Task 10. Work in pairs:in turns read the paragraphs for your partner to interpret them into Russian.
The Light and Shadows of the Global World
Globalization is becoming an ever more influential "architect" of the new international security agenda. Its impact on the evolution of the relations among states in this key area is contradictory.
On the one hand, globalization contributes to accelerated development of productive forces, scientific and technological progress and ever more intensive communication among states and peoples. The growing interdependence of countries and peoples in every sphere helps to generate new political approaches aimed at creating democratic multilateral mechanisms of managing the international system and hence reliable solution of the security problems.
At the same time the processes of globalization, which mainly develop spontaneously, without a collective directing influence of the world community, aggravate a number of old problems of international security and engender new risks and challenges.
The factors that make it easier or, on the contrary, more difficult for states to gain access to the benefits of globalization are increasingly becoming included in the arsenal of national security strategies. Globalization and manipulation of its course is more and more often used as instruments of political pressure. This feature of the present stage of international relations is pointed out in the UN report "The Impact of Civilization on Social Development". The document notes, among other things, that "concern over globalization is partly due to the fact that the national policies of states are increasingly influenced by policies pursued outside their boundaries". The instruments of such influence are many. They include "investment and credit diplomacy" that takes advantage of the acute need of most countries for foreign capital investments and loans. They include information diplomacy aimed at domination in the global information space. They include "political engineering", a combined use of economic, information and military-political levers to "construct" the desired kind of "partners", i.e. governments ready to accept the terms of the solution of international and internal problems that are imposed on them from outside.
The lack of effective mechanisms for coordinating the actions and accommodating the interests of a wide circle of states can be used as a pretext or a justification of the thesis that the acquisition of mass destruction weapons, even in limited quantities, is becoming just about the only way to guarantee security in this unstable and in many ways unpredictable world. The danger of this situation lies in the fact that unless urgent measures are taken, the threats to international peace and security may grow to such an extent that the world community will be unable not only to cope with them, but to keep the situation under control.
|
|
|
(from the article by the Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov published in the Journal "Russia in Global Affairs" No. 1/2003)
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalization/defining-globalization/27662.html
Task 11. Translate thefollowing text into English:
"О Стратегии национальной безопасности Российской Федерации"
Расширение НАТО и наделение ее глобальными функциями, реализуемыми в нарушение норм международного права, названо угрозой в новой Стратегии национальной безопасности России, утвержденной Президентом РФ
В Стратегии отмечается также, что Россия продемонстрировала способность к обеспечению суверенитета, независимости, государственной и территориальной целостности, защиты прав соотечественников за рубежом. Возросла роль РФ в решении важнейших международных проблем, урегулировании военных конфликтов, обеспечении стратегической стабильности и верховенства международного права в межгосударственных отношениях. Экономика РФ проявила способность к сохранению и укреплению своего потенциала в условиях нестабильности мировой экономики и применения ограничительных экономических мер.
|
|
|
Отмечается, что в борьбе за влияние на международной арене задействован весь спектр политических, финансово-экономических и информационных инструментов. Все активнее используется потенциал специальных служб. В международных отношениях не снижается роль фактора силы. Стремление к наращиванию и модернизации наступательного вооружения, созданию и развертыванию его новых видов ослабляет систему глобальной безопасности, а также систему договоров и соглашений в области контроля над вооружением. В Евро-Атлантическом, Евразийском и Азиатско-Тихоокеанском регионах не соблюдаются принципы равной и неделимой безопасности. В соседних с Россией регионах развиваются процессы милитаризации и гонки вооружений.
Стратегия является базовым документом стратегического планирования, определяющим национальные интересы и стратегические национальные приоритеты России, цели, задачи и меры в области внутренней и внешней политики, направленные на укрепление национальной безопасности РФ и обеспечение устойчивого развития страны на долгосрочную перспективу. Стратегия призвана консолидировать усилия органов государственной власти и местного самоуправления, а также институтов гражданского общества по созданию благоприятных внутренних и внешних условий для реализации национальных интересов и стратегических национальных приоритетов России.
