TY  - JOUR
AU  - Milosavljević, Slađan
AU  - Jeftić, Zoran
AU  - Mladenović, Miroslav
PY  - 2017
UR  - https://rhinosec.fb.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/365
AB  - After the collapse of the Soviet state, during the last decades of the 21st century, Russia found itself in the system crisis in cataclysmic measures that threatened to disintegrate this once powerful state. Political and economic power was significantly displaced outside the institutions of the system in the hands of oligarchs and regional governors, which threaten to disintegrate the federal system and problems in the economic, social, demographic and military sphere shook the foundations of the Russian state. On the international stage, Russia's influence was marginalized. All the elements of its hard and soft power were reduced. Russia has lost the attributes of a superpower and the leader of the former socialist camp was reduced to the level of a regional power. With the arrival of Vladimir Putin as the President of the RF in 2000 began a new phase in the development of post-Soviet Russia. Initiated extensive internal political, economic and social reforms, as well as changes in foreign and security policy, resulted in a gradual recovery and consolidation of the Russian state and society. An essential feature of political life in Russia is the personalization of the power and the institution of the President of the RF, which largely depends on the personality of the president and his inner circle. This distinction is rooted in the political tradition and culture, and the imperial legacy. Some Western authors state that the tradition of the autocratic rule is in the heart of Russian political culture, while Russian authors believe that a strong central government, embodied in the institution of the head of state in modern Russia is a necessity in the initial phase of democratization and social transition. From the beginning, Putin has sought to pour "people from their inner circle" "into all levels of government and spheres that generate social and political power." This profiled the structure of Putin's regime, which is a very active process of permanent change of position, role and importance of individual personalities, as well as their "migration" from one sphere of government to another. In the process, the overall fluctuations of high-ranking politicians, divided into clans and influential groups (the so-called siloviki, technocrats and liberals), Putin is the "headquarters" of the entire regime. Estimates of the regime of Russian President V. Putin, his personality, as well as a trail that is left in modern history, are more polarized and controversial than estimates of many other figures of Russia, and even global politics. However, the importance that Putin has for Russia and its position and role in the XXI century is undeniable, as well as his controversial planetary authority, or his global popularity. Putin is one of the most influential politicians in the world and the authors' opinions of him are so divided, conflicting, contradictory and "ideologically colored" that any attempt of his generalization represents an endeavor foredoomed to failure. The amplitude of reactions is ranging from awe and glorification, to protest and scorn. It is undisputed that he is a charismatic, pragmatic and capable statesman. It is also an indisputable fact that the implementation of his policy has the outright support of the Russian people. Critics of Putin's regime as its main characteristic state the rigidity of the government, inflexibility, lack of transparency, bureaucratic domination of political and economic elites, instability in the sense of being based on the personality of the President and not on the balance of institutions.
AB  - Nakon raspada sovjetske države Rusija se našla u sistemskoj krizi koja je pretila da dezintegriše nekada moćnu državu. Politička i ekonomska moć bila je u značajnoj meri izmeštena van institucija sistema, u ruke oligarha i regionalnih gubernatora. Problemi u ekonomskoj, socijalnoj, demografskoj i vojnoj sferi potresali su temelje ruske države. Na međunarodnoj sceni, uticaj Rusije bio je marginalizovan. Svi elementi njene tvrde i meke moći, bili su umanjeni. Rusija je izgubila atribute supersile i nekadašnja predvodnica socijalističkog lagera svedena je na nivo regionalne sile. Dolaskom Vladimira Putina na mesto predsednika RF 2000. godine, počela je nova faza u razvoju postsovjetske Rusije. Pokrenute su opsežne unutrašnje političke, ekonomske i socijalne reforme, kao i promene u spoljnoj i bezbednosnoj politici, što je rezultiralo postepenim oporavkom i konsolidacijom ruske države i društva. Jedna od suštinskih odlika političkog života Rusije jeste personalizacija vlasti, odnosno institucije Predsednika RF, koja u velikoj meri zavisi od ličnosti samog predsednika i njegovog najbližeg okruženja. Ova odlika ukorenjena je u političkoj tradiciji i kulturi, odnosno