Typology of countries of the world

The modern political map of the world represents about 230 countries and territories, more than 190 of which are sovereign states.

Among them there are countries with a very large territory and population (China, India, Russia, USA) and very tiny ones - such as the “microstates” of Europe: Monaco, Andorra, Vatican City, Liechtenstein, San Marino.

There are single-national countries (Japan, Sweden, etc.) and multinational ones (India, Russia, Nigeria, USA, etc.); There are those rich in natural resources and those deprived of them. There are countries that have access to the sea and long maritime borders (Russia, Canada, China, etc.) and those that do not, that is, inland countries (such as Chad, Mali, Central African Republic, Paraguay, Nepal, Bhutan). Moreover, very often the geographical location of a country affects the level of its socio-economic development. Some states occupy an entire continent (Australia), while others are located on a small island or group of islands (Nauru, Malta, Cape Verde, etc.).

Each country in the world has its own unique characteristics, but by identifying any similar features with other countries, it is still possible to identify certain types of countries.

The type of a country forms a set of conditions and features of development, which in some significant, sometimes decisive (typological) features, on the one hand, make it related to a number of countries similar to it, and on the other hand, distinguish it from all others. The very existence of types of countries, their historical evolution are the result of the fact that development occurs in countries at different rates, in different settings, under different conditions and in different ways.

At the same time, it is impossible to distinguish types of countries only on the basis of one or several criteria that are important for all countries. At the first stage of creating a typology, one really has to do a lot of statistical work, but then it is still necessary to find similar features that distinguish certain countries into separate groups.

There are different typologies. They take into account a large number of indicators characterizing the level of economic and social development of countries, as well as historical and political aspects, for example, the level of development of democracy, etc. There are typologies that take into account the level of development of capitalism, the level of income of the population and quality of life, the level of humanitarian development and social progress, etc.

For a long time, the scientific literature used a typology that divided states into groups based on the principle of belonging to one or another socio-economic formation - capitalist (with a market economy) or socialist (with a planned economy). Moreover, a special group included “developing” countries (or “third world” countries) that were previously colonial and dependent territories and had embarked on the path of independent development. But with the collapse of the socialist system, this typology seems to have become outdated.

In addition to scientific value, any typology also has practical significance. Thus, at the UN, when developing a strategy for the further development of countries around the world, a group of least developed states is identified to provide financial or humanitarian assistance. This group of countries is distinguished based on three main criteria: very low per capita income; the share of manufacturing industry in the structure of the economy is less than 10%; The share of illiterate people among the adult population is more than 80%. In the early 1990s, 40 countries were classified in this group: for example, Afghanistan, Haiti, Guinea, Bangladesh, Laos, Nepal, Bhutan, Mali, Mozambique, Somalia, Burundi, Chad, Ethiopia and others.

Currently, according to a typology that takes into account the level and nature of socio-economic and political development, three groups of countries in the world are distinguished:

Economically developed states;

Less developed countries (according to UN terminology, “developing countries”);

Countries with “transition economies” (post-socialist) and socialist countries.

The last group includes the republics of the former USSR, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, in America - Cuba, as well as Asian states - China, Vietnam, Mongolia and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). Previously, they were countries of the socialist camp.

After the collapse of the USSR, in the early 90s, most countries in this group underwent very significant changes in politics and economics - they are trying to join the world system of market relations. The transformation processes in these states go beyond standard reforms, as they are deep and systemic in nature.

Only four states in the world remain socialist: China, Cuba, Vietnam and the DPRK. However, there are also significant shifts in the economies and politics of these countries.

It is characteristic that some of the post-socialist countries with low per capita incomes have declared their desire to acquire the status of a “developing” country (for example, the republics of the former Yugoslavia, Vietnam, the Central Asian republics of the CIS). This will give them the right to receive preferential loans and various types of assistance from international banks and funds.

In its most detailed form, the typology of foreign countries of the world (i.e., without countries with “transition” economies and socialist ones) is presented in a number of publications by Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences V.V. Volsky and the staff of the Department of Socio-Economic Geography of Foreign Countries, Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. This typology is the result of many years of research; it is constantly supplemented and improved.

According to this typology, all countries of the world (with the exception of post-socialist and socialist ones), in accordance with their place in the system of the world economy and international relations, were divided into three main groups:

Economically highly developed countries;

Countries with an average level of development;

Economically underdeveloped countries or, in UN terminology, “developing countries”.

In each of these groups, types of countries and even subtypes can be distinguished. Let us consider the main types of countries in the modern world in accordance with this grouping.

The first group includes:

1. Economically highly developed countries.

These include the USA, Canada, Western European countries, Japan, the Commonwealth of Australia, South Africa, Israel and New Zealand. These states are distinguished by a mature level of development of market relations. Their role in world politics and economics is great; they have powerful scientific and technical potential. But within this group three main subtypes can be distinguished:

1.1. The main capitalist countries: USA, Japan, Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy.

These are the most developed countries in the world in terms of their economic, scientific and technical potential. They differ from each other in the characteristics of their development and economic power, but they are all united by a very high level of development and the role they play in the world economy.

This group of countries includes six states from the famous G7. Among them, the United States ranks first in terms of economic potential.

1.2. Economically highly developed small Western countries. Europe: Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland.

These countries have reached a high level of development, but each of them, unlike the main capitalist countries, has a much narrower specialization in the world economy. At the same time, they send up to half of their products to the foreign market. The economy of these states has a large share of the non-productive sector (banking, provision of various types of services, tourism business, etc.).

1.3. Countries of “settler capitalism”: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Israel.

The first four countries are former colonies of Great Britain. Capitalist relations arose in them as a result of the economic activities of immigrants from Europe. But unlike the United States, which at one time was also a settler colony, its development had some peculiarities.

Despite the high level of development, these states retain the agricultural and raw materials specialization that developed in their foreign trade back in the colonial period. But such specialization in the international division of labor differs significantly from such specialization in developing countries, since it is combined with a highly developed domestic economy.

Israel is a small state formed by immigrants after the Second World War in the territory of Palestine (which was a mandate of the League of Nations under British rule after the First World War).

Canada is one of the “Big Seven” economically highly developed countries, but in terms of the type and characteristics of the development of its economy, it belongs specifically to this group.

The second group in this typology includes:

2. Countries with an average level of capitalist development. There are few such countries. They differ from the states included in the first group both in history and in the level of their socio-economic development. Among them, subtypes can also be distinguished:

2.1. A country that has achieved political independence and an average level of economic development under the dominance of the capitalist system: Ireland.

The current level of economic development and political independence in Ireland were achieved at the cost of an extremely difficult national struggle against imperialism. Until recently, Finland also belonged to this subtype. However, at present this country has entered the group of “Economically highly developed countries”.

2.2. Countries lagging behind in development: Spain, Greece, Portugal.

In the past, these states played an important role in world history. Spain and Portugal created huge colonial empires during the feudal era, but later lost all their possessions.

Despite well-known successes in the development of industry and the service sector, in terms of the level of development these countries generally lag behind economically highly developed countries.

The third group includes:

3. Economically less developed countries (developing countries).

This is the largest and most diverse group of countries. For the most part, these are former colonial and dependent countries that, having gained political independence, became economically dependent on the countries that were previously their mother countries.

The countries of this group have many things in common, including development problems, as well as internal and external difficulties associated with the low level of economic and social development, lack of financial resources, lack of experience in running a capitalist commodity economy, lack of qualified personnel, strong economic dependence, huge external debt, etc. The situation is aggravated by civil wars and interethnic conflicts. In the international division of labor, they occupy far from the best positions, being mainly suppliers of raw materials and agricultural products to economically developed countries.

In addition, in all countries of this type, due to rapid population growth, the social situation of large masses of residents is deteriorating, an excess of labor resources is manifested, demographic, food and other problems are especially acute. global problems.

But despite the common features, the countries of this group are very different from each other (and there are only about 150 of them). Therefore, the following subtypes are distinguished:

3.1. Key countries: Brazil, Mexico, India (countries with the largest resource, human and economic potential among developing countries and the most diversified economy).

3.2. Countries of relatively mature capitalism. This group includes a wide range of countries - from Latin American states to Arab countries, where the dominance of capitalist relations has been established only in recent decades. The following subtypes are distinguished here:

3.2.1. Migrant countries of early development of dependent capitalism: Argentina and Uruguay (in the international division of labor they still act as agricultural countries). These states have a fairly high standard of living of the population. In recent years, very significant changes have been made in the Argentine economy.

3.2.2. Countries of large-enclave development of capitalism: Venezuela, Chile, Iran, Iraq, Algeria (developed under the massive invasion of foreign capital associated with the export exploitation of large mineral deposits on the territory of these states).

3.2.3. Countries of externally oriented opportunistic development of capitalism (they are characterized by an export-oriented industry and an import-substituting economy). IN Latin America these are Bolivia, Colombia, Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador; in Asia: Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand, Philippines, Republic of Korea; in Northern Africa: Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia.

3.2.4. Small countries of dependent plantation economy (they are distinguished by a conserved agricultural specialization of the economy and a high share in agricultural exports): Nicaragua, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Haiti.

3.2.5. Small countries of “concession development” of capitalism (the economies of these countries depend to a very large extent on prices on the world market - the factors for the development of these territories are the concessions of the largest mining corporations): Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Suriname, Papua New Guinea, Gabon, Botswana.

