Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)
92
obshcheobrazovatelnoy shkoly i problemy podgotovki pedagogicheskix
kadrov: Sb. nauch. tr. APN USSR NII general pedagogy. - M., 1978. - p. 24-36.
19. Prixojan, A.M. Prichiny, prophylaxis and overcoming anxiety. //
Psixologicheskaya nauka i profilaktika.- 1998.- №2.- S.11-17.
20. Stolyarenko L.D. Basics of psychology. - R / naD .: Phoenix, 1997. - p.
736.
21. B.M.Prakticheskoe myshlenie: chrestomatiya po obshchey
psychologii myshleniya. - M .: Pedagogika, 1981. - С. 177.
22. Trevoga i trevojnost / V.M.Astapov. - SPb .: Peter, 2001.- 156p.
23. Goziev EG “Psychology of higher education2Tashkent Publisher
2010
Abrar Turaev, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Jizzakh State
Pedagogical Institute, Uzbekistan
INTERPRETATION OF NATIONAL INTERESTS AND PROBLEMS OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE IDEOLOGY OF NEOCONSERVATISM
A. Turaev
Abstract: The article discusses the approaches of the US ideology of
neoconservatism to national interests, the attitude of neoconservative
theorists to international relations and world politics, the neoconservative
interpretation of the harmony of foreign policy and national interests, and
the conflict with international law.
Keywords: neoconservatism, foreign policy, international relations,
national interest, international law, political ideology, USA, security
In the current era of globalization, the democratization of society and
governance and the building of civil society are becoming increasingly
important. Modern ideological processes affect all spheres of social life and
reflect the nature of the domestic and foreign policies of states that are on
the path of development, their attitude to international legal norms. It is well
known that today the norms of international law take precedence over the
national legal approaches of states, and this system is considered a reliable
factor in the stability of world politics and international relations. At the
same time, domestic and foreign policy, formed under the influence of
modern political ideologies, sometimes contradicts the norms of
international law. In particular, the radical ideas and hegemonic approaches
of the neoconservatism ideology formed in the United States do not conform
much to the rules of international institutions.
Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)
93
For liberals, international law, international organizations, and
universal morality have played a key role in defending U.S. national
interests, while for conservatives, the first priority for the U.S. has been to
balance the forces of its close allies in the international arena and protect
American business. U.S. conservative foreign policy traditions have
emphasized a lack of confidence in multilateral international institutions
and the predominance of unilateral actions by the United States and its
allies. Adherence to tradition has led to increased focus on military
capabilities and increased defense spending. Such features of American
conservatism can also be seen in today’s foreign policy strategies.
One of the peculiarities of the ideology of U.S. neoconservatism is
reflected in the attitudes of neoconservative theorists to issues of
international relations and world politics. The foreign policy ideology of
neoconservatism sees international relations as a highly conflicted, anarchic
environment, and recognizes the decisive role of the power factor.
According to neoconservatives, humanity will always exist in the "anarchic
world of T.Hobbes", where international legal norms are ineffective, the
promotion of security and liberal order depends on the existing military
force and readiness to use it.
In international relations where anarchy reigns, the power of a
particular state is a more important factor for neoconservatives. R.Kagan
emphasizes that this rule has been relevant since the time of the Roman
Empire and is still so today .... Despite the possible abuse, military force
remains a universal tool for solving problems[1].
According to the neoconservative approach, international law and
institutions are ineffective tools and can also play a negative role in
advancing
national
interests.
Allied
states
are
perceived
by
neoconservatives as a situation where interests are matched. But still their
reliability is questionable, the main means of restraining them is military
force. Another characteristic feature of neoconservatism is its rigid
approach to evaluating a state’s foreign policy by its political system.
Autocracies, authoritarian regimes are more aggressive subjects of
international relations, and at the domestic political level they are not bound
by certain restrictions. Democracies, on the other hand, are more peace-
loving. J. Kirpatrick also emphasizes that there is a need for US power for the
survival of liberal democracy[2, р.3-16].
Based on historical experience, neoconservatism is close to realist
approaches as the main source of theoretical and empirical conclusions
about security strategy and foreign policy. Like political realism,
neoconservatism sees the nation-state as the main subject.
In contrast, neoconservatism denies the "balance of power" and "de-
ideology of national interests", which are important concepts of realism. The
Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)
94
factor that brings us closer to the liberal paradigm is the strategy of
spreading democracy. But the difference is in the use of military force. For
neoconservatism, moral correctness is important, not factual truth.
Unlike realists who base the system of stability and relations in
international relations on a "balance of power," neoconservatives seek to
articulate this issue through the ideology of "America's Choice" and the
universality of American socio-political principles. That is, instead of trying
to strike a balance against the U.S., a weak state should instead seek to unite
with it. But this proposal only applies to democratic systems.
An analysis of the problem shows that the neoconservative idea of
“intervention for freedom” is somewhat subtle, and the idealistic conception
of the right does not deny the use of elements of realism. In the structure of
national interests, neoconservatives combined and combined realistic
elements (power, intervention) with idealistic elements (character of
political systems, values, ideas, loyalty to historical traditions, freedom).
This unification limits the recognition of neoconservatives such as W. Kristol
and R. Kagan as representatives of the school of realists. Idealistic elements
undoubtedly take precedence in their interpretation of national interests.
