Search

More than any previous generation, today's students need to develop a global perspective and be knowledgeable about other nations in order to play a better role on the global stage. This paper first reviews some earlier and current studies on students' knowledge of the world, mainly conducted in the United States, and then it describes the global education status and similar studies in countries like Canada, Russia, the United Kingdom, China, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. Based on a review of studies in these countries, the paper proposes that contemporary assessments of students' cross-national and global knowledge and attitudes are necessary. The new research must be multinational, assessing what paired nations' school aged populations know about one another's history, geography, politics, economics, and international relations. (Contains 1 footnote.)

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan had to re-build their bilateral relations, and today this process continues. Both countries face up to a number of objective difficulties, such as crisis and the need to develop new foreign and domestic policy doctrines. Nevertheless, several bilateral agreements show the governments' desire to establish closer co-operation and to look for new integration method. Cross-border cooperation presents one of these methods. This paper deals with specific features of interterritorial and cross-border cooperation between border regions of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, basic problems of cross-border cooperation in these regions. The authors identified the most important areas of further cross-border and interregional cooperation between Kazakhstan and Russia. Relevant legal documents show intense cooperation development between the countries; this is confirmed by the participation of Kazakhstan and Russia in a number of international organizations, in particular, SCO, CIS, and the Customs Union. Development of cross-border cooperation presents a new stage in bilateral relations. Currently, the main difficulties that hinder such cooperation include inadequate legal framework, which requires improvement in order to meet the requirements of bilateral relations, the need to extend state funding, as well as the need to attract foreign investment.

This paper discusses the way the European Union (EU) needs to adapt its economic diplomacy toolbox to tackle current challenges pertaining to the Russian war on Ukraine. It investigates the way in which the EU has developed its economic diplomacy in Ukraine, focusing on the scope of this diplomacy and its efficacy in responding to Russia's assertiveness and, ultimately, to Russia's aggression. The research identifies those initiatives that may be part of the priority toolkit used for sustaining the EU's strategic goals in Ukraine and beyond, considering the evolving global economic environment. The paper concludes with a comprehensive listing of the EU's challenges and opportunities for further developing its economic diplomacy, including as a solution or a response to the Ukrainian reconstruction needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper examines Russia's cultural expansionism that extends beyond the military invasion in Ukraine since 2014. In the first part, I trace Russia's systematic efforts to seize and manipulate Ukrainian heritage, often under the guise of protection. I also touch on the role of museums in this expansion, where they are used to preserve collections through coercive acquisition and to promote a Russian-centric narrative. The second part of the article delves into the historical relationships between Russia and Ukraine, especially in the context of the Soviet era's museum infrastructure. Overall, the text calls for new concepts and international efforts to critique Russia's actions and protect Ukrainian culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historically, the cold war was a watershed that separated two epochs: the time of abnormal, although compelled, partnership of two political systems and the period of peaceful coexistence with barely hidden hostility. The peacefulness of the latter, however elusive and vulnerable it was from time to time, has to be credited to the cold war, a relatively short period of time in world history, when humankind, and most importantly its leaders, realized how close our world was to self-destruction. The purpose of this article is to trace educators' rationale or motivation for teaching about the Soviet Union in the second half of the 1940s through the1950s, and how their motivation changed during that period. It is argued that although there existed a general tendency and interest among social studies teachers to teach about the Soviet Union these motivations and interests were conditioned by different circumstances and, consequently, pursued different goals. People who are in political power in the United States and Russia now belong to the post-World War II generation. They learned about the Soviet Union/Russia and the United States from their parents, from the media, and in school. The analysis of teachers' motivations in this controversial period of the cold war points out a general attitude toward the Soviet Union among many educators. This attitude can be expressed by the following triad: hopeful curiosity; confrontational hostility; and confrontation and interest.

