Suchergebnisse

The article considers the prerequisites and problems of the evolution of Russian-Ukrainian relations in the period from 2014 to 2022. Geopolitical causes of the reunification of Crimea with the Russian Federation in 2014, as well as the consequences of the mentioned event have been analyzed. The results of negotiations for settlement of the conflict in Ukraine within the framework of the Normandy format have been studied. It is emphasized that in the result of the failure to implement the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements the process of resolving the conflict in the South-East of Ukraine has reached a dead end. Moreover, the Ukrainian side, with the support of the states of the socalled collective West, has initiated the preparations to finish the conflict under consideration by military means. In addition, the transformation of the doctrinal documents that determined the Russian-Ukrainian relations has been analyzed. The active influence of the member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on the foreign policy of Ukraine during the period under consideration is noted. The military and technical, reconnaissance, financial and diplomatic support provided to Ukraine by Western states, as well as the politics of Ukraine for implementation of the ideology of Ukrainian nationalism and Russophobia into society have been studied as the factors of transformation of Russian-Ukrainian relations, as well as the prerequisites for the Special Military Operation initiated by the Russian Federation on February 24, 2022.

The third and final article of the three-part series of articles «Artificial intelligence in the economy and politics of our time» (the first and second articles of the series were published in the fourth and fifth issues of the journal for this year, respectively) presents the results of a study of the goals, motivations and specifics of the adoption of national strategies to support the development of artificial intelligence in different countries. It is shown that such a strategy in Russia is based on the idea of the most important role of using artificial intelligence in solving the most complex economic, social, and military-political problems of the country. Differences in conceptual approaches to the development of research and practical use of artificial intelligence developments in the national strategies of the largest countries of the world — the United States, China and India.

Introduction. As part of French foreign policy, arms trade is currently considered to be a specific way to promote national influence in the world and support defense industry at home. This approach has been already exercised for several decades, but the last presidency was an entirely new and interesting point in this respect because in 2015 and 2016 French arms trade attained the highest income rates.

Methods. The key notion of this article is French 'strategic autonomy' which remains a pivotal point of any diplomatic activity of France since Charles de Gaulle's presidency. Arms export perfectly corresponds to this point because it helps to maintain French autonomy in economic and political ways. To prove it, several methods were provided such as functional method, comparative analysis and SWOT-analysis.

Analysis. This article aims to identify the specifics of contemporary French arms export policy. In this regard, the text is divided in three parts. The first one defines military export as a part of 'strategic autonomy' concept. To explain the recent growth, the second part explores a new governmental approach to arms trade. The third part brings together the issues and prospects of French military export expected for Emmanuel Macron's term.

Results. The main conclusion is that the new president seems to conduct the same policy as his predecessor. The government has reaffirmed its main principles in the field and renewed a political support for arms contracts. Military cooperation with foreign countries still officially depends on the idea of 'strategic autonomy' of France and its defense industry.

The author examines the process of Soviet military involvement in the events that took place in Afghanistan from the viewpoint of the United States. This topic is poorly studied, and the author makes an attempt to fill this gap. The main goal of the paper is to consider the process of increasing involvement of the USSR in the interior Afghan affairs from the U.S. position and to trace how this position changed during 1979. Methods and materials: The author mainly relies on the document 'The secret correspondence of the foreign policy agencies of the United States on Afghanistan' and also draws documents from the U.S. Congress and a monthly bulletin from the U.S. State Department. Analysis. The special attention is paid to the period from the beginning of the spring of 1979 to the end of 1979, since it was during this period of time that the Soviet military presence in Afghanistan continued to grow. Results: The author concludes that throughout 1979 and earlier, the U.S. closely followed the events in Afghanistan and Soviet actions there. However, the U.S. position on possible Soviet military involvement was expectant, and the USSR was not given strong protests, which could promote the Soviet decision on military intervention in the civil war in Afghanistan.