u imperijalnom nasleđu. Pojedini zapadni autori navode da je tradicija autokratskog vladanja u srži ruske političke kulture, dok ruski autori smatraju da snažna centralna vlast, oličena u instituciji predsednika države, u savremenoj Rusiji predstavlja nužnost u početnoj fazi demokratizacije i tranzicije društva. Putin je od početka nastojao da "ljude iz svog najbližeg okruženja "razlije" u sve nivoe vlasti i sfere koje generišu društvenu i političku moć". Time se profilisala struktura Putinovog režima u kojoj je veoma aktivan proces permanentne smene pozicija, uloga i značaja pojedinih ličnosti, kao i njihovo "seljenje" iz jedne sfere vlasti u drugu. U celokupnom tom procesu fluktacije visoko-pozicioniranih političara, svrstanih u uticajne grupe i klanove (tzv. siloviki, tehnokrate i liberali), Putin ima ulogu "stožera" celokupnog režima. Ocene o režimu ruskog predsednika V. Putina, njegovoj ličnosti, kao i tragu koji je ostavio u modernoj istoriji, polarizovanije su i kontroverznije nego ocene o mnogim drugim ličnostima ruske, pa i globalne politike. Međutim, značaj koji Putin ima za Rusiju i njenu poziciju i ulogu u XXI veku, nesporan je, kao što nisu sporni ni njegov planetarni autoritet, ni njegova globalna popularnost. Putin je jedan od najuticajnijih političara na svetu, ali su mišljenja autora u vezi sa njim toliko podeljena, oprečna, suprotstavljena i "ideološki obojena", da bi svaki pokušaj njihove generalizacije predstavljao poduhvat unapred osuđen na neuspeh. Amplitude reakcija kreću se od glorifikacije i divljenja, do osporavanja i nipodaštavanja. Nesporno je da je reč o harizmatičnom, pragmatičnom i sposobnom državniku, kao što je nesporna i činjenica da za sprovođenje svoje politike ima natpolovičnu podršku ruskog naroda. Kritičari Putinovog režima kao njegove osnovne odlike navode rigidnost vlasti, nefleksibilnost, netransparentnost, birokratizovanost, dominaciju političko- ekonomskih elita, nestabilnost u smislu zasnovanosti na ličnosti predsednika, a ne na balansu institucija.
PB  - Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu, Beograd
T2  - Review of International Affairs
T1  - Vladimir Putin and analysis of the role of leaders in the formation and implementation of state policy in contemporary Russia: Reviews and critics of Putin's regime
T1  - Vladimir Putin i analiza uloge ličnosti lidera u formiranju i sprovođenju državne politike u savremenoj Rusiji - ocene i kritike Putinovog režima
IS  - 1165
SP  - 47
EP  - 64
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Milosavljević, Slađan and Jeftić, Zoran and Mladenović, Miroslav",
year = "2017",
abstract = "After the collapse of the Soviet state, during the last decades of the 21st century, Russia found itself in the system crisis in cataclysmic measures that threatened to disintegrate this once powerful state. Political and economic power was significantly displaced outside the institutions of the system in the hands of oligarchs and regional governors, which threaten to disintegrate the federal system and problems in the economic, social, demographic and military sphere shook the foundations of the Russian state. On the international stage, Russia's influence was marginalized. All the elements of its hard and soft power were reduced. Russia has lost the attributes of a superpower and the leader of the former socialist camp was reduced to the level of a regional power. With the arrival of Vladimir Putin as the President of the RF in 2000 began a new phase in the development of post-Soviet Russia. Initiated extensive internal political, economic and social reforms, as well as changes in foreign and security policy, resulted in a gradual recovery and consolidation of the Russian state and society. An essential feature of political life in Russia is the personalization of the power and the institution of the President of the RF, which largely depends on the personality of the president and his inner circle. This distinction is rooted in the political tradition and culture, and the imperial legacy. Some Western authors state that the tradition of the autocratic rule is in the heart of Russian political culture, while Russian authors believe that a strong central government, embodied in the institution of the head of state in modern Russia is a necessity in the initial phase of democratization and social transition. From the beginning, Putin has sought to pour "people from their inner circle" "into all levels of government and spheres that generate social and political power." This profiled the structure of Putin's regime, which is a very active process of permanent change of position, role and importance of individual personalities, as well as their "migration" from one sphere of government to another. In the process, the overall fluctuations of high-ranking politicians, divided into clans and influential groups (the so-called siloviki, technocrats and liberals), Putin is the "headquarters" of