The main goal of this paper is to present and compare the main developments in the Russian wars in Ukraine and Syria by considering the main patterns, parallels, and changing trajectories that could shed more light onto both of these war zones, which are highly interlinked due to Russia's leading role in both. It analytically, comparatively, and contemplatively approaches those developments by highlighting multiple similarities and the main differences in global responses to these conflicts. Both conflicts should be seen as highly unpredictable, dynamic, and unnecessarily extended asymmetric proxy wars in which global powers test their new military doctrines and their competitors' responses to their unconventional actions and other unsolicited and indirect interferences in the local dynamism of both wars. Unlike in Syria, the Ukrainian war zone is wholly transformative and ready for the adoption of partial hybridization and the utilization of the new software-defined warfare in combination with conventional weapons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims to analyse how the theory of economic and institutional liberalism applies to the Three Seas Initiative (3SI) and its Investment Fund (3SIIF), particularly in the context of Ukraine, which was attacked by Russia in February 2022. The study integrates theoretical perspectives from security studies, political science, and international relations with the practical implementation of the 3SI and 3SIIF. It uses scholarly literature on liberalism along with official 3SI and 3SIIF documentation. By comparing the theoretical principles of liberalism with the operational practices of the 3SI, the article draws conclusions about the alignment of these practices with liberal theory. The findings indicate that the theory of liberalism can be used to explain and describe forms of regional cooperation such as the 3SI, which reflects its relevance across various operational and conceptual dimensions. The acceptance of Ukraine as a participating 3SI partner was one of the signals to Russia that Ukraine is a part of the Western world, where goals are achieved through voluntary integration, trade and investment cooperation, free market, and democratic principles, and not through dependency, violence, and military action. Finally, the paper illustrates the application of liberalism theory to the geopolitical realities of the 3SI and draws attention to its effectiveness in achieving economic and regional security goals. The research may influence future regional policies and strategies, especially in the context of Ukraine’s integration into Western structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 21st century, the issue of energy security is an important challenge for many states. Energy independence is an important component of the country's national security. That is why its development is considered a priority of the country's economic policy. Along with the trends of globalization, international energy relations are increasing day by day. However, the issue of energy security and vulnerability is equally on the agenda, which in turn is related to the problems of access to energy resources and the aggressive appeal of industrialized states with this issue, which creates a destabilizing vulnerable environment in the state. This issue was clearly revealed in the background of the 2022-2023 war between Russia and Ukraine. The mentioned issue is one important part of this paper, along with which the issue of renewable energies is also discussed. Renewable energies, the so-called practical way to get rid of petroleum products is growing more and more. Accordingly, the mentioned work considers both issues equally on the example of the European Union's energy security strategy, within the framework of the Russia-Ukraine war. The paper discusses the European Union's energy security policy and current challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Russia is using the Black Sea as a diplomatic tool in its foreign policy to achieve its maritime and foreign policy objectives, which are also linked with the country's strategic culture. This research investigates the significance of the Black Sea in Russia's Maritime Strategy for achieving its foreign policy objectives by using the balance of interest theory. This research employs two conceptual schemas. Firstly, with the help of maritime diplomacy, it analyses a tool to achieve foreign policy objectives in the waters. Secondly, the research uses the concept of strategic culture, which helps explore the diplomatic importance of the Black Sea in Russian foreign policy through the perspective of history and attitudes of decision-makers. This research highlights the case of the Black Sea for Russian maritime strategy, which also has a great economic significance for the region and world. It also highlights the importance of the Black Sea in the Russian maritime doctrine (2022) and links between maritime strategic culture and foreign policy objectives. It concludes that Russia is successfully pursuing its cooperative, coercive, and persuasive maritime diplomacy in the Black Sea region by providing humanitarian assistance, blocking Ukrainian access, and operating a stronghold at Sevastopol port as its naval base. In conclusion, this paper argues that strategic culture plays a vital role in employing the three diplomatic dimensions for achieving maritime objectives in the Black Sea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the political landscape of post-war Armenia, focusing on both domestic and foreign policy implications of the devastating war of 2020. More specifically, it aims at explaining the aftermath of the 2020 war, with a special emphasis on Armenia's