Submission and Peer Reviews

Print Text

Authors’ Guidelines

We welcome articles on all aspects of political studies, foreign affairs and social and cultural as well as historical studies related to the international relations.

Articles should represent the results of original research, new findings and/or in-depth analysis of the latest trends in the field nominated above.

Recommended size of the article: research article generally should not exceed 35 000 printed characters with spaces (annotation included).

Articles should be composed with respect to the IMRAD principles and should include separate annotation (of 250-400 words), keywords (4-9 words), author(s)’ academic affiliation, contacts and his/her research ID(s).

We are using the Harvard reference system in our journal and cordially ask authors to adhere to its standards. Authors should refrain from page- and/or endnotes. All references to sources and cited materials should follow Harvard practices of referencing.

For the guidelines, please refer to: http://www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing (brief guide), OR https://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/files/Harvard_referencing_201718.pdf (DETAILED GUIDE)

For further notice, please, refer to the authors’ submission guideline (in Russian)

Charges

We do not charge neither article submission charges nor article processing charges



Peer Review Process

All articles submitted for the publication are reviewed on the ‘double-blind peer review’ basis. An article, devoid of author’s name, academic title and affiliation (as well as of other references to author’s identity) is sent to a reviewer chosen by the Editorial Board. All in-text references to the author’s identity are temporarily removed from the text and anonymized.

When the Editorial Board collects the review from the peer, it is subsequently anonymized as well and send to the author for consideration. If a peer considers an article worthy of publication yet deserving additional amendments, the author can accept anonymized peer’s comments, remarks and/or criticism and amend his/her text accordingly and then re-submit the article.

If, however, the author does not accept peer’s comments, remarks and/or criticism, the Editorial Board can re-send the article for another review with a different peer.

Ultimately, the Editorial Board will have a final decision over the publication of any article submitted.



Our Peers

To uphold high academic standard of our publication we send submitted articles to the peers we select from the wide range of Russian and international academic institutions.

Among our reviews are the members of the Board of Advisors as well as other prominent experts. Our list of peers includes (but is not limited to):



Samuel Charap, Senior Political Scientist, RAND Corporation, Washington, USA

Andey Karneev, Assistant Professor at the Department of History of China, Institute of Asian anв African Studies, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia

Ivan Krastev, chairman of the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia, Bulgaria, and permanent fellow at the IWM Institute of Human Sciences in Vienna

Andrej Krickovic, Assistant Professor at Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

Vasiliy Kuznetsov, Head of Arabic and Islamic Studies Center at Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia

Peter Paul Anatol Lieven, professor at the campus of Georgetown University in Doha, Qatar and a visiting professor in the War Studies Department of King’s College London. Her is also a senior fellow of the New America Foundation in Washington D.C.

Pyotr Stegniy, Full professor of history, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.

Lanxin Xiang, Director, Centre of One Belt and One Road Studies, China National Institute for SCO International Exchange and Judicial Cooperation, The Graduate Institute Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Yuval Weber, Postdoctoral Fellow at Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University, Washington, U.S.A.

Archives
Choose year
Choose issue
Publisher's column

A new world order: A view from Russia

Since around 2017–2018, the world has been living through a period of progressive erosion, or collapse, of international orders inherited from the past. With the election of Donald Trump and the rapid increase of US containment of Russia and China—which is both a consequence of this gradual erosion and also represents deep internal and international contradictions—this process entered its apogee.

Editor's column

Will US pullout from Syria increase risk of conflict with Russia?

The announcement of the US pullout from Syria was received with caution in Moscow. Besides the security and political challenges it may bring about, the Trump decision could mean the end of a practical, relatively constructive US-Russian approach to conflict at flashpoints.


What is the ‘New Era’ of the Sino-Russian Relationship?

For a long time, Western commentators did not take the close relationship between Russia and China seriously, because conventional wisdom held that the foundation of this link is fragile. Russia has its “Eurasian complex,” which is considered ephemeral and opportunistic, whereas in China there has been a strong distrust of Russia since the 1949 Communist revolution, as typified by the Mao-Stalin alienation. Today, such analytical logic can no longer hold water.

Is There Life After Arms Control Death?

For several years, serious experts in Russia and the West have repeatedly warned the public about the threat of the collapse of the international nuclear arms control system. They spoke about the system, to be precise, because in the past half a century arms control developed as a sum-total of supplementary elements rather than an eclectic set of separate unrelated bilateral or multilateral agreements.

The INF Treaty: Mirror or Abyss?

The number of nuclear weapon states, their respective arsenals, and transatlantic nuclear arrangements make Europe one of the most “nuclearized” continents. Luckily, even when the total warhead numbers were even higher, nuclear use had been avoided – although the threat remains real.

Common Dreams or Vulgar Delusions? Elite Preoccupations in Discourses about the ‘Commons’

Our age is witness to a proliferation of discourses about the ‘commons’. They are emerging from more and more quarters, and the word is being applied to more things than ever before. One important strand of discourse, claiming to be communist, seeks to apply it to all kinds of spheres, from the earth and its natural bounty to culture, and to all sorts of resources, from the most immaterial, such as common knowledge, to the most material, such as the use of the earth’s finite natural resources. Internet activists refer to information and knowledge that exits on the web as the ‘digital commons’.

Globalization: New Pathways Along the South–South Axis

The year 2018 was marked by escalation in trade tensions among the world’s largest economies, mostly via bilateral trade restrictions.