Russia, just like the rest of the world, is an integral part of a complex, self-developing, open system - the system of international relations. The processes occurring in the international arena directly and indirectly affect the nature of the political, social and economic development of Russian society. As a result, learning, analysis and prediction of all processes occurring in the life of the country are unthinkable outside their correlation with international.

The most important component of international relations is interstate relations (MGO). Them a distinctive feature It is the fact that the subjects of this system are states or their associations. Like any other organic system, the MGO system has its own structure, i.e. The totality of states and their political associations with certain bonds and functions and develops on the basis of a number of regularities. These patterns have a system-wide character and are determined by the nature of its structure within the spatial and temporary continuum under consideration. In other words, the MGO system sets certain "rules of the game" to its subjects, following which is not so much an act of goodwill, how much the condition of self-preservation of each state. Attempts to bypass these rules not only make a serious imbalance in the functioning of the MGO system, but first of all may have destructive consequences for the initiators of such actions. From the point of view of the theory of international relations, the conflict is considered as a special political attitude of two or several parties - peoples, states or groups of states - concentrated reproducing in the form of an indirect or direct clash of economic, socio-class, political, territorial, national, religious or other in nature And the nature of interest.
International conflicts are thus a variety of international relations, which enter different states on the basis of contradictions. Of course, international conflict is a special, not a routine political attitude, since it means both objectively and subjectively, the resolution of heterogeneous concrete contradictions and caused by the problem of conflict form and during its development may produce international crises and armed struggles of states.

Often, international conflict is identified with an international crisis.

However, the ratio of international conflict and crisis is the ratio of the whole and part. The international crisis is only one of the possible phases of conflict.
It may arise as a natural consequence of the development of the conflict, as its phase, meaning that the conflict reached in its development to the verge, which separates it from an armed clash, from the war. The crisis gives all the development of international conflict a very serious and difficult-conditional character, forming the crisis logic of development, the focusing escalation of the entire conflict. At the stage of the crisis, it incredibly the role of a subjective factor, since, as a rule, very responsible political decisions are taken by a narrow group of persons under conditions of acute time deficit. However, the international crisis is not at all the mandatory and inevitable phase of the conflict. Its current sufficiently long time can remain latent, without generating directly crisis situations. At the same time, the crisis is far from always the final phase of the conflict even in the absence of direct prospects for processing it into an armed struggle. This or another crisis of politicians may be overcome, and the international conflict as a whole is able to preserve and return to the hidden state. But under certain circumstances, this conflict can again reach the phase of the crisis, while crises can follow with a certain cyclicity. The greatest acute and extremely dangerous form of international conflict reaches the institution in the phase of the armed struggle. But an armed conflict is also not the only and not inevitable phase of international conflict. It is the highest phase of the conflict, a consequence of irreconcilable contradictions in the interests of the subjects of the system of international relations.

It should be noted that international conflict as a system never acts in the "finished" form. In any case, it is a process or a totality of development processes, which are presented as a certain integrity. At the same time, in the development process, a change in conflict entities can occur, and therefore the nature of the contradictions underlying international conflict. The study of the conflict in its consistently changing phases allows you to consider it as a single process with various, but interrelated parties: historical (genetic), causal and structural-functional.

Phases of conflict development - These are not abstract schemes, but real, deterministic in historical and social plans specific states of international conflict as a system. Depending on the essence, the content and forms of one or another conflict, the specific interests and goals of its participants, the funds used and the possibilities of introducing new, involvement of other or exiting available participants, the individual stroke and the general international conditions of its development, the international conflict can pass through the most different Including non-standard phases.

The first phase of international conflict - This is formed on the basis of certain objective and subjective contradictions principled political attitude and the corresponding economic, ideological, international legal, military-strategic, diplomatic relations on these contradictions, expressed in a more or less acute conflict form.

Second phase of international conflict- This is a subjective definition of direct parties to the conflict of their interests, goals, strategies and forms of struggle to resolve objective or subjective contradictions, taking into account their capacity and the possibilities of applying peaceful and military funds, the use of international unions and liabilities, assessing the overall internal and international situation. In this phase, the parties are determined or partially implemented by a system of mutual practical actions that have the nature of the struggle of cooperation, in order to resolve the contradiction in the interests of a particular side or on the basis of a compromise between them.

Third phase of international conflict It is the use of the parties a fairly wide range of economic, political, ideological, psychological, moral, international legal, diplomatic and even military funds (without applying them, however, in the form of direct armed violence), involvement in one form or another in the struggle directly conflicting Parties to other states (individually, through military political unions, contracts, through the UN), with the subsequent complication of a system of political relations and actions of all direct and indirect parties in this conflict.

Fourth phase of international conflict It is related to the increase in the struggle to the most acute political level - the international political crisis, which can cover the relationship of direct participants, the states of this region, a number of regions, the world's largest powers, to involve the UN, and in some cases - to become a global crisis that she makes the conflict unprecedented earlier And contains a direct threat that military force will be used by one or several parties.

Fifth phase - This is an international armed conflict starting with a limited conflict (restrictions cover the goals, territories, the scale and level of combat operations, the military tools used, the number of allies and their world status) capable of developing under certain circumstances to a higher level of armed combating the use of modern Weapons and possible involvement of allies in one or both parties. If we consider this phase of the international conflict in the dynamics, then it contains a number of semi-parameters that mean the escalation of hostilities.

Sixth phase of international conflict - This is a settlement phase, which implies a gradual declaration, a decrease in the level of intensity, more active involvement of diplomatic funds, the search for mutual compromises, reassessment and adjustment of national-state interests. At the same time, the settlement of the conflict can be a consequence of the efforts of one or all sides of the conflict or begin due to the pressure from the third party, the role of which a large power may be, an international organization or the world community represented by the UN.

Features of international conflicts of modernity.

Introduction ................................................... .................................................. .. 3.

Chapter 1. Concept and phenomenon of international conflict 6

1.1 The problem of scientific definition of international conflict .......... 6

1.2 Structure and conflict functions ............................................. ............. nine

Chapter 2. Features of international conflicts post-bipolar period ........................................ ................................ fourteen

Conclusion ............................................................... ............................................ 21.

LITERATURE................................................. ............................................. 23.

Introduction

At the turn of the XX and XXI centuries, fundamental changes in the field of international security have occurred. The world community met with fundamentally new challenges and threats. In many regions of the world, an interstate rivalry is observed, which threatens the outbreak of local wars and military conflicts, which mostly may have the form of an armed confrontation. The paper discusses the main features of local wars and military conflicts in modern conditions.

Global geopolitical, economic, sociocultural interaction on modern stage Characterized by the "power dominant". Events in the Persian Gulf area, as well as in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan, the latest events in the Middle East (Egypt, Libya, Syria) indicate that the unipolar world has become even more dangerous than the two-pole during the Cold War. The presence of significant military force and demonstrating the determination of its use unilaterally in any area of \u200b\u200bthe globe is considered as prerequisite Protection of the interests of US National Security and the spread of American influence on a global scale. As a result of the collapse of such a superpower, as the USSR, the international relations of steel in the "definite degree of non-alternative".

All states of the world, planning their actions in the international arena, should now consider the American foreign policy rate. A distinctive feature of a post-pubolar system of international relations was the increase in voltage caused by the sole leadership of the United States in the context of global interdependence.

