Search results

This study examines Russia's policies towards and within the Councilof the Baltic Sea States in the aftermath of the Ukrainian and other internationalcrises. More specifically, this paper analyses Russia's interest in andexpectations from the CBSS, as well as Moscow's institutional behaviour in theCouncil. The CBSS is viewed by Russia as both a centrepiece and cornerstoneof the regional governance system. Moscow also sees the CBSS as an importanttool for overcoming the politico-diplomatic isolation where Russia founditself with the start of the Ukrainian crisis. With the help of the CBSS, it retainsits ability to influence socioeconomic, political, environmental, and humanitariandevelopments in the Baltic Sea region. Russia supported the Council'sthree long-term priority areas: a regional identity, a sustainable and prosperousregion, and a safe and secure region. Russia favoured further the Council'sinstitutionalization and strengthening of its role in the regional governancesystem. Despite the fact that Russia's relations with other CBSS member-statesremain tense and that Moscow does not always manage to use the Councilto promote its interests in the region, the CBSS is still seen by Russia as animportant platform for regional cooperation.

The aim of this short paper is to show that the relations between Ukraine and Russia are extremely complex as they are built on a shared history, religion, language, and culture and they should not, therefore, be gauged by Western standards. Evaluating the current situation from a broader perspective, the fact that Ukraine plays a significant role in Russia's foreign policy needs to be emphasized. Ukraine is considered the key post-Soviet state, a significant "near abroad" country, whose position, potential, and geopolitical location are vital for the balance of power in both Eastern Europe and Europe in general. The research project aims at a synthetic examination of the current Russia-Ukraine war from the point of view of Ukraine striving for full independence, memory, and identity. Will the war of the brotherly nations wreck Russia's long-term policy towards Ukraine? Will the conflict ruin Russia's plans of post-Soviet space reintegration, whose pivot is set on Ukraine? Will the war stimulate Ukraine to deal with the issue of its identity, post-Soviet legacy, and collective memory?

The article explores Turkey's ambitions to assume a proactive role as a mediator in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war. Positioned as a middle power striving to enhance its global standing, Turkey has dedicated itself to striking a delicate balance between Russia and Ukraine in its foreign policy. This is exemplified by Ankara's engagement in an ambiguous cooperative rivalry with Russia while strengthening its partnership with Ukraine, including military cooperation in the Black Sea Region. Given these circumstances, Turkey sees itself as naturally inclined to act as a facilitator in brokering a ceasefire and bringing about peace between the two conflicting parties. Some successes have already been achieved, with the grain initiative being a primary example thereof.

The article deals with the problem of Russia's aspirations to revise the geopolitical system created in Soviet times using Crimea as an example. It shows the activities of both local political circles and the central authorities of the Russian SFSR, and later the Russian Federation, aimed at revising the existing borders and integrating the Crimean peninsula into Russia. The article covers the years from the collapse of the Soviet Union to the 1997 agreement between Russia and Ukraine.

Both Russian authorities and Russian society have a sense of harm associated with the position of Russia in the world. They do not agree with the dominant role of the West. To a large extent it is associated with a sense of Russian pride. The consequence of this situation is the growing confrontation between the Russian Federation and the West. Currently, the theatre of confrontation is i.a. the conflict in the east of Ukraine and the war in Syria. The intensification of military tension is also observed, the confirmation of which is the violation of the airspace of NATO members. The author of this article undertook research effort associated with the determination of the fields of confrontation between Russia and the West.

The article discusses the relationship between the occurrence of international conflicts and the desire of states to implement their own geopolitical interests. The key factor in the emergence of conflicts is the concept of an inter-civilization clash by Samuel Huntington, where the role of states in the formation of the international system is the trigger for decision-making. The author states that in modern conditions Russia defends its interests, which should not be perceived by other actors of international relations as a threat, but as competition.

This concise paper explores the intricate relationship between thedynamics of the European Union and Russia's interests in Europe, emphasizingthe advantages perceived by Russia in a weakened EU. The paper is comprisedof three sections: firstly, it examines the collapse of the Soviet Unionand its impact on newly independent states, establishing the geopoliticallandscape. The subsequent section traces Russia's foreign policy leading tothe 2022 conflict with Ukraine, with a focus on Ukraine's pivotal role as a geopoliticalflashpoint. The final section explores the dynamics of the Russia-Ukraine war, specifically addressing the European Union's role in security.The paper concludes by addressing the 2022 escalation, marked by Russia'sfull-scale invasion of Ukraine, highlighting the imperative of understandingUkraine's status as a geopolitical flashpoint. Overall, the paper contributes toa nuanced comprehension of the evolving geopolitical landscape, its implicationsfor regional stability, and international relations.

This article raises the issue of how the Russian Federation could benefit from the instrumental use of ethnic heterogeneity to pursue its geopolitical interests. The paper focuses on the recent case of a Polish-Ukrainian historical memory dispute which affected relations between Warsaw and Kyiv. The research focus is on how vulnerable Poland and Ukraine are to Russian active measures which potentially target not only national minorities but also groups of people who are only temporarily present in these states, such as economic migrants and tourists. An analysis is conducted of Russia's geopolitical objectives and its strategy toward Polish-Ukrainian relations in the broader context of the rivalry between Russia and the West. The analysis is conducted within the framework of the neorealist theory of international relations. The case study of specific events discloses how Russia could exacerbate tensions between nations and the role of ethnic heterogeneity in this regard. Against this backdrop, the author shows how Russia may challenge other states of the Euro-Atlantic community with similar active measures.

