France and Germany have historically played pivotal roles in formulating and advancing the economic policy of the European Union. The conceptual frameworks of German ordoliberalism and French dirigisme underpin the dual foundations of European economic integration. The United Kingdom’s departure from the EU has reconfigured the composition of the Union’s core, amplifying Germany’s significance. This shift simultaneously elevates the Franco-German partnership while rendering France’s position within the Union increasingly contingent upon its tangible economic strength. This article seeks to examine the evolving role of France within the EU’s economic architecture, identify critical long-term trends, and forecast possible realignments in the balance of power within EU economic governance. The analysis includes an overview of France’s intellectual and executive contributions to European economic and monetary policies, followed by a comparative assessment of international statistical data, emphasizing GDP dynamics, demographic trends, per capita income, trade balance, and R&D investment.
The findings reveal that, despite being the EU’s second-largest economy, France has exerted a disproportionate influence on the Union’s economic governance, surpassing that of any other member state. French representation in the upper echelons of EU economic and financial policymaking has been unmatched. In the contemporary geopolitical landscape, French dirigisme is experiencing a resurgence of relevance.
Nevertheless, France’s share of the EU’s overall GDP has been progressively declining, even as its demographic contribution to the Union has grown. With respect to per capita income, France ranks 10th among EU member states, marking the lowest position among the core economies. The aftermath of the global financial crisis and the eurozone debt crisis has led to a significant erosion of France’s international competitiveness. Should these trends persist, projections indicate that France’s GDP per capita will fall below the EU average by the end of the decade, potentially signaling a shift from core to semi-peripheral status. This development would exacerbate the asymmetry within the Franco-German axis, complicating efforts to recalibrate EU economic governance and policy direction.

This article analyzes the distinctive features of the contemporary cyclical inclusive growth model within the European Union (EU). As an integration entity, the EU contends with a series of internal challenges that impede its development, arising from the divergent economic interests of member states and the uneven distribution of the costs and benefits of the 'twin transition' in the context of Europe’s declining global competitiveness. Exploring the nuances of inclusive growth in the EU, particularly the role of citizen participation in societal progress, offers a valuable framework for understanding the social and economic contradictions both within and between member states. The study commences with a critical review of existing definitions of inclusive growth, laying the groundwork for an in-depth analysis of the EU model.
The research employs quantitative methods to compare EU member states using the UNCTAD Inclusive Growth Index and additional indicators of social and economic development and well-being. It also evaluates the outcomes of the 'Europe 2020' strategy, which aimed to establish inclusive growth targets for the EU by 2020. The findings reveal that the highest levels of inclusive growth are concentrated in northern and continental European countries, whereas Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) exhibit significantly lower levels. The analysis further uncovers key contradictions, such as the tension between reducing socio-economic inequality and promoting economic growth, the generational conflict over the ‘green economy,’ and the misalignment of interests between smaller and larger EU economies.
Despite the initiatives under the 'Europe 2020' strategy, the study observes a shift in the priorities of EU citizens concerning inclusive growth. The research identifies fundamental characteristics of the EU's inclusive growth model, marked by a cycle of emerging and resolving social and economic contradictions at the Union level. A notable aspect of this model is the increasing complexity and multiplicity of contradictions, alongside a growing emphasis on subjective well-being and the fulfillment of intangible individual needs. The insights derived from this analysis have practical implications for developing inclusive growth support measures within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and can aid in defining priorities and mechanisms for the social and economic policies of EAEU member states.

This article examines current trends in financial governance within the European Union (EU), focusing on the regulation of foreign direct investment (FDI). The adoption of supranational mechanisms for EU FDI screening through Regulation 2019/452 not only highlights the expansion of multi-level governance, as promoted by the European Commission, but also reconfigures the EU's role as a global actor in investment transactions. This shift directly impacts a wide range of stakeholders.

