Understanding International Relations after the end of the cold war: the trap of achistoricism.

Abstract

The radical transformation of world politics has led to an active rethinking of practice and the theory of international relations. The situation is significantly complicated by the fact that historical parallels are most often used to justify or justify specific political decisions. Turning to the answers to History on the problems of modernity without proper methodological guidelines increases the risk of replacing the systematic reconceptualization of the nature of international relations with repeated "plastic surgery" of outdated theoretical approaches. The primary methodological source of substituting reconceptualization for "conceptual plastic surgery" is ahistoricism, the critical feature of which is the tendency to define and apply universal laws of historical development, unchanging characteristics of historical phenomena, whose nature depends little on the impact of specific historical circumstances.
The purpose of the study is to reveal the essence and consequences of the influence of ahistoricism on the understanding of international relations after the end of the Cold War. Its achievement is expected through the implementation of three research objectives: assessment of the analytical potential of the method of historical analogy; consideration of the case of the concept of "new cold war" and substantiation of its ahistorical methodological origins; proposals for a theoretical alternative to ahistoricism in the study of the modern world order, which is based on the methodological principle of historicism.
The autonomy of the two functions of the method of historical analogy (evidence and heuristic), the emphasis on the heuristic function, helps avoid the "trap of ahistoricism". Conclusions of the study: the effectiveness of the method of historical analogy in the study of international relations depends on a correct analysis of the nature of the compared phenomena and the whole set of factors influencing their behaviour and the state of the international system; the case of the "new cold war" is a convincing illustration of the "trap of historicism" in the understanding of international relations; analytical productivity of Cold War concepts is minimal, understanding modern world politics requires careful study of all dimensions of the historical context and social nature of the subjects, which requires updating methodological approaches.