Pursuing an idealistic policy leads to the application of double standards. In
particular, the United States has sometimes turned a blind eye to violations
of democratic values and human rights when it is in its best interests.
Moreover, the mere inculcation of democratic ideas into the world by force
is itself incompatible with democratic principles.
It is known that the interests of society, in turn, are inextricably linked
with the national interest. Foreign policy goals are inextricably linked to
domestic politics, cultural values, and public behavior. Proponents of
neoconservatism argue that a healthy society is willing to pursue an
effective foreign policy, unable to survive a social order based on selfish
principles. The stronger the person-centeredness in a society, the weaker
and more vital the resilience of the society. Selfishness erodes the
possibilities of collective protection, leading to foreign policy indifference. It
has a healing effect only if foreign policy goals are widely accepted in
society[3, р.321].
That is, through such conclusions, the inadequacy and ineffectiveness of
liberal ideas are criticized.
Another distinctive feature of neoconservatism is that neoconservatives
have always been skeptical of international institutions. In particular,
neoconservative views on the work of the UN have been formed.
Kirkpatrick, who served as U.S. ambassador to the UN from 1981-1985,
acknowledged that the UN has become an opportunity to polarize its
members instead of collectively resolving existing problems. That is, it is a
place to vote and be encouraged to choose a particular party. Even if the
Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)
95
voting state sees no personal interest in the situation of a particular issue
under discussion, it is forced to side with someone.
J.Bolton, the US permanent representative to the UN from 2005-2006,
criticized the UN, listing a number of shortcomings. For example, the UN only
becomes active during major international crises, such as the Gulf War[4].
However, there are shortcomings in the veto power of permanent
members of the UN Security Council. In particular, not all of them are
democracies.
Neoconservatives have been strongly opposed to entering into a
number of arms deals. This ranges from nuclear test ban treaties to medium-
and short-range missile limitation treaties. In general, neoconservatives
believe that U.S. security, in turn, relies on the U.S. military, not on the mirage
of arms control.
That is, in the anarchic context of international relations, it makes no
sense to reduce or limit U.S. military power. In turn, U.S. neoconservatives
support military cooperation, particularly military blocs led by him. In this
regard, Churchill's view that "sometimes, in cooperation with the Allies, they
also have personal views" and similar approaches are in full harmony with
the views of neoconservatism. According to neoconservatives, NATO has the
ability to perform many UN functions. With the end of the Cold War, it
became a central element of a community of nations that united common
political values[5].In their view, this military bloc is a guarantor of world
order.
In short, the domestic and foreign policy of the United States, based on
the ideology of neoconservatism, is in constant conflict with international
law. International principles, recognized by the world community as the
most important factor of stability in the era of globalization, are being
rejected by neoconservative approaches. This, in turn, increases the
likelihood of further escalation of conflicts in world politics. The violation of
international norms on the basis of the priority of national interests and
their practical expression in the activities of major powers sometimes calls
into question the effectiveness of the international legal system. Therefore,
the formation of a specific global ideological immunity, which weakens the
governing capacity of ideologies that represent different radical ideas, is
becoming an important task.
References:
1.Kagan R. Why America Must Lead // The Catalyst. – 2016. – No.1.//
www.bushcenter.org/catalyst/leadership/why-america-must-lead
2.Kirkpatrick J. The Reagan Phenomenon – and Other Speeches on
Foreign Policy. – Washington D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1983. –
P.3–16.
Scientific research results in pandemic conditions (COVID-19)
96
3.Williams M.C. What is the National Interest? The Neoconservative
Challenge in IR Theory // European Journal of International Relations. –
2005. – Vol. 11. – No.3. – P. 321.
4.Bolton J.R. The UN Crisis Is About More Than Money // Los Angeles
Times,
13.04.1997.
//
http://articles.latimes.com/1997-04-
13/opinion/op-48352_1_legitimacy-crisis
5. Schmitt G., Memorandum to: Opinion Leaders, Subject: NATO
enlargement. What is the «Threat?» // Project for the New American
Century, 13.10.1997. // http://www.newamericancentury.org/nato-
19971013.htm
6.Turaev, A. (2019). Islamic factor in neoconservative foreign policy of
the USA in the Middle East. Theoretical & Applied Science, (2), 175-178.
7. Turaev Abrar Salokhiddinovich, Abdusamadov Farrukh. (2020). The
Impact of Changes in Public Administration on the Development of
Neoconservative Ideas in the United States. International Journal of
Advanced Science and Technology, 29(3), 8104 - 8114.
Abrar Turaev, Senior Lecturer, Department of Social Sciences, Jizzakh State
Pedagogical Institute, Uzbekistan
THE IDEOLOGY OF NEOCONSERVATISM IN THE CLASSIFICATION OF
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Abrar Turaev
Abstract: This article describes the role of the US ideology of
neoconservatism in the system of international relations, approaches to
national interests, the methodological basis of modern neoconservative
theories.
Keywords: U.S. neoconservatism, ideology, international relations,
national interests, security
U.S. neoconservatism incorporates elements of classical paradigms -
political realism and liberalism - in the theory of international relations.
Neoconservatism is a unique subjective reality in international relations and
world politics that defines the long-term and priority goals of the United
States in this area. In the foreign policy views of neoconservatives, the
process is characterized by a binary, two-way assessment (good-bad,
positive-negative), which is clearly reflected in foreign policy practice.