Aboutdr. Cristina Carpinelli Expertise Cristina Carpinelli is a sovietolog. She deals with research works, from economic and social point of view, concerning Central-Est Europe (Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland), South-Est Europe (Bulgaria, Romania, balkan Countries), Russia and all Former Soviet Union Countries: all Countries in transition from a planned economy to a market one. Recently, She has become an expert in gender issues in Countries mentioned above. She can't answer the questions relative to other geo-economic and political areas or about other questions outside her competence/knowledge. She lives and works in Milan (Italy).
Experience Cristina Carpinelli wrote many articles and essays on the Ussr and on the transition of the Fsu from a planned economic system to a free market one. She wrote also some books (see below). Now, She is collaborating with some magazines/reviews (The Calendar of People, Slavia, Cassandra, Antonio Gramsci today, Marxism today ecc.).
Organizations She is a member of Scientific Committee of Cespi (International Problems Study Center) of Milan (Italy)- www.cespi-ong.org. She is also a directing member of Italy-Russia Lombardy Association and a member of Problems of Transition to Socialism Study Center (Naples - Italy). She is a journalist of the Italian Magazine "Wewomen".
Publications “Soviet society in the years of the perestrojka”, New Authors, Milan 1991; "Women and family in Soviet Russia", F. Angeli, Milan 1998; "Identities in Transition: Fsu Countries after the Collapse of Real Socialism", Cespi, December 2002; "Women and poverty in Russia under El’cin administration (the era of liberal transition)", F. Angeli, Milan 2004; "The contradictions of real socialism in Soviet Union" in 'Marxism Today' n.2/2007; "The Russia to pieces" (Achab, Verona 2008).
Education/Credentials Cristina Carpinelli graduated during the academic year 1983/84 with the thesis "The process of demografic ageing of the population in the Soviet Union" - State University of Milan, Faculty of Political Sciences (Statistics Department). The thesis of degree was elaborated in the Ussr, at the State University Lomonosov of Moscow. For a more detailed professional profile of Cristina Carpinelli, you can connected to: http://www.beepworld.it/members/criliberoit/curriculumenglish.htm
(sections: curriculumenglish and publications)
Question What do you think are the three most important current challenges that have replaced the Cold War standoff between the two superpowers? What are the historical roots of these new challenges?
Answer The bipolar system, determining to a large extent the relations among the countries in the world, collapsed with the fall of the Soviet Union (december 1991). This led to a radical upheaval of the international relations and dynamics among the countries, with the subsequent establishment of new political strategies played by countries on the international exchequer and also with the subsequent formation of new geo-political entities on a world scale. Immediately after the collapse of the USSR, the US has taken a hegemonic role in the world with the imposition of liberal economic policies towards the debtor countries (including Russia, other countries of the former Soviet bloc and former Soviet satellite states), dictated by International Monetary Fund, World Bank and WTO, and also with the use of the strategy of war (preemptive war, export democracy in the world etc.). These policies have expressed their full destructive weight, especially during the eighties and nineties. With regard to Russia, we have only to remember years of El’tsin management. They were, for the Russians, terrible years both for socio-economic internal situation and for the fall of the role of their country as super-potenza. Damaging national policies and heavy influences exercised from the outside, especially from the US - with its new policy of containment on a global scale - have contributed to the downfall of that country.
However, the globalization of markets, information and communications technology revolution, culture and legal spaces globalized, together with the effects and the changes produced by new global wars, while (they all) have eliminated barriers and “walls” among nations (“global” is also synonymous with inclusion), on the other they have built and defined our current world as a great multipolar exchequer (consisting of different and “opposite” poles). In reality, globalization has made acute the problems already existing worldwide. In today’s conditions of globalization (contrary to common idea), the system of international relations is unstable and becoming increasingly imbalanced. The world has not become a safer place to live in. The main reason is in the cost people pay for globalization - the growing gap in development engenders social, economic, ethnic, and religious conflicts. Recurrent unilateral use of force is also creating a feeling of insecurity. Disarmament stagnation is increasing the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Under these circumstances, many countries are beginning to revise their interests. Development of new global centers of influence and growth, a more even distribution of development resources and control over natural wealth are laying the foundation for a multi-polar world arrangement. The existing global politics is designed to privilege the position of some individual countries in the developing international system. The new poles (or new global centers of influence) are not necessarily closed blocs or alliances (like NATO) and often cut across and supplement each other. They include the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, US, and UK), the Quartet (the EU, Russia, US, and UN), the “Six” (South Korea, North Korea, China, Japan, US, and Russia).
In this different and more complex setting, Putin’s Russia - which marks a radical change with respect to El’tsin’s Russia - has redefined its international role (thanks to the acquisition of a some internal stabilization, although often achieved with strong policies: “vertical of power” etc.). At the present time, the Putin’s foreign policy is aimed at building a strong Russian pole that is a counterweight to other old or new poles (China, India, Brazil, European Union, USA etc.). For this purpose, Putin has raised again the patriotic spirit of russian people. About this last affair and Russia’s foreign politics, I refer You to my paper published on-line (go to link: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Russia-News-Politics-354/Russia-foreign-politics.htm)
I think that the replacement of bipolarism (USSR and the USA) with the multipolarism in the world requires a completely different reading (compared to the past) of international relations among the countries, intended now the last ones as mobile and intersecting geo-political entities. From this perspective, the focus on analysis of the relationships between the United States and Russia, in the international framework, acquires weight only to the extent that the two countries agree to build alliances (also temporary) to face or to compete with poles that have proved far more aggressive attitudes or superior capacities in all fields, such as to require the construction of an alliance. Assuming the worst, to the extent that the two countries decide to go to war against each other (meaning also various forms of war that are not only military ones), creating alliances with other countries or remaining alone.
The historical roots of these new challenges are secular and “eternal”, and are based on the will of each country to show and exercise its own supremacy, influence and power over men and resources of the planet. To that end, multinational dimensions are also taking shape (for ex: EU or Union of South American Nations), whose goal is to better cope with new giants or to cooperate to be stronger in all respects. In the past, the roots of world challenges expressed themselves with the colonialism, afterwards with the post-colonialism and today with globalization. From this point of view, it is perhaps more accurate to talk about “inter-imperialist world”, where relations between the USSR and the USA (for example) gain weight and meaningful only with reference to broader international dynamics taking place globally. My best regards and Merry Christmas. Cristina Carpinelli