3.2.6. Small “apartment-leasing countries” (islands or coastal countries located at the crossroads of trade routes; “tax paradise” countries, “hotel countries”, “flag of convenience” countries): Malta, Cyprus, Panama, Liberia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Singapore, etc.

TNCs use these countries to develop tourism on their territory, register ships under so-called “cheap flags,” etc.

3.3. Young liberated states (transitional type). What their future will be depends on specific socio-economic and political conditions. There are about 60 countries in this group, from large ones such as Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria to small ones - Gambia, Gabon, etc.

A unique type of country is formed in this subgroup from a number of oil-exporting countries with high income from oil trade. These are Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Libya, Brunei.

Let us note that the countries of the world included in the first and second groups of the typology presented above are the industrially developed countries of the world. The third group included all developing countries.

This typology was created when the world was bipolar (divided into capitalist and socialist), and characterized only non-socialist countries of the world.

Nowadays, when the world is turning from bipolar to unipolar, new typologies of countries around the world are being created or the old ones are being supplemented and modified (as is the typology of Moscow State University scientists presented to readers).

Other typologies have also been created, as noted earlier. As a generalizing, synthetic indicator, they often use the gross domestic or national product (GDP or GNP) per capita indicator. This is, for example, the well-known typological classification of developing countries and territories (authors: B.M. Bolotin, V.L. Sheinis), distinguishing “echelons” (upper, intermediate and lower) and seven groups of countries (from countries of moderately developed capitalism to the least developed ).

Scientists from the Geographical Faculty of Moscow State University (A.S. Fetisov, V.S. Tikunov) have developed a slightly different approach to the classification of non-socialist countries of the world - an evaluative-typological one. They performed a multivariate statistical analysis of data for 120 countries based on many indicators reflecting the level of socio-economic and political development of society. They identified seven groups of countries with a level of development from very high (USA, Canada, Sweden, Japan) to very low (Somalia, Ethiopia, Chad, Niger, Mali, Afghanistan, Haiti and others).

Famous geographer Ya.G. Mashbitz identified types of countries in the “developing world” based on industrialization trends. The first group in his classification included countries where large and relatively diverse industrial production was developed (Brazil, Mexico, India, etc.); the second - industrial countries of medium potential with significant development of raw materials and processing industries (Venezuela, Peru, Indonesia, Egypt, Malaysia, etc.); the third - small states and territories that take advantage of their economic and geographical position (Singapore, Panama, the Bahamas, etc.); the fourth - oil exporting countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc.). And the fifth group included the least industrialized countries with limited development prospects (i.e., the least developed countries: Haiti, Mali, Chad, Mozambique, Nepal, Bhutan, Djibouti, Somalia, etc.).

In some economic and geographical typologies, among the countries of the developing world, a group of “newly industrialized countries” (NICs) is distinguished. These most often include Singapore, Taiwan, and the Republic of Korea. In recent years, “second wave NIS” have been added to this group - Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines and some other countries. The economy of these countries is characterized by high rates of industrialization, export orientation of industrial production (especially products of knowledge-intensive industries), and their active participation in the international division of labor.

Attempts to typologically differentiate the countries of the world have been made by geographers, economists, and other specialists. You will learn more about the characteristics of various typologies of states in further courses. economic geography.

An important guideline in determining the number of sovereign states can be a country's membership in the United Nations (Table 2).

table 2

NUMBER OF UN MEMBER COUNTRIES

Growth in the number of UN member countries in 1950–1989. occurred mainly due to the entry into this organization of states freed from colonial dependence. That's what they are called liberated countries. In 1990–2007 Several more liberated countries (Namibia, Eritrea, etc.) joined the UN, but the main increase was associated with the admission of post-socialist states formed on the site of the former USSR, SFRY, Czechoslovakia. Nowadays the UN includes all CIS countries, six former republics. Yugoslavia, Czech Republic and Slovakia. In 2002, after a special referendum, Switzerland joined the UN, having previously believed that its policy of permanent neutrality was an obstacle to this. So now, of the sovereign states outside the UN, only the Vatican remains, which has observer status.

With such a large and, moreover, ever-increasing number of countries, there is an urgent need for their grouping, which is usually carried out according to several different characteristics and criteria.

Table 3

TEN COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD, THE LARGEST BY TERRITORY

Based on the size of the territory, the countries of the world are usually divided into very large, large, medium, small and very small. The top ten largest countries in the world, or giant countries, include the states listed in Table 3. Together they occupy 55% of all inhabited land.

The concepts of “large”, “medium”, and “small” country are different for different regions of the world. For example, the largest country in foreign Europe - France - turns out to be relatively small by the standards of Asia, Africa or America. But the concept of a “very small country” (or microstate) is approximately the same for different regions of the world. Most often it is used in relation to the dwarf countries of foreign Europe - Andorra, Liechtenstein, San Marino, etc. But in fact, many island countries of Africa, America and Oceania also belong to the microstates. For example, the Seychelles in Africa, Barbados, Grenada, Antigua and Barbuda, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines in Central America have an area of ​​350–450 km 2 (this is less than 1/2 the area of ​​Moscow), and the island states of Tuvalu and Nauru in Oceania occupy only 20–25 km 2 each. And the Vatican, occupying an area of ​​44 hectares, can be called a mini-state.

Only 13 countries have a population of 50 to 100 million people: Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy and Ukraine in Europe, Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, Iran and Turkey in Asia, Egypt and Ethiopia in Africa and Mexico in Latin America. In 53 countries, the population ranges from 10 to 50 million people. There are even more countries in the world with a population of 1 to 10 million (60), and in more than 40 countries the population does not reach 1 million people.

Table 4

TEN COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD WITH THE LARGEST POPULATIONS

As for the smallest states in terms of population, on the political map of the world they need to be looked for in the same place where the smallest territories of the country are located. In Central America, these are, for example, Barbados and Belize with a population of 200–300 thousand people, Grenada, Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, each with approximately 100 thousand inhabitants. In Africa, the same category of countries includes the island states of Sao Tome and Principe and the Seychelles, in Asia - Brunei, in Oceania - the island states of Tuvalu and Nauru, where only 10-12 thousand people live. However, the last place in terms of population is occupied by the Vatican, whose permanent population does not exceed 1000 people.

Based on the characteristics of their geographical location, countries of the world are most often divided into those with and without access to the World Ocean. Among the coastal countries, in turn, one can distinguish island ones (for example, Ireland and Iceland in Europe, Sri Lanka in Asia, Madagascar in Africa, Cuba in America, New Zealand in Oceania). A type of island country is an archipelagic country. Thus, Indonesia is located on 13 thousand islands, the Philippines occupies 7,000, and Japan – almost 4,000 islands. It is not surprising that archipelagic countries are among the top ten countries in terms of coastline length (Table 5). And Canada ranks uncompetitively first in this indicator thanks to the Canadian Arctic Archipelago.

Table 5

TOP TEN COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD BY LENGTH OF COASTLINE

43 countries do not have access to the World Ocean. Among them are 9 CIS countries, 12 - foreign Europe, 5 - Asia, 15 - Africa and 2 Latin American countries (Table 6).

As a rule, the lack of direct access to the World Ocean is one of the unfavorable features of the country’s geographical location.

Table 6

LANDLESS COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD

The typology of countries in the world is one of the most difficult methodological problems. Economic geographers, economists, political scientists, sociologists and representatives of other sciences are engaged in solving it. In contrast to the grouping (classification) of countries, the basis for their typology is not quantitative, but qualitative characteristics (criteria), which allow each of them to be classified as one or another type of socio-economic and political development. A prominent representative of the economic-geographical school of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov, corresponding member of the RAS V. V. Volsky under country type understood the objectively formed relatively stable complex of its inherent conditions and development features, which characterize its role and place in the world community at this stage of world history. In other words, in this case we are talking about those main typological features of countries that bring them closer to some and, on the contrary, distinguish them from other countries.

In a certain sense, the typology of countries is a historical category. In fact, until the early 90s. XX century It was customary to divide all countries of the world into three main types: socialist, capitalist and developing. In the 90s XX century, after the collapse of the world socialist system, a different, less politicized typology emerged with the division of countries into: 1) economically highly developed; 2) developing; 3) countries with economies in transition, but along with this, a two-part typology of countries is now still widespread, dividing them into: 1) economically developed and 2) developing. In this case, the indicator is usually used as a generalizing, synthetic indicator gross domestic product(GDP) per capita.

Table 7

COUNTRIES WITH THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST GDP PER CAPITA IN THE WORLD (2006)

This very important indicator is not only used to classify countries into these two types, but also gives a clear picture of the huge gap between the most and least developed countries in the world (Table 7). In this table, GDP is calculated not according to the official exchange rate, but as is now customary: according to their purchasing power (PPP).

A more convenient histological classification was proposed by the bank; it comes from dividing countries into three main groups. Firstly, this low income countries, to which the World Bank includes 42 countries in Africa, 15 countries in foreign Asia, 3 countries in Latin America, 1 country in Oceania and 6 CIS countries (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan). Secondly, this middle income countries which, in turn, are divided into lower middle income countries(8 countries of foreign Europe, 6 countries of the CIS, 9 countries of foreign Asia, 10 countries of Africa, 16 countries of Latin America and 8 countries of Oceania) and upper middle income countries(6 countries of foreign Europe, 7 countries of foreign Asia, 5 countries of Africa, 16 countries of Latin America). Thirdly, this high income countries which include 20 countries of foreign Europe, 9 countries of foreign Asia, 3 countries of Africa, 2 countries of North America, 6 countries of Latin America and 6 countries of Oceania. The group of high-income countries looks, perhaps, the most “combined”: along with the most highly developed countries of Europe, America and Japan, it includes Malta, Cyprus, Qatar, the UAE, Brunei, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Martinique, Reunion, etc.