the entire regime. Estimates of the regime of Russian President V. Putin, his personality, as well as a trail that is left in modern history, are more polarized and controversial than estimates of many other figures of Russia, and even global politics. However, the importance that Putin has for Russia and its position and role in the XXI century is undeniable, as well as his controversial planetary authority, or his global popularity. Putin is one of the most influential politicians in the world and the authors' opinions of him are so divided, conflicting, contradictory and "ideologically colored" that any attempt of his generalization represents an endeavor foredoomed to failure. The amplitude of reactions is ranging from awe and glorification, to protest and scorn. It is undisputed that he is a charismatic, pragmatic and capable statesman. It is also an indisputable fact that the implementation of his policy has the outright support of the Russian people. Critics of Putin's regime as its main characteristic state the rigidity of the government, inflexibility, lack of transparency, bureaucratic domination of political and economic elites, instability in the sense of being based on the personality of the President and not on the balance of institutions., Nakon raspada sovjetske države Rusija se našla u sistemskoj krizi koja je pretila da dezintegriše nekada moćnu državu. Politička i ekonomska moć bila je u značajnoj meri izmeštena van institucija sistema, u ruke oligarha i regionalnih gubernatora. Problemi u ekonomskoj, socijalnoj, demografskoj i vojnoj sferi potresali su temelje ruske države. Na međunarodnoj sceni, uticaj Rusije bio je marginalizovan. Svi elementi njene tvrde i meke moći, bili su umanjeni. Rusija je izgubila atribute supersile i nekadašnja predvodnica socijalističkog lagera svedena je na nivo regionalne sile. Dolaskom Vladimira Putina na mesto predsednika RF 2000. godine, počela je nova faza u razvoju postsovjetske Rusije. Pokrenute su opsežne unutrašnje političke, ekonomske i socijalne reforme, kao i promene u spoljnoj i bezbednosnoj politici, što je rezultiralo postepenim oporavkom i konsolidacijom ruske države i društva. Jedna od suštinskih odlika političkog života Rusije jeste personalizacija vlasti, odnosno institucije Predsednika RF, koja u velikoj meri zavisi od ličnosti samog predsednika i njegovog najbližeg okruženja. Ova odlika ukorenjena je u političkoj tradiciji i kulturi, odnosno u imperijalnom nasleđu. Pojedini zapadni autori navode da je tradicija autokratskog vladanja u srži ruske političke kulture, dok ruski autori smatraju da snažna centralna vlast, oličena u instituciji predsednika države, u savremenoj Rusiji predstavlja nužnost u početnoj fazi demokratizacije i tranzicije društva. Putin je od početka nastojao da "ljude iz svog najbližeg okruženja "razlije" u sve nivoe vlasti i sfere koje generišu društvenu i političku moć". Time se profilisala struktura Putinovog režima u kojoj je veoma aktivan proces permanentne smene pozicija, uloga i značaja pojedinih ličnosti, kao i njihovo "seljenje" iz jedne sfere vlasti u drugu. U celokupnom tom procesu fluktacije visoko-pozicioniranih političara, svrstanih u uticajne grupe i klanove (tzv. siloviki, tehnokrate i liberali), Putin ima ulogu "stožera" celokupnog režima. Ocene o režimu ruskog predsednika V. Putina, njegovoj ličnosti, kao i tragu koji je ostavio u modernoj istoriji, polarizovanije su i kontroverznije nego ocene o mnogim drugim ličnostima ruske, pa i globalne politike. Međutim, značaj koji Putin ima za Rusiju i njenu poziciju i ulogu u XXI veku, nesporan je, kao što nisu sporni ni njegov planetarni autoritet, ni njegova globalna popularnost. Putin je jedan od najuticajnijih političara na svetu, ali su mišljenja autora u vezi sa njim toliko podeljena, oprečna, suprotstavljena i "ideološki obojena", da bi svaki pokušaj njihove generalizacije predstavljao poduhvat unapred osuđen na neuspeh. Amplitude reakcija kreću se od glorifikacije i divljenja, do osporavanja i nipodaštavanja. Nesporno je da je reč o harizmatičnom, pragmatičnom i sposobnom državniku, kao što je nesporna i činjenica da za sprovođenje svoje politike ima natpolovičnu podršku ruskog naroda. Kritičari Putinovog režima kao njegove osnovne odlike navode rigidnost vlasti, nefleksibilnost, netransparentnost, birokratizovanost, dominaciju političko- ekonomskih elita, nestabilnost u smislu zasnovanosti na ličnosti predsednika, a ne na balansu institucija.",
publisher = "Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu, Beograd",
journal = "Review of International Affairs",
title = "Vladimir Putin and analysis of the role of leaders in the formation and implementation of state policy in contemporary Russia: Reviews and critics of Putin's regime, Vladimir Putin i analiza uloge ličnosti lidera u formiranju i sprovođenju državne politike u savremenoj Rusiji - ocene i kritike Putinovog režima",
number = "1165",
pages = "47-64"
}

