Search

The authoritarian menace to democratic values has become one of Europe's principal strategic concerns. This geopolitical challenge is altering the place of democracy support within European foreign and security policies. The European Union and European governments have begun to adopt a more defensive form of democracy support that reflects their evolving security concerns. This heralds a new kind of nexus between democracy and security agendas. As yet, however, European governments are not pursuing this defensive form of democracy policy in a way that is likely to further their long-term strategic interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Estudios Internacionales Mediterraneos is the property of Taller de Estudios Internacionales Mediterraneos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Israel‐Palestinian conflict is one of the most well‐known and polarizing issues that has impacts on societies, and institutions beyond Israel, and Palestine. This interview with prominent social scientist Daniel Bar‐Tal, Professor Emeritus, School of Education, Tel Aviv University, focused on the situation in Israel and Palestine following the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza. Interviews such as this are an academic inquiry drawing on the expert analysis of a scholar‐activist, grounded in research and theory. As such an analysis, Bar‐Tal explains the causes of this war, its context, its process, the contribution of each side to its escalation, and its effects on the possibilities of peaceful conflict resolution between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. He describes the current situation as governed by considerations of realpolitik, contestations over what defines antisemitism, and whether Israeli conduct in Gaza constitutes genocide or ethnic cleansing. This interview enables the application of Bar‐Tal's systematic and holistic Theory of Intractable Conflict to the current crisis to interrogate how ethos of conflict, collective memory, and collective emotional orientation dynamically interconnect to form a culture of conflict. But also, how these elements can also be addressed for solutions to enable peaceful resolutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, a philosophical and critical lens is applied to the case of corruption. For reasons having to do with both analysis and assessment of the framework of the only specialized convention at the international level of law, namely the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (uncac), the author takes a closer look at several aspects and areas that somehow fade into the background of the discourse or even fall out of the legal corruption equation itself despite their centrality to the topic. Examples include considerations of market theory, marginalization and discrimination, human rights, ethics, realpolitik, structural violence and corruption prevention, and norms of general international law. The essay also makes use of some country-specific scenarios, in part, to raise questions about possible ‘cracks’ in political governance typology. The essay is divided into two individual articles, Part i: ‘Perspectives on the Corruption Discourse’ and Part ii: ‘The Macro Area’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Shanghai University of Sport is the property of Editorial Department of Journal of Shanghai University of Sport and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

"Never again" has been a mantra of German foreign policy since the end of World War II. Together with Ostpolitik it informs its approach toward the conflict in Ukraine. The discourse moved from "never again war originating from German soil" via justifying military interventions to prevent ethnic cleansing in the Balkans in 1998 with Joshka Fischer's injunction of "never again Auschwitz" to Olaf Scholz' programmatic 2023 speech invoking "never again war of aggression in Europe." This development is interpreted in the light of Realpolitik, providing the hard security means to defend the rule of law and democratic governance. External shocks have led Germany to expand its soft security arsenal as a civilian power and to embrace military means for liberal ends. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Iranian Revolution of 1979 caused Iran to shape its foreign policy along with its domestic political structure, within the framework of a certain Shiite understanding of Islam. Within this context and through the use of the explanatory case study method, this study aims to examine the effect of Shiism within the foreign policy of the post-Revolution Islamic Republic of Iran. First, the foreign policy-making process of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its various elements were discussed within the framework of the views of the Republic's founder, the Supreme Leader Khomeini. Second, the effect of Shiism within and on Iranian foreign policy and affected regions will be explored and discussed. This study reports that Shiism is the most significant determining element in Iran's foreign policy following the 1979 Revolution, that the country's foreign policy approaches are not entirely Shiism-oriented, that there are deviations from this strictly Shiite approach, and that Iran's foreign policy also includes realpolitik approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, secularism has emerged as one of the most studied concepts in sociocultural anthropology, and Egypt a primary site of its analysis. This article considers trends in Egypt's modern and contemporary history in order to complicate the great explanatory power some anthropological works have granted to secularism. Above all else, it interrogates the manner in which the state's regulation of religion (which is the defining feature of Asadian conceptions of secularism) has unfolded in recent Egyptian history. First, I survey the different ways scholars have portrayed secularism in Egypt, focusing in particular on the insights and limitations of Asadian theories. A second section employs ethnographic data to uncover how ordinary Egyptians in the provincial capital of Beni Suef have experienced state power, religion, and secularism in their everyday lives. Contextualizing these ethnographic perspectives alongside several prominent instances of state violence between 2011 and 2013, I elucidate how, rather than typifying a secular state, Egyptian politics, above all else, have been driven by an opportunistic realpolitik. My final section brings historical and ethnographic perspectives into sustained conversation to argue that the state regulation anthropologists sometimes frame as secularism is better conceptualized as a form of state centralization. I conclude, in turn, that political developments in modern Egypt have most often been shaped by flexible national and imperial interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fundamental objectives of this research paper are to explore the enduring patterns of China's strategic competition in the Asia Pacific and to understand the interplay between states and their struggle for power from the lens of offensive realism. China and the US are currently the largest and the most powerful states. There was a time when the world was bipolar as the Soviet Union and the US during the Cold War were at loggerheads, but with the dismemberment of the Soviet Union, the US became the only superpower. However, in recent times, China has also demonstrated a promising rise in its economic and military power, and owing to its active engagement in Asia Pacific. In response, the US has also sharpened its interests in the given region. This research focuses on the broader analysis of China's Strategic Competition in Asia Pacific from the prism of Offensive Realism. This research has employed the qualitative method. Analytical literature (books and journal articles) for descriptive and historical research methods provide ample fresh information on the debate discussed in the research paper. Looking at the power play between the US and China, all states more or less have offensive capacities, but they fall into different levels of interest. With the realpolitik technique, China aspires to maximize cooperation with Russia, China, and India, though currently, China has flared territorial disputes with India. Through its economic and security capabilities, China would try to dominate the Asia Pacific region and exclude the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Covid-19 virus emerged firstly in the Wuhan city of China in late 2019 and quickly spread to the rest of the world. A few months later the states and World Health Organization securitized the virus, then it has become a severely full-scale health crisis at the global level. The Covid-19 pandemic has threatened all humanity irrespective of race, nation, religion, and ethnicity except socio-economic class, and has brought widespread insecurity, risk, and uncertainty around the world. Moreover, the pandemic has been a test for cooperative relations among states in the international system. The Covid-19 pandemic is a global problem but the response against the virus has been mostly national during the pandemic. In this context, the paper aims to evaluate the pandemic conditions critically and makes a comparison between the pre-pandemic era and the pandemic era of world politics. The paper concludes that although global problems ask for global solutions, concepts such as egocentrism, nationalism, and national security have increased their importance in the international system instead of cooperation and global solidarity during the pandemic.