The per capita GDP indicator does not allow us to clearly define the boundary between developed and developing countries. For example, some international organizations use $6,000 per capita (at the official exchange rate) as such a quantitative threshold. But if we take it as the basis of a two-member typology, it turns out that all post-socialist countries with transition economies fall into the category of developing countries, while Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE, Brunei, Bahrain, Barbados, and the Bahamas fall into the group of economically developed ones.

That is why geographers have long been working on creating more advanced typologies of countries in the world, ones that would also take into account the nature of development of each country and the structure of its GDP, share in world production, the degree of involvement in the international geographical division of labor, and some indicators characterizing its population . Representatives of the economic-geographical school of Moscow State University have worked and are working especially hard to create such typologies. M.V. Lomonosov, first of all V.V. Volsky, L.V. Smirnyagin, V.S. Tikunov, A.S. Fetisov.

V. S. Tikunov and A. S. Fetisov, for example, developed a comprehensive evaluative and typological approach to the study of foreign (with the exception of post-socialist and socialist) countries, based on 14 indicators reflecting the socio-political and economic aspects of their development. In total, they analyzed data from 142 countries. As a result of this approach, the USA, Canada, Germany, Sweden, Norway found themselves at the highest level of socio-economic development, and Somalia, Guinea, Yemen, Angola, Central African Republic, Haiti and some other countries were at the lowest. (rice. 2).

Rice. 1. Gross domestic product (GDP) in countries of the world per capita, US dollars

Rice. 2. Ranking of countries of the world by level of development (according to V.S. Tikunov, A.S. Fetisov, I.A. Rodionova)

V.V. Volsky developed and improved his typology over a long period of time. Its last version was published in 1998 and then in 2001.

Table 8 presents this typology in a more visual form.

V.V. Volsky’s typology has already entered into scientific use; it is widely used for educational purposes. This applies, for example, to the identification of the main economically developed countries, key developing countries, rich oil-exporting countries, as well as the least developed countries. Concept of least developed country was introduced by the UN back in 1970. At the same time, 36 countries were included in this category, in which GDP per capita did not reach $100, the share of the manufacturing industry in GDP did not exceed 10%, and the proportion of the literate population over the age of

Table 8

TYPES OF COUNTRIES IN THE FOREIGN WORLD

(according to V.V. Volsky)

For 15 years it was less than 20%. In 1985, there were already 39 such countries, and in 2003 – 47.

However, this typology also raises some questions. For example, classifying Canada as a country of “settler capitalism” turns the officially recognized “Big Seven” of leading Western countries into the “Big Six”. The classification of Spain as a moderately developed country raises doubts. Further, the typology actually lacks a generally accepted subtype of newly industrialized countries (NICs), which can hardly be justified by some uncertainty in its composition (no one seems to have any doubts regarding the Asian “tigers” of the first and second waves, but from other countries to Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Uruguay, India, Turkey, Egypt are sometimes included in this subtype). Finally, the typology seems to have dissolved the largest group of “classical” developing countries, which are far behind in their development.

Experience shows that the line between economically developed and developing countries is relatively fluid. For example, the International Monetary Fund in its official reports since 1997 has included the Republic of Korea, Singapore and Taiwan among the economically developed countries and territories. The largest of Latin American states - Brazil, Mexico, Argentina - have also actually gone beyond traditional ideas about developing countries and have come very close to the type of economically developed countries. It is no coincidence that Turkey, the Republic of Korea and Mexico were accepted into such a prestigious “club” of these countries as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

In the era of a bipolar world and the Cold War, one of the main sources of instability on the planet were numerous regional and local conflicts, which both the socialist and capitalist systems used to their advantage. A special section of political science began to study such conflicts. Although it was never possible to create a generally accepted classification, based on the intensity of the confrontation between the parties, conflicts were usually divided into three categories: 1) the most acute; 2) tense; 3) potential. Geographers also began to study conflicts. As a result, according to some scientists, a new direction began to form in political geography - geoconflictology.

In the 90s XX century, after the end of the Cold War, the military-political confrontation between the two world systems became a thing of the past. It was possible to resolve a number of regional and local conflicts. However, many sources of international tension, which are called “hot spots,” have remained. According to American data, in 1992 there were 73 hot spots in the world, of which 26 were “small wars” or armed uprisings, 24 were marked by an increase in tension, and 23 were classified as hotspots of potential conflicts. According to other estimates, in the mid-90s. XX century in the world there were about 50 areas of constant military clashes, guerrilla warfare and manifestations of mass terrorism.

The Stockholm Institute of International Peace Problems (SIPRI) is specifically involved in the study of military conflicts. The very concept of “major armed conflict” is defined by him as a prolonged confrontation between the armed forces of two or more governments or one government and at least one organized armed group, resulting in the death of at least 1,000 people as a result of hostilities over the entire duration of the conflict, and in which irreconcilable differences relate to governance and/or territory. In 1989, when SIPRI statistics begin, 36 such conflicts were registered. In 1997, 25 major armed conflicts were recorded in 24 places on the globe, all of them (except one) of an intrastate nature. A comparison of these figures indicates a slight decrease in the number of armed conflicts. Indeed, during this period of time, it was possible to achieve at least a relative settlement of armed conflicts in Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, Transnistria, Tajikistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Liberia, Somalia, Guatemala, Nicaragua, East Timor and some other former hot spots. But many conflicts were never resolved, and in some places new conflict situations arose.

At the beginning of the 21st century. Africa took first place in the total number of armed conflicts, which even began to be called the continent of conflicts. In North Africa, examples of this kind include Algeria, where the government is fighting an armed struggle with the Islamic Salvation Front, and Sudan, where government troops are waging a real war with the peoples of the southern part of the country who oppose forced Islamization. In both cases, the number of both those fighting and those killed is measured in tens of thousands. In West Africa, government forces continued to act against opposition armed groups in Senegal and Sierra Leone; in Central Africa - in Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chad, Central African Republic; in East Africa - in Uganda, Burundi, Rwanda; in South Africa - in Angola and the Comoros Islands.

An example of a country with a particularly protracted conflict that has died down and flared up with renewed vigor many times is Angola, where the armed struggle of the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) with the government began back in 1966 and ended only in 2002 The long conflict in Zaire ended in victory for the opposition; in 1997, the country's name was changed to become the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The death toll in the civil war in this country has reached 2.5 million people. And during the civil war in Rwanda, which broke out in 1994 on ethnic grounds, human losses exceeded 1 million people; another 2 million became refugees. Differences between Ethiopia and neighboring Eritria and Samoli remain.

In total, according to available estimates, during the post-colonial period, i.e., since the beginning of the 60s, more than 10 million Africans have died in armed conflicts. At the same time, political scientists note that most of these conflicts are associated with the poor and poorest countries of this continent. Although the weakness of a particular state, in principle, should not necessarily lead to conflict situations, in Africa such a correlation can be seen quite clearly.

Armed conflicts are also typical for different subregions of foreign Asia.

In South-West Asia, the Arab-Israeli conflict, which has more than once escalated into violent clashes and even wars, has lasted a total of more than 50 years. Direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which began in 1993, led to some normalization of the situation, but the process of peaceful resolution of this conflict has not yet been completed. Quite often it is interrupted by new outbreaks of fierce, including armed, struggle on both sides. The Turkish government has long been at war with the Kurdish opposition and its army. The governments of Iran (and, until recently, Iraq) also seek to suppress opposition groups by force. And this is not to mention the eight-year bloody war between Iran and Iraq (1980–1988), the temporary occupation of neighboring Kuwait by Iraq in 1990–1991, and the armed conflict in Yemen in 1994. The political situation in Afghanistan continues to be very difficult, where, after the withdrawal of Soviet troops in 1989, the UN peace plan was actually thwarted and an armed struggle began between the Afghan groups themselves, during which the Taliban religious movement, overthrown in 2001–2002, seized power in the country. anti-terrorist coalition of countries led by the United States. But, of course, the greatest military action by the United States and its NATO allies was undertaken in 2003 in Iraq to overthrow the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein. In fact, this war is far from over.

In South Asia, India continues to be the main source of armed conflict, where the government is fighting rebel groups in Kashmir, Assam, and is also in a state of constant confrontation with Pakistan over the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

In Southeast Asia, hotbeds of military conflicts exist in Indonesia (Sumatra). In the Philippines, the government is fighting the so-called new people's army, in Myanmar - against one of the local nationalist unions. In almost each of these protracted conflicts, the death toll is in the tens of thousands, and in Cambodia in 1975–1979, when the left-wing extremist group “Khmer Rouge” led by Pol Pot seized power in the country, as a result of genocide, according to various estimates, the death toll was from 1 million to 3 million people.

In foreign Europe in the 90s. The territory of the former SFRY became the epicenter of armed conflicts. The civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina lasted here for almost four years (1991–1995), during which more than 200 thousand people were killed and wounded. In 1998–1999 The autonomous province of Kosovo became the scene of large-scale military operations.