The study aims to explore the institutional architecture established by Regulation 2019/452 and address the research question: Why has the EU transitioned from a neoliberal approach favoring free capital movement (negative integration) to a framework emphasizing common European monitoring rules (positive integration)? The theoretical framework combines the concept of multi-level governance and securitization theory, underpinned by new institutionalism, which facilitates an analysis of how institutions, particularly the European Commission, articulate and advance common interests within political frameworks. The findings reveal that the securitization of Chinese FDI served as a critical tool for the Commission to legitimize its push for supranational regulation. Regulation 2019/452 is identified as “entry-level legislation,” designed to be amended through its built-in revision mechanism, ultimately broadening the Commission’s exclusive competencies in this area. This trajectory was partially confirmed by the Commission’s January 2024 proposal to strengthen the Regulation. The analysis situates this shift within a broader global context, demonstrating how the EU's move from neoliberalism to protectionism mirrors trends in other major economies, such as the United States, China, and India, all of which employ FDI monitoring mechanisms. The article also identifies key events that acted as catalysts for the EU’s geopolitical reassessment of foreign investment—from a stance of openness to recognizing potential threats to collective security and public order. It draws a parallel with the Commission’s use of securitization discourse in the energy sector, which contributed to the partial communitarization of energy policy through multi-level governance.

This paper explores the complexities surrounding the acceptance of the European Union (EU) Proposal in the ongoing Belgrade-Pristina dialogue. The incongruence between Belgrade and Brussels is shaped by several interrelated factors. Central to this discord is the premature transfer of authority from the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) to the EU. This transition was prompted by UNMIK's failure to safeguard Kosovo's non-Albanian population and the breakdown of status negotiations, culminating in Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence. Although the EU has facilitated technical agreements that have supported the region's trajectory toward European integration, it has also encountered significant challenges. Notably, the withdrawal of Kosovo Serbs from political, judicial, and law enforcement institutions, compounded by the destabilizing effects of the Ukraine conflict, has intensified the crisis. These dynamics have accelerated a reliance on informal agreements, which circumvent domestic legislative processes and are characterized by a lack of transparency. The EU Proposal seeks to expedite the normalization process but contains a contentious provision that implicitly demands Serbia's acceptance of Kosovo's independence—an issue perceived in Serbia as a transgression of its core national interests. While the proposal lacks formal legal bindingness, the EU wields considerable influence, applying pressure on Serbia through mechanisms such as economic sanctions. However, such measures risk exacerbating anti-EU sentiment within Serbia. The paper argues that the EU’s strategy, which emphasizes informal agreements and seeks to avoid overt confrontation, may yield eventual progress but also risks entrenching political tensions within Serbia and Kosovo. The long-term implications of this approach remain uncertain, posing potential challenges for the stability of the EU and the broader Western Balkans region.

The article focuses on assessing the capital of the global Chinese diaspora (overseas Chinese). Its objective is to estimate the absolute volume of this capital and analyze its potential impact on the economic development of individual countries and regions, including China itself. The author aims to compile and synthesize existing estimates of Chinese diaspora capital, covering studies conducted from 1949 onwards, to examine the methods used in these assessments and to propose an updated approach for evaluating this capital for the period from 2015 to 2023. Additionally, the study seeks to create original maps illustrating the geographical distribution of diaspora capital across countries and regions, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of regional GDP. Furthermore, it identifies key sectors of business activity and evaluates the influence of the Chinese diaspora on industry markets in specific countries and regions. A comparison is also made between the shares of diaspora capital and China’s accumulated outward foreign direct investment relative to the GDP of host countries and regions.
The analysis is based on Chinese and international statistical data. The calculation of Chinese diaspora capital for 2015–2023, along with its geographical distribution, draws on data regarding the market capitalization and valuation of major overseas Chinese enterprises. For these calculations, the author identifies eight key countries and regions with significant overseas Chinese business activity (Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, the United States, Hong Kong, and Fiji). The study estimates the share of large enterprises and SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) among overseas Chinese businesses within these locations and globally, adhering to the assumption that 75% of Chinese diaspora capital is concentrated in these eight regions of high business activity.
For qualitative evaluation, a comparative analysis method is applied. The current estimate of Chinese diaspora capital, as calculated by the author, is at least $5 trillion (excluding assets in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan unrelated to the Chinese diaspora). This capital spans five continents, holds substantial influence over the economies of more than 50 countries (including China), and serves as a significant external financial resource for China, especially in countries where China’s direct economic involvement is limited.