Modern warfare, including the Ukraine-Russia war, relies heavily on disinformation. Fake news on social media is an integral part of this. At the same time, each conflict is characterised by distinct communication specificities and in the context of the complex effects of fake news, questions arise about their specificity for a given conflict. The aim of the presented research was to answer the question of what the various fake news about the Russian-Ukrainian war disseminated in Polish-language social media have in common and what narrative they generate. The analysis covered the construction of the messages as well as their contexts: social, cultural, historical, and political. For this purpose, a three-stage analysis of ten fake news cases disseminated between March and September 2022 was conducted, applying a three-element analytical matrix. The research made it possible to identify the properties of fake news, generated narratives, and their possible effects.

The aim of this article is to analyse the international legal and political process of reconciliation between Serbia and Kosovo in terms of its impact on the scope of development directions and strategies of the European Union countries as well as Russia and the USA. Particular emphasis was placed on the treatment of these issues in the light of the activities of the Kosovo Specialist Chambers and Specialist Prosecutor's Office. The main theses assumed for the purposes of this article are as follows: firstly, that the policy of reconciliation between Serbia and Kosovo is multidimensional, including the necessity of the process of international criminal liability for the crimes committed by both states, while at the same time influencing the dilemmas of the development directions of individual European countries, but also of the European Union and the United States. In addition, the legal and political stabilization of the Balkan region, especially in the context of relations between Kosovo and Serbia, and the possibility of cooperation with these states as part of intergovernmental international organizations, is strategically extremely important for the EU, the USA, as well as for Russia. The Author critically analyses issues using polemics with the standpoint presented in the doctrine of the subject as well as interpreting selected instruments of international law and Kosovo's national law. The deliberations resulted in conclusions as to the determinants in terms of the directions of the legal and political development of the EU and Russia resulting from the complicated process of reconciliation and mutual settlement of sins by Serbia and Kosovo.

In the article, the EU and Russia relations are analyzed as paying specific attention to the conceptual and practical weight provided for the conjunction "and" when EU-Russia relations are interpreted and practically constructed in the West. The answer which is in common use -- these relations are intellectually based and practically shaped according the engagement doctrine -- is known well. However, the common answer does not eliminate the problem why the perspective of the practical application of engagement toward Russia is still under dispute in the West? The article proceeds to revealing the specifics of the Western attitudes in regard to engagement with Russia and their correlation with the cultural-political identities of engagement's participants. The conjunction "and" emphasizing the EU-Russia relations is interpreted in three ways: optimistically, equably and skeptically. The diversity of interpretations is stimulating by the nodus of factors (history, values and pragmatic interests) which is still affects the EU and Russia relations as well as different attitudes toward the perspectives of co-operation in the future. The very important source of the diversity is the difference in disparity of position regarding the geopolitical development of Eurasia. The article ends with the conclusion that the direction of the EU and Russia engagement will be strongly influenced by the reciprocal attempts to define their own cultural-political identities. Adapted from the source document.

The article analyses the aesthetic dimension of Chinese propaganda in Russia. The analysis seeks to identify the aesthetic component of Chinese propaganda in Russia as the fundamental, synthesising catalyst of Russian Sinophilia which unites several factors. The aesthetic aspect of Chinese propaganda in Russia is revealed through an analysis of official PRC websites in Russian, which clarifies a close connection between form and content in propaganda. The form quite often acquires a function which not only imparts the content, but also corrects it and uses it to manipulate and dominate. The analysis names as Russia's Achilles' heel its unbridled and unshakeable belief in its unique and inevitable Messianic mission in World History. This is its weak spot exploited by Chinese propaganda. The Russian reaction to Chinese propaganda is analysed, invoking the categories of both Sinophilia and Sinophobia. It is asserted that Chinese propaganda in Russia relies on the principles of involvement and participation, which are based on cultural exoticism and Confucian philosophy. To sum up, Chinese propaganda in Russia is identified as part of a plan/strategy for the establishment and maintenance of a grand, universal, practical, cosmopolitan Chinese philosophy or world order at the level of a global international system and world politics. Adapted from the source document.

This article is dedicated to the memory of Professor Andrzej Walicki, who died in August 2020 – an outstanding Polish historian of ideas and Russian scholar. It is an attempt to summarize the enormous scientific achievements of a representative of the Warsaw school of the history of ideas. His scientific activity has gained wide recognition in the West, being an prominent Polish contribution to world Russian studies. The subject of the scientist's research were Russia, Poland and Marxism. Andrzej Walicki explained to a wide audience in the West, Poland and Russia issues related to the formation of Russian ideas and philosophy, the development of various ideologies in Russia: imperialism, Marxism, liberalism, or the shaping of the platform and the main problematic network of intellectual relations between Poland and Russia. He also researched Polish thought in response to the Russian question, and tried to participate in debates on Polish-Russian relations after the fall of communism and the collapse of the USSR. He devoted much attention to the reception of Marxism in Russia – to what extent it was an ideological import from the West, and to what extent it was based on the native ideological and religious tradition. In the context of Russia's strong utopian predispositions, Andrzej Walicki showed Marxism as a utopia that transformed Russia into its tragic testing ground and whose goals turned out to be unattainable. As a result, his led to the collapse of the moral legitimacy of the communist system and became the fundamental premise for the disintegration of the Soviet empire.