Milosavljević, S., Jeftić, Z.,& Mladenović, M.. (2017). Vladimir Putin and analysis of the role of leaders in the formation and implementation of state policy in contemporary Russia: Reviews and critics of Putin's regime. in Review of International Affairs
Institut za međunarodnu politiku i privredu, Beograd.(1165), 47-64.

Milosavljević S, Jeftić Z, Mladenović M. Vladimir Putin and analysis of the role of leaders in the formation and implementation of state policy in contemporary Russia: Reviews and critics of Putin's regime. in Review of International Affairs. 2017;(1165):47-64..

Milosavljević, Slađan, Jeftić, Zoran, Mladenović, Miroslav, "Vladimir Putin and analysis of the role of leaders in the formation and implementation of state policy in contemporary Russia: Reviews and critics of Putin's regime" in Review of International Affairs, no. 1165 (2017):47-64.

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Milosavljević, Slađan
AU  - Đorđević, Branislav
AU  - Stanojević, Petar
PY  - 2017
UR  - https://rhinosec.fb.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/359
AB  - The deployment of NATO missile defense shield (EuroPRO) elements in Eastern Europe determines explicitly the so-called strong security of Russia and it represents a serious disruptive factor in its relations with the West. In such context, in the last three years the Ukrainian crisis has additionally complicated and actualized security situation because it turned out that, besides internal factors, it is largely influenced by some external factors, as well. In March 2014 Crimea unilaterally separated from Ukraine and it was joined to Russia whereas an armed conflict between central authorities and armed formations of rebellious pro-Russian population started in the parts of Donetsk and Luhansk. Ukraine accused Russia of the annexation of Crimea; their relations were reduced to minimum and in the last three years they have remained such tendency. The change of Crimean status has largely aggravated the relations of Russia with Western countries, which resulted in complex political and security situation in the Black Sea Region, which threatens to disintegrate the whole system of regional stability with potential implications for global security, as well. The deployment of EuroPRO elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula affect to a great extent regional stability of that part of the old continent and they represent one of essential destabilizing factors that is in direct correlation with a high level of entropy of the European political and security system.
AB  - Razmeštanje elemenata protivraketnog štita NATO ('EvroPRO') na prostoru Istočne Evrope eksplicitno determiniše tzv. čvrstu bezbednost Rusije i predstavlja ozbiljan remetilački faktor u njenim odnosima sa Zapadom. U tom kontekstu ukrajinska kriza je u poslednje tri godine samo dodatno usložila i aktuelizovala bezbednosnu situaciju, jer se pokazalo da nju, pored unutrašnjih činilaca, u znatnoj meri opredeljuju i pojedini eksterni faktori. Krim se, marta 2014. godine, jednostrano izdvojio iz sastava Ukrajine i pripojio Rusiji, dok je u delovima Donjecke i Luganske oblasti počeo oružani sukob centralnih vlasti i oružanih formacija pobunjenog proruskog stanovništva. Ukrajina je optužila Rusiju da je anektirala Krim; njihovi odnosi redukovani su na minimum i u poslednje tri godine zadržali su takvu tendenciju. Promena statusa Krima znatno je pogoršala i odnose Rusije sa zapadnim državama, što je prouzrokovalo stvaranje složene političko-bezbednosne situacije u Crnomorskom regionu, koja preti da dezintegriše celokupni sistem regionalne stabilnosti , sa mogućim implikacijama i na globalnu bezbednost. Razmeštanje elemenata 'EvroPRO' na prostoru Rumunije i militarizacija Krimskog poluostrva znatno utiču na regionalnu stabilnost tog dela starog kontinenta i predstavljaju jedan od suštinskih destabilizirajućih faktora koji je u direktnoj korelaciji sa visokim stepenom entropije evropskog političko-bezbednosnog sistema.
PB  - Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd
T2  - Vojno delo
T1  - Causality of deployment of missile defense shield elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula
T1  - Kauzalitet raspoređivanja elemenata antiraketnog štita u Rumuniji i militarizacije Krimskog poluostrva
VL  - 69
IS  - 5
SP  - 9
EP  - 28
DO  - 10.5937/vojdelo1705009M
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Milosavljević, Slađan and Đorđević, Branislav and Stanojević, Petar",
year = "2017",
abstract = "The deployment of NATO missile defense shield (EuroPRO) elements in Eastern Europe determines explicitly the so-called strong security of Russia and it represents a serious disruptive factor in its relations with the West. In such context, in the last three years the Ukrainian crisis has additionally complicated and actualized security situation because it turned out that, besides internal factors, it is largely influenced by some external factors, as well. In March 2014 Crimea unilaterally separated from Ukraine and it was joined to Russia whereas an armed conflict between central authorities and armed formations of rebellious pro-Russian population started in the parts of Donetsk and Luhansk. Ukraine accused Russia of the annexation of Crimea; their relations were reduced to minimum and in the last three years they have remained such tendency. The change of Crimean status has largely aggravated the relations of Russia with Western countries, which resulted in complex political and security situation in the Black Sea Region, which threatens to disintegrate the whole system of regional stability with potential implications for global security, as well. The deployment of EuroPRO elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula affect to a great extent regional stability of that part of the old continent and they represent one of essential destabilizing factors that is in direct correlation with a high level of entropy of the European political and security system., Razmeštanje elemenata protivraketnog štita NATO ('EvroPRO') na prostoru Istočne Evrope eksplicitno determiniše tzv. čvrstu bezbednost Rusije i predstavlja ozbiljan remetilački faktor u njenim odnosima sa Zapadom. U tom kontekstu ukrajinska kriza je u poslednje tri godine samo dodatno usložila i aktuelizovala bezbednosnu situaciju, jer se pokazalo da nju, pored unutrašnjih činilaca, u znatnoj meri opredeljuju i pojedini eksterni faktori. Krim se, marta 2014. godine, jednostrano izdvojio iz sastava Ukrajine i pripojio Rusiji, dok je u delovima Donjecke i Luganske oblasti počeo oružani sukob centralnih vlasti i oružanih formacija pobunjenog proruskog stanovništva. Ukrajina je optužila Rusiju da je anektirala Krim; njihovi odnosi redukovani su na minimum i u poslednje tri godine zadržali su takvu tendenciju. Promena statusa Krima znatno je pogoršala i odnose Rusije sa zapadnim državama, što je prouzrokovalo stvaranje složene političko-bezbednosne situacije u Crnomorskom regionu, koja preti da dezintegriše celokupni sistem regionalne stabilnosti , sa mogućim implikacijama i na globalnu bezbednost. Razmeštanje elemenata 'EvroPRO' na prostoru Rumunije i militarizacija Krimskog poluostrva znatno utiču na regionalnu stabilnost tog dela starog kontinenta i predstavljaju jedan od suštinskih destabilizirajućih faktora koji je u direktnoj korelaciji sa visokim stepenom entropije evropskog političko-bezbednosnog sistema.",
publisher = "Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd",
journal = "Vojno delo",
title = "Causality of deployment of missile defense shield elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula, Kauzalitet raspoređivanja elemenata antiraketnog štita u Rumuniji i militarizacije Krimskog poluostrva",
volume = "69",
number = "5",
pages = "9-28",
doi = "10.5937/vojdelo1705009M"
}

Milosavljević, S., Đorđević, B.,& Stanojević, P.. (2017). Causality of deployment of missile defense shield elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula. in Vojno delo
Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd., 69(5), 9-28.
https://doi.org/10.5937/vojdelo1705009M

Milosavljević S, Đorđević B, Stanojević P. Causality of deployment of missile defense shield elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula. in Vojno delo. 2017;69(5):9-28.
doi:10.5937/vojdelo1705009M .

