Suchergebnisse

This article analyses a range of problems faced by the NATO member states in the Baltic region in connection with Russian aggression in Ukraine. It is indicated that the Russian Federation boosts its military presence in the Kaliningrad Oblast: it deploys advanced missile systems and armored fighting vehicles to the region, increases its military contingent and rearms its Navy in the Baltic Sea. It is stressed that Russia has violated the 1987 Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-range and Shorter-range Missiles (the INF Treaty) and in recent years has been conducting large-scale military exercises.
It is pointed out that amid the growing threat from Russia, the countries of the Baltic region have to reconsider their military strategies, to join their efforts in order to prevent any possible aggression. The NATO member states, the United States of America in particular, take part in the military drills in the region. Sweden's military cooperation with NATO and the United States of America – a controversial issue in Swedish political circles – is discussed. The question of enhancing military interaction between the members of NATO – Germany and Norway, the Unites States and Poland – is addressed too. The advantages of building collective missile defense capability in the Baltic region and taking other steps to restrain Russia's aggressive actions are indicated.

Establishing a common strategic framework is a decisive factor in the Ukrainian-Polishrelations in the current social and political context. The complexity of the partnership between thetwo states arise from their geographical location on the borderline between civilizations, the site ofhistorical cataclysms. At the same time, national sovereignty of was always a high priority for bothpeoples. The recognition of Ukraine's independence by Poland marked a new stage ofrapprochement between Warsaw and Kyiv, the act being evidence of maturity of the Polishpolitical elite. Poland made its best to promote the interest of Ukraine in the international politicalarena. The article suggests periodization in the history of the Ukrainian-Polish partnership.Ukrainian policy can be modelled on Poland's experience of the transformation of society.Being a member of the European Union, Poland advocates the idea of European and EuroAtlantic integration of Ukraine. Increased economic cooperation is one of the aspects of theUkrainian-Polish partnership. Cooperation at regional level, between local government bodies isalso important for the relations between the two states. Step by step, visa regulations are beingliberalized, interpersonal contacts broadened. The beginning of the 21st century witnesses a changein political consciousness of Ukrainian and Polish people, who reconsider painful events from theirpast

This article is one of the first attempts to launch a national research aimed at understanding the activities of state authorities under extreme conditions of war. It aims primarily to identify and analyse the features of the functioning of the institution of the presidency in Ukraine during the first 50 days of the full-scale Russian aggression against Ukraine. Looking through the prism of the synergetic paradigm, using a number of research methods (real-time analysis of events, phenomena and processes, content analysis and comparative analysis) and based on the study of a number of documents (decrees, orders) approved by the signature of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky and analysing the dominant ideas uttered by him in numerous speeches and addresses, proclaimed during the hostilities conducted on the territory of the Ukrainian state, marked by the crimes committed by the Russian aggressor, the following was identified: • a time of transformation of the institution of the presidency, which is usually seen as a result of the autonomy of the incumbent president; • the effectiveness of the institution as a centre for making political decisions in times of war in the face of increasing instability and imbalance of processes and phenomena both in the Ukrainian state and in the political environment of Europe and the world; • the ability of the institution to cooperate (with other institutions of state power, the people, and the international community) and to a high degree of self-organisation in times of war.