The ideological dimension of international relations and foreign policy represents a distinct area of interaction, often situated at the intersection of political theory and philosophy. This study explores how metaphors, particularly Rousseau’s Organic Metaphor and its adaptation by Woodrow Wilson in his conceptualization of nationalism, function as powerful cognitive tools within the political sphere. These metaphors can act as "cognitive keys" that shape the perception of socio-political realities, influencing both the understanding and actions of political actors. However, while they provide a framework for understanding the internal logic of events, they also limit cognitive freedom by acting as implicit filters. This article traces the instrumental use of these metaphors in U.S. foreign policy, particularly how Wilson’s conceptualization of nationalism, derived from Rousseau’s metaphor, was utilized to reshape the ideational landscape of European politics in the 20th century and is now being applied in Eurasia. The concept of nationalism allowed for the fragmentation of competing political entities, aligning with the U.S. strategy of divide et impera to oppose integration movements. The article further examines how these strategies, which once targeted European empires, are now being employed against emerging integration unions in Eurasia, thereby highlighting the continuity of ideological tools in American foreign policy across different historical contexts.

The article explores the development of the concept of «civilizational» multipolarity in Russian religious thought from the 19th century to the first half of the 20th century. This notion of «civilizational» multipolarity suggests that power centers, beyond forming a geopolitical balance, also represent distinct civilizations. During the first half of the 19th century, Russian conservatism was predominantly Eurocentric and semi-colonial. However, in the latter half of the century, Russian religious thinkers began to recognize the plurality of civilizations and their potential to emerge as independent power centers, thereby reevaluating Russia's role in the world. Thinkers like Nikolay Danilevsky, Vladimir Lamansky, and Konstantin Leontyev progressively moved away from a colonial mindset, leading to the crystallization of the idea of «civilizational» multipolarity.
At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, thinkers such as Vladimir Gringmut, Lev Tikhomirov, Prince Esper Ukhtomsky, and Sergey Syromyatnikov further advanced these ideas. They identified an «awakening of the East» and advocated for Russia to align with Eastern civilizational powers in anticipation of an imminent world war. Post-1917 revolution, the concept of «civilizational» multipolarity persisted in the Eurasianist thought of the 1920s and 1930s, which is a focal point of this article. Leaders of the Eurasianist movement, such as Prince Nikolay Trubetskoy and Petr Savitsky, developed the doctrine of autarkic «worlds»-civilizations, envisioned as large economic blocs unified by common culture, ideology, and centralized authority. Religious ideas and rhetoric, including the trope of «Babylonian confusion», played a significant role in the Eurasianists' justification of their preferred international order.

The 18th century represented a transformative era for the Russian Empire, characterized by substantial internal reforms and notable foreign policy achievements. Amidst sweeping modernization efforts, Russia secured significant victories on the international stage. Under Peter I, Russia "opened a window" to Europe, while Catherine II's reign expanded Russia's geopolitical reach to the Black Sea, facilitating access to fertile southern territories and establishing crucial maritime routes for international trade. These strategic advancements considerably enhanced Russia's influence and strategic capacities. During Catherine II’s reign, Russia also initiated its first forays into North Africa, a region previously beyond the empire's strategic horizon. Prior to gaining maritime access to the Black and Mediterranean Seas, Russian interaction with North African territories was negligible. However, the geopolitical landscape of Catherine's era prompted the necessity of engaging with Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, and Tripoli.
This article investigates the principal foreign policy initiatives of Russia toward North Africa during the latter half of the 18th century. These efforts served as ancillary operations to Russia's overarching conflict with the Ottoman Empire. Throughout the Russo-Turkish Wars, Russia exploited separatist movements within the Ottoman periphery to weaken its adversary strategically. In times of peace, Russian priorities shifted to safeguarding merchant vessels in the Mediterranean from attacks by Barbary corsairs—specifically from Tunisia, Algeria, and Tripoli. To mitigate these threats, Russia employed diplomatic pressure on the Sublime Porte and sought to negotiate peace agreements with North African states. Nevertheless, these early Russian engagements in North Africa were tentative and often marked by limited success and instances of diplomatic adventurism, leaving several initiatives unrealized.
Utilizing archival documents from the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Empire (AVPRI) and the Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts (RGADA), this article provides a detailed examination of Russia’s diplomatic decision-making and negotiations with North African states. While prior Russian and foreign scholarship has analyzed specific events and countries in this context, this study seeks to offer a more holistic understanding of Russia’s foreign policy objectives and actions in North Africa during the 18th century.

Book Review: Crossman J. 2024. Superstition, Management and Organisations: Irrationality, Randomness, and Chaos in Decision Making. Palgrave Studies in Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 267 р. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-59020-7.