Milosavljević, Slađan, Đorđević, Branislav, Stanojević, Petar, "Causality of deployment of missile defense shield elements in Romania and militarization of the Crimean Peninsula" in Vojno delo, 69, no. 5 (2017):9-28,
https://doi.org/10.5937/vojdelo1705009M . .

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Milosavljević, Slađan
AU  - Tomić, Duško
AU  - Mandić, Goran
PY  - 2016
UR  - https://rhinosec.fb.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/318
AB  - At the beginning of the 21st century, a matter of achieving the energy security, as an essentially important element of the global security system, has become one of the priorities of global politics. This has caused it to become more topical and increased its importance in international relations. The possession of energy reserves provides nations with a number of comparative advantages in contemporary international politics, and with a place among the leading centers of power on a planetary level. This fact gives a special meaning to energy security, because energy resources are an important lever by which nations project their power and influence. The correlation between energy resources and the strengthening of positions and roles of nations in international politics is undeniable and easily verifiable. The paper analyzes and partly explains various attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security in the context of its growing importance in international relations and the impact on the strengthening of the projected positions of nations as subjects of international order. Nominal definition of the concept of “energy security” has been made more difficult by the fact that there is no universally acceptable definition of the concept of “security”, as well as that there coexist various theoretical approaches to its definition. In the scientific and technical literature, the prevalent concept is that the content and scope of the concept of security today have been substantially expanded due to the continued widening of the limits of its problem framework. The basic characteristics of most of these definitions are non-equivalence – disproportionality and inadequacy. Namely, they are either too narrow and do not include all the contents and essential factors of the security, or they are too wide, and the concept is lost in the range of phenomena. Therefore, in the conceptual sense this term is so debatable that it is not even closely possible to reach an agreement on its meaning. The attempt to define the syntagm of “energy security” reveals the same tendencies as in determining the meaning of the term “security”. Namely, there is a proliferation of different theoretical approaches, as well as differences in the definition of this syntagm, which are substantially determined by, among other things, the status that individual nations have in the global energy system.
AB  - Početkom XXI veka jedan od prioriteta globalne politike postalo je pitanje ostvarivanja energetske bezbednosti, kao suštinski važnog elemenata sistema globalne bezbednosti, što je uslovilo njenu aktuelizaciju i porast značaja u međunarodnim odnosima. Posedovanje rezervi energenata omogućava državama niz komparativnih prednosti u savremenoj međunarodnoj politici i obezbeđuje im mesto među vodećim centrima moći na planetarnom nivou. Ova činjenica energetskoj bezbednosti daje posebnu dimenziju, jer energetski resursi predstavljaju značajnu polugu kojom države projektuju svoju moć i uticaj. Korelacija između energetskih resursa i jačanja pozicija i uloga država u međunarodnoj politici je nesporna i lako dokaziva. U radu su analizirani i delom objašnjeni različiti pokušaji teorijskog definisanja pojma energetske bezbednosti u kontekstu porasta njenog značaja u međunarodnim odnosima i uticaja na jačanje projektovanih pozicija država kao subjekata međunarodnog poretka. Nominalno definisanje pojma “energetska bezbednost” otežano je činjenicom da ne postoji univerzalno prihvatljiva definicija pojma “bezbednost”, kao i da egzistiraju različiti teorijski pristupi u njegovom definisanju. U naučno-stručnoj literaturi preovladava shvatanje da su sadržaj i obim pojma bezbednost danas suštinski prošireni usled stalnog širenja granica njenog problemskog polja. Osnovne odlike najvećeg broja tih definicija su neekvivalentnost - nesrazmernost i neadekvatnost. Naime, ili su preuske i ne obuhvataju sve sadržaje i bitne činioce bezbednosti, ili su preširoke, pa se pojam gubi u širini pojava. Stoga je u konceptualnom smislu ovaj pojam toliko sporan da nije ni približno moguće postići saglasnost oko njegovog značenja. Pri pokušaju definisanja sintagme “energetska bezbednost” primećuju su tendencije kao i pri određivanju značenja pojma “bezbednost”. Naime, postoji proliferacija različitih teorijskih pristupa , kao i razlike u definisanju ove sintagme koje su u znatnoj meri determinisane, pored ostalog, i statusom koji pojedine države imaju u globalnom energetskom sistemu.
PB  - Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd
T2  - Vojno delo
T1  - Attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security as a factor in the determination of the international political and security system
T1  - Pokušaji teorijskog određenja pojma energetske bezbednosti kao činioca determinacije međunarodnog političko-bezbednosnog sistema
VL  - 68
IS  - 5
SP  - 106
EP  - 123
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Milosavljević, Slađan and Tomić, Duško and Mandić, Goran",
year = "2016",
abstract = "At the beginning of the 21st century, a matter of achieving the energy security, as an essentially important element of the global security system, has become one of the priorities of global politics. This has caused it to become more topical and increased its importance in international relations. The possession of energy reserves provides nations with a number of comparative advantages in contemporary international politics, and with a place among the leading centers of power on a planetary level. This fact gives a special meaning to energy security, because energy resources are an important lever by which nations project their power and influence. The correlation between energy resources and the strengthening of positions and roles of nations in international politics is undeniable and easily verifiable. The paper analyzes and partly explains various attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security in the context of its growing importance in international relations and the impact on the strengthening of the projected positions of nations as subjects of international order. Nominal definition of the concept of “energy security” has been made more difficult by the fact that there is no universally acceptable definition of the concept of “security”, as well as that there coexist various theoretical approaches to its definition. In the scientific and technical literature, the prevalent concept is that the content and scope of the concept of security today have been substantially expanded due to the continued widening of the limits of its problem framework. The basic characteristics of most of these definitions are non-equivalence – disproportionality and inadequacy. Namely, they are either too narrow and do not include all the contents and essential factors of the security, or they are too wide, and the concept is lost in the range of phenomena. Therefore, in the conceptual sense this term is so debatable that it is not even closely possible to reach an agreement on its meaning. The attempt to define the syntagm of “energy security” reveals the same tendencies as in determining the meaning of the term “security”. Namely, there is a proliferation of different theoretical approaches, as well as differences in the definition of this syntagm, which are substantially determined by, among other things, the status that individual nations have in the global energy system., Početkom XXI veka jedan od prioriteta globalne politike postalo je pitanje ostvarivanja energetske bezbednosti, kao suštinski važnog elemenata sistema globalne bezbednosti, što je uslovilo njenu aktuelizaciju i porast značaja u međunarodnim odnosima. Posedovanje rezervi energenata omogućava državama niz komparativnih prednosti u savremenoj međunarodnoj politici i obezbeđuje im mesto među vodećim centrima moći na planetarnom nivou. Ova činjenica energetskoj bezbednosti daje posebnu dimenziju, jer energetski resursi predstavljaju značajnu polugu kojom države projektuju svoju moć i uticaj. Korelacija između energetskih resursa i jačanja pozicija i uloga država u međunarodnoj politici je nesporna i lako dokaziva. U radu su analizirani i delom objašnjeni različiti pokušaji teorijskog definisanja pojma energetske bezbednosti u kontekstu porasta njenog značaja u međunarodnim odnosima i uticaja na jačanje projektovanih pozicija država kao subjekata međunarodnog poretka. Nominalno definisanje pojma “energetska bezbednost” otežano je činjenicom da ne postoji univerzalno prihvatljiva definicija pojma “bezbednost”, kao i da egzistiraju različiti teorijski pristupi u njegovom definisanju. U naučno-stručnoj literaturi preovladava shvatanje da su sadržaj i obim pojma bezbednost danas suštinski prošireni usled stalnog širenja granica njenog problemskog polja. Osnovne odlike najvećeg broja tih definicija su neekvivalentnost - nesrazmernost i neadekvatnost. Naime, ili su preuske i ne obuhvataju sve sadržaje i bitne činioce bezbednosti, ili su preširoke, pa se pojam gubi u širini pojava. Stoga je u konceptualnom smislu ovaj pojam toliko sporan da nije ni približno moguće postići saglasnost oko njegovog značenja. Pri pokušaju definisanja sintagme “energetska bezbednost” primećuju su tendencije kao i pri određivanju značenja pojma “bezbednost”. Naime, postoji proliferacija različitih teorijskih pristupa , kao i razlike u definisanju ove sintagme koje su u znatnoj meri determinisane, pored ostalog, i statusom koji pojedine države imaju u globalnom energetskom sistemu.",
publisher = "Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd",
journal = "Vojno delo",
title = "Attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security as a factor in the determination of the international political and security system, Pokušaji teorijskog određenja pojma energetske bezbednosti kao činioca determinacije međunarodnog političko-bezbednosnog sistema",
volume = "68",
number = "5",
pages = "106-123"
}

Milosavljević, S., Tomić, D.,& Mandić, G.. (2016). Attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security as a factor in the determination of the international political and security system. in Vojno delo
Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd., 68(5), 106-123.

Milosavljević S, Tomić D, Mandić G. Attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security as a factor in the determination of the international political and security system. in Vojno delo. 2016;68(5):106-123..

Milosavljević, Slađan, Tomić, Duško, Mandić, Goran, "Attempts to theoretically define the concept of energy security as a factor in the determination of the international political and security system" in Vojno delo, 68, no. 5 (2016):106-123.

