Suchergebnisse

Abstract: Of the major threats to contemporary mankind, is the use of very dangerous and lethal biological agents as the biological weapons. The first step in confronting with this serious threat after prevention, is the accurate and rapid detection of this agents and neutralization of them. In this article, the role of molecules known as aptamer, has been studied in biological defense against these menacing biological agents. Traditional methods for detection of these agents are based primarily on immuno-affinity assays and the use of antibody molecules. While the modern methods, based on aptamer-affinity assays, are being replaced with traditional methods, due to the abundant advantages of them. The selection and preparation method of specific aptamer with high binding affinity to these biological agents is known as SELEX and the use of magnetic nanoparticles to perform this procedure (Mag-SELEX) is very common. The isolated aptamers with high specificity can also be used in neutralization and inhibition of menacing agents function, in addition to, quick and accurate diagnosis of these agents, utilizing them in nano-biosensors, based on aptamers (as the nano-aptasensors). Keywords: Aptamer, SELEX, nano aptasensor, diagnosis and neutralization, menacing biological agents.

Over the period of 30 years various scientists representing different fields have been studying disintegration of the USSR with unflagging interest. As of August 1, 2020, more than 300 books, 3000 articles, and 20 dissertations have been written in Russia alone. Generalization and critical analysis of this literature requires a monograph. But this task is so complex that for the time being the case is limited to historiographical articles. The purpose of this article is to identify the most popular points of view expressed by well-known experts on the problem of the disintegration of the Soviet Union. The analysis enables to draw the following conclusions. The existing explanations can be divided into two large groups. The first one includes works whose authors consider disintegration as the product of a combination of random circumstances, external causes, and mistakes of party and Soviet leaders, and therefore focus first on the study of the role of subjective and external factors, and, second, on the short period of time, 1985–1991, immediately preceding the disintegration. The second group includes works whose authors consider disintegration as a natural result of long-developed processes, search for its historical background, study trends in the development of the Soviet Union and the Union republics, and look at the disintegration systemically and comprehensively. In other words, the former consider disintegration to be a random phenomenon generated mainly by the events of 1985–1991, while the latter consider it to be a natural phenomenon with deep historical, economic, political, cultural, and social prerequisites and causes.

A large scholarly literature exists about plans for a peasant reform in the reign of Nicholas I. However, the most important archival documents about the debates on the peasant question remain unpublished. The new book by T. V. Andreeva "The distant approaches to the Great Reform: The peasant question in Russia in the reign of Nicholas I" seeks to fill this lacuna. The book begins with a historical survey of the six government committees that were tasked with planning reforms, followed by an extensive collection of archival documents of both official and private provenance. In the debates under Nicholas I, the specific problem of serfdom was folded into the larger question of the social position of the peasants, which the government regarded as a source of both political instability and economic backwardness. The solution that officials envisioned was a reform that was comprehensive, multi-faceted, and gradual. Step-by-step, the evolution that had led to creation of serfdom from the 17th century onward was to be reversed: the landlords were gradually to lose their power over the person of the serfs, who were to be attached only to the land itself. Eventually, the serfs were to be emancipated with land; in the meantime, restrictions on the power of landlords and a comprehensive reform of the state peasants were to serve as preparatory steps. According to Andreeva, the vision of Nicholas and his advisors was too limited and conservative, and premised on the mistaken belief that it was possible to modernize the country without touching the core of the sociopolitical system.

The article analyses the Spanish Transition from a dictatorship to a democracy as a process of political change during the period from Franco's death in 1975 until the arrival of the Socialists to Power in 1982. Over this period, the political parties had reached a consensus, which contributed to reconciliation among the Spaniards culminating in the approval of the Constitution in 1978, which in its turn resulted in the creation of a rule-of-law state. The key people of the transition were King Juan Carlos I, who supported the democratic system; Adolfo Suárez, who became an active stateman under Franco's regime, and was appointed Head of Government by the King during the transition; and Torcuato Fernández Miranda, President of the Franco's Courts. During the Transition the sectarianism was abandoned, and a shared idea arose that our country was a democracy similarly to other European countries around us. The transition has been defined as a "model" because it took root, and democracy quickly consolidated. It has become a historical feat with no precedents, but above all we have to understand the historical context in which this occurred. The transition was possible thanks to genuine consensus among the Spaniards. Recently, an idea has emerged from the communist far left, and some socialists, along with separatists, connected with the 2008 crisis, which calls for the repeal of the constitutional order and the monarchy. The proponents of this idea consider monarchy a continuation of Franco's regime. However, it is evident that the Constitution ensures and guarantees Spaniards' rights and freedoms.

The article is devoted to the history of the formation and transformation of the theory of the Huns in contemporary Bulgaria through the prism of the political history of the country from the beginning of the debate about the origin of Bulgarians up to present day. The article examines how political reality impacted the processes of shaping scholarly and educational images, i.e. constructing a "convenient" usable past by the Bulgarian academic and non-academic circles. The main aspect in the study is related to the question of various interpretations of the ethnic origin of the Bulgars, the Huns and the role of the Slavic factor in the ethnogenesis of the contemporary Bulgarians. The milestones of the difficult history of Bulgaria and changes in political regimes have become the reasons for rejecting "Slavic" origin or, in some case, returning to it depending on external and internal circumstances. Today the Hun theory in all its variations and interpretations lies outside the professional scope of academic circles but is becoming the domain for various marginals. However, increasing activity of the right and the far-right in the politics of Europe capitalizing on the 2015 refugee crisis might return to the mainstream of official academic discourse the theory of the Hun The upcoming challenges of foreign policy (Euro-skepticism, ambitious projects outside the EU framework) and internal political issues (the question of national minorities) may also have a significant impact on this issue.

An immense role in the collapse of the USSR was played by a whole array of factors: the public being tired of the Communist project; the massive shortages of consumer goods, which made people hate the government; the growing opposition within the Communist party to Gorbachev's reforms; the hesitation of the General Secretary who tried to rely in turn either on the right or on the left wing; the drastic fall in the living standards. The crucial role, however, was played by "the parade of sovereignties" and the Centre being too late in its attempts to address the national question. By the autumn of 1990, the President's close associates started to sense that power was slipping from Gorbachev's hands; with the fellow countrymen staying remarkably indifferent, the Soviet Union was heading towards dissolution as the ambitions of local party leaders in the constituent republics generated and cannily magnified nationalist and separatist trends. Gorbachev kept up his maneuver strategy, which put him on the verge of resignation in the spring of 1991 when his support was minimal. He seemed, though, to have managed to pull out of this dive thanks to the Soviet Union referendum held on March 17, in which the voters were asked if they considered the preservation of the USSR necessary. Eventually, however, the issue of preserving or not preserving a unified state depended directly on the position of Russia as the backbone of the Soviet Union. The study draws on the author's personal archive of original testimonies and interviews of the political figures directly involved in the events in question.