In Latin America, armed conflicts are most common in Colombia, Peru and Mexico.

The most important role in preventing, resolving and monitoring such conflicts is played by the United Nations, whose main goal is to maintain peace on the planet. UN peacekeeping operations are of great importance. They are not limited to preventive diplomacy, but also include the direct intervention of UN forces (“blue helmets”) in armed conflicts. During the existence of the UN, more than 40 peacekeeping operations of this kind were carried out - in the Middle East, Angola, Western Sahara, Mozambique, Cambodia, in the territory of the former SFRY, Cyprus and many other countries. The military, police and civilian personnel from 68 countries who participated numbered approximately 1 million; about a thousand of them died during peacekeeping operations.

In the second half of the 90s. XX century the number of such operations and their participants began to decline. For example, in 1996, the number of troops involved in UN peacekeeping operations was 25 thousand people, and they were located in 17 countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cyprus, Lebanon, Cambodia, Senegal, Somalia, El Salvador, etc. But already in 1997, UN troops were reduced to 15 thousand people. And subsequently, preference began to be given not so much to military contingents as to observer missions. In 2005, the number of UN peacekeeping operations was reduced to 14 (in Serbia and Montenegro, Israel and Palestine, India and Pakistan, Cyprus, etc.).

The decline in UN military peacekeeping activity can only partly be explained by its financial difficulties. It was also affected by the fact that some of the UN military operations classified as peace enforcement operations, caused condemnation from many countries, since they were accompanied by gross violations of the charter of this organization, first of all, the fundamental principle of unanimity of the permanent members of the Security Council and even the actual replacement of it by the NATO Council. Examples of this kind include the military operation in Somalia, Desert Storm in Iraq in 1991, operations in the territory of the former SFRY - first in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and then in Kosovo, the anti-terrorist military operation in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003

And at the beginning of the 21st century. armed conflicts pose a great danger to the cause of peace. It must also be borne in mind that in many areas of such conflicts, where hostilities ceased, a situation of truce rather than lasting peace was created. They simply moved from the acute stage to the stage of intense or potential, in other words, “smoldering” conflicts. It is to these categories that one can include conflicts in Tajikistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Northern Ireland, Kashmir, Sri Lanka, Western Sahara, and Cyprus. A special type of source of such conflicts are the still existing so-called self-proclaimed (unrecognized) states. Examples of these include the Republic of Abkhazia, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, South Ossetia, the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic in the CIS, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. The political and military calm achieved in many of them over time, as experience shows, can be deceptive. Such “smoldering” conflicts still pose a great threat. From time to time, conflicts in these territories escalate and real military operations take place.

The political system of any country is characterized primarily by form of government. There are two main forms of government - republican and monarchical.

Republics arose in ancient times (Ancient Rome during the republican period of its development), but they became most widespread already in the era of modern and modern times. It is important to note that during the process of the collapse of the colonial system, most of the liberated countries adopted a republican form of government. In Africa alone, which was a colonial continent before World War II, more than 50 republics were formed. As a result, in 1990 there were already 127 republics in the world. Then, after the collapse of the USSR, the SFRY, and Czechoslovakia, their total number approached 150.

Under a republican system, legislative power usually belongs to parliament, elected by the entire population of the country, and executive power to the government. At the same time, a distinction is made between presidential and parliamentary (parliamentary) republics. IN presidential republic The president, who is the head of state and often the government, is vested with very great powers. There are more than 100 such republics in the world. They are especially common in Africa, where there are 45 of them (for example, Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, South Africa), and in Latin America, where there are 22 of them (for example, Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina). In foreign Asia there are noticeably fewer presidential republics (for example, Iran, Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines), and in foreign Europe there are even fewer (for example, France). The most striking example of a presidential republic is the United States. Let us add that all 12 CIS countries also belong to presidential republics. Moreover, some of them, including Russia, are sometimes called super-presidential, since their constitutions give presidents especially great rights. Parliamentary republics are most typical for foreign Europe, but there are many of them in foreign Asia (for example, China, India).

Monarchies also arose in ancient times (Ancient Rome during the imperial period), but became most widespread in the Middle Ages and in modern times. In 2008, there were 29 monarchies on the political map of the world: 13 in Asia, 12 in Europe, 3 in Africa and 1 in Oceania (Table 9). Among them there is one empire, kingdoms, principalities, duchies, sultanates, emirates, the papal state-Vatican City. Typically, the monarch's power is for life and is inherited, but in Malaysia and the UAE, monarchs are elected for a five-year term.

Table 9

COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD WITH A MONARCHIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT

The total number of monarchies remains fairly stable, since this form of government, something of a relic of feudalism, seems rather anachronistic these days. However, in recent decades there have been two cases of the revival of the monarchical system. This happened in Spain, where the monarchy, overthrown in 1931, was restored in 1975, after the death of the head of the Spanish state (caudillo) General Franco, and in Cambodia, where, after a 23-year break, the king again became king in 1993 Norodom Sihanouk. Here is the opposite example: in the spring of 2008, after 240 years of existence, the monarchy in Nepal was abolished.

The vast majority of existing monarchies are constitutional monarchies, where real legislative power belongs to parliament, and executive power belongs to the government, while the monarch, in the words of I. A. Vitver, “reigns, but does not rule.” These are, for example, Great Britain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Japan, where the role of the monarch is now predominantly representative and ceremonial. However, its political influence is quite noticeable in some cases.

The full title of Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain, who has occupied the throne for more than 40 years, is: By the grace of God, Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and other dominions and territories subject to her, Head of the Commonwealth of Nations, Guardian of the Faith, Sovereign of the British Orders of Chivalry. The Queen has the right to convene and dissolve parliament, appoint and remove the prime minister, approve laws passed by parliament, elevate peers of the kingdom, grant awards, and issue pardons. However, in all these actions it is guided by the advice or decisions of parliament and government. Every November, the Queen delivers the Speech from the Throne in Parliament, but it is written by the Prime Minister. Since 1707 there has not been a case where the English king vetoed a law passed by Parliament. Since 1783 there had not been a case where he had removed a prime minister. Nevertheless, British citizens encounter symbols of the monarchy, as they say, at every turn. The country is ruled by "Her Majesty's Government". Laws are declared “in the name of the queen.” Money is printed by the Royal Mint, letters are sent by the Royal Mail, and government correspondence is sent in envelopes marked “On Her Majesty’s Service.” At dinner parties, the first toast is usually to the Queen. At official celebrations, the anthem “God Save the Queen” is performed. From the release of the world's first stamp in 1840 until the 60s. XX century English postage stamps depicted only the monarchs of this country. But even now, any stamp must have the silhouette of Elizabeth II. It can be added that the Queen of Great Britain is one of the very rich people. Her fortune is estimated at $2.5 billion.

Along with the constitutional ones, several more remain absolute monarchies. There are no elected parliaments in them; at best, under the monarch, there are advisory bodies appointed by him, and the executive power is completely subordinate to the monarch. All currently existing absolute monarchies are located in Asia, mainly within the Arabian Peninsula.

The most striking example of a country with this moribund form of government is Oman, where Sultan Qaboos has ruled alone since 1970. As head of state, he at the same time serves as prime minister, minister of foreign affairs, defense, finance, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. There is no constitution in this country. Absolute monarchies also include Saudi Arabia, where the king is also the prime minister, commander-in-chief of the armed forces and chief judge, and Qatar, where all power belongs to the local emir. This group includes the United Arab Emirates, consisting of seven principalities, each of which is an absolute monarchy. But Kuwait and Bahrain have recently begun to be classified as constitutional monarchies, although in fact they continue to largely remain absolute monarchies.

A kind of absolute monarchy - theocratic monarchy(from the Greek word Theos - God). In such a monarchy, the head of state is also its religious head. A classic example of this kind is the Vatican, which is ruled by the Pope. Theocratic monarchies usually include the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Sultanate of Brunei.

Comparing the republican and monarchical forms of government, S. N. Rakovsky drew attention to the well-known convention of the widespread postulate that republican power is always more democratic and generally “higher” than monarchical power. Indeed, it is enough to compare European monarchies with some republics in Asia, Africa and Latin America in order to refuse to absolutize such a thesis.

Another common form of government is formed by states that are part of Commonwealth(Commonwealth), led by Great Britain. Legally, the British Commonwealth of Nations was formalized back in 1931. Then it included Great Britain and its dominions - Canada, Australia, the Union of South Africa, Newfoundland and Ireland. After the Second World War and the collapse of the British colonial Empire, most of Britain's former possessions remained within the Commonwealth. These are 54 countries with a total territory of more than 30 million km2 and a population of over 1.2 billion people, located in all parts of the world (rice. 3). The composition of the Commonwealth does not remain unchanged. At different times, Ireland, Burma (Myanmar) left it, in 1961–1994. South Africa left, but it was replenished with other members.

Rice. 3. Commonwealth countries led by Great Britain

The Commonwealth is a voluntary association of sovereign states, each of which pursues its own policies, cooperating with other member states for the purpose of "promoting the welfare of peoples". In 2007, the Commonwealth included 32 republics and 6 monarchies. Its remaining 16 members are officially referred to as "commonwealth countries". Each of them nominally recognizes as its head the monarch of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, i.e. Queen Elizabeth II. This group includes the former British dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, but its main part consists of island microstates, former British colonies: Jamaica, the Bahamas, Barbados, Grenada, etc.