growing dependence on Russia. Since September 2020, Armenia has plunged into a deep crisis. The Nagorno-Karabakh war had a series of implications, both for conflicting parties and a wider region. The ceasefire agreement which entailed huge territorial concessions took many by surprise and raised questions as to the transparency and accountability of the government. Although the Russian-brokered ceasefire ended the hostilities, yet it left many fundamental matters unanswered. Furthermore, the war has exacerbated the pre-existing divisions amongst the foremost political actors and the general public. Combined with the war and its aftermath, the COVID-19 pandemic has also invited challenges, which resulted in an increased human toll, slowdown of economy, and deepened public anger and mistrust of the authorities. The situation is compounded by Armenia's deepening dependence on Russia, which has been largely treated as war-torn Armenia's irreplaceable ally by the Armenian leadership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides an analysis of Russia's role and place in President Biden's U.S. foreign policy aims. Particularly, this paper explores clashing world order visions, issues pertaining to national sovereignty, post-Soviet space development, sanction policies, climate change issues, and global security. The following research reveals that the rivalry between the United States and Russia influences the system of international relations, because both parties promote substantially different concepts of the future world order. The Biden administration was unwilling to make the necessary concessions to accommodate Russia because 1) there is a huge gulf between the two country's world views that even makes negotiations between the two almost impossible, and 2) because it does not take Russia seriously and views it as a declining power. As a result, the two sides were unable to come to some kind of negotiated agreement that would have addressed Russia's concerns including the Ukraine issue. Instead, deterring Russia has become a priority for U.S. foreign policy in critical areas such as national sovereignty, the democratic development of post-Soviet countries, Russian-related human rights issues, and U.S. sanction policies against Russia. Comparing Trump's presidency to the Biden administration's first year in office, Biden has championed a more pragmatic narrative towards Russia. Most evidently, this is manifested in problems concerning universal global challenges such as strategic stability, cyber-security, and even aspects of climate change. Nevertheless, the possibility of concluding any serious negotiations between the parties on new world order parameters seems less realistic today than ever before. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drawing on the theoretical framework of the Copenhagen School of Security Studies, the paper's aim focuses on the role of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Russia-EU political and security relations, considering its securitization following the Ukraine crisis and Russia's military intervention against this country. The paper, utilizing the comparative analysis method and securitization theory, argues that in the past, the Nord Stream pipeline significantly contributed to maintaining friendly relations between Russia and the EU, assisting the two parties in determining foreign policy positions and flexibility. However, following the Ukraine crisis and the subsequent development of mistrust and increased military threats, this pipeline has lost its position and stabilizing role, and it no longer fulfills its previous function of fostering relations between the EU and Russia. The paper concludes that after the Ukraine crisis, it became securitized, and rather than holding a constructive role, it has adopted a threatening role for the EU and its Western allies, especially the US. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the highs and lows of Russian-South Korean collaboration in science and technology (S&T) during the first 10 years of diplomatic relations between the two countries (1988–1998). S&T collaboration served as a path to improve diplomacy in the absence of prior interaction and offered an opportunity for both countries to collaborate in their pursuit of technological advancement and economic growth. However, the history of this collaboration has been largely forgotten. The paper investigates the reasons for the decline of Russian-South Korean S&T collaboration and identifies potential obstacles to establishing a lasting and stable bilateral partnership in the field of science and technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Russia has re-emerged as an important global actor after the advent of the post-Soviet era. Kremlin's repositioning in the global affairs under President Vladimir Putin has led to a geopolitical and geostrategic transformation of its foreign policy. It follows multilateralism with active outreach in different parts of the world. In contemporary Russian foreign policy, there are tangible determinants that call for multipolar world order including realignment of foreign relations and consolidation of great power status. This paper, therefore, examines Russian foreign policy in the post-Crimean annexation era, where Moscow launched various campaigns through active engagements with the world's larger economies and strategically important countries, such as China, India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. The paper also highlights Russia's evolving bilateral relations with these countries, especially in economic, political, and military spheres. Following the current global geopolitical realities, it also attempts to mark clear