dominated by the sociological approach, which replaced the legal and historical-descriptive approaches that prevailed shortly after the end of World War II. Behaviorism and structural functionalism are particularly influential. Classification of American theorists by schools and directions is known to present considerable difficulties due to the fact that there are many different philosophical and methodological premises, which are also combined with each other in a wide variety of ways. Showing the incompleteness and conventionality of classification schemes that exist in American literature, V. F. Petrovsky identifies two main areas of modern American bourgeois science of international relations - traditionalist and modernist, each of which is critically analyzed in the monograph.

The traditionalist trend is characterized by a historical-philosophical or political - strategic approach to the search for the root cause of the behavior of states in the international arena, and it, in the author's opinion, is essentially exhausted by the so-called school of "political realism", which occupies a dominant place among American theorists of international relations. Professor G. Morgenthau is generally recognized as the head of this school, whose main credo boils down to the vocation of the struggle for power as the most important factor in international relations.

Even with a cursory list of individuals included in the cohort of "realists" - J. R. R. Tolkien. Kennan, R. Straus-Hyupe, W. Rostow, and Yu. Rostow, Z. Brzezinski, and others who were involved at various stages in the development of the US foreign policy course-it is not difficult to conclude that the ideas of "political realism" about the absolutization of power, the exclusive importance of "national interests", the concept of "balance of power" as an alternative to total war, etc. are, as the author emphasizes, an integral part of foreign policy. the thinking of the country's ruling circles.

The monograph also examines in detail another school associated to a certain extent with the "realists", the" school of strategic analysis", which raises the role of strategy in foreign policy to the highest rank in modern conditions. The group of "civilian strategists" includes no less famous theorists-H. Kissinger, R. Osgood, B. Brody, M. Taylor, J. Gavin, P. Nitze, P. Warnke, and others, who develop the theory of "limited wars"as an alternative to total war.

Considering the modernist projects of the general theory of international relations, which use logical and mathematical tools and the latest electronic technology to construct models of international situations.-

page 159

The author focuses the reader's attention on the differences between "traditionalists" and " modernists "(M. Kaplan, E. Mccleland, J. Rosenau, D. Singer, etc.), who assess international relations as a system consisting of interrelated parts; analyzes the theory of decision-making, which is closely related to the theory of the international system, the proponents of which (R. R. McClelland, D. R. McClelland, D. R. Singer, etc.). Snyder, H. Brak, B. Sapin, J. Modelsky) widely use system analysis as a research method. Among the theoretical schools of the modernist trend, the so-called "game theory" (O. Mortenstern, T. Schelling, A. Wolstetter, G. Kahn, etc.), which have become quite popular in the United States in recent years, and the development of a methodology for predicting international relations are particularly highlighted. The book convincingly shows the futility and futility of American theorists ' efforts to create a grand scheme of international relations. The limitations of such projects, both in the framework of traditionalist and modernist trends, and the crisis of " grandiose experimentation "led to the emergence of private - "island" - theories that involve a multi-factor analysis of individual phenomena, problems and processes, which is also subjected to critical analysis in the peer-reviewed monograph.

Summing up the theoretical and methodological research of American scientists in general, the author emphasizes that "behind the facade of the theoretical boom, eclecticism is hidden, hidden by the latest methodology" (p. 169). The search for American bourgeois thought in the field of international relations was virtually fruitless and did not lead, as the book summarizes, "to the creation of an integral method based on a solid general methodological philosophical basis and at the same time taking into account the specifics of international relations as a special subject of research. The efforts of none of the bourgeois schools not only failed to produce a general theory of international relations, but also some scientifically grounded theories of secondary importance" (p.170).

A large part of the monograph is devoted to a critical analysis of the leading modern concepts of international relations and foreign policy developed by American theorists. The author traces the relationship of these concepts with the official foreign policy doctrines of the United States, shows how the latter, under the influence of changes in the balance of power in the world in the post - war period, began to evolve more and more - albeit rather slowly, with numerous zigzags and fluctuations-towards realism, away from the dangerous policy of the "cold war" and rabid anti-communism. "By the beginning of the 1970s, the growing inter-imperialist contradictions, the collapse of the US aggressive policy in Vietnam, and, most importantly, the strengthening of the power of the world system of socialism revealed, in essence, the incapacity of the main US foreign policy concepts, including in their modernized form" (p.177). The author illustrates this thesis with the obvious collapse of the policy of "deterrence", the failure of the mission to protect the world order, which was aimed at creating a world order pleasing to the United States; the ever-decreasing effectiveness of relying on military force as the main weapon of US foreign policy, etc. (pp. 177-178).

A common thread throughout the work is the idea that the main American foreign policy concepts are built primarily on the basis of the global confrontation between two socio-social systems, depending on which the changes taking place in the world are evaluated and the foreign policy capabilities of the United States, their strategy and tactics in world politics are considered.

The book emphasizes that when developing questions about the means and methods of global confrontation with socialism, American bourgeois theorists, while remaining generally apologists for the power approach, at the same time attach great importance to ensuring economic and scientific and technical superiority, " since in the current conditions, as a result of the growth of the military and economic power of the USSR, the opportunities to use force in confrontation with socialism in the military-political sphere " (p. 266). Along with this, ideology and diplomacy are also considered important components of state power, which have significantly increased interest in theoretical studies on foreign policy topics currently conducted in the United States.

The book explores in detail the recent turn in American foreign policy thought towards peaceful coexistence and recognition of the United States.

page 160

negotiations as a basis for relations with the Soviet Union and other socialist countries. The author is absolutely right in describing this turnaround as a slow-moving process, with fluctuations and zigzags, which reflects a sharp struggle between sensible theorists and supporters of the cold war. The paper gives a principled assessment of the significant positive changes for the better that took place in Soviet-American relations in 1971-1974, and highlights the importance of the most important documents and agreements concluded between the USSR and the United States during this period. Noting that these positive developments have led to an increased theoretical search for concepts related to Soviet-American relations, the author critically examines the concepts of "competitive coexistence", "limited competition", "global convergence" , etc.

In general, as the final conclusion of the monograph justifiably points out, modern American foreign policy concepts, although they differ in their content by great inconsistency, are built "taking into account the new situation, in particular in the military - strategic field, the need to bring foreign policy closer to the real capabilities of the United States, and the recognition of the increasing importance of relations with the USSR. In many ways, they bring the foreign policy thinking of the ruling circles closer to the ideas of peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems that were categorically rejected in the recent past " (p. 309).

There is no need to prove the relevance of the peer-reviewed monograph, performed at a high professional level. The author's successful research, which critically and comprehensively reflects on the complex processes currently taking place in US foreign policy thinking, is of undoubted interest to all those who study US foreign policy and international relations.

page 161

Permanent link to this publication: