This article examines the biography of the Bulgarian-born General Radko Dimitriev (1859–1918), who was convinced that the good of his homeland was inextricably linked with Russia and depended on good relations with it. For this good, he went to the overthrow of the monarch, but a decade later due to changes in the vector of Bulgarian policy was able to return home and become a hero. In 1913–1914, R. Dimitriev served as Bulgaria's envoy to Russia and tried to change the negative image of his country. With the outbreak of World War I, he joined the Russian army, and a year later in Bulgaria he was declared a deserter and a traitor. In 1918 he was executed by the Bolsheviks in Pyatigorsk, and in a few decades he became practically a symbol of friendship between the Bulgarian and Russian peoples, which led to retouching the circumstances of his death. The article traces the actions of the General and his motivation. Despite his Bulgarian origin, in 1914 he became nearly the main hero of the war in the Russian public space. The reasons for its popularity were not only in the im-portance of his victories, but also in the fact that R. Dimitriev was called the incarnation of A. V. Suvorov and M. D. Skobelev. The article shows what values, embodiments of which were these popular warlords, were characteristic this Bulgarian general. This is a personal part in the fighting, the care of soldiers, democracy in communication. Modern Russian military also has moved to a new paradigm of command, which, however, worked against their popularity among the soldiers. And at the same time, values of the commander of Suvorov's or Skobelev's types were insolvent in the conditions of revolutionary commotion, and R. Dimitriev lost control of the parts entrusted to it. Because of their gener-osity and love for Russia, he refused to take part in the Civil war that decided his death.

The author declares absence of conflict of interest.

During the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Eastern question and the search for ways to solve it occupied a central place in the politics of both Russia and European states. With his decision was closely linked the process of formation of the young Balkan countries. Serbia, whose formation of a new statehood typologically coincides with a change in the system of European international relations of the 19th and early 20th centuries, played an important role in the events of the Eastern question, while claiming to be the Yugoslav “Piemont”. However, it was the war by the beginning of the twentieth century. It became, both for Serbia and other countries of the region, not only a means of gaining state sovereignty, but also the main way to resolve its own interstate contradictions, which took place against the background of an external factor - the impact on the political processes of the Balkans of the Great Powers. These factors led to the natural militarization of the everyday life of Serbian society. The presence in the everyday consciousness of the people of the image of a hostile “other” became one of the main ways of internal consolidation of the country, when attitudes towards war, pushing the values of peaceful life to the background, created a special basic consensus in the state development of Serbia at the beginning of the 20th century, and the anthropological role of the military factor was essential influenced the underlying processes that took place in the country at the beginning of the twentieth century. In the conditions of a new stage of destruction of the Balkans along the ethno-political line, the factor of militarization of everyday life again becomes an important element of the historical policy of the Balkan countries and the construction of a “new past”. In this regard, the understanding of many problems and possible scenarios for the development of the current Balkan reality is linked to this phenomenon. Thus, the study of the impact on the political life of Serbia at the beginning of the twentieth century of special "extra-constitutional" institutions is important for a wide range of researchers, including for a systematic analysis of the crisis in the territory of the former SFRY.

Author declares the absence of conflict of interests.

The article considers the course and results of the Soviet-West German negotiations that led to the conclusion of the Moscow Treaty of August 12, 1970, which became an important factor in defusing international tensions on the European continent. Special attention is paid to the problem of the genesis of the so-called "Letter on German unity", the adoption of which the Soviet side stubbornly insisted on the representatives of Germany. The article reveals the flexible tactics of the Soviet delegation, which was headed by the Minister of foreign Affairs of the USSR AA. Gromyko: taking into account, in particular, the position of the GDR, the diplomats opposed the inclusion in the text of the Treaty of any provisions relating to the unification of Germany, but left open the prospect of such unification in the future. Some realism and willingness to compromise showed and West German negotiators, among whom special credit belongs to the personal emissary of Chancellor Brandt E. Bahr. On the basis of these compromises, a common position of the parties on the conclusion and subsequent ratification of the Moscow Treaty was worked out. The article pays due attention to the "US factor" in Soviet-West German relations. Formally declaring a positive attitude to the" new Eastern policy " of Germany, in fact the American side tried to compromise it in every possible way and complicate the process of preparing the Moscow Treaty. There is also some inconsistency in the German diplomacy in departing from previous political dogmas, primarily from the claims to the sole representation of all Germans. The main conclusion of the article is that as a result of the complex and sometimes conflicting Soviet-West German negotiation process, its participants managed to overcome the real contradiction between the principle of inviolability of borders and the right to national self-determination. In the current international situation, when this contradiction is artificially aggravated by the supporters of confrontation, the experience gained in the development and coordination of the provisions of the Moscow Treaty is of actual practical importance. The work is written on the basis of previously not entered into scientific circulation of primary sources from the Archive of foreign policy of the Russian Federation, as well as published West German documents.