adjustments in Moscow's foreign policy with respect to its power, responsibility, and ambitions for international peace and stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Persuasion, disinformation, manipulation, censorship, which are elements of propaganda, can be regarded as central terms of the language of politics, especially during conflict situations and wars. The question of interest is in what ways the specific language techniques are used by the Russian Foreign Affairs Department for the purposes of propaganda in the context of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. The paper analyzes the official statements of Maria Zakharova, the Director of the Information and Press Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation that are available on the web page of the Embassy of Russia in Berlin. The following examinations are confronted with the well-documented nature of the persuasive language in Nazi propaganda before and during World War II. The aim of such analysis is to examine in what ways and to what extent the specific propaganda techniques they are used to justify the war that Russia has started by invading Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper discusses the institutional factors that influence the development of think tanks in different political systems, with a focus on Russia and Turkey. It identifies various institutional factors such as the structure of the decision-making process, the type of regime, bureaucratic structure, level of democratization, approach of decision-makers, presence of pluralism, effectiveness of political parties, strength of foundations, legal norms, state of civil society, presence of an open public debate culture, and autonomy of the business world that influence the operation of think tanks. The study examines the similarities and differences between the institutional environment of Russia and Turkey, provides examples of how political and institutional factors in different periods in Turkey and Russia have had a facilitating or complicating effect on the establishment and development of think tanks. This paper contributes to the literature by highlighting the importance of institutional factors in the formation, development, role, and structure of think tanks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the reasoning and implications of the unrest in Kazakhstan unleashed in January of 2022. This crisis was the most severe form of violence that Kazakhstan has endured since gaining independence. It distorted Kazakhstan's image as a stable country. While the crisis was limited to the territory of Kazakhstan and developed mainly from domestic problems, it undeniably acquired an important international element. Kazakhstan's appeal to the CSTO presented a drastic change in Kazakhstan's foreign policy and ensued in the shift in the balance of power in the greater Eurasian region. Although Russia played a relatively subtle role on the ground, Russia's involvement was set to link the political future of Kazakhstan to Russia for an unspecified amount of time. The study concludes that Kazakhstan is faced with the challenges of undertaking significant reforms to lower the possibility of further instabilities while remaining true to its multi-vector foreign policy agenda amid Russian intrusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the Soviet Union's (USSR) collapse, Russia's domestic and foreign policies have changed. With the loss of "superpower" status, Russians struggled to define their "national identity," which influenced the country's new foreign policy. This struggle affected Russia's ties with its sovereign neighbours, the former Soviet states termed the "Near Abroad" (blizhnee zarubezhe). The struggle specifically led to a series of territorial, leadership, economic, diaspora, and military conflicts with some countries in the Near-Abroad. The question of the legitimacy of territories and borders in Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan), Abkhazia and South Ossetia (Georgia), the Trans-Dniester area (Moldova), and Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk areas of Ukraine is largely a result of the struggle. This paper discusses the factors affecting Russian domestic and foreign policy towards the Near-Abroad nations, which have influenced Russia's behaviour in contemporary international politics. Firstly, this essay analysed Russia's identity crisis and foreign strategy. The effect of Marxism-Leninism on Soviet foreign policy and the new Russian State was also discussed. This paper also analysed Vladimir Putin's pragmatic strategy in the Near-Abroad, focusing on Ukraine. This paper submits that Russia's determination to see the Near-Abroad states as largely within its sphere of influence and geopolitical interests hinders the establishment of equal ties with these countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Eastern Review is the property of University of Lodz - Lodz University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper aims to provide an empirical analysis of EU policy towards the South Caucasus in the framework of the CFSP and CSDP along with perspectives of further development, taking in to consideration Russia's military and ideological intervention in this region, and to address the issue of the EU's role in shaping Common European Security. Methodologically, the research is based on qualitative techniques of analysis, key assumptions are raised through a comprehensive review of existing studies/ primary sources and, more specifi cally, presents a case study of August 2008's Georgia-Russia military confrontation and creeping occupation. The comprehensive review continues with Russia's disinformation campaign