Soft power is analyzed in the article as a resource of integration in the post-soviet area. The author shows that soft power today is an indispensable resource of any integration policy. The amount of soft power defines the depth of integration. Integration in Eurasia is a natural process and eventually it will be of interest for all the states in the region. Soft power will reduce the transaction costs of integration and increase the attractiveness of the project for other states over the long run. A resource of the Russian soft power which will foster the integration processes in the post-soviet region might and ought to be higher education and science. The development of national science may be not only an integration tool, but also a nation idea and a goal for modernization. The author argues that science and higher education will indeed help Russia deepen the Eurasian integration, overcome the lack of trust among its regional neighbors and channel the positive experience of economic integration in adjacent spheres of interstate relations in the post-soviet area.

Having moved to the global level, capitalist political economy today is turning into a dominant way of governance in world politics, undermining the state-centrist model that has been developing since the time of the Westphalian peace treaties. As a result, we are witnessing a Schumpeterian phenomenon of “creative destruction” i.e., destruction of old accompanied by creation of new. The current world politics is dominated by the logic of destruction, and this destruction is not limited to changing interstate relations, as it is represented in most studies, but involves at the same time at least three levels of political organization of the world, forming a synergy effect: the level of the Westphalian world order; the level of interstate relations; the level of the national state. The Westphalian ststem is being blurred largely by transnational business activity. Entrepreneursinnovators form capitalism of co-participation. This capitalism rests not on interest, but on values and social ties that unite people in networks. Examples of such capitalism are various forms of sharing, peer-topeer networks, wiki-platforms, block-chain technology. Capitalism of sharing unites in- formational networks and human potential, the main resource of such capitalism is precisely human capital, human trust and social relations. The sharing is being transmitted to the international political sphere, supplementing the principle of the Westphalian sovereignty with the potential of eventually replacing it. At the same time, practices are being introduced into the political organization of the world from other projects of the political organization of the world, in particular Islamic (Islamic banks, hawala money transfer system, etc.).

Московский государственный институт международных отношений (Университет) МИД России, Москва, Россия Максим Владимирович Харкевич Московский государственный институт международных отношений (Университет) МИД России, Москва, Россия Информация о статье:Аннотация: В современных условиях трансформации и хаотизации системы международных отношений снижение прогнозируемости ее развития необходимо компенсировать за счет усиления нормативного содержания такого прогнозирования, что на деле является планиро-ванием. Кризис, углубляющийся в международных отношениях в по-следние годы, позволяет сделать пессимистический вывод о наиболее вероятном и опасном сценарии развития международных отношений -«усилении военно-силового противоборства между основными ло-кальными человеческими цивилизациями» и представляемыми ими военно-политическими коалициями и центрами силы. При этом сле-дует учитывать, что эффективным инструментом реализации тако-го противоборства является система военных и гражданских инстру-ментов, используемых для оказания комплексного многофакторного и многоаспектного воздействия на объект. В результате такого давления между отдельными его инструментами возникает синергетический эф-фект взаимного усиления, что позволяет экономить ресурсы влияния. Сегодня наиболее ярким примером такого комплексного влияния может служить политика новой публичной дипломатии. Для реализации по-добных комплексных подходов к отстаиванию своих национальных ин-тересов необходимо реформировать систему обеспечения националь-ной безопасности с целью включения в нее не только традиционных силовых органов, но и организации бизнеса и гражданского общества, а также для повышения координации отдельных ее частей. Однако реа-лизовать такую реформу невозможно без национальной идеологии, ко-торая формирует нормативные приоритеты национального развития и национальной безопасности. Исследование выполнено в рамках проекта РНФ «Долгосрочное прогно-зирование развития международных отношений» №14-18-02973Поступила в редакцию: декабря 2016Принята к печати:

.

The article discusses the use and transformation of the American scientific concept "soft power" in official Russian and US foreign policy rhetoric with the methodological help of Habermas' communicative action theory and its adoption to IR by T. Risse. In mainstream IR the proliferation of the "soft power" concept is viewed in terms of ideological competition among states. The author argues that it is better to view this process as a form of international political deliberations on new forms of power in world politics. The article shows that there's no communicative action of US and Russia based on their tentative discussion of the "soft power" concept. On of reasons might be the lack of interest of both states for the concept as an ideological basis for cooperative actions. For Russia soft power in its classical form might be used towards its near abroad and probably BIC states. In dealings with western states Russian soft power turns into lobbyism and propaganda which is strictly not soft power. US under Obama have basically refuted the concept, having changed it for analytically meaningless "smart power". The conclusion is that communicative action requires prior existence of commutative rationality. This type of rationality is evident among postmodern states - the EU member states - and apparently absent among modern states such as Russia and US.