The article is devoted to an urgent problem dealing with the cooperation of the Turkish Republic and Azerbaijan Republic in the military sphere at the end of 20th – the beginning of 21st century. For Azerbaijan' s leaders Turkey has always been a special partner. This statement has an explanation. Ankara was the first state, which recognized the independence of Azerbaijan Republic. Moreover, Turkish government made great efforts to strengthen new state in different spheres. Military ties were one of the most important for both sides.
The cooperation between two states in the military sphere can be subdivided into several periods. The article gives the detailed analysis of normative documents concluded by the Republics' governments. The first period of military contacts (1990s) was the time of Turkish educational support. Ankara provided training assistance to the military forces of Azerbaijan. Military staff was restrained by Turkish instructors. Special uniform, armament and other equipment to make transformation was given to Baku by Turkish partners. Step by step, Azerbaijan' s military sphere was moving to Western standards. The year 1999 has become an important period for the military relations of Ankara and Baku. Since this year the military cooperation has extended and intensified, it is possible to name it as a new period of states' military collaboration. Turkish government gave financial aid to Ministry of Defense of Republic of Azerbaijan, provided the material and technical support to Baku for improving long-term military cooperation. In 2010 the Turkey-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Agreement was signed. It should be noticed that Baku refused to sign the agreement of Azerbaijan's participation in Collective security treaty organization, leaving the block of CSTO states headed by the Russian Federation. It's possible to say about the strengthening of the Baku-Ankara alliance. This action may lead to complication of Baku-Moscow relations and destabilize mutual relations. Mutual military ties between two Turkish states are shown in the context of Russia's interests in the region.

The article studies the influence of Russia and Turkey on the political development of the South Caucasus in 1918. The choice of 1918 year is conditioned by its transitivity in the relations of two countries with regard to the Caucasus region: peace treaty was concluded, but cooperation was not achieved yet. After the fall of the monarchy Russia entered the stage of reconstruction, while Turkey was on the verge of the final fall of the Young Turks. For both countries the territory of the South Caucasus became the stage of political struggle for realizing imperial ambitions and an attempt to prevent the final territorial disintegration of states. The author shows a difference between Russian and Turkish political approaches. Turkey acted directly, holding negotiations and introducing troops, while Russia had no contacts with Caucasus officials and tried to weaken the Turkish activity in the region through Germany. The conflict nature of the region, which had earlier been suppressed by the power of Russian monarchy, was revealed now. The author presents the political development of the South Caucasus in the form of evolution from the idea of autonomy within the Russian statehood to the proclamation of independence of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. Considering the South Caucasus political development in the international context is conditioned by dependence on external challenges, which determined the decisions and actions of Caucasian political elites. On the one hand, the newly formed Caucasian governments declared their independence at the international level. On the other hand, these governments were dependent on the leaders of world politics in achieving their goals. The participation of Russia and Turkey in the political processes in the South Caucasus was associated with the contradictory aims. Both parties didn't want to be eliminated from the Caucasian region. At the same time, they tried to avoid military conflict. The Turkish government's motivation to use the military power consisted in the need to protect the Muslim population, but not in opposition to Russia. In general, year 1918 marked two opposite perspectives for both countries: for Russia - the loss of the Caucasus as a territory and a sphere of influence; for Turkey - strengthening positions through the local Muslim population.

Political situation in Egypt has been attracting international attention since 2011, when the wave of protests of so-called Arab Spring swept through the region of Middle East and North Africa. Inspired by democratic slogans of political pluralism, freedom of speech, press and religion, Egyptian revolution led to the political success of the Islamist groups, such as An-Nour and Muslim Brotherhood, that came to power in 2012. The representative of Muslim Brotherhood Mohammed Morsi held his position of the head of the state for a critically short term: had been elected in the end of June 2012, he was overthrown in the beginning of July 2013 by military coup supported by all the political forces of Egypt as well as Egyptian people, who gathered again in the Tahrir Square. Eventually, the people who had voted for Morsi a year before turned against him as well as political forces that used to support Muslim Brotherhood. He didn't manage to prove his consistency as the president of the country. A number of factors led to this result. Economic situation in Egypt didn't improve, democratically elected president launched totally undemocratic initiatives, etc. All these factors may be considered as obviously objective reasons for loosing the power. But Egyptian political environment has specific features that should be taken into account while investigating the reasons and factors of Morsi overthrow in 2013. Had being shaped through previous 30 years of Hosni Mubarak power and firmly rooted in Egyptian society, they couldn't be changed simultaneously after the revolution. Two key players have been occupied leading positions in Egyptian politics during all this period: business elites and army. Both of them had financial and social base and influenced public opinion in the country. Political situation turned to be even more complicated with the vast number of new parties arouse after the revolt. All these players had an important part in Egyptian politics and should have been taken into account by the president. Moreover, his ability to form relationship with them and gain their loyalty was an important condition for maintaining power. Instead, M. Morsi started confrontation with the leading political forces of Egypt. Apparently, this wrong tactics resulted in his overthrow from the presidency in 2013.