Interestingly, in 1999, a referendum was held in Australia on the issue of changing the current state status and declaring the country a republic. “Why on earth,” asked the supporters of the republican form of government, “should a foreign queen, not born and not living in Australia, be our overlord?” As a result of the referendum, Australia still did not become a republic: less than half (45%) were in favor of transforming the political system.

At the end of 1991, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, another Commonwealth appeared in the world - Commonwealth of Independent States(CIS), which included 12 former union republics of the USSR.

There are other forms of government entities in the world. For example, with the collapse of the French colonial empire after World War II, some former colonies of France received the status of its overseas departments (Martinique, Guadeloupe, Guiana in Latin America, Reunion in Africa). As in any department of France proper, each of them has a state executive body - a prefecture, as well as local government bodies. There are so-called overseas territories (New Caledonia in Oceania). Both are represented in the French parliament by a small number of deputies and senators.

The political system of any country is also characterized by the form administrative-territorial structure(or administrative-territorial division - ATD). Typically, such a division is carried out taking into account economic, historical, national, natural and other factors. Its main functions include: stepwise placement of government bodies and public administration, ensuring the collection of taxes and information, control of the center over places, implementation of flexible economic and social policies, regional policies, holding election campaigns, etc.

Research by political geographers shows that the grid of administrative-territorial division of countries is formed evolutionarily under the influence of several factors and approaches. In this case, historical and ethnocultural approaches prevail. Historical ATD typical, for example, for many countries of foreign Europe. It was based on historical provinces that were feudal states in the Middle Ages (Thuringia, Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg and others in Germany, Tuscany, Lombardy, Piedmont in Italy). Ethnic ATD more common in developing countries, especially multinational ones. An example of this kind is India, where ethnic boundaries are primarily taken into account when determining state boundaries. This principle was also the basis for the formation of the administrative-territorial division of the former USSR, which included autonomous republics, regions and districts. However, it is often not possible to clearly separate both of these principles, so it is obviously more correct to talk about historical-ethnic approach. Accordingly, the boundaries between administrative units are often drawn along historical and ethnocultural boundaries, which, in turn, are often associated with natural (river, mountain) boundaries. It is not so rare (for example, in the USA) to find geometric administrative boundaries.

Countries around the world also vary greatly in the degree of fragmentation of administrative-territorial divisions. In most of them, the number of administrative units ranges from 10 to 50: this is considered more or less optimal from a management point of view. In Germany, for example, there are 16 states, in Spain there are 50 provinces and 17 autonomous regions. There are also countries with a smaller number of such units (Austria has 8 states).

The most striking examples of countries with very fractional ADT are France, Russia and the USA. In France, a decree on the transformation of old historical provinces into small departments was adopted back in 1793. Nowadays, this country is administratively divided into 100 departments (96 in France and 4 “overseas”) and 36.6 thousand communes. This puts it in first place in foreign Europe in terms of the degree of decentralization of grassroots power. In Russia, until 2007, there were 86 subjects of the Federation (21 republics, 1 autonomous region, 7 autonomous okrugs, 48 ​​regions, 7 territories and 2 cities of federal subordination - Moscow and St. Petersburg). In the United States, the lowest administrative unit should be considered a district or county (there are more than 30 thousand of them in total), which are part of 50 states. However, some counties are further divided into townships and municipalities, not to mention many thousands of so-called special districts in charge of housing and road construction, water supply, health care, school education, etc.

In the 60-90s. XX century In many Western countries, reforms of the administrative-territorial division were carried out, aimed primarily at its consolidation and streamlining. As a rule, they were of a compromise nature. In developing countries since the 50s. They are also reorganizing. However, unlike Western countries, it is aimed primarily at disaggregating such divisions. As for the former USSR and Russia, the ATD that has developed here has long been criticized, including by geographers - primarily for its disconnect from economic zoning. However, in the current situation, its radical reform is hardly possible, although some consolidation of the ATD has already begun.

There are two main forms of administrative-territorial structure - unitary And federal. The first of them appeared much earlier. However, some federations already have a long history.

A classic example of this kind is Switzerland, where the beginnings of a federal system arose more than 700 years ago.

A unitary state is a form of government in which the country has a single constitution, there are single legislative and executive authorities, and the administrative units within it do not have any significant self-government. There are an overwhelming majority of such states in the world. Examples of them include Belarus, Poland, France, Sweden, Japan, Turkey, Egypt, Chile, Cuba.

A federal state is a form of government in which, along with unified (federal) laws and authorities, there are self-governing administrative units - republics, states, provinces, lands, cantons, which have their own bodies of legislative and executive power, albeit of a “second order” . Thus, in the USA, each state has its own legislative (legislative assembly) and executive (governor) authorities, the structure and competence of which are determined by the constitution of the given state.

In most federal states, parliaments consist of two chambers, one of which provides representation of republics, states, provinces, etc. (such as, for example, the functions of the Senate in the US Congress). In 2007 there were 24 federal states in the world (Table 10). As is easy to see, their official names in most cases directly reflect this feature of the political system.

In Table 10, attention is drawn to Switzerland, which has the official name of the Swiss Confederation. A confederation can be considered a type of federal government system, in which the units forming the state are legally equated to independent states with their own authorities, and the state authorities, common to the entire country, are in charge only of foreign policy and military affairs. In this case, each canton has its own constitution, parliament and government. But in fact, this form is quite close to the federal one.

It is interesting that in a federal (confederal) government system, the capital of a country is often not its largest city. Examples include Washington in the USA, Ottawa in Canada, Brasilia in Brazil, Canberra in Australia, Islamabad in Pakistan, Abuja in Nigeria, Yamoussoukro in Cote d'Ivoire, Bern in Switzerland. In some cases, capital functions are divided between two cities. Thus, in South Africa, the seat of government is located in Pretoria, and parliament sits in Cape Town.

Table 10

COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD WITH A FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE-TERRITORIAL STRUCTURE

There is a fairly widespread opinion that the federal form of administrative-territorial structure is characteristic primarily of multinational and binational countries. Of course, there are such examples - Russia, India, Switzerland, Belgium,

Canada, Nigeria. And yet, the majority of federations that currently exist are countries with a more or less homogeneous national (ethnolinguistic) composition. Consequently, their emergence reflects not so much national-ethnic as historical and geographical features of development. Australia, Austria, Germany, Canada, the USA, and Switzerland are most often cited as examples of countries with a federal structure that provides for a clear distribution of competencies between different levels of government, which should indicate their progress towards “new federalism” and a departure from the old “official federalism” "

Nevertheless, world experience shows that conflicting internal political situations are often associated precisely with federal states, where separatism continues to manifest itself. This especially applies to multinational and binational countries, where the internal situation is complicated due to interethnic and religious contradictions. In the SFRY and 4exoslovakia, and to a large extent in the USSR at the turn of the 1990s. they led to the disintegration of federations that seemed quite stable, and this “divorce” did not always occur peacefully.

As a kind of separatist curiosity, we can cite the example of the tiny island federal state of St. Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean Sea. These two islands with a total area of ​​269 km 2 with a population of about 45 thousand people formed their own federation in 1983. In 1998, 10 thousand residents of Nevis demanded secession from it and full political independence. However, during the referendum held for this purpose, they failed to collect the required 2/3 of the votes, so that the world's smallest federal state did not disintegrate.

It can be added that in many federal states (for example, Russia) quite strong elements of unitarianism appear. And in some unitary states (for example, Spain) there are elements of federalism. The combination of both depends primarily on the interests of various political, financial and economic groups.

In conclusion, we present an interesting typology of modern federations proposed by V. A. Kolosov, who distinguishes the following types: 1) Western European (Germany, Austria, Belgium, Switzerland); 2) North American (USA, Canada, Australia); 3) Latin American (Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil); 4) island (Micronesia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Comoros); 5) Afro-Asian (India, Malaysia, UAE, South Africa); 6) Nigerian (Nigeria, Pakistan, Ethiopia, Myanmar); 7) post-socialist (Russia, Yugoslavia).

Political geography is a borderline, transitional science that arose at the intersection of geography and political science.

The establishment of political geography as an independent scientific direction occurred at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th centuries. It was associated with the appearance of the book “Political Geography” by the German geographer, ethnographer, and sociologist Friedrich Ratzel. Ratzel’s ideas were then developed in their works by the English geographer Halford Mackinder (“Britain and the British Seas”), the Swedish political scientist Rudolf Kjellen (“The State as an Organism”) and other authors. Many Russian geographers, for example V.P. Semenov Tian-Shansky, continued to pay attention to political geography.

In the 30-50s. XX century in connection with the preparation and then the outbreak of the Second World War, then with the beginning of the Cold War, which led to fundamental changes in the political map of the world, state borders, the emergence of two opposing political systems, the proliferation of military bases, the emergence of regional conflicts, etc. , political geography has received further development both theoretically and practically. The works of R. Hartshorne, S. Jones, M. Gottman, and other prominent scientists appeared in the West. However, in the USSR, despite the interest in political-geographical research on the part of N.N. Baransky, I.A. Vitver, I.M. Maergoiz, in general they developed very slowly.