The author declares absence of conflict of interests.

The “Nixon China Shock” (the July 15, 1971 statement by the U.S. President R. Nixon about the recent trip of his National Security Advisor H. Kissinger to the PRC and about the President’s upcoming visit there) became one of the pivotal points in the history of Japanese foreign policy and contributed to Tokyo becoming more independent from Washington in its diplomatic course. Using the case of Japan’s reaction to this event, the article explores the characteristic features of the foreign policy making process in post-war Japan and demonstrates the considerable influence of these features on the character of Japanese foreign policy of the so-called “1955 System” period (the prolonged and continuous dominance of the conservative Liberal Democratic Party in 1955-93). The paper shows the decentralization of the foreign policy making process, expressed in the limited ability of the Prime Minister to determine foreign policy, the presence of considerable internal contradictions in the MoFA of Japan, the factionalism of the ruling party, and the high degree of dependency of the government’s policy course on the public opinion. It proves that these factors were one of the reasons for Japan’s political leadership avoiding decisive actions to normalize relations with the PRC before the “Nixon shock”, cautious that it might damage its relations with the U.S. and unable to discern the signs of upcoming U.S.-Chinese détente, and after this event, vice versa, making every effort to normalize its relations with Beijing as soon as possible, reaching this goal even before their American partners did. Given the historical importance of the “1955 System” for contemporary Japanese politics, the article’s conclusions are significant for the understanding of the logic of Japan’s domestic politics and foreign policy of the entire post-war period.

Author declares the absence of conflict of interests.

The article discusses the security relations among the United States, the EU and Russia in the context of Donald Trump's populism, the change of Western political elites and the erosion of arms treaty regimes. The purpose of the article is to analyze the current state and identify the probable scenarios of relations in the triangle of the USA – the EU – Russia. The article explores the features of the Euro-Atlantic security system from 1990’s till the mid-2000’s; the concept of Euro-Atlantic security in 2008-2009; the US, the EU and Russia relations under Barak Obama and Donald Trump. As a result of a comprehensive analysis, the author comes to the following conclusions: 1) the concept of Euro-Atlantic security is still relevant. Since the NATO based security arrangements are not stabile, security interaction among the USA, the EU and Russia is growing in importance. 2) European leaders seem to be moving towards building a new security architecture and a more balanced dialogue with Russia. The EU remains the main economic partner of the Russian Federation. 3) Trump's “transactional” approach has prompted Europeans to strengthen its defense identity and seek a compromise with Russia. 4) In a multipolar world, the Euro-Atlantic regional security is no longer closed to transatlantic ties. It is important to rethink the concept towards cooperation with non-regional countries. 5) The complex game of engagement and deterrence is likely to continue in relations between Russia and the West. The more uncertain the transatlantic relations become, the more the EU and the US need Russia.

The author declares absence of conflict of interests.

The West is concerned over the crisis of the liberal world order attributing it to the conduct of emerging powers, such as China, India and Russia. Are its concerns legitimate? Drawing on social identity theory, the authors analyze the emerging powers’ stances on international development through the lens of status dynamics. In particular, three issue areas are investigated: the debate over the UN development agenda, which has revealed differences between Western and non-Western approaches, the changes in the membership of donor and recipient groups over the last decade and the discourse of emerging countries concerning science and technology, which betrays their self-image of a “developed” or “laggard” state.

The key finding of the paper is that the crisis of the liberal world order as a set of institutions created by the US-led countries after WWII manifests itself in the distorting symbolic exchange between developed and developing countries. The emerging states are unwilling to recognize the authority of the West and its leadership in setting the direction of global development. Meanwhile, they are trying to gain the status of development front-runners using their own foreign aid programs and science and technology development strategies. However, the rising states are not uniform and consistent in posing a symbolic challenge to the liberal order – while the Russia is striving for a “developed non-western country” status (thereby copying the USSR’s image), India and China, though to different degrees, are positioning themselves both as developed industrial states and as developing countries which receive aid packages from richer members of the international community. What leads to the distortions in this symbolic exchange is the desire of some emerging powers to use the resources of the West and reap the benefits of the world order created by it while denying it a high status. Thus, a classic economic “free-rider problem” arises in international relations: while benefiting from the liberal order created by the West, the rising states do not recognize the status it ascribes itself ignoring the symbolic hierarchy which, as viewed by western countries, underlies this order.

The authors declare the absence of conflict of interest.