The article is a continuation of the publication from the previous issue of the journal. In the previous part, the main focus was on Russia's domestic political and economic transformation during Vladimir Putin's first presidential term, which clearly shows a refusal from Yeltsin's limited democracy and the establishment of an authoritarian regime with Praetorian features. During his first years as president, Vladimir Putin demonstrated that, contrary to the commitments made by Boris Yeltsin's team at the OSCE Istanbul Summit, he did not intend to reduce Russia's military presence in the post-Soviet space. Conversely, the official Kremlin has intensified diplomatic efforts, which have resulted in an increase in the number of its military bases in the countries of the so-called «Near Abroad». At the same time, steps were taken to demonstrate the growing potential and ambitions of the Russian army. The corresponding activity was accompanied by purposeful actions aimed at building a modern Soviet Union around Russia. To achieve this goal, a wide range of tools was used, ranging from official statements to Moscow-initiated integration projects. The practical consequences of the respective aspirations of the new leadership of the Russian Federation were the signing of agreements on the establishment of the EurAsEC, the Common Economic Space, and the reformatting of the Collective Security Treaty into the CSTO. Analysis of internal and external initiatives of the new leadership of Russia in the period outlined in the article, in comparison with the statements of authoritative researchers, provide grounds to conclude that the construction of an authoritarian regime in the Russian Federation was accompanied by pro-Western rhetoric of its leadership due to the internal weakness of the Russian state in the early XXI century. After Russia's significant economic growth, complemented by the introduction of comprehensive control within the country by the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin began to gradually abandon the disguise of the true nature of his regime, which soon was manifested through the prism of both tough statements and aggressive steps in the international arena.

The accession to power of Vladimir Putin was a turning point in the history of Russia. At the beginning of the twentieth century, instead of Yeltsin's peculiar model of democracy, an authoritarian regime with Praetorian features was gradually established. During Vladimir Putin's first presidential term (2000-2004), his official speeches traditionally included pro-Western messages. However, in practice, the Kremlin leadership initiated processes that testified completely opposite trends in development of the state. At this time, thanks to legislative changes favorable for the ruling elite, a significant blow to political pluralism was dealt, and the importance of central authorities was essentially strengthened. These events in Russian distorted realities allowed Putin's team to have more control over federal units than authorities of the democratic unitary states have over parts of their state formations. At the same time, using law enforcement agencies pressure, the state leadership established control over the media. At the same time, in the economic sphere, contrary to Vladimir Putin's assertion that "Monopolies are dangerous things in general; especially state monopolies" there was a systematic renationalization due to the purposeful efforts of law enforcement, judicial, and fiscal structures. It was the most pronounced in the energy sector, where Kremlin-controlled Gazprom and Rosneft fundamentally strengthened their positions. Similar processes took place in the automotive, aviation, metallurgical and other industries. As part of the redistribution of property, there was also pressure on foreign business represented on the Russian market. Some of the world's leading energy corporations have been forced to sell some of their shares to Kremlin-affiliated entities. In other cases, foreign companies were revoked permits to operate in Russia under contrived pretexts. The second part will outline the activities of Vladimir Putin and his team, which aimed to strengthen the position of the Russian Federation at the global level, and to increase the influence of official Moscow on the countries of the so-called "Near Abroad". An attempt will also be made to identify the reasons why, during the first few years of Vladimir Putin's presidency, the trends outlined above were accompanied by pro-Western rhetoric.

The assessment of the state of security cooperation between Ukraine and Canada on the NATO platform is carried out in the context of the study of Ukraine's role in Canada's actual security policy. The importance of such a study is determined by the priority of solving urgent problems in the field of international support for national security and the implementation of the foreign policy course for Euro-Atlantic integration of our state. The existence of significant threats to the national security of Ukraine in the context of conflict with Russian Federation determines the relevance of studying the theoretical and practical aspects of cooperation with key foreign partners to counter security challenges. Canada remains a staunch supporter of Ukraine's state sovereignty, regardless of temporary changes in domestic and foreign policy. Such a consistent position of Ottawa defines the significance and effectiveness of the special partnership of this state with Ukraine, in particular, in the field of security policy. The article reviews the main aspects of Ukrainian-Canadian cooperation within NATO as the main multilateral security platform for Ukraine. An important component of Canadian support for Ukraine is the desire to bring Ukrainian military, social and democratic standards in line with the standards of NATO member countries. In this context, Canadian practical and expert experience is extremely important for our country. We are constantly confirming this in the process of meaningful Ukrainian-Canadian political dialogue within international organizations and NATO in particular. Thus, Ottawa actively supports Ukraine's efforts for Euro-Atlantic integration and plays an important role in filling the practical content of Kyiv's cooperation with the Alliance in the military-political and humanitarian spheres.