Since the late 70s. XX century Political geography - as an independent scientific direction - is experiencing a period of new growth. In Western countries, many political-geographical books and atlases are published, and political-geographical magazines are published. In Russia, many important problems found expression in the works of V. A. Kolosov, S. B. Lavrov, Ya. G. Mashbits, Yu. D. Dmitrevsky, N. S. Mironenko, L. V. Smirnyagin, O. V. Vitkovsky , V.S. Yagya, N.V. Kaledin, R.F. Turovsky, M.M. Golubchik and other geographers. At the same time, we can talk about the formation of a largely new political geography, differing from the traditional one in accordance with how the current stage of world development differs from previous ones.

There are many definitions of political geography. As an example of the most concise definition, the following can be given: political geography is the science of territorial differentiation of political phenomena and processes. But in most cases, experts in the field of this science formulate their definitions in more detail. Thus, according to Ya. G. Mashbits, political geography studies the territorial arrangement of class and political forces in connection with the socio-economic, historical, political, ethnocultural and natural features of the development of regions and countries, their districts, cities and rural areas. According to V. A. Kolosov, modern political-geographical research can be classified into three territorial levels: the macro-level includes research on the world as a whole and its large regions, the meso-level on individual countries, and the micro-level on individual cities, regions, etc. d. In the 80-90s. XX century in domestic political geography, the first and second of these levels have received the greatest development.

It is obvious that at the global and regional levels, the sphere of interests of political geography should include changes occurring on the political map of the world (related to the formation of new states, changes in their political system, state borders, etc.); changes in the balance of power of the main political, military and economic groups; the most important territorial aspects of international relations, including the geography of hotbeds of international tension and military conflicts. A new direction of political-geographical research is also developing rapidly - political geography of the Ocean. This is explained by the fact that the World Ocean today has also become an arena of active political events, reflecting changes in the balance of political forces and, accordingly, in the delimitation of sea areas.

As for political-geographical area studies, generalizing (and simplifying) the available publications, with a certain degree of convention, we can say that the sphere of interests of political-geographical area studies may include the following questions:

– features of the social and state system, form of government and administrative-territorial division, domestic and foreign policy;

– formation of the state territory, its political and geographical position, assessment of borders and self-sufficiency in basic natural resources, border areas;

– geographical differences in the social class structure of the population, in its national and religious composition, political relations developing between social groups, nations, state and local authorities;

– geography of the country’s party and political forces, including political parties, trade unions, public organizations and movements, their influence on political and public life, areas of political tension and social explosions;

– organization and conduct of election campaigns, referendums, as well as strikes, demonstrations, armed uprisings, separatist, underground, partisan movements affecting the interests of various social forces.

An analysis of sources shows that in Russian political geography of the post-Soviet period, two areas have aroused the greatest interest - geopolitics and electoral geography.

Geopolitics(geographical policy) is one of the main areas of political geography. Like political geography, it examines processes and phenomena occurring in the world at different levels. At the global and regional levels, its main task is to study the geography of international relations, especially the balance of power emerging between the great powers. At the level of individual countries - in the study of the position of a particular country in the system of existing military-political and economic relationships that influence its foreign policy and determine changes in its geopolitical position. We can say that geopolitics considers each state as a spatial-geographical organism that lives in its own rhythms and has its own unique face. Sometimes they also talk about applied geopolitics or geostrategy.

The main geopolitical factors are usually considered:

– geographical(space, location, natural conditions and resources);

– political(type of government system, social structure of society, relationships with other states, participation in political unions and blocs, character

state borders and their mode of operation, the presence of hot spots);

– economic(standard of living of the population, degree of development of leading sectors of the economy, participation in foreign economic relations);

– military(level of development, combat capability and combat readiness of the armed forces, level of development of military infrastructure, degree of training of military personnel, military expenditures);

– environmental(degree of degradation of the natural environment and measures to protect it);

– demographic(nature of population reproduction, its composition and distribution);

– cultural-historical(level of development of science, education, healthcare, cultural and labor traditions, ethnic and religious relationships, crime situation).

The geopolitical doctrine of each state is determined by the totality of the listed factors. But the greatest importance is usually given to geographical and political factors.

In its development, geopolitics, like all political geography, went through a number of stages.

The first stage is often called the stage classical geopolitics. It covers the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, when there was a sharp aggravation of numerous military-political contradictions and the struggle for the territorial redistribution of the world, which ultimately led to the First World War. The main ideologists and, as is often said, the fathers of geopolitics during this period were the German geographer F. Ratzel, the Swedish political scientist R. Kjellen and the English geographer H. Mackinder.

F. Ratzel in his “Political Geography” put forward the idea that the state is a kind of living being and its life is also largely determined by the environment, like the life of living organisms. Therefore, to improve its geographical position, a state - especially a young, growing one - has the right to change its borders, increase its territory by annexing neighboring lands, and also expand its overseas colonial possessions. It was F. Ratzel who coined the terms “living space” and “world power.” The ideas of F. Ratzel received even more extreme expression in the works of R. Kjellen, who applied them to the specific geopolitical situation in Europe at that time, arguing that Germany, occupying a central position in it, should unite the rest of the European powers around itself.

H. Mackinder in his report “The Geographical Axis of History” (1904) divided the whole world into four large zones: 1) the “World Island” of three continents - Europe, Asia and Africa; 2) “core land”, or Heartland – Eurasia; 3) the “inner crescent”, or outer belt, encircling the Heartland, and 4) the “outer crescent” (rice. 4). From this geopolitical model of the world flowed Mackinder's main thesis, which he formulated as the most important geopolitical law: whoever controls Eastern Europe dominates the Heartland; whoever dominates the Heartland dominates the “world island”; whoever dominates the “world island” dominates the entire world. It directly follows from this that Russia occupies a central geopolitical position in the world.

Rice. 4. Geopolitical model of H. Mackinder (according to A. Dugin)

The second stage in the development of geopolitics covers the period between the First and Second World Wars, when the ideas of revanchism became most widespread in Germany. In fascist Germany, geopolitics became, in essence, an official state doctrine, widely used to justify aggression and territorial claims. Back in 1924, Karl Haushofer founded the geopolitical magazine Zeitschrift für Geopolitik, which promoted the ideas of revanchism and redrawing of borders. Later he became the head of fascist geopolitics, the founder of the Institute of Geopolitics in Munich, and the president of the German Academy of Sciences. During this period, geopolitical concepts such as “living space”, “sphere of influence”, “satellite country”, “pan-Germanism”, and others were mainly formed, with the help of which territorial seizures in Europe and an attack on the Soviet Union were justified. During the Second World War, geopolitical concepts became widespread in Japan.

The third stage, which began shortly after World War II, spanned four decades of the Cold War between the two world systems. At this stage, geopolitical research intensified in many countries of Western Europe, especially in France, Germany and Great Britain; The international geopolitical magazine “Herodotus” began to be published. Nevertheless, the main center of geopolitical thought moved to the United States, where many new concepts were put forward.

An example is Saul Cohen's concept. He identified two main geostrategic spheres - maritime and continental, each of which, in his opinion, is dominated by one of the two superpowers. Within the first sphere, he proposed to distinguish four regions: 1) Anglo-America with the Caribbean countries; 2) Europe with North African countries; 3) South America and Tropical Africa; 4) island Asia and Oceania. In the second sphere he included two regions - the Heartland and East Asia. S. Cohen also identified the five main political centers of the world - the USA, Russia, Japan, China and Western Europe. In addition to resuscitating H. Mackinder’s idea of ​​the Heartland, American geopoliticians developed nuclear war scenarios, identified zones of vital US interests, “arcs of instability,” etc. The famous American political scientist, director of the Center for Strategic Studies at Harvard University S. Huntington put forward the concept according to which the main the contradictions of the modern world are based on the contradictions between the civilizations existing on the planet - Judeo-Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc. In his opinion, armed conflicts primarily arise in the areas of the so-called civilizational fault lines.

In the Soviet Union, at the third stage, geopolitics actually did not receive any development. This is mainly explained by the fact that the term “geopolitics” itself turned out to be compromised, since it was associated only with the militaristic ideas of the Western bloc. In Soviet scientific and reference publications, geopolitics was usually characterized as a reactionary direction of bourgeois political thought, based on an extreme exaggeration of geographical factors in the life of society, as a pseudoscientific concept that uses geographical terminology to justify the aggressive policies of capitalist states. As a result, the label of bourgeois geopolitician threatened anyone who wanted to invade this field of research.

The fourth stage in the development of this direction began in the late 80s. XX century It is sometimes called the new stage, non-confrontational geopolitics. Indeed, with the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the bipolar system of international relations, there was a general warming of the global geopolitical climate. The confrontation between capitalism and socialism ended with the defeat of the latter. A direct consequence of the departure from the previous confrontation between two world systems and two superpowers - the USA and the USSR - was the gradual fading of some conflicts, the expansion of peaceful settlement processes, a decrease in military spending and the number of military bases on foreign territories, etc. The transition of international relations from the characteristic of past times began plane of military confrontation into the mainstream of primarily economic, cultural, and diplomatic interaction. The modern world has begun to transform from a bipolar world into a multipolar one, and international relations have become more neighborly, regular and predictable.

However, all this does not mean that the transition from the geopolitics of confrontation to the geopolitics of interaction (both at the global and regional levels) can be considered complete. The global geopolitical situation is complicated by the fact that even in a multipolar world, one superpower stands out - the United States, which, as experience shows, has by no means abandoned the policy of dictatorship and military threat, based on its understanding of the “new world order.” Further, the geopolitical situation is now characterized by the emergence on the world stage of new “heavyweight” centers that lay claim to the role of world or at least regional leaders. These are Western Europe, Japan (although it has great economic power, it is not distinguished by military power), China, India, and the Arab world. In the West, the ideas of “Atlanticism” based on the strength of NATO have not yet been removed from service, which has repeatedly led to a rather sharp escalation of international tension (for example, in connection with the events in Kosovo and Chechnya).