The author studies the influence of the "Shia factor" on the relations between Iran and the Gulf Arab countries. In most countries of the Persian Gulf, there are Shia communities that constitute a significant part of the population. After the Islamic revolution of 1979 relations between Iran and most Arab countries have become particularly tense. In the 1980s, the Gulf monarchies also became wary of exporting the Islamic revolution in their countries. This was due to the fact that, being inspired by the success of the co-religionists in Iran, the Arab Shiites became more involved in politics. It should be noted that the way the Arab Gulf countries treat the Shiites in the region is influenced by the fact that Iran and the Arab Gulf countries compete for political and economic predominance in the region. Often the Shia Muslims are discriminated by the authorities of the Arab countries, and are regarded as the so-called "fifth column" of Iran. In the author's opinion, the policy of oppression of the Shia Muslims in the Persian Gulf monarchies not only worsens the political situation in these countries, but also complicates relations with neighboring Iran. This policy is not constructive. Moreover, the mythical "Iranian threat" does not go to any comparison with the threat posed by the Islamic State. According to the author, although after the execution of the Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr in Saudi Arabia at the beginning of 2016 Iran's relations with Arab countries became even more strained, the further escalation of the conflict is not in the interests of Iran. Especially now, at the initial stage of removing sanctions against Iran's nuclear program, the military operations against the Shiites in the Arab countries may slow down the process. As for Saudi Arabia, in the event of the outbreak of hostilities Riyadh may seriously damage relations with the United States. This is because Washington sees no benefits in involving Saudi Arabia, its biggest ally in the region, into another armed conflict in the region.

The complexity of foreign policy actions' international legitimization is determinedby the use of unilateral approach in the new environment of world political processes. Due to Russian foreignpolicy's intensification, the issue of international legitimization of its foreign policy actions has expanded anddeepened in the post-Soviet space and beyond: it is obvious in practice, but not conceptualized at the theoreticallevel. It seems to be of utmost importance to consider the problem in the context of the recent mostpressing events - the Ukrainian and Syrian conflicts, using the case-study method as well as through the perceptual-hermeneutic analysis of foreign policy actions. The need to do research in legitimization as a process ofjustification and achievement of a foreign policy position's recognition is obvious. It is necessary to highlight thereasons for the ineffectiveness of Russian foreign policy actions' justification instruments and legitimizationpolicy. The assessment and conceptualization of existing legal and political concepts is particularly importantto build an international legitimization foreign policy strategy. The implementation of foreign policy action shouldbe accompanied by the transfer of basic foreign policy values and interests, combining legal, political, and moralgrounds. The improvement of the international legitimization mechanism, its tools' rapid revitalization and operatingflexibility can give Russia an indisputable advantage over other actors and allow it to ensure the necessary resultfor the foreign policy strategy and strengthen its positioning in the international environment.

Целью статьи является рассмотрение одного из аспектов отношений римлян с другими народами в IV в. В этот период Римская империя испытывает массированный напор варварских племен. Взаимодействие противоборствующих сторон имеет различные аспекты, включающие как прямые столкновения, так и установление договорных отношений на основе достигнутых результатов. Для того, чтобы противостоять варварам, римляне используют все средства. Довольно часто их действия, отчасти из-за высокомерного и пренебрежительного отношения к варварам, отчасти из-за непродуманности возможных последствий, носили провокационный характер. Неприглядные методы борьбы римлян вызывали закономерную ответную реакцию и взрыв возмущения обиженных, еще более накаляя напряженную ситуацию на границах. Среди этих методов можно выделить беспринципное отношение к уже установленным договоренностям; коварное невыполнение данных обещаний; интриги недобросовестных должностных лиц, из-за которых вожди и цари отдельных племен не могли добиться справедливости по отношению к себе; несправедливые наказания; подлые убийства вождей; недальновидную политику высших военачальников по отношению к целым народам, переселявшимся на территорию империи; натравливание одних племен на другие; использование варваров во внутренней борьбе за власть; уменьшение установленных выплат и сокращение принятых традиционных даров. В таком ракурсе события IV в. в научной литературе практически не рассматривались.
The aim of the article is an examination of the one aspect of the roman-barbarian relations in the IV century. In this period the Roman empire is tested by mass barbarian's rush. The interactions of the opposite sides have different aspects, which include both direct collisions, and establishment of the contracted relations on the base of the achieved results. The Romans use all means in order to resist barbarians. Sufficiently often their actions had provocative character, partly owing to supercilious and neglect relation to the barbarians, partly because of inconsideration of the possible consequences. The Roman unacceptable methods of the struggle called regular answerable reaction and indignation's explosion of that, who were offended. It made the strained situation on the frontiers some more worse. Among these methods there are relations of no principles to the already established agreements; insidious inexecution of already given promises; intrigues of the unconscientious officials; unjust punishments; base assassinations of the cheftains; the high military leaders' infar-seeing politics; the use of barbarians in the home struggle for the rule; decrease the established payments. In this aspect the events of the IV century haven't examined practically in the scientific literature.