This article investigates the case of Libya; the way the International Criminal Court responded to it; what went wrong; and what the Court could learn from the case for its future. It attempts to show that the regime change strategy followed in Libya jeopardized the international criminal justice mandate of the Court, created a failed state conundrum, and rendered the Court's intervention counterproductive. Also, in cases like Libya, where judicial intervention sits alongside military intervention, it is difficult for the Court to claim jurisdiction independent of untamed realpolitik while finding the right constituency, which is an urgent issue that remains unsolved. This research concludes that only a dispute settlement approach oriented towards a peacemaking mandate, and its incorporation into the jurisdiction of the Rome Statute, can protect the Court's independence and international criminal justice promises regarding the different limitations the Court faces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine is developed to stop genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. Since 2005, the UN operationalized it in Libya, Yemen, Liberia, Syria, South Sudan, and Congo. However, to address India’s genocide in Kashmir, the framework is contested and politicized. So the paper test the parameters of R2P and its possible implementation. It asks (a) Why the UN has failed to operationalize R2P in Kashmir. (b) What are the underlying reasons and how realpolitik is undermining R2P implementation? It argues that India is involved in a systematic and sustained genocide of the Kashmiri population and illegal settlements of the Hindu community. Nevertheless, major powers’ geo-economics and geopolitical interests, a paradigm shift in the global order where India is placed at the heart of U.S. hedging strategy against China, and New Delhi's sustained role in regional and global politics prevent the international community from invoking R2P. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article appertains to the scope of studies focused on the persistence of the Crusader ideal in the modern age and reconstructs the historical-military, politicaleconomic and diplomatic circumstances of the Crusader activity, or at least anti-Ottoman and anti-Barbarian activity, carried out by Charles V of Habsburg. Starting chronologically with the African conquests of the Catholics and the Spaniards and reaching the end of the reign of the King and Emperor Charles V, this article presents a broad chronological framework (about sixty years) encompassing the entire European and Mediterranean international system of the first half of the sixteenth century, with its Popes, Sultans, Christian monarchs, States, military protagonists, admirals and privateers, in the grandiose framework of events of that era: the Italian Wars, Ottoman imperialism, the conflict in the Balkans and, above all, the omnipresent shadow of the Council, and of Protestantism. This study focuses primarily on the complex military and political relations that Charles V maintained with Suleiman and his "very Christian" ally Francis I and, in the shadow of these three rulers, on the confrontation between the two rival admirals Doria and Barbarossa, the true protagonists of international politics in those days. Enriched by the contribution of earlier (especially the most recent) literature, to which the author carefully refers, this contribution aims to contextualize a fundamental aspect of the universalist vision of Charles V, the crucial importance of which is perhaps not fully and universally understood even today, even from the point of view of his religious and dynastic politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Count Miklós Bánffy headed the Royal Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in a difficult period, from April 1921 to December 1922. It was during his ministry that the first and for a long time only Hungarian territorial revision in Sopron and its surroundings took place, which was negotiated by the consensus of the great powers. In this period, Hungary joined the League of Nations as well. He sought to win the confidence of the Entente powers, both for himself and his country, as an equal but weaker party, and strived to reach agreements with neighbouring countries on the basis of various concessions. He abandoned the foreign policy path based on Hungarian hegemony and, realising its anachronism, tried to modify the instruments, objectives, and communication of Hungarian diplomacy. Meanwhile, he became politically isolated, and, despite his achievements, was forced to resign. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This scientific article explores the notion of a Christian geopolitics and its compatibility with realpolitik and international relations. The analysis delves into the perspectives of Pope Francis, John Mearsheimer, and Catholic social thought principles to examine the moral implications of geopolitical strategies. Mearsheimer's bait and bleed strategy in Ukraine is critiqued for its callousness and disregard for human life, while Francis's emphasis on personal and social reform highlights the importance of ethics and the universal destination of goods. The article questions whether Christians can engage in realpolitik strategies that perpetuate poverty and violate the principles of human dignity and mercy. It further considers the implications for Catholic leaders in government and military roles, particularly in the context of upcoming U.S. presidential contenders. The analysis ultimately challenges the notion that a Christian geopolitics is a category mistake, advocating for a higher moral road in international relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Human Review is the property of Eagora Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Middle Eastern Studies / Ortadoğu Etütleri is the property of Turkmen Cooperation & Cultural Foundation Center for Middle Eastern Strategic Studies (ORSAM) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Since the Soviet Union's (USSR) collapse, Russia's domestic and foreign policies have changed. With the loss of "superpower" status, Russians struggled to define their "national identity," which influenced the country's new foreign policy. This struggle affected Russia's ties with its sovereign neighbours, the former Soviet states termed the "Near Abroad" (blizhnee zarubezhe). The struggle specifically led to a series of territorial, leadership, economic, diaspora, and military conflicts with some countries in the Near-Abroad. The question of the legitimacy of territories and borders in Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan), Abkhazia and South Ossetia (Georgia), the Trans-Dniester area (Moldova), and Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk areas of Ukraine is largely a result of the struggle. This paper discusses the factors affecting Russian domestic and foreign policy towards the Near-Abroad nations, which have influenced Russia's behaviour in contemporary international politics. Firstly, this essay analysed Russia's identity crisis and foreign strategy. The effect of Marxism-Leninism on Soviet foreign policy and the new Russian State was also discussed. This paper also analysed Vladimir Putin's pragmatic strategy in the Near-Abroad, focusing on Ukraine. This paper submits that Russia's determination to see the Near-Abroad states as largely within its sphere of influence and geopolitical interests hinders the establishment of equal ties with these countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The endless struggle between two seemingly incompatible but occasionally convergent concepts, namely liberal values and national interests, has determined United States (US) foreign policy and its implementation throughout the nation’s history. Based on the neoclassical realist assumptions shored up by the methodological insights offered by the five-dimensional pre-theory of foreign policy, this article reveals a persistent dichotomy in US foreign policy through the analysis of Washington’s response to the Arab Spring uprisings in Egypt, Libya, and Syria. Throughout history, US foreign policy has had a pendular behavioral pattern, swinging across a policy spectrum ranging from moralpolitik to realpolitik. While the inherent values-interests dilemma lies at the root of the inveterate oscillation of US foreign policy, the interplay of international stimulus and societal factors stands out as the principal source of its ambivalence, if not inconsistency, in the face of the upheavals that swept across the Middle East.

The subject of my interest is to present the most important determinants of relations between the Russian Federation and Israel. The main purpose of this paper is to describe the current state of affairs in mutual contacts and their importance for international security. In addition, it will be important to try to answer the question of whether Russia will continue to play an important role as an economic and political partner of Israel in the near future, in the face of the gradual containment of the Syrian conflict. At the beginning, I intend to refer to the history of relations of both countries, dating back to the time of the existence of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the breaking of diplomatic relations after the Six-Day War in June 1967. In the following part of the discussion, I present the relations of both entities immediately after the collapse of the Soviet empire and coming to power of Vladimir Putin, who from the beginning of his term in office has sought to significantly improve contacts with Israel. Then, I raise the problem of Moscow-Tel Aviv contacts after Benjamin Netanyahu took over as prime minister again and after the Arab Spring, which implied the conflict in Syria, during which Russia and Israel established cooperation. It will also be important to trace the attitude of the authorities in Tel Aviv to the annexation of Crimea and the war in eastern Ukraine. I would also like to refer to the relationship of both entities on the historical and cultural level, as well as on the economic and military level. In the summary, I highlight future perspectives and try to determine whether the current relations of both countries will intensify in the face of the end of war in Syria, and whether we can observe a close alliance of both countries now and in the future, or a limited partnership, determined by the need to implement real policy in the world.

This article attempts to explain how India has adapted over time to changing power dynamics at various times in its history, including at Independence, during the Cold War and currently at a time of systemic instability and uncertainty. Noting that foreign policy is always a combination of both interests and values, the article argues that India's great power strategy is characterised by a prudent mix of both realpolitik and moralpolitik. In the author's view, India's maritime geography and history have shaped the interests and values underpinning the country's foreign policy decision-making, providing the basis for a sense of pre-eminence as well as leadership in the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary European Union (EU) and China relations are marked by a simultaneously beneficial, conflictual and competitive partnership. This is aptly evident in the cyber technology realm. This paper contends that the European Union’s gestaltian approach towards China can be understood with the aid of three theoretical positions: (1) an institutional perspective; (2) as a values-based actor; and, (3) a realpolitik dimension. The arguments advanced in the paper, ultimately imply that the EU’s approach towards China can provide various EU domestic and global actors’ space to exploit contradictions, notably when it comes to cyber technology diplomacy. This has the attendant effect of fostering future fissures in the EU’s overall engagement with China.