Such a geopolitical situation poses complex problems for young Russian geopolitics, which has recently become one of the fastest growing scientific areas.

In Russia, its own geopolitical school began to take shape, the backbone of which consists not only of political scientists, but also geographers (V. A. Kolosov, N. S. Mironenko, L. V. Smirnyagin, N. V. Petrov in Moscow, S. B. Lavrov , Yu. D. Dmitrevsky, Yu. N. Gladky, A. A. Anokhin in St. Petersburg). Studies have appeared containing geopolitical analysis with elements of geopolitical strategy and forecasting. Of great scientific and practical interest is the development of the issue of state borders, which influence territorial development through their fundamental properties - barrier and contact. New directions include the study of the geopolitical aspects of the World Ocean, the interdependence between political, economic and environmental situations, the role of border areas, etc.

Naturally, the main question that domestic geopolitics must answer is the question of the place and role of Russia in the modern world. It is divided into several sub-questions. Let us present the most important of them. Does Russia, which has a large nuclear potential, remain a great power or, due to its severe economic backwardness, has it become a regional power? How should Russia's relations be built with the CIS countries, where Russia has geopolitical interests of a strategic nature, with the USA, Western Europe, China, Japan, India, and the Arab East? How to ensure the preservation of one’s own territory, which is the highest state interest for each country?

It is characteristic that in this regard, disputes about Eurasianism– a political (geopolitical) and philosophical movement that arose among the Russian emigration in the 20-30s. XX century

“Eurasians” opposed the exaggeration of the role of Europe in world history, i.e. Eurocentrism. They viewed the vast territory of Russia as a special historical and geographical region, belonging to both Europe and Asia and forming a special cultural region - Eurasia. It is known that already in recent times the ideas of Eurasianism were developed by the prominent historian and geographer L.N. Gumilyov, who also considered Russia-Eurasia to be a special, unique, but at the same time integral world, having greater kinship not with Europe, but with Asia. At the end of the 20th century. the ideas of Eurasianism (neo-Eurasianism) again gained great popularity in scientific and public circles in Russia and some CIS countries. Many began to speak out against the “Westerners”, citing the fact that the state emblem of Russia - the double-headed eagle - has a symmetrical shape, and this should be understood as a kind of symbol of the equality of the country’s relations with the West and the East. The ideas of neo-Eurasianism are also shared by some world-famous Russian scientists, for example academician N. N. Moiseev, who defended the concept of a “Eurasian bridge”. There is an all-Russian socio-political movement “Unity”, led by professional geopolitician A.G. Dugin. Its supporters believe that Eurasianism should become the national idea that modern Russia so lacks.

Russia's role in the global geopolitical system has not yet been fully determined. It is symptomatic that the final chapter of the new book on the problems of the country’s geopolitics is entitled “Gloomy Morning: Geopolitical Prospects for Russia on the Threshold of the 21st Century.” It follows from this: in order not to turn into a semi-peripheral country, Russia must subordinate its geopolitical and geo-economic strategy to one main task - the gradual transformation into a truly prosperous great power with a modern economy, a high standard of living for people, and a developed democratic system of government.

Political-geographical regional studies include, as one of the central areas, the study of the territorial distribution of political forces. The richest material for such a study is provided by the analysis of elections to representative bodies of power. This is exactly what the branch of political geography, called electoral geography(from Latin elector - voter). It is based on a study of the political-geographic differentiation of the territory and an analysis of differences in the political orientations of the population. Such analysis includes studying the geography of voting, geographic factors influencing voting, and the geographic representation of parties in elected bodies. The abundance of works on this topic can be explained by the relative availability of electoral statistics, which contain the most valuable source material for a political geographer, and the interest of all political forces in information about their influence in the country.

One of the most important concepts of electoral geography is electoral structure of the country(it refers to the division of the country’s territory into areas of primary support for various political parties and movements). Sometimes it is formulated differently: territorial structure of political preferences. Such preferences may depend on a variety of factors. First of all, naturally, they are associated with differences in the social structure of the population. But this main factor is usually mediated by many others - the electorate’s belonging to a particular religion, to the main nation or national minority, etc. Often men and women, residents of cities and rural areas, show their sympathies differently, and in large urban agglomerations - residents of central and suburban areas.

All these and other questions have received wide coverage in the literature on electoral geography over the past two or three decades. An important feature of such literature is its publication electoral cartography, based on relevant statistics. New methods of calculation have also emerged, for example, using the coefficient of electoral preferences.

Electoral geography has attracted the attention of not only Western but also Russian geographers, who have long begun to study the electoral structure of individual foreign countries. Back in the 70s. XX century works appeared on the electoral geography of Italy (V. A. Kolosov) and Germany (O. V. Vitkovsky), in the 80s. – France, in the 90s. – Great Britain, India, etc.

A study of the electoral structure of such a classic country of bourgeois parliamentarism as Great Britain, and on the basis of several election campaigns, allows us to draw a conclusion about the significant territorial and political stability of the electorate. Thus, it was found that in rural constituencies, as a rule, they vote for the Conservatives, and in industrial cities - for Labour; that the population of the southern and eastern regions usually supports the Conservatives, and the northern and western ones - the Laborites (Figure 5); that in large urban agglomerations voters from prestigious residential suburbs prefer to vote for the Conservatives, and from working-class neighborhoods - for Labour. The electoral structure of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland also has its own specifics. On this basis it is possible to carry out political-geographical zoning Great Britain.

Of great interest is also the analysis of election campaigns in India, which is sometimes called the largest parliamentary democracy in the world (the number of voters here has already exceeded 650 million people). Unlike Great Britain, India is a typical multi-party democracy, with many dozens and even hundreds of political parties. And yet, the territorial structure of political preferences (at least until recently) remains traditional here too. The population of the interior regions of the country usually votes for the Indian National Congress (INC) party; in the coastal regions of peninsular India, the influence of the left opposition is significant; in the peripheral, outlying regions - various opposition parties. And the densely populated Ganges Valley is usually called a barometer of the influence of various political forces, reflecting their relationship throughout the country.

The works of Russian authors on the electoral geography of foreign countries also touched upon issues of “election engineering”. This term primarily means the choice of one of the existing electoral systems - majoritarian, preferential or proportional. Of great importance are also the methods of “cutting” electoral districts, which open up a greater or lesser possibility of manipulating votes. This is also typical for the US election system.

Until the end of the 80s. XX century Russian geographers have paid little attention to issues of the electoral geography of their country. But then - due to a sharp change in the socio-political situation and the transition to a truly free expression of the will of voters and a real opportunity to choose candidates - the electoral geography of Russia turned into one of the fastest growing scientific areas.

Rice. 6. Deviation by constituent entities of the Russian Federation from the share of votes cast in the country as a whole for V.V. Putin in the presidential elections in 2000.

Rice. 7. Results of the elections to the State Duma on December 2, 2007. The share of those who voted for the United Russia party.

The first major work in the field of electoral geography was a collective study of domestic political geographers entitled “Spring 89: Geography and Anatomy of Parliamentary Elections” based on the results of the elections to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. Conducted in the 1990s. In Russia, a number of presidential and parliamentary election campaigns contributed to the appearance of a considerable number of publications. As an example of this kind, we can cite the book by R. F. Turovsky, rich in cartographic material. Electoral maps provide a clear picture of the territorial differences in the political preferences of voters during the 1995 parliamentary elections and the 1996 presidential elections (for example, they clearly highlight the southern “red belt”). In 2000, electoral statistics of the results of the elections to the State Duma in 1999 and the presidential elections in 2000 were published, and at the beginning of 2008, an electronic map of the parliamentary elections held in December 2007 was published (Fig. 6 and 7) .

The category of geographic location, which characterizes the position of a particular spatial object in relation to others, is very widely used in geography. This category has several varieties: physical-geographical location, economic-geographical location (EGP), transport-geographical location. In the system of political-geographical knowledge, the first place comes political-geographical location(GGP).

There is no absolutely clear boundary between the categories of EGP and GGP. Thus, the position of a particular country or region in relation to the most important economic centers, world transport and trade routes, integration groups, and tourist flows is important not only for economic, but also for political geography. After all, their safety and normal functioning ultimately depend on the political situation in the world. As an example of a beneficial combination of EGP and GGP, one can cite small countries and territories that are classified as “apartment landlords” or “intermediaries” that now occupy a significant place in the international geographical division of labor (Singapore, the Bahamas, etc.). An example of a much less advantageous combination of EGP and GGP are countries that do not have access to the open sea.

As for the very definition of GPP, then, according to M. M. Golubchik, a political-geographical position is the position of an object (a country, its part, a group of countries) in relation to other states and their groups as political objects. The GWP of a state in a broad sense is a set of political conditions related to the geographical location of the country (region), expressed in a system of political relationships with the outside world. This system is mobile, it is affected by processes and phenomena occurring both in the surrounding space and in the object being studied.

It is customary to distinguish between macro-, meso- and micro-GWP.

