| Summary/Abstract |
IN THE 21st century, a certain confidence persisted for a long time that the specific nature of contemporary challenges in international relations was a deviation from the norm and was not destroying their essence. "Individual violations of the existing system, which states allow as an exception, should not necessarily be perceived as a movement toward the dismantling of the system of international law as such."1 However, today it is obvious that the interpretation of even the inviolable principles of international law depends on political expediency. Put more starkly, you could say that law has practically disappeared, giving way to transient rules of foreign policy expediency. Of course, in places where initially there were difficulties adapting to codified law - for example, in Eastern Europe - the understanding of neutrality and multi-vector policy turned out to be simplified and formalistic. Idealism in economic or political theory can be considered a possible approach that, under certain conditions, leads to the required academic results, but in foreign policy, it can yield negative and irreversible results.
|