Присоединение Крыма к России в 1783 г. стало значимым событием в мировой политике и привлекло внимание всей Европы. Свидетельством этого интереса явилось включение Крыма в маршрут большого образовательного путешествия (Grand Tour) представителей европейской элиты. В опубликованных впоследствии путевых записках они вели обсуждение «законности» и эффективности действий российских властей. Учитывая специфический облик Крыма, региона с преобладавшим мусульманским населением, который располагался у воображаемой границы между Европой и Азией, путешественники использовали традиционные для европейской общественной мысли рассуждения об исторической роли Востока и Запада, о миссии европейских держав и о сущности Российского государства. Материалом для исследования стали несколько наиболее популярных в исследуемую эпоху травелогов, в частности сочинения Франсуа де Тотта и Эдварда Даниэля Кларка, Уильяма Итона и Маттью Гатри, Мэри Хоулдернесс и Поля Гибаля, супругов Омер де Гелль, а также Олимпиады Петровны Шишкиной. Показан генезис полярных интерпретаций исторической роли и судьбы Крымского ханства, от «золотого века» в истории региона до катастрофы, отбросившей его далеко назад. В зависимости от этого присоединение к России воспринималось либо как «нашествие варваров», либо как открытие возможностей для быстрого прогресса. Раскрыты использованные путешественниками основные критерии оценок действий российских властей: их отношение к местным жителям, способность организовать эффективное управление, развивать торговлю, защищать христианство, охранять археологические и архитектурные памятники и проч. Проанализированы устойчивые стереотипы, выработанные путешественниками и связанные с «колоссальным хозяйственным потенциалом» Крыма, с восприятием его жителей как «благородных дикарей» / «праздных ленивцев», а также с «русским варварством» по отношению к памятникам культурного наследия и слабостью Черноморского флота. Показано, что многие оценки в травелогах зависели от изначальных установок их авторов, усвоенных ими еще до поездки. Продемонстрирована устойчивость стереотипов и объяснительных моделей, активно проявившаяся, в частности, во время обострения противоречий между Россией и Европой накануне и в ходе Крымской войны, когда вновь востребованными оказались антироссийские идеологические приемы и дискурсы.
The unification of the Crimea with Russia in 1783 was an important event in the world politics and attracted the attention of the whole Europe. The apparent evidence of that interest was the inclusion of the Crimea in the itinerary of the great educational journey, or the Grand Tour, of the European elite. In their travelogues, published later on, the representatives of the European elite discussed the "legality" and effectiveness of the actions of the Russian authorities in the region. Given the specific image of the Crimea, a region with a predominantly Muslim population, located at the imaginary border between Europe and Asia, the travellers used traditional in the European mind ideas of the historical roles of East and West, the historical mission of the European powers, and the essence of the Russian state. As the source base for the study, several of the most popular travelogues of the period under research were chosen, in particular the works of François de Tott and Edward Clarke, William Eton and Matthew Guthrie, Mary Holderness and Paul Guibal, Xavier and Adèle Hommaire de Hell, and Olimpiada Shishkina. The article shows the genesis of popular, and the same time opposite interpretations of the historical role and fate of the Crimean Khanate, from the "golden age" in the history of the region to the disaster that threw it far back. Depending ⁎ This article is an extended version of the paper presented at the conference "State Politics and Images of Power in Central Europe and Neighboring Regions: Praise, Criticism, and Rejection" (Institute of Slavic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, November 2–3, 2021). Исследования Н.И. Храпунов. Россия в Крыму – цивилизатор или угнетатель? Образы имперской власти в полемике травелогов конца XVIII – первой половины XIX в. Historia provinciae – журнал региональной истории. 2023. Т. 7, № 1 ISSN 2587-8344 (online) 192 on the author's aim, the unification with Russia was interpreted as a "barbarian invasion," or, alternatively, as a new possibility for fast progress. Moreover, the article uncovers the main criteria used by the travellers when evaluating the activities of the Russian government, their attitude towards the local residents, the ability to establish effective administration, develop trade, protect Christianity, keep archaeological and architectural monuments and sites, and so on. The work analyses established stereotypes developed by the travellers, such as "huge economic potential" of the Crimea, the perception of its residents as "noble savages / lazy idlers," "Russian barbarism" concerning cultural heritage, and "military impotence" of the Black Sea Navy. It is indicated that many such assessments depended on the travellers' background and already existing opinion, which had been formed before the journey. The article demonstrates the continuity in the stereotypes and explanatory models, especially in the period of aggravation of relations between Russia and Europe on the eve and in the course of the Crimean War, when anti-Russian ideological patterns and discourses became in demand again.