The macro-GWP of a country or region is its position in the system of global political relationships. It is assessed primarily depending on the position of the country (region) in relation to the main military-political and political groupings, centers of international tension and military conflicts (hot spots), democratic and totalitarian political regimes, etc. Macro-GPP - historical category, changing over time. To prove this statement, we can compare the situation in the world during the Cold War and after its end.

Meso-GWP is usually a country's position within its region or subregion. When assessing it, a special role is played by the nature of the immediate neighborhood, which, in turn, is determined primarily by political relationships. To illustrate, it is enough to give, on the one hand, examples of relations between Germany and France, the USA and Canada, Japan and the Republic of Korea, Russia and Finland, and on the other, examples of relations between Israel and neighboring Arab countries, between Iraq and Iran, India and Pakistan , USA and Cuba. During the period when the racist regime dominated South Africa, the states neighboring this country were called front-line.

By micro-GWP, a country usually understands the advantage or disadvantage (both from a political and military-strategic point of view) of the location of individual sections of its border, the nature of the contact of border areas with neighboring states.

Rice. 8. Geopolitical position of Russia (according to E.L. Plisetsky)

A large number of works are devoted to the analysis of the new geopolitical situation of Russia (after the collapse of the USSR). Their authors note that Russia’s overall losses at the meso- and micro-level turned out to be very large, both in terms of the destruction of the former unified political and economic space, the loss of a significant part of the demographic, economic and scientific-technical potential, the increase in the “northernness” of the entire country and, to a large extent, fencing it off from the Baltic and Black Seas, and in a purely geopolitical aspect.

Many geopolitical problems have arisen in Russia’s relations with its neighboring countries, that is, with other CIS countries. On the western border, this applies to a lesser extent to Belarus, with which in 1999 Russia signed a Union Treaty on the creation of a single state, but to a much greater extent to Ukraine and Moldova (Crimea and Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet, the status of Transnistria, tariffs for pumping Russian oil and natural gas to foreign Europe). After the Baltic countries and Poland joined NATO, new difficulties arose in organizing land connections with the Kaliningrad region. On the southern border, there was some cooling of relations with Azerbaijan and especially with Georgia (disagreements on the issue of transportation routes for Caspian oil, the status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Russian military bases, etc.). The Southeast cannot but be concerned about the growing US military presence in some Central Asian republics. Recently, those from the CIS countries where the “Rose Revolution” (Georgia), the “Orange Revolution” (Ukraine), and the “Tulip Revolution” (Kyrgyzstan) took place have also experienced considerable political shock.

To this list of problems we must add the lack of infrastructure on part of the country’s state borders, since many of them are actually “extended” to the borders of the former USSR. Russian border guards remain, for example, on the border of Tajikistan with Afghanistan, while on Russia's own borders with the CIS countries, border and customs controls are not as strict. We must not forget that the total length of Russia’s borders is 60.9 thousand km and that many subjects of the Federation (almost half) became border territories after the collapse of the USSR.

Even more geopolitical problems are associated with foreign countries. On Russia's western borders, former socialist countries quickly reoriented their political preferences. “NATO’s advancement to the East” means the inclusion of these countries in Western political and military structures, and their entry into the European Union into economic structures. In the Baltic countries, ethnic Russians are discriminated against and territorial claims are made against Russia. Elements of Western missile defense are being created in Poland and the Czech Republic. In the South and Southeast, Islamic states are seeking to bring former Soviet Central Asia and Azerbaijan into their orbit; A difficult situation has developed on the border with Afghanistan. In the Far East, Russia's position has become more stable, despite the dispute with Japan over the Kuril Islands.

Attempts to reflect the geopolitical position of Russia on a map are not so common, but they still exist (rice. 8).

As a kind of commentary on this map, we can give a brief description of the geopolitical position of individual parts of modern Russia, given by academician A.G. Granberg: “The specificity of the geoeconomic and geopolitical position of Russia in the modern world is that it comes into contact with the world’s largest economic groupings different parts of its huge heterogeneous body. Naturally, different contact zones experience different external attractions. Thus, the regions of the European part and the Urals are economically more oriented towards a uniting Europe. For the entire Far East and a large territory of Siberia, the main area of ​​economic cooperation is the Asia-Pacific region (APR). For Russian regions close to the southern borders from the North Caucasus to Eastern Siberia, these are neighbors in the CIS (behind them is the second echelon - the countries of the Muslim world) and continental China."

The solution to Russia's geopolitical problems in the future, apparently, should be associated, firstly, with slowing down and stopping the processes of disintegration within the CIS and the revival of their common economic space and, secondly, with the continuation of the establishment of close political relations with both the West and with the East. A striking example of this kind is the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighborhood and Cooperation between Russia and China concluded in 2001.

WEALTH AND POVERTY

GEOGRAPHICAL TYPOLOGY OF COUNTRIES

Types of economically developed countries

These countries are characterized by high per capita indicators of GNI, energy consumption, high average life expectancy, the predominance of the service sector in the economic structure of the economy, and a low share of agriculture. All of them are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development*.

Major capitalist countries- This USA, Canada, Japan, Germany, France, Italy and Great Britain. They occupy leading places in the world in terms of GDP. They and Canada are called G7 countries. They account for more than half of the world's total industrial output and the bulk of foreign investment. They form the three main economic “poles” of the modern world: Western European with a “core” in Germany, American (USA) and Asian (Japan). Over the past decades, the role of these states in the global economy has changed significantly. The role and influence of Japan in the Asia-Pacific region and in the world as a whole is growing; over the past decades, Japan's share in global GDP has almost doubled, Japanese high-tech goods are conquering markets in other regions.

Economically highly developed small countries of Western Europe

(Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, Iceland, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino, Andorra) characterized by high per capita income, high quality of life, and political stability.

Amsterdam (Netherlands)

Many of them are neutral states with the lowest defense spending in the world. The high-tech industry of these countries operates primarily on imported raw materials, and most of the products produced are exported. In GDP, a large share of income received from the service sector - banking and tourism.

Countries of settler capitalism- these are mainly former colonies of Great Britain, some of them still recognize the English Queen as the head of their state, Australia, Canada, South Africa. The population of these countries was formed with the determining role of migration from the metropolises. The indigenous population has been placed on reservations and has significantly lower income levels and quality of life. In the economy of these countries, the leading role is played by companies of the former metropolis or neighboring countries - economic giants. Compared to other developed countries, the mining industry is of great importance in their economy.

This type of country also includes Israel , formed by decision of the UN in 1948. Its population was formed through aliyah - the return of Jews to the land of Palestine. The first stream of immigrants consisted of immigrants from Eastern Europe (second half of the 1940s); the bulk of the second stream of repatriates were citizens of the USSR (in the 1960s-1980s).

The port city of Barcelona was built up with pompous buildings emphasizing the wealth of Spain

Countries with an average level of economic development in the past they possessed huge colonial empires and lived through the exploitation of overseas colonies and unequal exchanges with them. The loss of the colonies led to a weakening of their economic power and loss of political influence in Europe. During the twentieth century. Almost all of these countries were ruled by military and fascist dictatorships, which also affected their lag behind other economically developed countries. Accession to the European Union, the signing of the Schengen agreements and entry into the euro zone contributed to an increase in economic growth and a rise in living standards in these countries. This group includes Greece and Ireland, for a long time dependent on Great Britain, Spain and Portugal.

Developing countries

This type includes states with a market economy and a low level of socio-economic development. The differences between industrialized countries and developing countries lie not so much in the field of economics as in the peculiarities of the territorial structure of the economy. Some states that, according to the currently accepted classification, belong to the category of developing countries, according to a number of indicators (GDP per capita, development of pioneer industries), not only approach developed countries, but sometimes even surpass them. However, the main characteristics of the socio-economic development of developing countries - dependence on foreign capital, the amount of external debt, the territorial structure of the economy - allow us to classify them as developing countries.

Within the boundaries of the territory of developing countries, as a rule, areas with different socio-economic structures coexist - from primitive appropriating economies, subsistence economies to modern industrial ones. Moreover, natural and semi-natural lifestyles occupy significant areas, but are practically excluded from general economic life. Commodity structures are associated primarily with the foreign market. Many developing countries have not yet identified their “face” in international economics and politics.

Key countries(countries of great potential). This group includes China, India, Brazil, Mexico, occupying respectively the second, fourth, ninth and fourteenth places in the world in terms of GDP. They have the most significant human potential in the developing world, cheap labor, diverse mineral reserves of global importance; A number of manufacturing industries produce high-tech and high-quality products. India and China are the world leaders in terms of population; These countries are characterized by low per capita GNI indicators, a low share of the urban population, and low quality of life indicators.

Brazil and Mexico have been politically independent states since the first quarter of the 19th century. They have achieved a high level of development through the use of foreign investment. Within these countries there are sharp contrasts between poor and rich areas, between poor and rich groups of the population.

Highly urbanized migrant countries with rich agricultural resources and high standard of living - Argentina and Uruguay are allocated to a separate group of countries. The lack of significant mineral reserves hampered the development of the industries that usually started industrialization, and European Union bans on the import of cheap agricultural products to support farmers, introduced in the 1970s, began to constrain the development of their agricultural sector.

Countries of enclave development. The main distinguishing feature of the economy of many countries of this type is existence of export-oriented mining enclaves that are controlled by foreign capital and are poorly connected with the national economy. Venezuela, Chile, Iran, Iraq receive their main income from the development of deposits and the export of minerals (oil in Venezuela, Iran and Iraq; copper and saltpeter in Chile).