ISSN 2618-9844 (Online version)
ISSN 1810-6374 (Print version)
In order to understand the present and the future of the world order, an analysis should start with the last phase of the bipolar system, late Gorbachev era.
This issue differs from the previous ones, as our readers have probably noticed. The more chaotic the international situation is and the more absurd its manifestations are, the more in-depth and stricter approach is needed in order to figure everything out.
In recent months, the Kremlin’s priorities in Syria have shifted from fighting a long war to seeking a quick peace.
Perhaps the most significant element of the socio-political life of the region during those years, at least to the outside observer, was violence.
The Kurds after their setbacks in the aftermath of their independence referendum of 25th of September in 2017 in Iraq are facing another tragedy, but this time in Afrin in the western part of Kurdistan called Rojava.
Irredentism may cause all the risks stemming from the strong identity of a great power and its imperial heritage, which fuels the temptation to regard the modern borders as “casually drawn” and “unfair,” to get mixed with nationalism. This is a very dangerous cocktail.
If the U.S. and NATO continue to step up their activity near Russia’s borders, it would have to take extra measures to ensure the security. As a result, Russia and NATO would wind up as hostages to a security dilemma, and the risk of conflict would rise.
Dialogue (in its original meaning) can hardly be regarded as an effective instrument for handling urgent political crises “right here and now.” Nevertheless, the “strategic,” communicative potential of dialogue, though in little demand today, remains significant.
Russia realizes that with the war waning and reconstruction looming, others will begin to step forward in Syria, including China, Europe, and Japan. Moscow will seek to partner with them to secure a piece of the lucrative reconstruction effort.
The Russian Armed Forces' Chief of Staff announced that “all terrorist units of ISIS on Syrian soil have been destroyed, and the territory is liberated”. Quite an achievement! — brought about by the Syrian Army, by Iran, by Hizbullah, and of course, by Russia’s military forces and its diplomats (the latter playing an important effective part, too). It represents a significant feat of multi-party co-ordination.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared “a complete victory” over the Islamic State on both banks of the Euphrates River in Syria.
Four years ago, Armenia’s failure to sign the EU Association Agreement was an early indication of the impending Ukraine crisis.
Geopolitical pluralism, in all its continentally and regionally uneven permutations is the global reality in what passes for ‘no one’s world’ (Charles Kupchan) and/or a ‘world in disarray’ (Richard Haas) when in fact, there is an evolving underlying logic to a multipolar landscape in what should be considered ‘everyone’s world.’
A key continent, Eurasia, could become a continent of cooperation in the 21st century.
One of the most disturbing trends in international politics today is a rapid deterioration of the security situation in the Gulf area, — a region which remains a critically important part of the global economy, finance and transportation.
The time when Russia could contemplate an exit strategy seems to have passed. It would be virtually impossible now to guarantee a negotiated settlement in Syria or at least a lasting truce without Russia’s substantial military presence in that country.
There is not and should not be any automatic right of self-determination, not least because a world of frequent secession would be in even greater disarray than the world we already have. To gain international recognition, secessionist entities should meet five key criteria – and Iraq's Kurdistan Region satisfies all of them.
The runup to the Kurdish independence referendum that took place Sept. 25 revealed just how politically intertwined different actors are in the modern Middle East. Russia is no stranger to diplomatic games and typically follows a strategy of inserting itself into the most dynamic contexts, hoping to reap benefits and make itself more visible in the region.
On September 25, 2017, a referendum on independence was held in Iraqi Kurdistan, which was condemned by the governments of Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria. According to the Iraqi Kurdistan Electoral Commission, more than 90 percent (2.86 million out of 3.31 million) of the referendum participants voted for independence.
The greatest analytical challenge in trying to understand the Syrian civil wars overcoming the propensity to see the world as it was and not as it is. It is tempting to look at Syria on a map and imagine that one day soon it could be put back together – if only a resolution could be found during diplomatic meetings in Astana or Istanbul.
During the 2014 Ukraine crisis, Russia broke from the post–Cold War system and openly challenged U.S. dominance. This effectively ended 25 years of cooperation between great powers and ushered in an era of intense competition. Three years on, Moscow is still in defiance.
The defeat of Islamic State is apparent. What next, then? Islamic extremism will come full circle. Having failed to preserve Islamic State, the extremists will focus on punishing their “offenders” by returning to the methods previously employed by al-Qaeda.
The EU's foreign policy is aimed to promote liberal values, therefore in order to "teach a lesson" to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan the Europeans are ready to further exacerbate relations with Ankara, even to the detriment of themselves.
The West is increasingly reluctant to allow its vision of civil liberties and human rights to shape foreign policy, often owing to the potential commercial costs. Such foreign-policy decadence threatens to undermine the West's claim to be a community of values – and the EU's claim to be more than a glorified customs union.
The serious decline in Russia’s relations with the West has breathed a new life into NATO, which returned to its traditional role, the containment of Russia.
The relations between the United States and the Russian Federation have been deteriorating at a rapid pace. Each nation has been accused of interfering in the domestic elections of the other, making it increasingly difficult for the respective administrations of these states to work cohesively to solve critical problems between the two states.
Most Greek Cypriots bestow gratitude on Moscow, for its prolonged, consistent, and multi-layered protection of their Republic, through diplomatic, political, economic and “psychological” support.
Middle East, espicially its Arab part, does not cease to surprise the rest of the world that would hardly be shocked after the turbulent Arab spring and recent political events in the US and Europe.
Once it has consolidated its civilizational subjectivity, Russia will be able to go back to playing an active role in world affairs. This rebound will not be a return to the principles of (neo)-Soviet or superpower globalism. Rather, it will proceed from a new understanding of the country’s international role.
Russia and China’s strategic military cooperation is becoming ever closer. President Putin has announced that Russia is helping China build an early warning system to spot intercontinental ballistic missile launches.
This year’s Annual meetings of the IMF and the World Bank in Washington DC revealed a growing preoccupation with the mounting signs of a slowdown in the world economy.
Catherine the Great is credited with saying that the only way to secure the borders of the Russian Empire is to expand them continuously. This logic is to some degree applicable to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which embarked on a path of geographical enlargement quite literally from the very first days of its existence.
Developing the Russian Far East and Siberia has been an important step in state-building for Russia. Although there have been debates about appropriate ideas and policies in the strategy, developing the vast frontier region and promoting relations with Asian countries has set a steadfast direction of development for Russia. Chinese-Russian cooperation in the border region during the early stages of imperial Russia’s policies in the Far East holds enlightening significance for today’s bilateral cooperation.
The main objective for the Shinzo Abe administration’s active engagement in supporting the involvement of Japanese companies in the development of the Russian Far East is to create favourable environment for resolution of the territorial issue and conclusion of a peace treaty with Russia. Japan–Russia cooperation in the Russian Far East is part of Abe’s 8-point cooperation plan with Moscow.