|
|
|
http://www.consultant.ru/law/review/2771101.html
SPEECH FOCUS
MODEL
| Informative speeches inform your audience about a topic, event, or area of knowledge.Instructional speeches provide information about how to do something. Persuasive speeches attempt to convince or persuade the audience. How to write a good speech? |
| Step 1. Objectives Objectives is what you want to achieve: to inform, persuade, train, or entertain the audience. |
| Step 2. Audience To decide on how to achieve your objective you should know youraudience: n what kind and number of people it consists of, n what they need to know, n what they already know, n what they expect from you, n what their reaction can be. |
| Step 3. Approach n Tone. The audience determines the toneof your speech. The tone expresses your attitude towards the audience. It can be formal or informal. To choose the right tone is crucial for establishing rapport. n Point of view. The audience also determines how openly and straightforwardly you can express your attitude towards the subject of your speech, i.e. your point of view. To opt the tone and point of view beforehand is a must. |
| Step 4. Content Content is information you use to substantiate your idea. If the objective is n to inform - you have to present as much relative information on the topic as possible irrespective of whether it is negative or positive; n to persuade - you should select only those facts which support a particular point of view. |
| Step 5. Structure IntroductionUse the introduction to welcome your audience, introduce your topic/ subject, outline the structure of your talk (optional), provide guidelines on questions (optional). Body( informative speech).Easily digestible parts n Logical order n Length and structure depends on information to be conveyed Body (persuasive speech) – 1)Inductionis a process of reasoning that moves from specific information to general conclusions. The specific information is often empirical data. However, the specific information might also be textual evidence used to support or prove an argument. 2)Deductionis a process of reasoning that begins with premises or commonly held beliefs and moves to conclusions. 3) 4P’s n Positions (background information: history and present state of affairs) n Problem n Possible decisions n Proposal ConclusionUse the conclusion to summarize the main points of your speech, end with a strong statement and thank your audience. After that invite questions (optional). Experts in communication recommend to prepare the introduction and conclusion after the main body of the presentation is ready. |
| Step 6. Language n Simplicity -Use short words and sentences n Clarity and accuracy -Use active verbs and concrete words n Signalling -Indicate when you’ve completed one point and are moving to the next n Impact – Use emotional, evaluative and expressive words, rhetorical devices (metaphors, similes, alliteration, rhetorical questions, repetitions, parallel constructions etc.). |
Task 1. Read President Vladimir Putin’s speech at Munich Security Conference in 2007 (the part relating to disarmament issues). Pay attention to the words and word combinations in italics and look them up in the Glossaryto the unit.
|
|
|
Thank you very much dear Madam Federal Chancellor, Mr Teltschik, ladies and gentlemen!
I am truly grateful to be invited to such a representative conference that has assembled politicians, military officials, entrepreneurs and experts from more than 40 nations.
This conference’s structure allows me to avoid excessive politeness and the need to speak in roundabout, pleasant but empty diplomatic terms. This conference’s format will allow me to say what I really think about international security problems. And if my comments seem unduly polemical, pointed or inexact to our colleagues, then I would ask you not to get angry with me. After all, this is only a conference. And I hope that after the first two or three minutes of my speech Mr Teltschik will not turn on the red light over there.
Therefore. It is well known that international security comprises much more than issues relating to military and political stability. It involves the stability of the global economy, overcoming poverty, economic security and developing a dialogue between civilisations.
This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “security for one is security for all”. As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days that the Second World War was breaking out: “When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger.”
These words remain topical today. Incidentally, the theme of our conference – global crises, global responsibility – exemplifies this.
….
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
The potential danger of the destabilisation of international relations is connected with obvious stagnation in the disarmament issue.
Russia supports the renewal of dialogue on this important question.
It is important to conserve the international legal framework relating to weapons destruction and therefore ensure continuity in the process of reducing nuclear weapons.
Together with the United States of America we agreed to reduce our nuclear strategic missile capabilities to up to 1700-2000 nuclear warheads by 31 December 2012. Russia intends to strictly fulfil the obligations it has taken on. We hope that our partners will also act in a transparent way and will refrain from laying aside a couple of hundred superfluous nuclear warheads for a rainy day. And if today the new American Defence Minister declares that the United States will not hide these superfluous weapons in warehouse or, as one might say, under a pillow or under the blanket, then I suggest that we all rise and greet this declaration standing. It would be a very important declaration.