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Mladenović, Miroslav
AU  - Kilibarda, Zoran
AU  - Milosavljević, Slađan
PY  - 2013
UR  - https://rhinosec.fb.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/198
AB  - In the last twenty years the world has undergone serious changes, unfortunately not in positive direction. The collapse of the bipolar system and the establishment of one bloc hegemony - NATO headed by the USA, has not only failed to establish more stable and secure international relations, but, on the contrary, it has corresponded with the greatest insecurity and uncertainty of the mankind ever since World War II till the present day. After the 'counter-balance' disappeared, there has been open political, economic, even direct military, interference by the Alliance states in the sovereignty of many countries. Consequently, the world's conflicting potential has largely increased. Apart from the threats present from earlier, the contemporary world is faced with a series of new, formerly unknown or marginal, ones. The most notable among them are: uncontrolled escalation of armed conflicts; international terrorism; proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction; expansion of drugs trafficking; illegal cross-border migrations; human trafficking and trafficking in human organs; piracy; criminalization of different areas of living; etc. The economic and financial crises have additionally warned the world of the limitedness of natural resources and, in the most serious form, posed the issue of the fight for preservation, or conquest of areas rich in raw minerals. Apart from the current courses of action in the fight for control over the natural resources, both new methods of action and new areas of contest are emerging (Arctic, Antarctic ...; above and under the Earth's surface; on the sea, and under the sea bottom), over which the interests of great powers will be increasingly conflicting. Michael Klare, the author of well-known books 'Blood and Oil' and 'Resource Wars', convincingly evokes a growing hunger for resources by the picturesque title of his latest book 'Race for What's Left: Global Scramble for the World's Last Resources'. For success in this new competition in strength and skills, new strategic concepts are required. Some have already been created and preliminarily tested; others are being prepared for implementation and corrected 'on the go' based on the performance of already proved solutions; still others are being hurriedly shaped. Understandably, along with this, what actual and potential rivals do related to this, or what their activities suggest, is watched closely.
AB  - Za poslednjih 20 godina svet se ozbiljno promenio i to, nažalost, ne u pozitivnom smeru. Rušenje bipolarnog sistema i uspostavljanje hegemonije jednog bloka - NATO na čelu sa SAD, ne samo da nije dovelo do uspostavljanja stabilnijih i bezbednijih međunarodnih odnosa, već je naprotiv, korespondiralo sa najvećom nesigurnošću i neizvesnošću ljudskog roda od vremena Drugog svetskog rata do danas. Posle nestanka 'kontrabalansa', došlo je do otvorenog političkog, ekonomskog, pa i direktnog vojnog mešanja zemalja Alijanse u suverenitet mnogih zemalja. Kao rezultat ovakvog stanja, konfliktni potencijal u svetu znatno se povećao. Pored od ranije prisutnih pretnji, savremeni svet suočava se sa nizom novih, nekada nepoznatim ili marginalnim. Među njima su najznačajnije: nekontrolisana eskalacija oružanih konflikata; međunarodni terorizam; rasprostiranje atomskog i drugog naoružanja za masovno uništavanje; bujanje trgovine narkoticima; nelegalne preko-granične migracije; trgovina ljudima i ljudskim organima; piratstvo; kriminalizacija različitih sfera života itd. Ekonomska i finansijska kriza dodatno su opomenule svet na limitiranost prirodnih resursa i, u najozbiljnijoj formi, postavile problem borbe za očuvanje, odnosno osvajanje prostora bogatih sirovinama. U borbi za kontrolu nad prirodnim resursima, pored dosadašnjih, pojavljuju se, kako nove metode delovanja, tako i nova područja nadmetanja (Arktik, Antarktik, ...; na zemlji i ispod zemljine površine; na moru i ispod morskog dna), oko kojih će se u narednom periodu sve otvorenije sukobljavati interesi vodećih svetskih sila. Narastajuću glad za resursima, Majk Kler (Michael Klare), autor dobro poznatih dela 'Krv i nafta' (Blood and Oil) i 'Ratovi zbor resursa' (Resource Wars), uverljivo dočarava slikovitim nazivom svoje najnovije knjige 'Trka za onim što je preostalo' (Race for what's Left: Global Scramble for the World's Last Resources). Za uspešnost u tom novom odmeravanju snaga i umešnosti neophodni su novi strategijski koncepti. Neki su već kreirani i preliminarno testirani; drugi se pripremaju za implementaciju i u 'hodu' koriguju na osnovu učinka već oprobanih rešenja; treći se ubrzano formiraju. Pri tome se, razumljivo, pomno prati ono što u vezi s tim čine, odnosno što svojim delovanjem nagoveštavaju aktuelni i potencijalni rivali.
PB  - Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd
T2  - Vojno delo
T1  - 'Post-cold war' changes in security and strategic concepts of the Russian Federation
T1  - 'Posthladnoratovske' promene bezbednosnih i strateških koncepcija Ruske Federacije
VL  - 65
IS  - 3
SP  - 40
EP  - 58
ER  - 