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2020 5(1), 387-401 | European Forum Insight of 25 April 2020 | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction. - II. Requests for assistance from certain EU Member States and replies received. - II.1. Italy. - II.2. Spain and France. - III. Available assistance mechanisms and their use in the COVID-19 crisis. - III.1. Ad hoc Assistance. - III.2. The NATO Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre. - III.3. The EU Civil Protection Mechanism. - IV. Lessons learned and further research paths. - IV.1. The lack of public information and the need for transparency of European public action. - IV.2. Realpolitik and the civil-protection autonomy of the Union. - IV.3. The gap between EU citizens' expectations and the Union's competences. | (Abstract) It is of course too early to draw conclusions about the European Union's response to the COVID-19 crisis in its Member States while we are still in the midst of the health crisis. On the other hand, it is already possible to correct the widely shared first impression that European solidarity had been shattered. The available public data systematized in Section II and the analyses in Section III show that European solidarity has been expressed in two ways: First, bilaterally between EU Member States; second, collectively under the recent impetus of the European Commission. To help explain this impression of the absence of a Union, Section IV proposes three paths that should be the subject of further research: public information and the policy of transparency of European public action, the Union's emergency-reaction autonomy in the face of third countries' Realpolitik strategies, and the gap between the expectations of the Union's citizens and its actual competences.

The present paper aims to analyse the Machiavellian power strategy that Prince Hal, the new King Henry V, develops in Henry V in order to construct a legitimate self-image. We shall argue that Hal manages to become, by means of an extremely calculated technology of self-representation, the successful Machiavellian producer of his own hero-image.

Increasingly, policymakers, observers and scholars are calling for including China in nuclear arms-control efforts. Missing from debates, however, is a thorough analysis of Chinese perspectives. Drawing extensively on Chinese-language sources, this article traces the evolution of arms-control views among Chinese strategists and experts during the last decade. Updating earlier scholarship, we find that most Chinese strategists tend to view arms-control efforts through a strongly realpolitik prism. Many lament US domination of the arms-control agenda and believe US initiatives are intended to undermine Chinese nuclear deterrence. In recent years, these views have hardened. Chinese strategists increasingly see arms control as an arena for zero-sum military and political struggle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad is the property of Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Review of Eurasian Studies / Revista Română de Studii Eurasiatice is the property of Romanian Review of Eurasian Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The endless struggle between two seemingly incompatible but occasionally convergent concepts, namely liberal values and national interests, has determined United States (US) foreign policy and its implementation throughout the nation's history. Based on the neoclassical realist assumptions shored up by the methodological insights offered by the five-dimensional pre-theory of foreign policy, this article reveals a persistent dichotomy in US foreign policy through the analysis of Washington's response to the Arab Spring uprisings in Egypt, Libya, and Syria. Throughout history, US foreign policy has had a pendular behavioral pattern, swinging across a policy spectrum ranging from moralpolitik to realpolitik. While the inherent values-interests dilemma lies at the root of the inveterate oscillation of US foreign policy, the interplay of international stimulus and societal factors stands out as the principal source of its ambivalence, if not inconsistency, in the face of the upheavals that swept across the Middle East. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

States exist in an anarchic international system in which survival is the necessary precursor to fulfilling all of their citizens' other interests. Yet states' inhabitants – and the policymakers they empower – also hold social ideas about other ends that the state should value and how it should pursue them: the 'role' they expect their state to 'play' in international politics. Furthermore, such role-performative impulses can motivate external behaviours inimical to security-maximization – and thus to the state survival necessary for future interest-fulfilment. This article therefore investigates the tensions between roleplay and realpolitik in grand strategy. It does so through interrogation of four mutual incompatibilities in role-performative and realpolitikal understandings of 'Great Powerness', a core – but conceptually contested – international-systemic ordering unit, thereby demonstrating their necessary logical distinctiveness. The argument is illustrated with brief case studies on the United States, China, France, the United Kingdom, Germany and Japan. Identification of such security-imperilling role motives thus buttresses neoclassical realist theory; specifically, as an account of strategic deviation from the security-maximizing realist baseline. Such conclusions carry important implications for both scholarship and statecraft, meanwhile. For once we recognize that roleplay and realpolitik are necessarily distinct incentive structures, role motives' advocates can no longer claim that discharging such performative social preferences necessarily bolsters survival prospects too. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Mülkiye Dergisi is the property of Mulkiye Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Este artigo destaca duas leituras influenciadas pelo texto Politik, do historiador Alemão Heinrich von Treitschke (1834-1896). A primeira é encontrada na publicação “L’Allemagne au-dessus de tout: la mentalité allemande et la guerre”, da autoria de Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) em 1915. Já a segunda leitura aparece no livro Paix et Guerre Entre les Nations, assinado por Raymond Aron (1905-1983) em 1962. O artigo se volta para os principais pontos de Treitschke, destacados nas abordagens de Durkheim e Aron, e tem como objetivo analisar em que medida as diferenças das visões durkheimianas e aronianas respondem satisfatoriamente à perspectiva de Treitschke. Como leitores peculiares, Durkheim e o Aron da Guerra Fria oferecem duas chaves importantes, uma vez que o poder político, suas configurações e possibilidades, também emergem como pontos de discussão bibliográfica e reflexões sobre os riscos, acertos e imposturas intelectuais, diante da diplomacia, relações internacionais e sociologia.

The aim of the article is to show the weaknesses of the demoliberal paradigm resulting both from its internal, discursive conditions, as well as from its historical grounding together in the course of the cultural and civilizational evolution of Western societies (on the trajectory of premodern - modern - postmodernity) and in the structures of hegemonic and dependence relations between the West and the non-Western world. The issue under consideration appears to be important because the aforementioned weaknesses affect the development prospects of the demoliberal formation in the contemporary world, the specificity of which is in turn largely determined by the post-colonial status structure and the increasingly clear symptoms of the reconfiguration of the international system of power and dependencies. The basic internal contradiction of the demoliberal discourse is based on the contradictory implications of the idea of equality and freedom, the latter of which is dynamized by emancipatory tendencies that violate the ordering powers of an equality utopia. The noticed contradiction emphasizes the growing importance of identity politics in contemporary liberal democracies. The latter derives largely from the conflict of tradition and revolution, fundamental to the beginnings of modernity, the latter of which, as a social force and as a political and social project, is motivated by, among other things, democratic and liberal ideas. The entanglement of the democratic- liberal evolution in cultural contradictions and apories characteristic of the history of the Western world calls into question the universalism of the demoliberal paradigm. On the other hand, the conflict of utopias, both those under the sign of tradition and those under the sign of the revolution, is being relativized due to the emancipatory tendencies that destroy both them. The formal fulfilment of an equality and freedom utopia not only does not mitigate the aspirations for further emancipation, but also seems to be conducive to deepening the identity dilemmas of demoliberal societies. The particularization of identity discourses that takes place in this context threatens the social consensus around traditional demoliberal values. It also threatens the authority of the demoliberal formation, its coherence and credibility in the perception of different cultures, in relation to which the former plays an analogous role as it played at the dawn of Western European modernity in relation to tradition. The author sees a remedy for the crisis of cohesion and credibility of the demoliberal formation, among others in broadening the scope of inclusiveness by liberal culture of various identity policies, as well as in deepening the practices of deliberativeness responsible for social consensuality. Noticing the importance of the discursive and moral factor in the article does not obscure the influence of Realpolitik on contemporary liberal democracy. Real politics emphasizes the importance of the United States as the leader of the demoliberal camp, although it does not yet determine whether and how the American center of power will retain its stabilizing powers in the reality of a multipolar order. Due to the interdiscursive nature of the considerations, inevitable due to their subject matter, the article refers to a broader disciplinary background, including, apart from the above-mentioned postcolonial studies, e.g. philosophical anthropology, historiosophy, political theory and cultural criticism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]