Suchergebnisse

TABLE OF CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- INTRODUCTION -- PART ONE-WESTERN EUROPE -- CHAPTER I-THE OBSESSION OF FEAR -- CHAPTER II-MUDDLING THROUGH -- CHAPTER III-RULE BY ORGANIZATION -- CHAPTER IV-LOYALTY -- PART TWO-THE SOVIET UNION -- CHAPTER V-A NEW MENTAL PATTERN -- CHAPTER VI-THE PSYCHOLOGICAL RESULTS OF POLITICAL REPRESSION -- CHAPTER VII-ORGANIZATIONAL CONDITIONING -- CHAPTER VIII-ARE THEY MORAL OR IMMORAL? -- CHAPTER IX-ATTITUDE TO THE WEST -- CHAPTER X-THE VLASSOV MOVEMENT -- CHAPTER XI-THE NATIONALITIES PROBLEM -- CHAPTER XII-DISCONTENT TODAY -- CHAPTER XIII-CAN RUSSIA BECOME A DEMOCRACY? -- PART THREE-AMERICA -- CHAPTER XIV-THE U.S.A. AND THE WORLD ARE DRIFTING APART -- PART FOUR-DEMOCRACY VS. TOTALITARIANISM -- CHAPTER XV-TOWARD A NEW STRATEGY -- CHAPTER XVI-REVOLUTION OR WAR? -- CONCLUSION -- REQUEST FROM THE PUBLISHER

The article examines the transfer of ideas and practices of constitutionalism from Spain to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in 1812–1820. On the basis of dispatches of the Russian envoy in Naples Gustav Stackelberg, the author analyses the features of the revolutionary events of the summer — autumn of 1820. The immediate objects of Count Stackelberg's observation in Naples were the situation of the Bourbon monarchy and the new constitutional government; their relations with the Carbonari society; relations within the diplomatic corps and among representatives of the great powers. The article also examines texts of constitutional acts that formed the main milestones of the development of constitutionalism in Southern Europe: the Bayonne Statute of 1808, the Cadiz Constitution of 1812, the Sicilian Constitution of 1812, the French Charter of 1814, and the "constitution of Murat" of 1815. An attempt is made to compare the constitutional revolutions in Spain and Italy in 1820–1823: contradictions of domestic politics, the struggle of the Liberal Party and the opposition, support for the army, parliamentary activity, the fight against separatist movements, complications in foreign policy and opposition to the Holy Alliance, the role of Kings Ferdinand VII of Spain and Ferdinand I of Naples in the development of constitutional practice. This approach corresponds to modern trends in the history of the Restoration era, in which the concept of the "liberal international" is tested against Russian diplomatic sources. G. Stackelberg did not just observe the Neapolitan Revolution; he noted obvious parallels with the Spanish Revolution and reported on any attempts of covert contacts of revolutionaries from all over Europe. His political ideal was the French Charter of 1814, the application of which to the Neapolitan political situation he wanted to see in order to avoid the worst consequences of the intervention of the Austrian Empire. The author concludes that the borrowing of the Spanish constitution by the Neapolitans took place within the prepared framework, becoming a logical stage in the development of constitutionalism in countries close to each other not only in spirit, but being for a long time in the orbit of the French revolutionary and Napoleonic despotic influence. The article also shows that Stackelberg modernized the pattern of the era about the "pan-European conspiracy" and created its more moderate version based on his observations of the development of the constitutional revolution in Naples.

The work by Eileen Kane on the Russian Empire's experience of regulating the hajj — the Muslim pilgrimage from the Volga region, the Caucasus, and Central Asia to the Middle East — is of interest not only from the perspective of Asian and African studies or the history of religion. It is also, potentially, a comparative study as the author illustrates her observations and conclusions by referring to Russia's policies towards the Christian populations of the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire. E. Kane advances a debatable thesis that Russia provided unofficial support for the hajj undertaken by its subjects. Whereas the patronage of Russian Orthodox pilgrimage was fully in line with Russia's geopolitical role in the Middle East as well as with the tsarist ideology, open declaration of its interest in an organized hajj was out of the question for the Russian government. The idea of regulating the hajj was consistent with Russia's need to integrate its Muslim subjects into the empire in order to secure the imperial rule. In the Ottoman Empire, adherents of various religions united under one dynasty and entitled to its consular protection can be viewed from the perspective of comparative historical research and the authorities' general idea of imperial unity. In this case, the modes of comparison can be the following: the appropriation by the authorities of the traditions of pilgrimage and the hajj; their modernization; controversies in implementing the policies; consular protection; the subjugation of the clergy to the imperial bureaucracy. The profound differences between the two religious cultures, Christianity and Islam, resulted in the differences between Russia's Muslim and Orthodox presence in the Middle East. In the late 19th century, Orthodox subjects of the tsar upon arriving at the destination of their pilgrimage, were offered the services of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society: they could use the accommodation owned by the "Russian Palestine", and were provided with spiritual guidance by the Russian Orthodox ecclesiastical mission in Jerusalem. Muslim subjects of the tsar did not enjoy the same level of official protection.

Although current political tensions hinder international studies in the Arctic, science partnerships helped tunnel through barriers during the Cold War. One of the most successful models of U.S.-Russian collaboration was the "Environmental Bilateral" agreement of 1972. During an era of political tension, it brought together a multidisciplinary group of top professionals and early carrier scientists in both countries. Acting through science diplomacy, this group communicated sound scientific messages about global climate change to top level policymakers well before the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came into existence. Similar models today can help the U.S. and Russia remove obstacles for scientific collaboration and implement the 2017 Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation signed by both countries.