Russia strictly adheres to and intends to further adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as well as the multilateral supervision regime for missile technologies. The principles incorporated in these documents are universal ones.
In connection with this I would like to recall that in the 1980s the USSR and the United States signed an agreement on destroying a whole range of small- and medium-range missiles but these documents do not have a universal character.
Today many other countries have these missiles, including the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, India, Iran, Pakistan and Israel. Many countries are working on these systems and plan to incorporate them as part of their weapons arsenals. And only the United States and Russia bear the responsibility to not create such weapons systems.
It is obvious that in these conditions we must think about ensuring our own security.
At the same time, it is impossible to sanction the appearance of new, destabilising high-tech weapons. Needless to say it refers to measures to prevent a new area of confrontation, especially in outer space. Star wars is no longer a fantasy – it is a reality. In the middle of the 1980s our American partners were already able to intercept their own satellite.
In Russia’s opinion, the militarisation of outer space could have unpredictable consequences for the international community, and provoke nothing less than the beginning of a nuclear era. And we have come forward more than once with.
Today I would like to tell you that we have prepared a project for an agreement on the prevention of deploying weapons in outer space. And in the near future it will be sent to our partners as an official proposal. Let’s work on this together.
Plans to expand certain elements of the anti-missile defence system to Europe cannot help but disturb us. Who needs the next step of what would be, in this case, an inevitable arms race? I deeply doubt that Europeans themselves do.
Missile weapons with a range of about five to eight thousand kilometres that really pose a threat to Europe do not exist in any of the so-called problem countries. And in the near future and prospects, this will not happen and is not even foreseeable. And any hypothetical launch of, for example, a North Korean rocket to American territory through Western Europe obviously contradicts the laws of ballistics. As we say in Russia, it would be like using the right hand to reach the left ear.
And here in Germany I cannot help but mention the pitiable condition of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe.
The Adapted Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was signed in 1999. It took into account a new geopolitical reality, namely the elimination of the Warsaw Bloc. Seven years have passed and only four states have ratified this document, including the Russian Federation.
NATO countries openly declared that they will not ratify this treaty, including the provisions on flank restrictions (on deploying a certain number of armed forces in the flank zones), until Russia removed its military bases from Georgia and Moldova. Our army is leaving Georgia, even according to an accelerated schedule. We resolved the problems we had with our Georgian colleagues, as everybody knows. There are still 1,500 servicemen in Moldova that are carrying out peacekeeping operationsand protecting warehouses with ammunition left over from Soviet times. We constantly discuss this issue with Mr Solana and he knows our position. We are ready to further work in this direction.
But what is happening at the same time? Simultaneously the so-called flexible frontline American bases with up to five thousand men in each. It turns out that NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders, and we continue to strictly fulfill the treaty obligations and do not react to these actions at all.
I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask: against whom is this expansion intended? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them. But I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: “the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee”. Where are these guarantees?
The stones and concrete blocks of the Berlin Wall have long been distributed as souvenirs. But we should not forget that the fall of the Berlin Wall was possible thanks to a historic choice – one that was also made by our people, the people of Russia – a choice in favour of democracy, freedom, openness and a sincere partnership with all the members of the big European family.
And now they are trying to impose new dividing lines and walls on us – these walls may be virtual but they are nevertheless dividing, ones that cut through our continent. And is it possible that we will once again require many years and decades, as well as several generations of politicians, to dissemble and dismantle these new walls?
…
Dear ladies and gentlemen!
In conclusion I would like to note the following. We very often – and personally, I very often – hear appeals by our partners, including our European partners, to the effect that Russia should play an increasingly active role in world affairs.
In connection with this I would allow myself to make one small remark. It is hardly necessary to incite us to do so. Russia is a country with a history that spans more than a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy.
We are not going to change this tradition today. At the same time, we are well aware of how the world has changed and we have a realistic sense of our own opportunities and potential. And of course we would like to interact with responsible and independent partners with whom we could work together in constructing a fair and democratic world order that would ensure security and prosperity not only for a select few, but for all.
Дата добавления: 2018-02-28; просмотров: 304; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!