The article analyzes the evolution of international mediation from the middle of the 20th century to the present day. How do changes in international environment influence mediation and research on it? The paper’s hypothesis is that the transformation of international order and political organization of the world, the dynamics of (de)globalization and changes in the nature of international conflict determine the specifics of international mediation and shape the relevant research. Over the last 80 years international mediation evolved through three stages. During the first stage, shaped by the cold war, conflicts were mostly of interstate nature and were settled by states and international organizations. Meanwhile, the growing activity of non-state actors led to the emergence of mediation via “track II diplomacy”. At this stage, the study of international mediation becomes an established research area. The second stage, since the end of 1980s to the beginning of the 21st century, witnessed a rapid progress in the settlement of many protracted regional conflicts, aided by the mediation efforts of the USSR and the United States. In Russia, research on international mediation, previously fragmentary and legalistic, developed into a separate subfield of international studies. During the third stage, in the 21st century, the political organization of the world has been undergoing a turbulent transformation at all the three levels: Westphalian system, the system of interstate relations, and political systems of individual states. The all-encompassing nature of this change increases conflict potential and changes the nature of international conflicts, which become multidimensional and involve a variety of actors. Responding to the demand for managing complex conflicts, new trends in mediation emerge, such as the growth in mediation attempts by developing nations, engagement of peacekeeping missions in mediation, the use of digital technologies for mediation purposes. At the same time, the erosion of the old political organization of the world triggers the rise in identity-based conflicts that involve disagreement over values. As parties to such conflicts are less likely to seek interestbased compromises, the likelihood of successful mediation decreases. 

The fragmentation of the Internet, which has replaced information globalization, is becoming a new reality. Digital technologies and the Internet are becoming a field of new geopolitical contradictions and a struggle for leadership between the great powers. Cyber diplomacy, which includes a range of issues of using ICT to achieve the foreign policy goals of the state, as well as new problematic and subject areas of international relations arising in connection with digitalization, is the most important tool for interstate competition and conflicts, as well as a means of conducting information wars.

At the international level, there are no internationally recognized norms governing the development and use of digital tools in the framework of foreign policy, interstate competition or confrontation. It becomes especially important to develop rules for the responsible behavior of states in the global information space. Methodologically, the article is based on the theory of the life cycle of norms. According to this approach, norms are social standards that regulate the behavior of states in a certain area of international relations. At present, there has been a rejection of the norms of the global Internet, which has been promoted by the United States for a long time, free from state borders. A set of norms has been formed in the field of responsible behavior of states in the ICT environment, enshrined in the documents of the UN, regional organizations and other international forums. However, the directions of their development and practical application remain the subject of interstate discussions, in view of the high significance of this problem and the differences in the interests and approaches of states.

This article presents relevant tools for analyzing engagement in digital diplomacy, where ‘engagement’ is defined as the two-way interaction between a digital diplomacy channel on social media and its users. Existing methods for evaluating engagement often fail to fully utilize the available data or lack the flexibility needed for specific diplomatic purposes. Using the case study of US digital diplomacy in Russia, this paper addresses two research questions: (1) To what extent are the automated evaluation metrics developed by data aggregator platforms applicable for analyzing engagement in digital diplomacy? (2) Do these metrics help identify significant patterns in digital diplomacy?
The findings of our pilot study indicate that the automated engagement metrics provided by the Popsters and TGStat data aggregator services effectively measure engagement in terms of audience reach and expansion, geographic distribution of traffic, overall engagement, and engagement based on content type (text, photo, video, or link) or text length. The analysis of selected metrics reveals two key trends in US digital diplomacy in Russia: since 2022 there has been a notable shift in focus toward Telegram as the primary platform, and while the content partially reaches the existing Russian-speaking audience, it struggles to expand its overall reach.
The authors provide six recommendations for diplomatic agencies and consulting firms to enhance the tools for analyzing digital diplomacy engagement: (1) adopt automated engagement metrics that account for the interface differences among social media platforms; (2) incorporate built-in topic modeling of posts; (3) integrate sentiment analysis of comments; (4) develop mechanisms to detect traffic manipulation; (5) track multi-level reposts, the timing and spread of hashtag diplomacy, and audience growth considering these processes; and (6) evaluate digital diplomacy activity concerning responses to comments. The authors advocate for closer collaboration between the academic community and diplomatic practitioners to improve engagement metrics and thereby enhance the effectiveness of digital diplomacy.

Contemporary international relations, anchored in the principles of multipolarity, frequently employ consensus-based decision-making, which prioritizes respect for all negotiating parties and ensures that the views of all participants are considered equally. While consensus remains a core mechanism for many international organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), it has increasingly come under criticism for its inefficiency and substantial time requirements. This highlights the importance of examining the factors that influence the time needed to reach consensus. Utilizing formal mathematical modeling based on a modified DeGroot model, this article explores how variables such as the size of the negotiating group, the level of authoritativeness, dominance dynamics within the group, and coalition formation affect the time required to achieve consensus. The findings indicate that an increase in group size, on its own, results in only a minor increase in the time needed to reach consensus, becoming a significant factor only when paired with high levels of authoritativeness among the participants. Conversely, the presence of a highly authoritative member within a negotiating group significantly prolongs decision-making time, even in smaller groups, and the formation of coalitions (e.g., due to multiple highly authoritative members) can make reaching consensus impossible. The "consensus minus k" rule, intended to break deadlocks, is found to be ineffective for international organizations with numerous participants and divergent interests. In hierarchical structures, consensus is typically achieved through preliminary negotiations within subgroups, which further prolongs the consensusbuilding process.

