The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the critical problems of the structure not only of the modern health system but also of the role of the state in managing socio-economic processes, government institutions, and their ability to ensure the safety and well-being of the population in conditions of the practical economic shutdown, self-isolation of citizens and ultra-high mobilization of state administrative resources to ensure a full-scale fight against the spread of the virus. Inherent human rights and freedoms were limited to effectively counter the coronavirus, which would have been difficult to imagine even a few months before the pandemic outbreak. Arguments about the gradual decline of the role of the state in the organization of the management of socio-economic processes against the background of the strengthening of civil society institutions also lost their significance, as only the state was able to organize a centralized mobilization of resources to counter the mass threat to public health. These questions lead to a revision of the traditional axiology of Western society, based on the primacy of individualism and the atomization of society – approaches that the Roman Catholic Church has traditionally opposed, which in its doctrine is based on the concept of the common good. As the world's largest confession, Catholicism retains its influence over a wide range of people in many of the leading countries of the modern West. The church's social doctrine is traditionally perceived, both by Catholics themselves and by various associations of citizens, as an ethical basis for organizing the life of society. The paper analyzes the development of the social doctrine of the Catholic Church after the outbreak of the pandemic in the context of both its perception of the coronavirus itself and the necessary measures to combat it and its position on the post-ovoid structure of the world. The Papal encyclicals, messages, and speeches, which reflect the official position of the Vatican, are of crucial importance. As a possible way to overcome the crisis, the Vatican offers the classic principles for the social teaching of the Catholic Church-solidarity and subsidiarity, which require, on the one hand, the subjectivity of society and the decentralization of power.

The article is devoted to the discussion of the role of postcolonial/decolonial critique and its contribution to the theory of international relations. Intersecting with multiple disciplines and area studies, the postcolonial/decolonial critique offers a broad view not only on the cultural heritage of colonialism/imperialism as such, but also on the more complex and multifaceted challenges facing international relations – the coloniality of power and geopolitics of knowledge – and conditions of their emergence. Postcolonial/decolonial approaches foster critical engagement with Eurocentric narratives in social sciences, countering teleological or linear representations of modernity. Despite its importance, postcolonial/decolonial thought penetrated the theory of international relations rather late. The two fields of intellectual quest have developed not only separately, but they have often diverged in their very epistemological constitution. Based on a review of an extensive literature, the author explores the links between the production of postcolonial knowledge and the theory of international relations. Thus, the author illuminates the problems of modern political science and international studies, on the one hand, and on the other hand, emphasizes the need to make the theory of IR accessible to a variety of new global perspectives. The formation of integrative approaches in the study of world politics should provide a new consolidation of both political science and international studies and a productive interaction of these areas of knowledge.

The article discusses an essential dimension of modern diaspora research related to the functional status of diasporas in contemporary armed conflicts. The conventional point of view is that diasporas can only act as the “third party” of the conflict by either contributing to the deepening of the contradictions between the opposing parties or acting as an intermediary between them. In theoretical terms, the author relies on the concept of “new” or network wars (netwars) and tries to demonstrate that there are the prerequisites for more active involvement of diasporas in armed conflicts at the structural level of modern world political processes. To identify the structural requirements for such participation, the author turns to the analysis of two cases. The first case is the emergence and functioning of the 1st Polish Corps in 1917-1918 in Russia, which was formed when the Polish population of Russia was separated from their territory of origin as a result of the First World War. An analysis of the documents shows that the leadership of the corps quite clearly evaded political subordination to the Russian authorities and retained only military subordination, implying that the task of this unit was to participate in the restoration of Polish statehood. The second case is the genesis and evolution of the “Secret Army” of General Wang Pao in Laos in 1960-1974. This unit played an essential role in the Civil War in Laos, as it managed to restrain the onslaught of the superior forces of the Patet Lao Front and troops from North Vietnam. Such long-term participation in hostilities was made possible thanks to US special services' logistical and technical support. The two case studies allow us to conclude that there were armed units in previous historical periods with a clear diaspora component: they made a significant contribution to the overall dynamics of the confrontation between major parties to the conflict. This experience helps analyze contemporary conflicts with the diaspora component, especially in the context of the gradual erosion of power resources in world politics. The participation of diasporas in armed conflicts outside the “third party” framework is associated with the achievement of several conditions, both internal and external ones.

The article uses the constructivist securitization concept to analyze the European Economic Community (EEC), and the European Union (EU) approaches to ensuring energy security. It seeks to establish whether the energy supply has been securitized within the European integration process and if so when it happened. The literature review does not give a definitive and comprehensive answer to this question which is essential for all the history of the EEC and the EU. The authors of this study use an extensive documentary database available on the EU websites. They established that for the EEC/EU the energy policy securitization is a long-lasting ongoing process that came into being in 1973. Within the European integration, the securitization is justified by the dependency of the member states on the imported energy resources, which is regarded through the prism of securing reliable, affordable, and (since 2000s) environmentally sustainable supply. The authors identified two waves of energy supply securitization in the EEC/EU. The first wave was triggered by the oil embargo of the OPEC Arab countries and, generally, the world oil crisis of 1973-1974. The second wave of the 2000s and 2010s was triggered by the Russian-Ukrainian gas conflicts of 2006 and 2009 and the sharp deterioration of Russian-Ukrainian relations in 2014. For both waves, the Commission was the main ‘securitizing actor’. However, during the second wave, the European Parliament, some EU countries, and even the United States made their own ‘securitizing moves’. The ‘audience’ (EEC/EU countries) expressed its opinion towards the ‘securitizing moves’ through the European Council and the Council decisions. The research conclusions can be useful for a profound scientific explanation of the EU energy policy as well as for the operationalization of the securitization concept.

Central Asia's importance in Turkish foreign policy has begun to rise since the beginning of the 2010s. Turkey determines its regional policy in the conception of the Turkic world, including Azerbaijan. With this regard, Turkey pays particular attention to the institutionalization of bilateral relations with the regional states. The most successful measure in that direction is the establishment of the Turkic Council. This integration project marks significant progress for the institutionalization of Turkey's Central Asian policy. Turkey is one of the non-regional actors affecting the Central Asian balance of power. However, it has limited influence on regional security and military affairs, which Russia dominates. Turkey is only a secondary non-regional actor in Central Asia. Therefore, it primarily structures its Central Asian policy using common historical and cultural elements. In this study, we investigate whether Turkey has a long-term project in Central Asia. For this purpose, we explore the restrictions of Turkish policy in Central Asia. After that, we compare Turkey's importance for the foreign policies of Central Asian states. Additionally, we evaluate Turkey's interest in non-Western organizations such as the Eurasian Economic Union and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to transform Turkish foreign policy priorities in recent years. Finally, we show that Turkey has a policy toward Central Asia but not a fully-fledged project for the region.

Book review: Gajić S. 2020. From Slave to Citizen: The Struggle of African Americans for the Recognition of Humanity. Belgrade, CATENA MUNDI. 294 p. (In Serbian) [Гаjић С. Од роба до грађанина. Борба афроамериканаца за признање човечности]

Book review: «The World System of Socialism» and the Global Economy in the mid-1950s – mid-1970s/ ed. by M.A. Lipkin. Moscow: Ves’ mir, 2019.

Book review: Kelton S. 2020. The Deficit Myth. Sydney: McPhersons Printing Group. 325 p. ISBN 978-1-529-35253-5.