The article is the form of scienti c report on the results of three year long project on method- ology of long term forecasting the development of the system of international relations. The methodology is based on the following assumptions: input information is accurate and complete; international relations constitute a system, scenarios for di erent levels of international relations development are hierarchically interdependent; the speed of development is di erent on various levels of international relations; various national capabilities a ect the development; elites a ect international relations; civil society a ect interna- tional relations. Based on this assumption the author builds the most probable scenario of intercivilizational relations which is military coercive interaction. The role of soft power will increase its share in the toolkit of the confrontational politics. To win in this confrontation it is necessary to review the current practices of strategic forecasting and planning and to rebuild the entire military organization of the Russian army. The principal condition for the victory is development of national human capital, as well as the formation of the national ideology.
Key words: civilization, forecasting, planning, international relations, human capital.
References
1. Baumgartner J. C., Francia P. L., Morris J. S. A clash of civilizations? The in uence of religion on public opinion of US foreign policy in the Middle East. Political Research Quarterly. Jun., 2008. Vol. 61, No. 2. Pp. 171-179.
2. Bettiza G. Civilizational Analysis in International Relations: Mapping the Field and Advancing a “Civilizational Politics” Line of Research. International Studies Review. 2014. Vol. 16. Pp. 1–28.
3. Casanova J. Cosmopolitanism, the clash of civilizations and multiple modernities. Current Sociology. 2011. Vol. 59. No. 2. Pp. 252-267.
4. Choucri N., Robinson T. W. (ed.). Forecasting in international relations: Theory, methods, problems, prospects. San Francisco : WH Freeman, 1978. 468 p.
5. Díez-Nicolás J. Two contradictory hypotheses on globalization: Societal convergence or civilization dif- ferentiation and clash. Comparative Sociology. 2002. Vol. 1. No. 3-4. Pp. 465-493.
6. Henderson E. A., Tucker R. Clear and present strangers: the clash of civilizations and international con ict. International Studies Quarterly. 2001. Vol. 45. No. 2. Pp. 317-338.
7. Inglehart R., Norris P. The true clash of civilizations. Foreign policy. November 4, 2009. Pp. 63-70.
8. Singer J. D. The level-of-analysis problem in international relations. World Politics. 1961. Vol. 14. No. 01. Pp.
77-92.
