National security of the state in context of globalization processes: social-philosophical aspects
In the article the essence and how main characteristics of globalization as one of the leading trends of growth of processes of interdependence and interdependence of objects and phenomena in the modern world, having an objective, dynamic, accelerating character are singled out. It has been discovered that globalization generates two interconnected processes. On the one hand, ideas, lifestyles, values of different cultures, peoples are integrated, universalized; on the other hand, there is a directly opposite process, which leads to differentiation, a multifaceted fragmentation of the socio-cultural space of different countries.
From the point of view of scientists, it is grounded that there is no alternative to globalization, but globalization is alternative in terms of ways and means of implementation – in the sense that it can be both humane and inhumane. This feature forms the tip of the theoretical-praxeological intrigue not only of the present, but also of the prospective future.
While studying globalization processes, science of international relations pays much attention to the measurement of global security, which is associated with the processes of bipolar confrontation during the Cold War and the emergence of a new world order in the post-bipolar period. Emphasis is placed on the emergence of new threats to international security and formation of new systems of global and regional international relations.
It has been established that in modern conditions provision of military security of the state remains relevant, but it adds challenges associated with increasing rates in the field of economic cooperation, environmental issues, information, culture, etc.
Effectiveness of the functioning of international security structures is to a large extent constrained by imperfection of existing mechanisms of international law and order, which raises question of international law in general.
The new world order in the age of globalization should be created on the basis of the humanistic tradition, that is, in favor of each person and its security. Although it looks like an ideal, it's worth pursuing.
Hlobalizatsiia, 2009 – Hlobalizatsiia i suchasnyi mizhnarodnyi protses / za zah. red. B. Humeniuka i S. Sherhina. Kyiv : Universytet «Ukraina», 2009. 508 s.
Zelena, 2015 – Zelena O. Bezpekova polityka. Novitnia politychna leksyka (neolohizmy, okazionalizmy ta inshi novotvory) / [I. Ya. Vdovychyn, L. Ya. Uhryn, H. V. Shypunov ta in.]; za zah. red. N. M. Khomy. Lviv : «Novyi svit – 2000», 2015. S.28-29.
Parakhonskyi, 1999 – Parakhonskyi B. O. Mizhnarodne pravo, heopolityka ta natsionalna bezpeka // Stratehichna panorama. 1999. № 1–2. S. 37–45.
Pro vnutrishnie i zovnishnie, 2006 – Pro vnutrishnie i zovnishnie stanovyshche Ukrainy u 2006 rotsi / Ekspertna dopovid. Kyiv : PP «Intertekhnolohiia», 2006. 256 s.
Rafalskyi, 2018 – Rafalskyi O., Samchuk Z. Tsyvilizatsiini perekhrestia suchasnoho suspilstva. Kyiv : IPiEND im. I. F. Kurasa NAN Ukrainy, 2018. 688 s.
Tyshkun, 2015 – Tyshkun Yu. Hlobalna prohrama bezpeky / Novitnia politychna leksyka (neolohizmy, okazionalizmy ta inshi novotvory) / [I. Ya. Vdovychyn, L. Ya. Uhryn, H. V. Shypunov ta in.]; za zah. red. N. M. Khomy. Lviv : «Novyi svit – 2000», 2015. 492 s.
Troian, 2010 – Troian S. S. Tsyvilizatsiino-kulturni markery suchasnoi Ukrainy u vymiri hlobalizatsii // Chornomorskyi litopys. 2010. №4. S. 65-69.
Tsivilizatsionnaya struktura, 2006 – Tsivilizatsionnaya struktura sovremennogo mira v 3-h t. T. 1. Globalnyie transformatsii sovremennosti / [pod red. Yu. N. Pahomova, Yu. V. Pavlenko]. Kyiv : Nauk. dumka. 2006. 686 s.
Tsyigankov, 1998 – Tsyigankov P. A. Globalnyie politicheskie tendentsii i sotsiologiya mezhdunarodnyih otnosheniy // Mezhdunarodnyie otnosheniya: sotsiologicheskie podhodyi / [Ruk. avt. koll. prof. P. A. Tsyigankov]. Moskva : Gardarika, 1998. 352 s.
Szporluk, 2000 – Szporluk R. Russi, Ukrine, nd the Brekup of the Soviet Union. Sthford: HooverInst.Press, 2000. 437 p.