The formation of a qualitatively new system of international relations in the context of globalization deepens the old and creates new problems and threats in the field of international security. More and more countries are involved in local wars and military conflicts. There are serious reason to believe that the New World War in the event of its occurrence will occur in a different form than the previous ones: with a global bipolar clash, it will turn into permanent armed conflicts covering the whole world.

Historians calculated that over the past 5.5 thousand years, 15.5 thousand wars and military conflicts occurred on Earth (on average 3 wars per year). For 15 years, from the end of the XIX century to the First World War, 36 wars and military conflicts were registered (on average 2.4 per year). In 21, 80 wars occurred between the two world wars (4 per year). From 1945 to 1990, 300 wars occurred (on average 7.5 - 8 per year). And over the past 12 years, about 100 wars and military conflicts (10 per year) occurred.

The study of local wars and military conflicts in the context of global changes is devoted to many scientific works of both domestic and foreign authors.

Given the relevance of the problem, the purpose of our work is to analyze and reveal the basic features of local wars and military conflicts in modern conditions.

Over the past one and a half decades, in all local wars and military conflicts, the decisive factor was not the military destruction of the enemy, but its political isolation and the most powerful diplomatic pressure on his leadership.

If, in the past in the struggle in the section of the world, the military component of states played the main role, then in the context of globalization, there is a tendency to expand the spheres of influence with non-military means. We are talking about the strategy of "indirect actions." It involves the achievement of victory without conducting (if possible) an armed struggle in a normal understanding and is characterized, first of all, the integrated use of the methods of economic and information pressure on the enemy in combination with the operations of special services, military threats and demonstrations of military power. In this regard, a new, but already quite common term is an informational and psychological confrontation. His essence is that the main efforts in the fight against the enemy are not aimed at the physical destruction of the means of armed struggle, but, above all, to eliminate the information resource and state management systems, a significant weakening of the military potential of the enemy.

Chapter 1. Concept and phenomenon of international conflict

1.1. The problem of scientific identification of international conflict

Despite the invisible presence of a conflict in all spheres of public life, its exact and unequivocal definition remains the subject of scientific search. This is partly due to the multifaceted conflict and the variety of its forms. Others and, possibly, more important circumstances, which prevents the general understanding of this phenomenon, is the fundamental difference between those roles and functions that conflict is endowed with various approaches to the study of various social processes ...

Under conflict entities usually understand its immediate participants. Disconnect their own systems of interests and values, in this case - incompatible; While the object of conflict or a combination of such objects, combines them into a single whole, creating a conflict system. Subjects of conflict are added to objective contradictions subjective, turning them into the driving force of the conflict.

The system of existing contradictions, turning into a system of interests of conflict constituent, requires them awareness of the incompatibility of the goals and the impossibility of simultaneous achievement. Since such awareness, conflict begins, at least in its latent phase. After that, strategies for the actions of conflict subjects are formulated.

The conflict is a situation in which participants in relations are combined by the only object, in relation to it there is a conscious incompatibility of their interests; And act on the basis of such awareness.

This definition emphasizes the dualistic nature of the conflict: it exists in consciousness and in the actions of the participants. These two spheres of conflict breaking are interrelated, and the conflict management is most effective subject to distribution on both. In addition, the conflict is dynamic, not static phenomenon, which passes through a number of phases of development, on each of which it becomes characteristic of new features. Finally, the universality of the given definition allows you to cover the conflict as a generalizing concept by opening the prospects if not creating, then at least discussion of the general theory of conflict.

Conflictology is dealing with various types of international conflicts, among which political conflict is the most versatile. There is no single and generally recognized determination of the phenomenon of the political conflict, which, however, does not mean the lack of some common elements in understanding this phenomenon. The general is the recognition of the existing persistent confrontation, the situation of stress, the collision of the parties, goals and interests, and for the political conflict, the imposition of these contradictions into a political level is characterized. The political conflict is a social phenomenon, a structured process, a peculiar means of solving important political issues for its participants, subjectively valued by them as mutually exclusive interests.

International conflict can be viewed:

4) as an opportunity or a situation;

5) as a structure;

6) as an event or process.

The above list of conflict interpretations indicates the complexity and systematicism of this phenomenon, because for a complete understanding of the conflict it is necessary to study it in all the above-mentioned manifestations.

International conflict is a conflict that arises with the participation of two or several international players and has international political consequences; The object of the conflict comes out of the jurisdiction of any of its participants.

The international conflict is inherent in the following features:

- conflict participants can be both states and other international players who are able to pursue political goals;

- international conflict can begin as internal, but its escalation is able to bring the object of conflict outside the jurisdiction of its participants, as a result of which the conflict leads to international consequences;

- the development of international conflict occurs in the specific conditions of the anarchy of the international system, which reduces the effectiveness of international legal instruments;

- International conflict can take various forms, and often the concepts associated with the conflict denote only one of the possible ways to solve it (for example, ultimatum).

The international crisis is called the specific phase of the international conflict, which is characterized by 1) high value of the interests of the Parties, 2) a short time for decision-making, 3) high levels strategic uncertainty.

Often the crisis is identified using military force in conflict, although there is no direct connection between them. However, the crisis, reducing the amount of information from the Parties regarding the actions and intentions of each other, as well as increasing antagonism in conflict, also increases the likelihood of the transition of the conflict from the latent phase to the open confrontation phase using military force.

If the use of military force occurs during the crisis, it is often spontaneous, inorganized and may include mobilization of regular troops, partisan forces or liberation armies; introduction of economic or military sanctions; partial occupation or violation of the status of demilitarized zones; Border incidents. Unlike the war, the use of military force during the international crisis is not systematic. However, if we take into account the pressure of temporary restrictions, in which the participants in the crisis are operating, the non-systematic use of military force can provoke a full-scale war.

1.2 Conflict Structure and Functions

In modern political science, there is a whole system of methods - methodological approaches - based on the identification of general and stable features of fundamentally changeable phenomena.

The methodological approach is called systemic, and among the various methods, in its framework, the structural method is optimal for our tasks. It allows you to identify the structure of the international conflict and evaluate its meaning.

International conflict, even in a relatively simple form of bilateral confrontation of sovereign states, is a complex social system. All social systems are inherent in the high degree of variability, dynamism and openness. This means that such systems are actively exchanged with the environment and are updated under the influence of this exchange. Under these conditions, an important task is to establish the permanent parameters inherent in international conflict in general, and on the basis of which the conflict can be explored ...

The most important of them traditionally include subjects (parties) of the conflict, its object or object field (sometimes the subject), the relationship between the subjects and participants (third parties). In addition, it is also necessary to establish its frameworks (temporary, geographical, system) and medium in which the conflict flows. After the implementation of these operations, the existing structure of the conflict and its place in the world of other social relations will be understood.

The circle of subjects of international conflict mainly consists of sovereign states. In modern theory of international relations, large-scale discussions continue to change the role of the state in international relations.

The monopoly of the state to participate in international conflicts is destroyed. Today, the initiators and parties to conflicts falling under the above definition may be, in addition to sovereign states, national liberation movements, terrorist groups, separatist forces, transnational corporations and, quite possibly, individual individuals.

In general, the conclusion that the usual subject of international conflict is a sovereign state is inferior to numerous competitors who, due to the weakening and erosion of state sovereignty, acquire the ability to formulate their own political goals and potential to achieve them. This makes it difficult for both diagnostics and the typology of international conflicts, as well as diversify the means of managing them.

The subjects of the international conflict are characterized by a complex of interests and the possibilities of their protection, that is, forceful capabilities, if the strength to understand in a modern, broad sense. A complex of interest determines the goals of each of the subjects, thus determining the object field of the conflict - a variety of purposes that cannot be achieved at the same time.

The object of international conflict is material or intangible value, about which the interests of its subjects are incompatible; Complete possession or control of which cannot be achieved at the same time by all sides of the conflict.

The object of the international conflict may be the territory, political influence, military presence, ideological control, etc. As a rule, the international conflict arises due to the interlacing of several different contradictions, as a result of which the system of interrelated objects is formed - the object field of the conflict. Some researchers also distinguishes the subject of conflict, as a specific, specifically definite value, on which parties come into conflict relations ...

In the international conflict, the parties pursue several goals at the same time. Therefore, the object field of the conflict, as a rule, consists of several elements, among which the most important are: 1) power (political control, influence) 2) of values, 3) territory and other physical resources. These elements are interrelated, and, spreading control over one of them, the conflict entity can expect to strengthen the effect on others. Such interconnection complicates the regulation of modern international conflicts.

In modern international conflicts, of course, there may be all the specified resource groups. Of particular importance, territorial conflicts are also acquired, i.e., conflicts in which the main object is the territory. The value and value of the territory are due to the functions that it performs in the development of the strength of the modern state. The territory at the same time is the placement of armies and weapons, an important economic and geopolitical resource. This increases its political value and makes the most "popular" object of conflicts, especially between new or so-called. "Weak" states. In addition to the territory of the objects of the conflict, other material values \u200b\u200bcan act.

The relations between conflict entities are the practical interaction of their strategies.

Depending on the conflict phase and its object, the relationship between the parties is concentrated mainly in one or more adjacent spheres. Only large-scale conflicts ("total") affect all spheres of relations between the parties. Relationships between subjects determine the type of conflict.

According to the prevailing value of a separate sphere of relations, economic, political, military, information conflicts, etc. can be distinguished.

The main common functions of the conflict were first allocated in the works of the founder. "Positive-functional" approach in the conflictology of Lewis Kozer.

Their aggregate characterizes the conflict as a special state of relations between the elements of the Company, which, due to the identification of systemic contradictions, is able to solve some of them, thus ensuring the transaction and stability of further development. We highlight the following basic functions of the conflict.

1) the integrative function of the conflict is to promote the overcoming of internal contradictions and inconsistencies.

2) The conflict information function is manifested in its ability to contribute to the exchange of information between the elements of social systems.

3) speaking a means of wording and resolution of contradictions, the conflict performs an organizational function.

4) Conflicts perform another feature that is associated with the previous one - stabilization. Thanks to conflicts, the output is a sharp contradictions that can destroy the system.

5) Innovative conflict function, as the two previous ones, is associated with its contribution to maintaining the viability of public relations systems. The conflict causes subjects and participants to generate ideas on how to defeat or resolve the conflict.

Chapter 2. Features of international conflicts post-bipolar period

After the end of the Cold War, contrary to many liberal, optimistic forecasts about the gradual decline in international conflict and designing a more stable world order, the global system of international relations did not less conflict, as well as did not occur with "obsolescence" or "examination" of international conflicts.

While, indeed, in the developed part of the world, the war between great powers is an anachronism, in other parts of Light - Africa, South Asia, the Middle East, in the post-Soviet space - conflicts are still an integral part of interstate relations and domestic development, and rather , degradation.

The international conflicts of the present take a new form incompatible with the traditional perception of the concept of war. Even for the most developed states, the conflicts of the new generation constitute a vitality. "New forms of war and conflicts can destroy our military advantage if we are not already updated and adapting," recognize the US military. Thus, this topic is extremely relevant as a generalizational problem.

The main feature of the development of the international conflict of recent decades is the sustainable consolidation of the trend on the continuous presence of armed violence, which is confirmed by the majority of existing databases for the development of conflicts.

According to the data program on armed conflicts of the Uppsa University, most of the conflicts of the last decade are internal character (about 95%), and their peak came to the beginning of the 2010s and years for obvious reasons, while traditional interstate wars were almost sued.

Quantitative indicators also show a resistant tendency to reduce the number and intensity of wars. There is a clear tendency to a stable decrease in the number of armed conflicts with the participation of states - in 1991 their number in the world was 49, and in 2005 - 25. At the same time, an alarming trend is that the number of states, one way or another involved in armed conflicts, is constantly growing . This is a direct result of the internationalization of some conflicts. The same contradictory trend can be traced in human losses during hostilities. At the same time, the number of losses of civilians during hostilities disproportionately increases. According to some calculations, the loss of civilians in conflicts is 80-90% of all victims (for comparison: during World War II - about 50%, at the beginning of the last century - 20%).

The changes that have suffered international conflicts after the end of the Cold War made it makes it distinguish them or radically in a completely new cluster of "new" wars, conflicts of a new generation, or more carefully in a group of conflicts that have only changed their shape, not an essence. In a professional environment, the debate is on the "novelty" of international conflicts of our time. For example, Newman E. considers the difference between old and modern wars a significant exaggeration, questioning the sustainability of trends in the development of modern international conflicts, notes that all the manifestations of modern conflict exist a lot of time.

Along with the term "new" wars (conflicts), in a wider political and military-strategic discourse, such terms are used as conflicts of the 4th generation, low-intensity conflicts, asymmetrical conflicts, modern conflicts and post-modern (post - POST - Modern), non-government war, etc.

In modern military science, the term of the 4th generation conflict was widespread. It is defined as "the conflict form, which is used to achieve moral victory, undermining a potential enemy by using the weaknesses of its information infrastructure, asymmetric actions, weapons and technique that differs from weapons and techniques of the enemy." According to military specialists, characteristic feature Such conflicts are the erosion of the differences between war and crime, virtual and physical, military and criminals, etc., "non-conventional and asymmetric actions close to rebel and terrorist." Thus, the armed struggle takes a decentralized form, which differs from an open interstate confrontation of previous periods.

In our opinion, the conflicts of the post-bipolar era - the phenomenon that was undoubtedly unlarded from the previous era, they undoubtedly inherited most of the traditional parameters, the structure in the form of a contradiction, hostile relationship and behavior, as defined more classics. But most of the qualitative parameters of international conflicts have undergone amendments after the end of the Cold War and the fundamental restructuring of the international system, the development of the processes of interdependence and globalization (and in parallel with its antipode - fragmentation). Thus, "new" these conflicts can be called rather in shape, and not by nature.

It is characteristic that "obsolescence" of the classical interstate forms of armed conflicts and their gradual replacement by other forms of conflicts - more often in domestic ones. This is due to, along with other factors, degradation state power, reducing the role of states as relatively autonomous players of the international system, obtaining opportunities "new" players (including criminal paramilitary groups, terrorist organizations, resistance movements, etc.). More or less effectively counteract legitimate in the international legal sense to governments, including to influence the global policy. So, according to Keldor M., the conflicts of the new era occur "in the context of the erosion of a monopoly of legitimate organized violence."

Globalization carries out a double effect on the nature of modern conflicts and wars. First, it leads to the erosion of state power and social vulnerability, secondly creates new opportunities and economic promotions arising during the civil war, thereby stimulating their beginning.

The main types of conflicts of modernity is civil wars of low intensity and asymmetric wars, which are conducted between stronger and weak states or non-governmental players (Syria, Libya). The conflicts of the new generation are conflicts based on separatism, nationalism, rebel movements, etc. - have an expressive asymmetric character, which complicates significantly, and sometimes it makes it impossible to be a quick and sustainable solution. The protracted nature of most modern conflicts is their characteristic feature.

Qualitative parameters of "new" conflicts.

Defining armed conflicts of modernity as a qualitatively new phenomenon of the international system, the authors of the theory of "novelty" of modern wars rely on such variables as players or parties to the conflict, the causes or motives of the beginning and maintenance of an armed struggle, their spatial accommodation, means of struggle, conflict loss (human victims , material losses). All these factors, in their opinion, have undergone fundamental changes.

New wars have a more complex multi-level structure from the point of view of the composition of the conflicting parties. Parties to the majority of domestic conflicts are non-state players, such as organized crime, criminal groups, religious movements, international charitable organizations, diaspora, rebel groups. Such a diversification of the parties to the conflict, in our opinion, indicates not only the new features and potentials that these players received thanks to the objective processes occurring in international SystemBut also about the multi-layer structure of contradictions underlying each of the modern conflicts and the complexity of the task of their long-term settlement based on the satisfaction of the interests of all parties.

Motivation and causes of start and conducting hostilities, the use of violence, etc., is not a paradoxical, but the purpose of hostilities is often not a victory over the opponent, which is characteristic of traditional conflicts, and the very state of war, its fixation, then There is a war as an end in itself. Thus, new wars are aimed at political mobilization, when participation in hostilities is hardly the only form of social activity.

According to Caldor M., new wars, unlike previous epochs, have not geopolitical or ideological motives, but go around identity, and this identity in most cases has no connection with the state. Such an approval of the conflicting theory of S. Huntington on the collision of civilizations. Political motives are moving into the background, there are no "clear political goals" and "a certain political ideology that justified the actions."

Regarding the influence of conflict actions on the population, international conflicts of the period under study are characterized by the growing dependence of the population from conflict actions, "excavation" level of violence applied to noncommunications, the spread of ethnic cleansing, violent movement of the population, and the like. Victims among civilians are deliberate, planned, and not just side effects hostilities.

New methods and methods of armed struggle are developing, classic wars using regular armies are gradually replaced by small collisions of small intensity, the form of struggle is close to partisan, or "cleaning" of civilians. In addition, new types of weapons are developed, experts predict the gradual transformation of traditional forms of armed struggle to contactless and such that do not lead to the instant death of people, but are latent, peculiar "mines of slow motion." Thus, among new types of deadly weapons, experts identify geophysical, laser, genetic, acoustic, electromagnetic weapons, etc. Of course, it would be more characteristic of armed conflicts between rich and technologically developed countries.

The main threat in this situation is the absence of an international legal instrument, which could adequately monitor and control new types of weapons, since they most often use double-purpose technologies.

In addition, according to many liberal authors, an important factor that gradually begins to manifest itself is such a moral and regulatory aspect as attitudes towards international conflict (by the international community).

Conclusion

All factors specified in the work became the basis for scientific speculation relative to the drastically new nature of the conflicts of the post-bipolar era. According to the author, not the essential characteristics of this phenomenon changed (after all, then the conflict would be conflict), but rather the scale and form of manifestation of confrontation. The term "new" wars (conflicts) is convenient for use in scientific and political discourse, but should not mean something more than the modification of a classic armed conflict.

It is important to note that the conflicts of the post-bipolar period due to a number of factors mentioned above brought to the forefront the threat of a humanitarian nature that require immediate solution. Obviously, the methods of resolving such conflicts, as well as the scientific tools of their analysis, do not always meet the requirements of time. The most pressing need for the international community, as well as each individual state, is adaptation to changes that brought conflicts of a new generation to ensure national and international security.

In the post-pubiolar system of international relations there is a unique interaction of symmetric and asymmetric factors. This creates additional threats, but at the same time additional possibilities for systemic stability. General is that in both forms of conflict conflicts, the parties achieve settlement at the moment when the cost of further dispute exceeds the cost of reaching an agreement.

If the means of mutually pressure of the parties in symmetric relations is the power potential in all manifestations and forms; In the situation of asymmetry, the asymmetry of time, goals, etc., as well as the influence of third parties and the interdependence of partners.

Especially threatening are conflicts, the parties of which weakly depend on each other. The settlement of such conflicts becomes problematic, an example of which international terrorism is, especially if they are considered in the context of the "Collision of Civilizations".

Strengthening the interdependence of the subjects of international relations and the dissemination of international regimes is one of the most effective means of preventing asymmetric conflicts.

LITERATURE

1. UCDP / PRIO database (Uppsala Conflict Data Program / Peace Research Institute of OSLO) - "Number of State-Based Armed Conflicts by Type, 1946-2005" // http: // www. HumanSecuritybrief. Info / 2006 / Figures. HTML.

2. Belous XXI century // International Life. - 2009. - №1. - P. 104-129.

3. Lebedev Settlement conflicts. - M.: Aspect-press, 1999. - 271 p.

4. International law. et al. 4th ed., Ched. - M.: 2011. - 831 p.

6. Stepanova and a person in modern conflicts // International processes. - 2008. - T. 6. - No. 1 (16) - C. 29-40.

7. Gypsies of international relations: studies. Manual - M.: Gardariki, 2003. - 590 s.

8. Gray S. C. How is War Changed Since The End of the Cold War? // Parameters. - Spring 2005. // http: // www. Carlisle. Army. MIL / USAWC / PARAMETERS / 05SPRING / GRAY. Htm.

9. Kaldor M. New and Old Wars: Organized Crime In A Global Era. - Cambridge: POLITY Press, 2001. - 216 p.

10. MIAL H., RAMSBOTHAM O., WOODHOUSE T. CONTEMPORARY CONFLICT RESOLUTION: THE PREVENTION, MANAGEMENT AND TRANSFORMATION OF DEADLY Conflicts. - Malden: Blackwell Publishing Inc., 2003. - 270 p.

11. Mueller J. The Obsolesiscence of Major War // The Global Agenda: Issues and Perspectives / C. W. Kegley, E. R. Wittkopf. - 4th Ed. - New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1995. - P. 44 - 53.

12. NEWMAN E. THE "NEW WARS" DEBATE: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE IS NEEDED // Security Dialogue. - Vol.35 - 2004. - №2. - P. 173-189.

13. TOPOR S. A NEW Generation of Military Conflict Technology - The Fourth Generation Warfare // Strategic Impact. - 2006. - №2. - P.85-90 // www.

14. UCDP / PRIO ARMED CONFLICT DATASET CodeBook // http: // www. PCR. UU. SE / Publications / UCDP_PUB / CodeBook_v4-2006b. PDF.

15. Wilson G. I., Bunkers F., Sullivan J. P. Anticipating The Nature of the Next Conflict. - 19 February 2001 // http: // www. / Emergent-ThRts. Htm.

International law. et al. 4th ed., Ched. - M.: 2011. - P. 117

International law. et al. 4th ed., Ched. - M.: 2011. - p. 121

Wilson G. I., Bunkers F., Sullivan J. P. Anticipating The Nature of the Next Conflict. - 19 February 2001 // http: // www. / Emergent-ThRts. Htm.

UCDP / PRIO database (Uppsala Conflict Data Program / Peace Research Institute of OSLO) - "Number of State-Based Armed Conflicts by Type, 1946-2005" // http: // www. HumanSecuritybrief. Info / 2006 / Figures. HTML.

Panova Western studies of international conflict // International processes. - 2005. - T. 3. - № 2 (8) // http: // www. intertrends. RU / SEVEN / 005.HTM

Newman E. The "New Wars" Debate: A Historical Perspective is Needed // Security Dialogue. - Vol.35 - 2004. - №2. - P. 173-189

Topor S. A New Generation of Military Conflict Technology - The Fourth Generation Warfare // Strategic Impact. - 2006. - №2. - P.85-90 // www.

Kaldor M. New and Old Wars: Organized Crime in A Global Era. - Cambridge: POLITY PRESS, 2001. - P. 4

Newman E. The "New Wars" Debate: A Historical Perspective is Needed // Security Dialogue. - Vol.35 - 2004. - №2. - from 177.

Panova Western studies of international conflict // International processes. - 2005. - T. 3. - № 2 (8) // http: // www. intertrends. RU / SEVEN / 005.HTM

Kaldor M. New and Old Wars: Organized Crime in A Global Era. - Cambridge: POLITY Press, 2001. - P. 6

Newman E. The "New Wars" Debate: A Historical Perspective is Needed // Security Dialogue. - Vol.35 - 2004. - №2. - P. 177.

Belous XXI century // International Life. - 2009. - №1. - P. 104-129.

Stepanova and a person in modern conflicts // International processes. - 2008. - T. 6. - No. 1 (16) - C. 39.

Contradictions inherent in capitalist society reached in the world the level of acute conflicts threatening the destruction of humanity. Consider the most important of these conflicts.

Conflict first. The key contradiction of the capitalist system is a contradiction between the social nature of labor and the private ownership of the assignment. Life confirms the justice of this Marxist position. Contradiction between increasing internationalization (globalization) social productionOn the one hand, and the domination of private ownership - on the other, in the modern world, it was aggravated to the conflict level. It is the private affiliation assignment that is the deep cause of increasing inequality in the world. At the same time, inequality within countries and inequality between countries is organically interrelated processes. Developed capitalist countries have tried to weaken the internal inequality by strengthening non-equivalent relations with other countries of the world. As a result, the class confrontation was embodied in the opposition of the developed capitalist countries and the countries of the rest of the world. This creates insurmountable obstacles to the further development of human civilization.
The world is growing understanding that it is the private ownership of the dominant social system that becomes the main brake of human progress. This was definitely stated at the UN conference held in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro. Awareness that in modern conditions Private property for fixed assets of production is based on the exacerbation of all other contradictions, is extremely important today.
At the same time, the formal socializing of the main means of production by transferring them to state property does not solve the problem. Apparently, it is necessary to introduce the category of national heritage, which is not the ownership of the state, but the total indivisible property of the entire people of the country. In relation to national heritage, the state performs the function of the manager, controlled by society. Only with this approach, the generally accepted constitutional provision that the people are a source of power can turn from the declaration into reality, and the current "Democracy of the Tolstoy Wallet" can change the real democracy.

Throughout the history of our planet, peoples and whole countries were hosting. This led to the formation of conflicts, whose scales were truly global. The nature of life itself provokes to survival the strongest and most adapted. But, unfortunately, the king of nature ruins not only everything around, but also destroys themselves like.

All major changes on the planet over the past few thousand years are associated with human activity. Maybe the desire to conflict with yourself similar has a genetic basis? One way or another, but it will be difficult to recall this point in time when the world would be reigned everywhere.

Conflicts carry pain and suffering, but almost all of them are still localized in some geographic or professional area. In the end, such skirmishes end with interference with someone stronger or successful achievement of a compromise.

However, the most destructive conflicts include the greatest number of peoples, countries and just people. Classic in history are the two world wars that occurred in the past century. However, there were a lot of other truly global conflicts about which it was time to remember.

Thirty-year war. These events occurred between 1618 and 1648 in Central Europe. For the continent, it was the first global military conflict in history, which touched almost all countries, including even Russia. And the skirmish began with religious clashes in Germany between Catholics and Protestants, which turned into the fight against the hegemony of Habsburgs in Europe. Catholic Spain, the Sacred Roman Empire, as well as the Czech Republic, Hungary and Croatia faced a strong opponent in the face of Sweden, England and Scotland, France, Danish-Norwegian Union and the Netherlands. There were many controversial territories in Europe, which was heated by the conflict. The war ended with the signing of the Westphalian world. He, in fact, ended with feudal and medieval Europe, setting new boundaries of the main parties. And from the point of view of hostilities, the main damage suffered Germany. Only there were up to 5 million people, the Swedes destroyed almost all metallurgy, a third of the cities. It is believed that Germany recovered from demographic losses only after 100 years.

Second Congolese War. In 1998-2002, the Great African War unfolded on the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This conflict has become the most destructive among numerous wars on the Black Continent over the past half century. The war initially arose between the pro-government and forces and the militias against the regime of the president. The destructive nature of the conflict was associated with the participation of neighboring countries. In total, more than twenty armed groups were involved in the war, which were represented by nine countries! Namibia, Chad, Zimbabwe and Angola supported the legitimate government, and Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi - rebels, who sought to seize power. The conflict officially ended in 2002 after the signing of a peace agreement. However, this agreement looked fragile and temporary. Currently, a new war rages in the Congo again, despite the presence of peacekeepers in the country. And the global conflict itself in 1998-2002 was due to the life of more than 5 million people, becoming the most deadly since the Second World War. At the same time, most of the victims fell from hunger and disease.

Napoleonic wars. Under such a collective name, those hostilities that Napoleon led since his consulate in 1799 and to the renunciation in 1815 were known. The main confrontation was formed between France and the United Kingdom. As a result, combat battles between them were manifested in a whole series of sea battles in different parts of the globe, as well as a large ground war in Europe. On the side of Napoleon, who excited gradually Europe, performed and allies - Spain, Italy, Holland. The coalition of the Allies constantly changed, in 1815 Napoleon fell before the forces of the seventh composition. The decline of Napoleon was associated with the failures on the Pyrenees and a trip to Russia. In 1813, the emperor gave way to Germany, and in 1814 and France. The final episode of the conflict was the battle of Waterloo, lost by Napoleon. In general, those war took from 4 to 6 million people on both sides.

Civil War in Russia. These events occurred in the territory of the former Russian Empire in the period between 1917 and 1922. For several centuries, the country was controlled by the kings, but in the fall of 1917 the authorities captured the Bolsheviks led by Lenin and Trotsky. After the storming of the Winter Palace, they removed the temporary government. The country, which took part in the first world, immediately pulled into a new one, this time the internecine conflict. The People's Red Army was opposed by the Protsary Forces, who had been restored by the former regime, and nationalists who solved their local tasks. In addition, the Entente decided to support anti-Bolshevik forces, landing in Russia. The war raged in the north - the British landed in Arkhangelsk, in the east - the plated Czechoslovak Corps rebelled, in the south - the uprisings of the Cossacks and the campaigns of the Volunteer Army, and the West was almost all under the terms of the Brest world, Germany was departed. For five years of fierce fighting, the Bolsheviks broke the scattered forces of the enemy. The civil war split the country - after all, political views made even native to fight against each other. Soviet Russia came out of the conflict in the ruins. Rural production has decreased by 40%, almost all intelligentsia was destroyed, and the level of industry decreased by 5 times. In total during the civil war, more than 10 million people died, another 2 million in a hurry left Russia.

Taipin's uprising. And again it will be about the Civil War. This time she broke out in China in 1850-1864. In the country, the Hong Sucuan Christian has formed the Taith Heavenly Kingdom. This state existed in parallel with the Manychur Empire of Qing. Revolutionaries took almost all southern China with a population of 30 million people. Taipins began to conduct their sharp social transformations, including religious. The uprising this led to a series of like in other parts of the Qing Empire. The country was split into several areas that announced their own independence. Taipina occupied such big citiesAs Wuhan and Nanjing, and Shanghai's sympathetic troops occupied. The rebels even made trips to Beijing. However, all the relaxation that Taipina was given to the peasants were reduced to "no" tightening war. By the end of the 1860s it became clear that the Qing dynasty could not end the rebels. Then the Western countries pursued their interests entered into the fight against Taithines. Only thanks to the British and French, the revolutionary movement was suppressed. This war led to a huge number of victims - from 20 to 30 million people.

World War I. The First World War laid the beginning of modern wars as we know them. This global conflict took place from 1914 to 1918. Prerequisites for the beginning of the war were contradictions between the greatest powers of Europe - Germany, England, Austria-Hungary, France and Russia. By 1914, two blocks were formed - Anntan (United Kingdom, France and the Russian Empire) and the Tripal Union (Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy). The reason for the start of hostilities was the murder of the Austrian Erzgertzog Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. In 1915, Italy joined the war on the side of the Entente, but Turks and Bulgarians joined Germany. Even countries such as China, Cuba, Brazil, Japan made on the side of the Entente. By the beginning of the war in the army of the parties there were more than 16 million people. Tanks and airplanes appeared on the battlefields. The First World War has ended with the signing of the Versailles Agreement on June 28, 1919. As a result of this conflict, four empires disappeared from the political map: Russian, German, Austria-Hungary and Ottoman. Germany turned out to be so weakened and geographically trimmed that it was gone by the revenge on the Nazis. The participating countries have lost more than 10 million killed soldiers, more than 20 million civilians died due to hunger and epidemics. Another 55 million people were injured.

Korean war. Today it seems that on the Korean Peninsula, a new war will break up. And the situation is such a beginning to make shape in the early 1950s. After the end of World War II, Korea turned out to be divided into separate northern and southern territories. The first adhered to the Communist Course with the support of the USSR, and the latter were influenced by America. For several years, relations between the parties were very tense, until Northene decided to invade their neighbors in order to unite the nation. At the same time, the Communist Koreans supported not only the Soviet Union, but also the PRC with the help of his volunteers. And on the side of the South, in addition to the United States also the United Kingdom and the UN peacekeeping forces. After a year of active hostilities, it became clear that the situation went to a dead end. Each party had a millionth army, and speech could not be a decisive advantage. Only in 1953 was signed a cease-fire agreement, the front line was fixed at the level of the 38th parallels. A peace treaty that would formally completed the war and was not signed. The conflict destroyed 80% of the entire infrastructure of Korea, several million people died. This war only aggravated the confrontation of the Soviet Union and the United States.

Holy Crusades. Under this title, military trips in the XI-XV centuries are known. Medieval Christian kingdoms with religious motivation opposed the Muslim peoples who inhabited sacred land in the Middle East. First of all, Europeans wanted to free Jerusalem, but then the cross passes began to pursue political and religious goals in other lands. Young warriors from all over Europe performed against Muslims in modern Turkey, Palestine and Israel, protecting their faith. This global movement had great importance For continent. First of all, it turned out to be a weakened Eastern Empire, which eventually fell under the power of the Turks. The crusaders themselves brought home the many Oriental will accept traditions. Hiking led to rapprochement and classes, and nation. In Europe, the sprouts of unity were originated. It was the crosses that created the ideal of the knight. The most important consequence of the conflict is the penetration of the culture of the East to the West. Also, the development of navigation, trade. On the number of victims due to many years of conflict between Europe and Asia, you can only guess, but this is undoubtedly millions of people.

Mongolian conquest. In the XIII-XIV centuries, the conquest of Mongols led to the creation of an unprecedented empire, which had even genetic influence on some ethnic groups. Mongols captured a huge territory at nine and a half million square miles. The empire spread from Hungary to the East-China Sea. Expansion lasted over one and a half centuries. Many territories were devastated, cities and cultural monuments were destroyed. Genghis Khan became the most famous figure of Mongols. It is believed that it was he who united the eastern nomadic tribes, which made it possible to create such an impressive force. In the captured areas there were such states as the Golden Horde, the country of hoolugidov, the empire yuan. The number of human lives that expansion took is from 30 to 60 million.

The Second World War. It passed only a little more than twenty years after the end of the First World War, as the next global conflict broke out. The Second World War has become, without a doubt, the largest military event in the history of mankind. In the troops of opponents, there were up to 100 million people who represented the 61 state (of the 73 all existing at that time). The conflict lasted from 1939 to 1945. He began in Europe from the invasion of German troops into the territory of his neighbors (Czechoslovakia and Poland). It became clear that the German dictator Adolf Hitler is committed to world domination. War nazi Germany Announced the United Kingdom with its colonies, as well as France. The Germans were able to capture almost the entire Central and Western Europe, but the attack on the Soviet Union was for Hitler's fatal. And in 1941, after an attack on the US, an ally of Germany, Japan, America entered war. The conflict theater was three continents and four oceans. Ultimately, the war ended with defeat and the surrender of Germany, Japan and their allies. And the United States still managed to use the latest weapon - a nuclear bomb. It is believed that the total number of military and civil victims on both sides is about 75 million people. As a result of the war, Western Europe lost a leading role in politics, and the United States and the USSR were world leaders. The war showed that the colonial empires have already become irrelevant, which led to the emergence of new independent countries.

It will not be an exaggeration to say that the conflicts of old people like the world. They were before the signing of the Westphalian world - the time marked the birth of the system of national states, they are now. Conflict situations and disputes, in all likelihood, will not disappear in the future, since, according to a aphorist statement of one of the researchers, R. Li, society without conflicts is a dead society. Moreover, many authors, in particular L. Kozer, emphasize that the contradictions underlying conflicts have a number of positive functions: attract attention to the problem, make it seek the exits from the current situation, they are preventing stagnation - and thereby contribute world development. Indeed, conflicts are unlikely to be avoided at all. Another thing is in what form to resolve them - through a dialogue and search for mutually acceptable solutions or armed confrontation.

8.1. Features of conflicts at the end of the XX - early XXI century.

Speaking about the conflicts of the end of the XX - early XXI century, it is necessary to stay on two most important issues that have not only theoretical, but also practical significance.

Whether the nature of conflicts has changed (if so, then what is it about "|

is an)?

As you can prevent and regulate armed forms of conflicts in modern conditions?

The answers to these questions are directly related to the definitions of the nature of the modern political system and the possibility of "impact on it. Immediately after the end of the Cold War, the feeling appeared that the world was on the eve of the conflict-free era of existence. IN Academic Circles This position is most pronounced F. Fukuyama, when he declared the end of history. It was actively supported quite supported and official circles, for example, the United States, despite the fact that in the early 1990s in the early 1990s. The Republican administration was less inclined, compared with democrats, confess nonoliberal views. US President J. Bush-senior, for example, speaking about the conflict in the Persian Gulf, said that "he interrupted a brief moment of hope, but nevertheless we are witnessing the birth of a new world free of terror."

The events in the world began to develop so that the number of local and regional conflicts with the use of violence in the world immediately after the completion of the Cold War has increased. This is evidenced by the data of the Stockholm International Institute for Research Problems of Peace (SIPRI), one of the leading international conflict analysis centers, and most of them turned out to be either in developing countries or in the territory of the former USSR or the former Yugoslavia. Only in the post-Soviet space, according to V.N. Lysenko, in the 1990s. There have been about 170 conflict zones, of which in 30 cases conflicts proceeded in active form, and in ten cases came to the use of force.

In connection with the development of conflicts immediately at the end of the cold Warriors And the emergence of them in Europe, which was a relatively peaceful continent after World War II, a number of researchers began to put forward various theories associated with increasing conflict potential in world politics. S. Huntington became one of the most striking representatives of this area. his hypothesis about the collision of civilizations. However, in the second half of the 1990s. The number of conflicts, as well as conflict points of the world, according to SIPRI, began to decrease; Thus, in 1995 there were 30 major armed conflicts in 25 countries of the world, 1999 - 27, and also in 25 points of the globe, while in 1989 they were 36 - in 32 zones.

It should be noted that data on conflicts may vary depending on the source, since there is no clear criterion for which there must be a "level of violence" (the number of killed and affected in construction, its duration, the nature of the relationship between the conflicting parties, etc. ) To ensure that the result is considered as a conflict, and not incident, criminal disassembly or terrorist actions. For example, M. Sollenberg and P. Wallenstin define a large armed conflict as "a long confrontation between the armed forces of two or more governments, and one government and at least one organized rifle group, leading to hostilities to the death of at least 1000 people during the time conflict. " Other authors call 500 numbers and even 100 dead.

In general, if we talk about a general trend in the development of conflicts on the planet, most researchers agree that after a certain surge of the number of conflicts in the late 1980s - primary 1990s. Their number declined in the mid-1990s., and from the late 1990s. continues to keep approximately one level.

Nevertheless, modern conflicts create a very serious threat to humanity due to their possible expansion in the context of globalization, the development of environmental disasters (it is enough to recall the arson of oil wells in the Persian Gulf when Iraq's attack on Kuwait), serious humanitarian consequences associated with a large number of refugees affected by the peaceful population, etc. Concern causes the emergence of armed conflicts in Europe - the region where two world wars broke out, an extremely high population density, many chemical and other industries, whose destruction during the period of armed actions can lead to technogenic catastrophes.

What are the reasons for modern conflicts? Various factors contributed to their development. So, they made themselves to know the problems associated with the spread of weapons, its uncontrolled use, not an easy relationship between the industrial and commodity countries while improving their interdependence. The development of urbanization and the migration of the population in the city should be added to this, which were not new states, in particular Africa; The growth of nationalism and fundamentalism as a reaction to the development of globalization processes. It was also significant that during the Cold War, the global nature of the confrontation of the East and the West to some extent "removed" the conflicts of lower levels. These conflicts were often used by superpowers in their military-political confrontation, although they tried to keep them under control, realizing that in disgusting "the case of regional conflicts could grow into a global war. Therefore, in the most dangerous cases, the leaders of the bipolar world despite the rigid confrontation between themselves, coordinated the actions to reduce tensions in order to avoid direct collision. Several times such a danger, for example, arose iwith the development of Arab-Israeli conflict during the Cold War. Then each of the superpowers influenced the "his" ally to reduce the heat of conflict relations. After the collapse of the bipolar structure, regional and local conflicts largely "healed their lives".

And yet, among a large number of factors affecting the development of recent conflicts, it should be especially highlighted by the restructuring of the global political system, its departure from the Westphalian model that was dominated for a long time. This transition process, transformation is associated with the nodal moments of global political development.

In the new conditions, conflicts have gained qualitatively different. First of all, the "classic" interstate conflicts were practically disappeared from the World Arena, which were typical for the flourishing of the state-centrist political model of the world. So, according to M. Sollenberg and P. Wallenstin, out of 94 conflicts, which were numbered in the world for the period 1989-1994, only four can be considered interstate. Only two out of 27, according to the estimates of the other author, the Sipri T. S. South British Yearbook, in 1999 were interstate. In general, according to some sources, the number of interstate conflicts for a fairly long period of time decreases. However, it should be done here: we are talking about "classic" interstate conflicts, when both parties recognize each other status of the state. This is also recognized by other states and leading international organizations. In a number of modern conflicts, aimed at the separation of territorial formed and declare a new state, one of the parties, stating its independence, insists on the interstate nature of the conflict, although it is not recognized by anyone (or almost none) as state.

Internal conflicts who subsidize in the framework of one state came to replace intergovernmental. Among them can be allocated in three groups:

1) conflicts between the central authorities and the ethnic (religious) group (groups);

2) between different ethnic or religious groups;

3) between the state (states) and non-governmental terrorist) structure.

All specified conflict groups are so-called identity conflicts Since related to the problem of self-identification. At the end of the XX - early XXI century. Identification is mainly based on a state basis, as it was (a person saw himself a citizen of a country), and in another, mainly ethnic and religious. According to J. Rasmussen, 2 / s conflict of 1993 can be determined precisely as conflicts of identity. At the same time, according to the observation of the famous American politician S. Talbott, less than 10% of the countries of the modern world are ethnically homogeneous. This means that only an ethnic basis can be expected to be expected in more than 90% of states. Of course, the judgment expressed is an exaggeration, but the problem of national self-determination, national identification remains one of the most significant.

Another significant identification parameter - religious factor Or, more widespread, the fact that S. Huntington called civilizational. It includes, except for religion, historical aspects, cultural traditions, etc.

In general, the change in the function of the state, its inability in some cases to guarantee security, and together with this identification of the individual to the extent that it was previously - during the flourishing of the state-centrist model of the world, entry into the uncertainty, the development of protracted conflicts, which Fucking, then flashed again. At the same time, internal conflicts are involved not so much interests of the parties, how much value (religious, ethnic). According to them, the achievement of a compromise is impossible.

The domestic nature of modern conflicts is often accompanied by a process related to the fact that several participants are involved in them (various movements, formations, etc.) with their leaders, structural organization. Moreover, each of the participants often acts with its own requirements. This is extremely difficult to regulate the conflict, since it involves achieving agreement at once a number of people and movements. The greater the coincidence zone of interest, the greater the possibilities of finding a mutually acceptable solution. As the number of parties increases, this zone is narrowed.

In addition to the "internal" participants, a conflict situation affects many external actors - state and non-state. The latter includes, for example, organizations engaged in humanitarian assistance, the wanted missing beat in the conflict process, as well as business, media, etc. The influence of these participants to the conflict often makes an element of unpredictability into its development. Because of his multipleness, it acquires the character of a multi-headed hydra and, already as a result, leads to even more! Weakened state control. In this regard, a number of researchers, in particular A. Mink, R. Kaplan, K. Bus, R. Harvey, began to compare the end of the 20th century with medieval fragmentation, spoke about the "New Middle Ages", the upcoming "chaos", and the like . According to such ideas, today also due to differences in culture, values \u200b\u200bare added to conventional interstate contradictions; overall degradation of behavior, etc. The states turn out to be too weak to cope with all these problems.

Reducing controllability of conflicts is due to other processes occurring at the level of the state in which the conflict flashes. Regular troops prepared for military actions in interstate conflicts are poorly adapted with military and psychological points of view (primarily due to military operations on their territory) to solve internal conflicts by forceful methods. The army in such conditions turns out to be often demoralized. In turn, the overall weakening of the state leads to a deterioration in the financing of regular troops, which entails the risk of loss of state control after its own army. At the same time, in some cases, there is a weakening of state control and the events occurring in the country at all, as a result of which the conflict region becomes a kind of "model" of behavior. I must say that in conditions of internal, especially a protracted conflict, not only the control of the situation on the part of the center, but also within the periphery itself, is often weakened. The leaders of various and movements are often not able to maintain a discipline for a long time among their associates, and the honeycomb commanders come out from under control, making independent raids and operations. Armed Forces disintegrate into several delometric groups, often conflicting with each other. The forces involved in internal conflicts often turn themselves to the extremist, which is accompanied by the desire to "go to the end 9 of the price" for the achievement of goals due to unnecessary deprivities of the victims. The extreme manifestation of extremism and fanaticism leads to the use of terrorist drugs, seizing hostages. These phenomena recently accompany conflicts increasingly. Modern conflicts acquire a certain political and geographical orientation. They arise in the regions that can be attributed, rather, to developing or in the process of transition from authoritarian regimes of the Board. Even in economically developed Europe, conflicts broke out in those countries that were less developed. If we speak as a whole, modern armed conflicts are focused primarily in African and Asia countries.

The emergence of a large number of refugees - Another factor complicating the situation in the conflict area. So, in connection with the conflict, Rwanda in 1994 left about 2 million people who were in Tanzania, Zaire, Burundi. None of these countries were able to cope with the refugee stream and provide them with the most necessary.

Domestic conflicts continued their existence in the XXI century., But the new trends that cover a wider class of conflict situations were obvious - Asymmetric conflicts. The asymmetric conflicts include conflicts in which the forces of the parties in militarily are obviously unequal. Examples of asymmetric conflicts are the operations of the Multilateral Coalition in Afghanistan in 2001, the United States against Iraq in 2003, the reason for which suspicion of the production of weapons of mass destruction was suspected, as well as domestic conflicts, when the central authorities are much stronger than the forces opposing them. Asymmetric conflicts should be attributed to the fight against international terrorism, conflicts in November 2005 in the cities of France, Germany and other countries that were organized by immigrants from the countries of the Middle East, Asia, Africa. At the same time, the conflicts of the identity of the 1990s. Not necessarily were asymmetric.

In principle, there is nothing new in the asymmetric conflicts. In history, they met repeatedly, in particular, when regular troops entered into confrontation with partisan detachments, rebel movements, etc. A feature of asymmetric conflicts in the XXI century. It became that, firstly, they began to dominate among the total number of conflicts, and secondly, they show too much gap in the technical equipment of the parties. The fact is that at the end of the XX - early XXI century. There is a revolution in a military case, which is focused on the creation of high-precision contactless weapons. It is often assumed that the state acts as an opponent. For example, V.I. Slipchenko writes that modern wars, or warthe sixth generation, suggest "the defeat of a contactless method of the potential of any state, on any distance from the enemy." There are several problems here. Firstly, When administering asymmetric wars with a non-state opponent (terrorist you,rebels, etc.) High-precision weapons are often useless. It is ineffective when the goal is rebel detachments, terrorist groups that are hidden in the mountains or are among the civilian population. In addition, the use of satellites, cameras with a high degree of resolution allows the command to track the battlefield, however, as S. Brown notes, "technologically, the more retardant opponent is able to take countermeasures with radar disinformation (as Serbs did during the conflict in Kosovo)." Secondly, The presence of high-precision weapons creates a feeling of obvious superiority over the enemy, which is true from a technological point of view. But there is still a psychological side, which is often not taken into account. The opposite, technologically significantly weaker side, on the contrary, makes a bet on psychological aspects, choosing the appropriate goals. It is clear that from a military point of view, neither the school in Beslan nor the theater on Dubrovka in Moscow, nor the buses in London nor the building of the World Trade Center in New York had any meaning.

The change in the nature of modern conflicts does not mean reducing their international significance. On the contrary, as a result of the processes of globalization and those problems that make conflicts of the end of the XX - early XXI century, the appearance of a large number of refugees in other countries, as well as the involvement in the settlement of conflicts of many states and international organizations, intra-state conflicts are increasingly acquired by international color.

One of the most important questions when analyzing conflicts: Why are some of them are regulated by peaceful means, while others develop into an armed confrontation? In practical terms, the answer is extremely important. However, methodologically detecting universal factors of processing conflicts into armed forces we Is not simple. Nevertheless, researchers who are trying to answer this question usually consider two groups of factors:

structural, or, as they are more often called conflictology, are independent variables (society structure, level of economic development, etc.);

procedural, or dependent variables (policies, conduct lie both participants in the conflict and third party; Personal features of political figures, etc.).

Structural factors are often called also objectiveprocedural - subjective. There is a clear analogy and political science with others, in particular with the analysis of democratization problems.

In conflict, several phases are usually isolated. American jackets D. Prutet and J. Rubin compare the life cycle of conflict with the development of the plot in the play of three actions. The first determines the essence of the conflict; In the second, he reaches its maximum, and then a packet, or a junction; Finally, in the third action there is a decline in conflict relationships. Preliminary studies give reason to believe that in the first phase of the conflict development, structural factors define a certain threshold, which is critical in the development of conflict relations. The presence of this group of factors is necessary both for the development of the conflict in general and to implement its armed form. At the same time, the more clearly the structural factors are expressed and they are more involved, the more likely the development of the armed conflict (hence the armed forms of conflict development with its escalation often occurs in the literature on conflicts. In other words, structural factors determine the development potential of armed conflict. It is very doubtful to conflict, and the more armed, originated in an empty place without objective reasons.

At the culmination phase, predominantly procedural factors begin to play a special role, in particular the orientation of political leaders in unilateral (conflict) or joint (negotiating) with the opposite side of the action to overcome the conflict. The influence of these factors (i.e. political decisions regarding negotiations or further conflict development) is quite brightly manifested, for example, when comparing the culmination points of development of conflict situations in Chechnya and Tatarstan, where the actions of political leaders in 1994 entail in the first case armed Conflict development, and in the second - peaceful way to its settlement.

Thus, in a rather generalized form, it can be said that1, when studying the process of forming a conflict situation, the structural factors must be analyzed, and the structural factors should be analyzed, and when the form of its permission is identified - procedural.