Articles

The article examines the Free Syrian Army, one of the largest Syrian insurgent group that takes part in armed confl ict against Bashar al-Assad’s government. The article reveals how the nature and characteristics of this insurgent group aff ected its development during the Syria Civil War. The fi rst part of the article provides a general background of the group and its principles. The following part sketches out the theoretical framework providing the necessary anchor for the main hypothesis explored in the article, namely that the nature and character of the insurgent group determine its subsequent evolution. Starting from the assumption that there are three diff erent types of insurgent groups: political, religious and ethnic, the article focuses on the diff erences between the creation of ethnic and non-ethnic groups and defi nes how the nature of the group aff ects the development of the Free Syrian Army. Furthermore, the article provides an analysis of how, between 2012 and 2018, this insurgent group was able to manage and control its territory, develop its military potential and infl uence the numbers of its members. Finally, the Free Syrian Army is compared with another insurgent group, the 19th of April Movement (M- 19), active in Colombia during 1970s–1990s. Through this lens, the article argues that by looking at the nature of an insurgent group, it can be possible to predict its capacity and chances of success.

Great powers can play a central role in the process of regional integration, as a driving force of the integration, a provider of international public goods, a rule-maker, an initiator of regional mechanisms and as the founder of specifi c regional organizations. Russia and China are playing such a central role in the integration process in Eurasia through a selective use of opportunities provided by the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and the Belt and Road Initiative. Where the EAEU contributes to an increase in trade volume between its members, the SCO ensures a safe and stable external environment, and the Belt and Road Initiative is primarily focused on infrastructure development. Russia remains the driving force of post-Soviet integration, especially in the security sphere. The trans-regional nature of Russia allows it to borrow and process the experience and economic resources of both Europe and Asia, bringing together these two continents. At the same time, Russia is the initiator of integration projects and the rule-maker. China seeks to strengthen its role as an initiator and rule-maker of regional integration. Cooperating with partners and free-riders, it is ready to take on the role of a provider of global public goods.

The article attempts to make a conceptual interpretation of the hybrid war phenomenon integrating it in the broader fi eld of political science. The authors consistently separate scientifi c and non-scientifi c interpretations of the phenomenon, define various disciplinary frameworks for its interpretation and analyze contemporary literature on the topic. Based on the historical and comparative analysis of diff erent cases of hybrid war through the lens of discourse analysis, the article provides a defi nition of the notion putting it in relationship with concepts of conventional war, smart power, “legal” and “political war.” As a result, hybrid war is defi ned as a combination of concrete military action and other tools able to infl uence political institutions, regimes and processes. Thus, hybrid war as a political phenomenon is part of the (geo)political strategy of an actor and consequently a conscious and goal-oriented action. Furthermore, the article notes that taking into consideration that communication is a system forming process in modern politics, the interpretation of hybrid warfare must look at the role of information and communication as key components of the concept. In fact, it is exactly the domination over the realm of information which determines the specifi cs of the modern confl ict as it appears more and more important not the victory as such, but rather how it is communicated and presented in the information fi eld. In turn, the infl uence on information processes is carried out through political technologies and refl ection management.

The article presents an analysis of the role played by the Conference on Interaction and Confi dence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), an international forum aimed at strengthening cooperation in ensuring peace, security and stability in contemporary international relations. The author provides a detailed analysis of the background, the history of this dialogue platform, its main achievements and problems of development at the present stage. The author concludes that, although the CICA is a unique regional forum in the fi eld of security in Asia, the results of its activity are rather modest. The forum indeed is not a full-fl edged regional supranational organization and its decisions are not binding on member states. Participation in the CICA dialogue is voluntary, and decisions are made on the basis of consensus. In many ways, the slow pace in the development of the Conference is due to the presence of a large number of contradictions between its participants. However, despite all the limitations, CICA has become part of the modern system of regional and global multilateral institutions, a real factor in international relations. The organization developed a consolidated vision of the member states on key security issues in the region and in the world, hand in hand with some practical steps. The Conference adopted specifi c action plans and concepts in order to introduce confi dence-building measures in diff erent spheres of action, such as the military-political, economic, environmental and humanitarian, hand in hand with the broader realm of new challenges and threats.