and series of anti-government protests in Georgia (after the so-called "Gavrilov's Night"), testing several theoretical explanations such as the democratic peace theory and the Europeanization Confl ict concept concerning the EU's confl ict resolution instruments' evaluation and offensive realism to explain Russia's involvement/intervention in South Caucasus territorial confl icts. As for its structure, the paper includes an introduction, with two important stages of model building - conceptualization and operationalization, an interpretation part - an overview of EU Foreign and Security Policy instruments, relationships with other global/regional actors, confl icts in the South Caucasus, specifi cally the, Georgia case, and, fi nally, a summarizing part, where key fi ndings are highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Annals of the Croatian Political Science Association / Anali Hrvatskog Politoloskog Drustva is the property of Croatian Political Science Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista UNISCI is the property of Unidad de Investigaciones Sobre Seguridad y Cooperacion International (UNISCI) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

There have been several overlapping crises in North Africa in recent decades. The social contract is in crisis, and this became clear during the antiauthoritarian uprisings of 2011 and 2019. In addition, the region is locked in a socioeconomic crisis that deepened after the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and has been aggravated by the global impacts of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This paper underscores the need to reflect on the legitimation of the North African elites in this context, looking at the connection between the domestic and international spheres. It also presents various legitimation strategies that take in the interaction between the domestic and external spaces. This approach seeks to enrich the debate on the relationship between authoritarianism, its legitimation and the international dimension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to describe analytically Indonesia and Russia's bilateral relations, particularly concerning the defense cooperation between the two countries in the Southeast Asian region. Historically, at the beginning of the Cold War, the government of the Soviet Union (currently the Russian Federation) recognized and fully supported the independence of the Republic of Indonesia on August 17, 1945. The Soviet Union has never abandoned Indonesia in obtaining international recognition of its independence. The establishment of informal relations between both countries since the first years of the existence of the UN. Postnational reform in 1998, Indonesia has always put forward the concept of a defense strategy without having enemies from any country. A qualitative method and primary data were gathered through interviews with informants from several government institutions. Literature, journals, and related documents are utilized in supporting data analysis. In fact, for more than seventy years' diplomatic relations between the two countries have been established, and importantly, bilateral defense cooperation still needs to be further strengthened, apart from the current sustainable economic cooperation. It has so far been carried out through the procurement of the defense system equipment (alutsista), in line with efforts to increase the capacity and capability of the Indonesian armed forces. Russia recognizes Indonesia's leadership in Southeast Asia and fully supports Indonesia's role in maintaining peace and world order. This study revealed that Southeast Asia's regional stability is secured and has a good impact on international harmony. The role and contribution of defense cooperation between Indonesia and Russia in Southeast Asia need to be developed and empower further to boost mutual understanding and trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Throughout its history, Finland's relations with Russia have generally been determined by Russian attempts to secure control over the eastern part of the Baltic Sea region. In medieval times, it was mainly about the control of trade routes, especially between Novgorod, and Western Europe and Byzantium. After the founding of the new city of St. Petersburg by Peter the Great in 1703, the rulers of Russia were faced with the problem of ensuring security to that city. From a Russian point of view, it became vitally important to gain control over lands on the eastern side of the Baltic Sea. When Finland became a Russian province in 1809, it seemed that the Baltic security dilemmas of Russia had finally been resolved. However, the collapse of Tsarist Russia in 1917 changed that particular situation. Finland became independent, and Russia's border moved east to the outskirts of St. Petersburg (renamed Petrograd during World War I). For the leaders of the Soviet Union, which had replaced the Romanov Empire, World War II provided an opportunity to try to regain lost Finnish territories. Although the Red Army did not manage to conquer Finland, during two wars (occurring between 1939-1940 and 1941-1944), the post war settlement saw the Soviet-Finnish border shift back westwards. Finland also had to reckon with the requirements of the USSR's security policy and make it a priority of its own foreign policy. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Finland modified its policy of neutrality and adopted a doctrine of non-alignment that has remained in place to this day. However, the increase of tensions in international relations in recent years, due to Russia's aggressive foreign policy threatening its neighbours, has forced Finnish statesmen to rethink their country's security policy. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Finland, together with Sweden, decided to apply for NATO membership. The ratification procedure is ongoing. The aim of this paper is to analyse, in a longer historical perspective, what Finland's place was as regards the Russian and Soviet security policy, from Peter the Great to our times. The methodological approach reflects the chronology of events which have occurred in the eastern part of the Baltic Sea region in the last 300 years. They are described to provide readers with necessary facts, and create the background for conclusions on the reasons for the Russian/Soviet policy towards Finland and, in a broader sense, the northern coasts of the Gulf of Finland. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN THOUGHT. WE NOTICE THAT MANY OF THE EVENTS WITH A NEOEURASIAN IDEOLOGICAL SUBSTRATUM OCCUR FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE THIRD MILLENNIUM AND WITH THE COMING TO POWER OF VLADIMIR PUTIN. IT SEEKS TO POSITION RUSSIA AS THE UNDISPUTED GEOPOLITICAL PIVOT BETWEEN THE WEST AND THE EAST. THE PAPER PRESENTS SOME STATEMENTS MADE BY THE RUSSIAN PRESIDENT, EVALUATED BY THE IDEOLOGUE ALEXANDER DUGHIN, AS MARKING THE BEGINNING OF A NEW GEOPOLITICAL APPROACH. CERTAIN RECENT MOMENTS IN THE POLITICAL AND MILITARY FIELD OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION SUPPORT THE HYPOTHESES OF THIS PAPER, REFLECTING VERY WELL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CONCEPT OF NEO-EURASIANISM. IN THE AUTHOR'S OPINION, THE EMERGENCE OF NEO-EURASIANISM IN RUSSIA IS DETERMINED BY THE NEED TO DEFINE AND CONSOLIDATE THE SPHERES OF INFLUENCE. IT IS MAINLY MOTIVATED BY ETHNOCENTRIC SENTIMENTS TO EXTEND ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BEYOND POLITICAL BORDERS AND TO FOSTER FEELINGS OF PROTECTION AND SECURITY. NEO-EURASIANISM MEANS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FOREIGN POLICY CONSENSUS BASED ON POLITICAL CULTURE AND NATIONAL AWARENESS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Foro Internacional is the property of El Colegio de Mexico AC and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The subject of the paper concerns Russia's decision to start a conventional war by invading the independent and sovereign Ukrainian state with regular troops on February 24th, 2022. The research question that I will address is how Putin decided in favour of a military solution to advance his foreign policy goals. The methodology I use to address the issue consists of the following steps: (i) identify mostly in news articles the information that most likely influenced Kremlin's calculus (thus rejecting some claims that Putin is irrational or insane); (ii) briefly present the three theoretical models employed by Graham T. Allison (1971) to explain the Cuban Missile Crisis - The Rational Actor, The Organizational Process and The Governmental Politics; (iii) apply the basic unit of analysis, organizing concepts and dominant inference pattern for each of the three theoretical models in order to analyse how the balance might have been tipped in favour of a full-scale military intervention, from Russia's perspective. The analysis contributes to a better understanding of the decision-making mechanisms that led to war, despite limitations stemming from the lack of reliable information for the time being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research concerning cross-border cooperation initiative between regions presents international relations that are often formed upwards and have their roots in bilateral relations of the regions. A research hypothesis was positively verified on the basis of the conducted research, according to which the examined subject is a form of cross-border cooperation at the level of regional parliaments: German federal states, Kaliningrad District of the Russian Federation and selected Polish voivodships. Coherently with the purpose of the study, an institutional and legal analysis, analysis of source materials and a questionnaire were conducted. The paper contains an investigation of the genesis, objectives and the scope of substantive works concerning the cross-border cooperation formula within the regional parliaments of the South Baltic Region. A special nature of work within the Forum was also presented; the most important substantive issues introduced by the partners in resolutions adopted by acclamation are discussed, as well as the results of own research are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is democracy's place in the shifting international order? There is a fear that a more geopolitical order will only aggravate the general crisis of democracy; or that a more plural order will dilute the efforts to defend the rules governing it. Yet, while recent political and normative trends corroborate this concern, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has in some ways given greater prominence to the defence of democratic values around the world. This paper explores the impact that geopolitical tensions and shifting international order on global democracy. And in the context of the crisis of meaning affecting democracies, it examines whether Russia's war in Ukraine has served both as a catalyst of the international dimensions of support for democracy and as a factor magnifying its fragility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politica y Sociedad is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In recent years, Russia and Turkey have been among non-Western powers that have been more assertive in their foreign policies in the Western Balkans. Naturally, this creates the need to identify the key similarities and differences between these