The article investigates the modern policy of Great Britain in Central Asia. In recent years, official London has increased its interest in Central Asia. The region is considered as an important direction of British foreign policy. The British course is implemented in the context of the policy of the collective West towards the Central Asian states. It is based on the weakening of Russia’s political, trade and economic relations with Central Asian countries and putting pressure on them to change their foreign policy course. It is important for London to reorient Central Asia’s political and economic ties with Moscow and Beijing toward the interests of the collective West. London’s involvement in Central Asia is determined by energy resources in the region, as well as long-term plans to gain access to deposits of rare earth metals. The article concludes that it is possible to make only а relative comparisons with the “Great Game” that unfolded between the Russian Empire and Great Britain in the middle of the 19th century in the Central Asian khanates. The geopolitical conditions have changed dramatically and, in addition, London follows the general policy of the West. Nevertheless, London’s goals in Central Asia have not changed — the struggle for resources and limiting the influence of Russia.

The problematic field of political interaction between the countries of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) is constructed under the influence of actualizing national priorities of external political players in view of the strategic and resource significance of the post-Soviet space in general. Attention is focused on the contribution of extra-regional and transnational subjects to the development of political and economic space of the EAEU. Political presence of the United States, as well as Western and European states in this region is increased. In this context, we are talking about the intersection and competition of geostrategic, political, economic and other goals of existing political participants in the framework of interstate exchange. On the one hand, it creates some additional factors and mechanisms of manifestation and expansion of conflict-causing precedents, on the other hand, it leads to the emergence of qualitatively new opportunities for opening special political potential, strengthening the status-role positions, establishing the bilateral and multilateral ties, etc. In the end, real prerequisites are created for transformation the symbolic nature and activity significance of the EAEU in the context of domestic political and supranational processes. In this sense, the conceptual basis and tool of American media publications in the direction of actualization the US political agenda in relation to the EAEU countries are interesting. The ideological, semantic and technological features of The Washington Post publications on the topic of political relations between the United States and other foreign policy actors with the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia are analyzed. As a result, it is determined that political participation of the United States in this region is built in the focus of creating the restraining factors for stabilization of political and economic partnership of the EAEU participant countries in the framework of the concept of Greater Eurasia. The existing institutional and functional potential of the post-Soviet states is used for negativization of political and regional role and strengthening of geopolitical opposition of the Russian Federation and the PRC. Particularly, the most frequently published topics in relation to political problems of the EAEU are the Russian participation in a special military operation on Ukrainian territory and foreign policy participation of foreign states in the main processes of Eurasian integration.

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union with the immediate appearance on the world map of five independent republics in Central Asia, the Turkish government, believing in its own political calling to unite the Turkic-speaking peoples under its auspices, launched extensive activities to plant its influence in this region. Convinced of the ineffectiveness of too persistent political patronage over the Central Asian republics, the Republic of Turkey, which claims to be the standard-bearer of pan-Turkic ideology and political Islam, has built an influential network of educational institutions and international organizations representing the arsenal of its “soft power” and designed to turn Turkey into a reference point for the development of the Central Asian states.

The article explores the foreign policy course of the Republic of Turkey in Central Asia, which has intensified in recent years. The article analyses ambitious energy projects of Turkey, which seeks to become an energy ‘hub’. The article pays great attention to the study of the institutional framework and key instruments of Turkey’s ‘soft power’, which pursues an active policy towards the Turkic-speaking countries of Central Asia. This has allowed Turkey to significantly expand its influence in the countries of the region, competing with Russian and Chinese influence. The article explores the role of the ‘Organisation of Turkic States’ (OTS), whose activities Ankara pays increased attention to. Turkish policy is aimed at using the potential of this organisation to pursue its own interests. The article concludes that the Organization of Turkic States plays a significant role as one of the important actors between Turkey and the states in the region. It also concludes that Turkey’s policy in Central Asia is aimed at addressing long-term objectives related to the expansion of political, economic and cultural influence.

Current geopolitical situation affects greatly on worldwide distribution of energy. These circumstances challenge Russian energy companies to be more flexible in development of foreign market expansion strategies and pro-active in establishing of cooperation mechanisms with new partners abroad. In this case gas power generation should be considered more attentively, gas-fired power plants provide the customer with end-product, while natural gas exporters create additional values to gas exports and are able to achieve synergy of core business and power supply. The article considers Russian power generation companies’ potential expansion to new power markets. Brief description of two electricity markets is provided with examples of Iran, the largest regional market and Pakistan, which suffers from power deficit and non-sustainable energy supply. Iran power sector is also remarkable with its experience of development under international sanctions, including establishment of energy machinery sector based on localization of foreign technologies. Pakistan is one of the most attractive LNG markets for Russian companies, which face the challenge to increase LNG export up to 20% of world market share.

The purpose of this article is to clarify the role of Russophobia in the structure of Ukrainian political identity. The genesis and transformations of Russophobic normative-value attitudes within the geographical boundaries of modern Ukraine are considered. The main ways of manifestation of Russophobia in socio-political practices are analyzed. The pivotal role of Russophobia has been revealed, without which the entire structure of the national and state identity of the Ukrainian state is not viable. The conclusion is made about the need for systematic efforts of Russian political science to develop a holistic project for the political reintegration of Ukraine into Russia and the “Russian World”.

The article considers the specific features of the systemic approach to the history of the international relations and world politics. International relations are viewed as a single complex organism, which is greater than the sum of its parts. The freedom of actions of the states is limited by the frames of the system of international relations, the part of which they are. Each system has its spatial and temporal characteristics. In the period of the Early Modern Age the process of formation of the national states unrolls. In the XVII century The Thirty Years’ War became the largest event of the international life, at the end of which the Westphalian system of the international relations was born. In the XIX century after the victory over Napoleon the Vienna system of international relations develops. Both Westphalian and Vienna systems are European regional systems. The end of the World War I war resulted in formation of the Versailles-Washington world order, which was the first attempt to build the global system of the international relations. After the victory of the anti-Hitler coalition in the World War II the global bipolar Yalta-Potsdam system was built, which existed till the dissolution of the USSR. At the present moment the new system of international relation is developing, with polycentrism and diversity of actors as its’ specific features.