This paper examines the practice of implementing Track-II diplomacy as practiced by the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences (IORAS) in the form of situational analysis, a methodology developed by Academician Yevgeny Primakov. This approach represents an effective tool for resolving international conflicts and enhancing global security by combining science with diplomacy. Special attention is given to a series of three expert discussions on the Concept of Collective Security in the Persian Gulf region, held at IORAS from 2019 to 2023. These discussions demonstrated the method's ability to bring together a broad range of experts for in-depth interdisciplinary analysis of complex international situations. The practical focus of the results from these situational analyses makes them valuable for both policy recommendations and long-term strategic planning. The application of this method fosters the creation of trustful relationships between conflicting parties and the establishment of sustainable mechanisms for international security. The paper also highlights the significance of this practice for the development of Russian foreign policy strategy and its contribution to the interdisciplinary study of international relations.

The article examines key features, main directions, and current trends in international negotiations between subnational territorial units using the example of cities. In today’s world, where the global political system is undergoing epochal change, the international activities of non-governmental and subnational actors, including their participation in international negotiations, have intensified. One of the key features of international city negotiations is that they occur mainly in a multilevel and multilateral format. This is due to the hybrid nature of cities, which are both state and non-state entities. The balance of power between cities and states in international relations depends on factors such as the degree of autonomy granted to sub-national units by the central government, as well as the level of economic and political influence held by cities. Sometimes, the position of a city may differ significantly from that of the state it belongs to. At the international level, there are several specialized institutions and mechanisms that allow cities to coordinate their positions and develop common approaches. These include the World Association of United Cities and Local Authorities, the World Assembly of Local and Regional Authorities, and the Metropolis Association. The main topics of today’s multilateral negotiations between cities include combating climate change, ensuring protection from natural disasters, promoting the rights of migrants and other displaced people, and fostering innovation in urban environment and governance. In contrast, bilateral negotiations between cities, based on the institution of sister cities, focus more on the humanitarian, scientific, educational, and cultural spheres of cooperation. Finally, current trends in international city negotiations include the increasing use of digital technologies and the geographical reorientation of Russian cities’ partnerships towards the countries of the “global majority.”

In 2023, the world marked 30 years since the start of the Oslo process, which sought to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Given the ultimate breakdown of these negotiations, it is crucial to examine the evolution of academic research on this process, identifying its key themes and trends. This literature review focuses on both empirical and theoretical studies of the Oslo process, with a particular emphasis on research that investigates the reasons behind its failure. Such studies provide valuable insights for developing more effective models of negotiation and conflict resolution. Initially, the commencement of the Oslo negotiations was met with optimism in the academic community, with scholars highlighting the pivotal role of individual leaders in successfully launching the process. However, as the peace process faltered, the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations were analyzed through existing theoretical frameworks. Various scholars critically examined the Oslo Accords from the perspective of international law and highlighted economic factors that obstructed the path to a lasting peace. Other studies explored indirect influences on the peace process, such as public opinion and electoral dynamics, often employing Robert Putnam's “two-level games” theory. Nevertheless, these studies mainly address the immediate causes of the peace process’s failure and do not fully account for the underlying motivations driving the behavior of actors in the negotiations. Research into the deeper causes of the Oslo process’s collapse has highlighted socio-psychological barriers, such as the “conflict syndrome” and issues of ontological security. Scholars have investigated the roles of historical memory, collective trauma, and cultural identities in shaping negotiation outcomes. The rise of interdisciplinary approaches—combining insights from psychology, philosophy, and linguistics—has been essential for understanding the complex dimensions of this conflict. The diverse body of research and theories inspired by the Oslo peace process continues to influence the field of negotiation and conflict resolution studies, underscoring the enduring significance of this critical episode in diplomatic history.

This article explores the peace mission of Francesco da Collo and Antonio de Conti, envoys of Emperor Maximilian I of the Holy Roman Empire, to Grand Prince Vasily III of Moscow in 1518–1519. The mission aimed to mediate between Moscow and the PolishLithuanian Commonwealth, seeking to align both states for a planned united Christian campaign against the Ottoman Empire, whose expansion in Southeastern Europe posed a serious threat. The study centers on da Collo’s report from the mission, which not only chronicles the negotiations but also provides rare insights into Russian diplomacy and courtly traditions of the early 16th century. The article underscores the critical role of ceremonial practices, such as receptions, banquets, and hunts, in the diplomatic culture of the period.
Particular focus is given to da Collo's accounts of his interactions with Vasily III and his entourage, highlighting the crucial importance of personal meetings and informal contacts in the diplomatic process of the time. Despite the envoys' efforts, the mission achieved only a temporary one-year truce, with insurmountable barriers to a comprehensive peace including territorial disputes—especially over the control of Smolensk—and the issue of repatriating Russian prisoners of war from Poland.
Furthermore, da Collo’s report serves as an early illustration of how Muscovy was constructed as an eastern, despotic power, offering one of the first examples of Russia being depicted as the “Other” in early modern European thought. The study sheds light on the complex dynamics of diplomacy in this era and reveals how these interactions contributed to the broader European perception of Russia as an alien and adversarial state.

Book Review: Khenkin S. 2023. Spain. Modern unstable society. Moscow. Aspect Press.Book Review: Khenkin S. 2023. Spain. Modern unstable society. Moscow. Aspect Press.