two geopolitical players. By using the case of Serbia, the pivotal country of the Western Balkans and a country whose foreign policy was largely influenced by the idea of hedging and engaging non-Western players, one can determine key similarities and differences between these two powers. This paper states two major similarities between these two powers and one major difference. The first similarity is that both Russia and Turkey are acting based on the same permissive environment of a regional power vacuum, the environment in which the EU's leverage has decreased and in which countries like Serbia feel emboldened to hedge their bets and diversify partnerships. The second similarity is that although the popular explanation is to stress to powers' ethnic and religious ties with the Balkans, Slavic and Orthodox ties in case of Russia and Islam in case of Turkey, or even as the continuation of old imperial traditions, the two countries are guided by strategic pragmatism. The difference between the two powers is that Russia can be defined as a status quo power as it aims to act as a spoiler perpetuating the current state of political dysfunctions; Turkey is not a status quo player as it does not oppose the region's membership in Western institutions as long as its interests are respected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA), inaugurated in March 2017, has breathed new life into waxed and waned EU-Armenia partnership. There is a lot of scholarship on the domestic state of affairs in Armenia and consideration of the combined effects of power transition, tough economic contexts, geopolitical fragility and other ways in which the specific 'Armenian reality' affects the way that EU policies are received and implemented (Kostanyan and Giragosian, 2016; Delcour, 2015; Delcour and Wolczuk, 2015; Delcour, 2018). This paper aims to build upon existing scholarship and addresses the following research question: What are the implications of the 'velvet revolution' for Armenia's relations with the EU within the CEPA? The paper contends that despite the power transition, political and economic conditions underlying Armenia's arbitrary decision to join the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and constraining country's profound advancement towards the EU have largely remained unchanged. Therefore, the EU's 'competing governance provider' Russia maintains its economic and political grip on Armenia, with its ensuing adverse effects on the EU-Armenia rapprochement, and more specifically on the effective implementation of the CEPA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Russian Federation has been for several years characterized as having both domestic resources and the corresponding desire to re-establish some of the influences in the international affairs, resembling the ones it used to have during the Soviet times. In this manner, it seeks to re-establish the status not only by military means, but by diplomatic tools as well, which are at the center of this research. To be more concrete, the purpose of this research paper is to map and explain Russian non-military strategies on the Arctic region. The main questions are, therefore, as follows: (a) What is the attitude of the Russian Federation toward the Arctic region? and (b) What are the factors that contribute to this attitude? As indicated by many, the states with political ambitions share conservatism mainly related to economics and relative suspicion toward the well-established multilateral institutions, while preferring bilateral relations or being establishing partners in emerging organizations. Apart from what has been mentioned above, this paper intends to develop such an argument and test it on the particular case of the Arctic region. It, in essence, argues that Russia prefers bilateral approach in case of negotiations over the issues of its core national interests and is inclined to multilateral options in case of soft issue areas. However, although Russian bilateral relations attract sufficient scholarly attention, its presence in multilateral institutions is still an under-researched area. This research paper aims at contributing to global discussion by providing an answer on what is Russian attitude in multilateral institutions and what factors contribute to this behavior. As for the hypothesis, it shall be tested on the empirical data from content analysis of official documents (press releases and governmental statements), provided by the online archive of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals with the subject of the strength of the key world powers in the years 1992-2020. These include the G7 group and the Russian Federation, which was suspended from the group, and so far has not been authorized to resume meetings with the G7 group. In this period, after Russia's exclusion, both regional and global rivalry grew in the world. This translated into the global imbalance of power and an overall geopolitical situation. In this paper, the author proposes a quantification of the power to measure power metrics. Based on the data from the World Bank and Military Balance, the general (economic), military and geopolitical potential of the Russian Federation, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Great Britain and the United States was developed. The model of Mirosław Sułek was applied to calculate the power, which reflects the objective reasons for changes in shaping the potential of the aforementioned countries. The purpose of this article was to determine the changes in the power of the G7 countries and the Russian Federation in the years 1992-2020. This translated into the international balance of power and the struggle for influence in the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Carta Internacional is the property of Associacao Brasileira de Relacoes Internacionais and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper examines the relationship between international practices of recognition and state quest for ontological security, on the one hand, and Russia's most recent identity makeover as well as increasingly aggressive foreign policy, on the other. I argue that in order to understand Russia's growing belligerence in foreign and security policies we need to examine the connection between Western refusal to recognize Russia's great power self-image, the effects this refusal has had on Russia's ontological security, and a subsequent shift in Russia's self-description from pro-Western to civilizational. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Medunarodni Problemi is the property of Institute of International Politics & Economics and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Historia i Polityka is the property of Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Cooperation and trust between Russia and the European Union (EU), two of the most important international actors, have reached the lowest level since the Cold War. The main bone of contention has been the future of countries situated in Eastern Europe, in the so-called 'in-between'/'buffer' region. On the one hand, the EU aims at strengthening links with the six Eastern European partners - Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Belarus, Moldova and Ukraine - by encouraging reforms and by luring them to embrace European core values. However, Russia's counteractions have mitigated the EU's plans towards its vicinity - as the case of Ukraine best points out. Apart from the geopolitical competition over the 'shared' neighbourhood, the EU-Russia relation has started to depend heavily on the energy issues further complicating the already complex background. Russia uses the energy card as tool to influence the shape of the regional context, whereas the EU responds with a superior technological advantage and a more attractive economic and political agenda. Having this a backdrop, this paper aims to underline that a clear competition between the two players exists, fomented by a fundamental ideological difference in perceiving the outside world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Politics & Religion Journal is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article is devoted to the study of the state of development of the issue and the availability of scientific world achievements on the institutional history of the US Department of State. Using the historiographical and problematic research method, the main aspects that reveal the essence of the State Department as a state institution were identified. That is why such aspects as institutional history, legal framework, Secretaries of State (taking into account gender) were chosen for historiographical analysis, as these positions are the minimum that give institutions the status of legitimacy. It was expedient to characterize the available literature on the research topic in accordance with the geographical factor. That is why the scientific achievements are divided into separate layers: foreign literature (mostly American), scientific works of Ukrainian authors and Russian historiography (chosen as a contrast to the existing American). It is pointed out that American scientific papers are fundamental to research and have certain features: they are quite close to the official views of the State Department, not critical enough or full of traditional formulations; however, in general, it is worth noting the fundamentality and detail. Ukrainian scientific achievements are essential in the issue of US foreign policy or Ukrainian- American relations, but not in the history of the State Department, so the author emphasizes the lack of comprehensive Ukrainian research on this topic. A characteristic feature of Russian historiography is the extreme politicization that was and is caused by the confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union then, and the United States and the Russian Federation today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 2014 and Russia's annexation of Crimea and the start of hostilities in Donbass, the West has shown unprecedented solidarity in imposing sanctions on Russia. Yet Asia-Pacific's response to the Ukraine crisis has been different. While Japan and New Zealand imposed symbolic sanctions, South Korea refrained from introducing any measures at all. The main objective of this paper is to explore the response of the Asia-Pacific region to the Ukrainian crisis and the underlying motivations behind these stances. From a perspective of sanctions coordination and alliance behaviour theory, this paper examines the interaction between domestic and international factors when states decide whether (or not) to join international sanctions coalitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the effects on Belarus of European Union (EU) sanctions against Russia, on the one hand, and Russian sanctions on Ukrainian and EU goods, on the other. International sanctions opened up new political and economic opportunities that the Belarusian authorities sought to capitalise on. But Minsk's attempts to swim between two waters (retaining the benefits Moscow offered while improving relations with the EU) have backfired and distrust towards Minsk has grown in Moscow, Brussels and Kiev. A theoretical approach is made to the foreign policy of small states, before this paper shows how Belarus has been harmed by its attempts to take advantage of EU and Russian sanctions regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]