The article studies “ontological” security concept. In a general sense the term depicts expectations of a state about its stable and predictable relations with counterparts. With the term gaining theoretical sway in constructivism since the 21st century, we argue, that it still lacks instrumental definition with fixed assumptions and variables. The analysis of ontological security is conducted in twofold manner. First, we overview the broad range of interpretations, demonstrate the absence of an instrumental definition of the concept and suggest some parameters of such a definition. Secondly, we study the ways how a state can gain ontological security. Three options of achieving ontological security are being presented: adaptation (assuming the role of ‘another’ from the external environment); change of rules (imposing its own role on the subject with whom the interaction occurs); and the breach of relations. At all these stages, the state tries either to adopt the norms and practices by which it interacts with the environment, or to redefine its position in ongoing relations with counterparties. We conclude by presenting a sought definition of the term and by arguing that the concept enhances the constructivist contribution to the IR theory since it allows to define the logic of states’ behavior in international arena. Thus, states seek to be socialized into an intersubjective reality and to define norms, practices and status through forging common and communicative knowledge with ‘other’. Otherwise, the state’s behavior could be irrational. Theory emphasizes the need to avoid situations of the ontological security dilemma: the state projects its own, mostly protective reality, which, however, does not provide it with ontological security from the counterparty and could potentially push for further escalation of crisis interactions.

Authors declare the absence of conflict of interests.

The most notable feature of the past five centuries of global economic history dating back from Colonial Age until the present accelerated globalization is the persistence of «North–South» division between the global rich and poor. This ground pattern has been falling apart over the last three decades with the rise of BRICs emerging economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China). The Chinese Belt and Road Initiative fosters further rapid growth and synergy among these large nations. This ambitious and historically unprecedented infrastructural project if successful can lead to a formation by 2049 of a huge common economic zone bringing opportunities for multilateral development to the BRICs. These profound changes have deep implications for the global health care sector. Previous research on health and pharmaceutical spending has clearly documented that low- and middle-income economies (LMICs), led by these emerging markets, have doubled their share in global health spending from roughly 20% up to approximately 40% in purchasing power parity terms. Alongside with these global developments, a decade ago, some of the leading Western academic centers, confirm new era of rising world’s geo-economic and geopolitical multipolarity. The world witnesses this process being accelerated today and seek deeper understanding how it will reflect on long term health and pharmaceutical expenditure trends, particularly in the leading BRICs emerging markets being a front runner of such evolution.

The authors declare absence of conflict of interests.

The expediency of hosting large-scale sport events (LSE), such as the Summer and Winter Olympic Games, FIFA World Cup and EUFA European Championship, is a matter of public and scientific discussion. The main argument against hosting large-scale sport events is the substantial direct financial losses for an organizing country in most cases. Moreover, local residents often oppose hosting major sport events because of price increase and different inconveniences in their everyday life. At the same time the effects of hosting large-scale events have long-term nature and go beyond direct financial benefits. One of the difficulties in estimating the effects of LSE is that they are hard to measure.

The literature review shows the deficit of research on how large-scale events influence the foreign direct investment inflows in the hosting country. In contrast to numerous papers on LSE influence on economic growth, foreign trade, international tourist flows, the authors found only one article devoted to LSE influence on FDI inflows. The present paper analyzes the influence of major sport events on foreign direct investment flows to the hosting country. The estimated database comprises data for 195 countries for the period of 1970–2018, 24 out of which hosted or will host 48 major sport events. The regression analysis indicates that LSE induce significant influence on foreign direct investment flows in the hosting economy. Comparing several models, we show that the most reliable is the model where hosting LSE positively influence on FDI inflows within the period starting 8 years before and ending 4 years after the event. We explain the result by the following. Firstly, fostering economic growth due to hosting LSE serves as a catalyst of foreign direct investment inflows. Secondly, LSE improves image of the hosting country abroad that positively affects the attractiveness of the country to foreign investors. Thirdly, the growing openness of the economy due to LSE (expressed for example in growth of international trade) positively affects the FDI inflows.

The authors declare the absence of conflict of interests.

Book review: Eurasia on Edge: Managing Complexity. Lanham: Lexington Books, 2018. 324 p.

The author declares absence of conflict of interests.

The authors examine the role and place of Islam in international development and global governance in the context of pressing issues of inter-civilizational and inter-confessional interaction in the modern world, the challenges and threats that arise, including the problems of combating extremism and international terrorism. The authors focus on a comprehensive assessment and forecast of the development of the «Muslim segment» of the modern polycentric world, the conflict between the spatial expansion of traditional Islam and the neoliberal world order, the «Arab spring» phenomenon, mass management technologies from various political forces, the danger of regional destabilization and threats to global security and the interests of Russia.

Author declares the absence of conflict of interests.

Abstract: Review of the book by Milovidov V. D. Simmetry of delusions. Uncertainty factors of the global financial market under the technological revolution. Moscow, Magistr, 2019. 336 p. (In Russian).

Author declares the absence of conflict of interests.

Review of the books: Franklin D. Megatech: Technology and Society: 2050 in the Forecasts of Scientists and Writers. Moscow, Bombora, 2018. 400 p. (in Russian) Leonghard G. Technology vs. Humanity: The Coming Clash between Man and Machine. Moscow, Publishing house AST, 2018. 260 p. (in Russian)

The author declares absence of conflict of interests.