The article attempts to provide a systematic analysis of the phenomenon of dogmatic thinking explaining its signifi cance for political and psychological research. The publication contains four relatively independent sections. First, the author discusses the dogma and dogmatic thinking concepts, their content, meanings, and functions. Dogmas have integrative properties and are considered as a factor of socialization, able to form a systemic model of the world in mass consciousness. The second part of the article deals with the “law of context,” the psychological mechanisms of contextualization, decontextualization, refl ection, and their importance in understanding political problems. The third part develops the thesis that dogmas can be seen as the dominant contextual system, a building block for the formation of mental matrices and the main paradigm of political thinking. Finally, the last part investigates the essence of dogma as the basis of political mentality. The author concludes refl ecting on the heuristic potential of the dogmatic principle in the study of global mental-political systems.

The article presents an analysis of the protest potential of self-organization among citizens in the context of the emergence of new social and technological opportunities provided by modern media structures and institutions. The analysis of the potential for protest of Russian citizens rests on the hypothesis that various network-based communication methods, hand in hand with specifi c internal and external factors, can result in a “gathering” and “conversion” of the public energy into virtual or real protest potential. Based on the case studies of public protests against the unifi cation of the Nenets Autonomous district with the Arkhangelsk region, local actions against the development of Shikhan Kushtau and a series of online rallies as new forms of civil activism, the authors partially confi rm their hypothesis. More broadly, the article analyses the existence of a “communication gap” between the government and society, the shift of the “energy” of the protest potential in Russian society to new online platforms. Finally, the authors refl ect on the general problem of identifying and solving a number of hidden “social issues” that can constitute the bedrock of online protests in the future. The methodological basis of the research relies on conceptual provisions developed within the framework of the theory of communication by C. Shirky, A.I. Solovyov, M.N. Grachev, and M.D. Rich. In particular, the theoretical framework provides tools to interpret causes, mechanisms, and consequences of network-based involvement of citizens in protest actions of various types and levels.

The article provides an analysis of the fundamental foundations of the anti- Russian discourse in the European Union, suggesting possible explanations for its escalation in contemporary European politics, in both the academic and expert community and in the mass media. The author suggests that the anti-Russian discourse in the EU should not be viewed as a series of random coincidences and not even as a coordinated one-time campaign, but rather as a part of an integral geopolitical strategy. This strategy has an impact on the social space (informational, ideological, semantic), within which the anti-Russian discourse is one of the tools of the European Union and NATO expansion to the East, closer to the borders of the Russian Federation. One of the most important reasons for the constant anti- Russian rhetoric is associated with European Union’s problems in achieving its own “strategic autonomy,” i.e. a unifi ed security and defense policy. The growth of European Russophobia is also associated with the desire to gain competitive advantages in the growing economic rivalry on the world stage. Furthermore, the incessant attacks on Russia are rooted in the erosion of the common European identity, the loss of the attractiveness of European values, as they are understood in the modern establishment of the European Union. Finally, the scope of the anti-Russian rhetoric is explained by the diffi culties experienced by the so-called “European solidarity,” the internal cohesion of the European Union as an integral entity.

The dying away of the world of the Modern in today’s Western countries and the triumph in them of postmodern principles are in fact the main source of the weakness of European civilization., generating advancing trends of Countermodernism and archaism. This variant of European civilization is demonstrating genuine powerlessness in the protection of its basic values. But that does not mean that this historical tendency should be abandoned in favor of other mythical paths of development that run counter to the Countermodern and barbarization. It only means that it is necessary to look for and off er a diff erent version of Modernism — an altermodern or a supermodern — that is able to bring new life to European civilization, fi ll it with a new reading and feeling of basic European values that can give progress a new impetus, making it strong enough to withstand not only the forceful but also the semantic challenge of the forces that have adopted post-terorism today.

The article deals with the main features of the development of state and church relations in modern Russia, discussions about the current model of state and church relations in our country. It is concluded that modern society has worked out a balance in the communication of secular and spiritual power, based on dialogue and cooperation, which is the most important guarantee of social and political stability and the provision of proper conditions for state building. It is emphasized that the established model of state and church relations in modern Russia is cooperative, within which the state and the church are treated as equal partners.