@article{
author = "Mladenović, Miroslav and Kilibarda, Zoran and Milosavljević, Slađan",
year = "2013",
abstract = "In the last twenty years the world has undergone serious changes, unfortunately not in positive direction. The collapse of the bipolar system and the establishment of one bloc hegemony - NATO headed by the USA, has not only failed to establish more stable and secure international relations, but, on the contrary, it has corresponded with the greatest insecurity and uncertainty of the mankind ever since World War II till the present day. After the 'counter-balance' disappeared, there has been open political, economic, even direct military, interference by the Alliance states in the sovereignty of many countries. Consequently, the world's conflicting potential has largely increased. Apart from the threats present from earlier, the contemporary world is faced with a series of new, formerly unknown or marginal, ones. The most notable among them are: uncontrolled escalation of armed conflicts; international terrorism; proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction; expansion of drugs trafficking; illegal cross-border migrations; human trafficking and trafficking in human organs; piracy; criminalization of different areas of living; etc. The economic and financial crises have additionally warned the world of the limitedness of natural resources and, in the most serious form, posed the issue of the fight for preservation, or conquest of areas rich in raw minerals. Apart from the current courses of action in the fight for control over the natural resources, both new methods of action and new areas of contest are emerging (Arctic, Antarctic ...; above and under the Earth's surface; on the sea, and under the sea bottom), over which the interests of great powers will be increasingly conflicting. Michael Klare, the author of well-known books 'Blood and Oil' and 'Resource Wars', convincingly evokes a growing hunger for resources by the picturesque title of his latest book 'Race for What's Left: Global Scramble for the World's Last Resources'. For success in this new competition in strength and skills, new strategic concepts are required. Some have already been created and preliminarily tested; others are being prepared for implementation and corrected 'on the go' based on the performance of already proved solutions; still others are being hurriedly shaped. Understandably, along with this, what actual and potential rivals do related to this, or what their activities suggest, is watched closely., Za poslednjih 20 godina svet se ozbiljno promenio i to, nažalost, ne u pozitivnom smeru. Rušenje bipolarnog sistema i uspostavljanje hegemonije jednog bloka - NATO na čelu sa SAD, ne samo da nije dovelo do uspostavljanja stabilnijih i bezbednijih međunarodnih odnosa, već je naprotiv, korespondiralo sa najvećom nesigurnošću i neizvesnošću ljudskog roda od vremena Drugog svetskog rata do danas. Posle nestanka 'kontrabalansa', došlo je do otvorenog političkog, ekonomskog, pa i direktnog vojnog mešanja zemalja Alijanse u suverenitet mnogih zemalja. Kao rezultat ovakvog stanja, konfliktni potencijal u svetu znatno se povećao. Pored od ranije prisutnih pretnji, savremeni svet suočava se sa nizom novih, nekada nepoznatim ili marginalnim. Među njima su najznačajnije: nekontrolisana eskalacija oružanih konflikata; međunarodni terorizam; rasprostiranje atomskog i drugog naoružanja za masovno uništavanje; bujanje trgovine narkoticima; nelegalne preko-granične migracije; trgovina ljudima i ljudskim organima; piratstvo; kriminalizacija različitih sfera života itd. Ekonomska i finansijska kriza dodatno su opomenule svet na limitiranost prirodnih resursa i, u najozbiljnijoj formi, postavile problem borbe za očuvanje, odnosno osvajanje prostora bogatih sirovinama. U borbi za kontrolu nad prirodnim resursima, pored dosadašnjih, pojavljuju se, kako nove metode delovanja, tako i nova područja nadmetanja (Arktik, Antarktik, ...; na zemlji i ispod zemljine površine; na moru i ispod morskog dna), oko kojih će se u narednom periodu sve otvorenije sukobljavati interesi vodećih svetskih sila. Narastajuću glad za resursima, Majk Kler (Michael Klare), autor dobro poznatih dela 'Krv i nafta' (Blood and Oil) i 'Ratovi zbor resursa' (Resource Wars), uverljivo dočarava slikovitim nazivom svoje najnovije knjige 'Trka za onim što je preostalo' (Race for what's Left: Global Scramble for the World's Last Resources). Za uspešnost u tom novom odmeravanju snaga i umešnosti neophodni su novi strategijski koncepti. Neki su već kreirani i preliminarno testirani; drugi se pripremaju za implementaciju i u 'hodu' koriguju na osnovu učinka već oprobanih rešenja; treći se ubrzano formiraju. Pri tome se, razumljivo, pomno prati ono što u vezi s tim čine, odnosno što svojim delovanjem nagoveštavaju aktuelni i potencijalni rivali.",
publisher = "Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd",
journal = "Vojno delo",
title = "'Post-cold war' changes in security and strategic concepts of the Russian Federation, 'Posthladnoratovske' promene bezbednosnih i strateških koncepcija Ruske Federacije",
volume = "65",
number = "3",
pages = "40-58"
}

Mladenović, M., Kilibarda, Z.,& Milosavljević, S.. (2013). 'Post-cold war' changes in security and strategic concepts of the Russian Federation. in Vojno delo
Ministarstvo odbrane Srbije - Vojnoizdavački zavod, Beograd., 65(3), 40-58.

Mladenović M, Kilibarda Z, Milosavljević S. 'Post-cold war' changes in security and strategic concepts of the Russian Federation. in Vojno delo. 2013;65(3):40-58..

Mladenović, Miroslav, Kilibarda, Zoran, Milosavljević, Slađan, "'Post-cold war' changes in security and strategic concepts of the Russian Federation" in Vojno delo, 65, no. 3 (2013):40-58.