The article offers a comparative analysis of the modern political realities in the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation. In that regard, there is a given account of the principal political problems which are springing from migration. The article offers an estimate of modern migration laws of the United Kingdom. The possibility of appliance of the British governmental initiatives up on the post-Soviet states by the Russian government is examined.

The collapse of the USSR resulted for Azerbaijan to pursue an independent foreign policy. Azerbaijan focused on establishing and furthering relations with Western states, primarily, with the United States. Official Baku considered the United States as an important partner to provide support for the economic development and production of hydrocarbon resources. On the other side, the United States also increased its focus on Azerbaijan due to the favorable geographical position of the Caspian state and the pro-Western attitude of its political elite. The US counted on taking advantage of Azerbaijan to change the flow of oil, which was supposed to be produced in the future. The United States played a decisive role in expanding Azerbaijan's cooperation with Western oil companies, which headed for the shores of the Caspian Sea. As a result, the Azerbaijani-American cooperation in the 90s of the XX century led Baku to chose the western direction in exporting its hydrocarbon resources as the principal one. In addition, under the US influence, Azerbaijan took a tough position on the international legal status of the Caspian Sea. Cooperation between the United States and Azerbaijan has had a great impact on the situation in the region, relations with Russia and the other Caspian states.

The article examines the historical prerequisites for the formation of the ideology of Ukrainian nationalism, analyzes its main provisions, and its impact on the foreign and domestic policy of the independent Ukrainian state. The Ukrainian national idea was formed in the late 19th first half of the 20th century. It was based on three fundamental provisions: the Russian state is the enemy of Ukrainian independence and therefore in the interests of Ukraine its weakening, and even better disintegration; the Russian population in Ukraine is a very serious obstacle to the formation of an independent Ukrainian state, and therefore it should be assimilated; the independence of the Ukrainian state can be guaranteed only by close cooperation with European countries, which will help it in defending its independence in the confrontation with “Asian” Russia, as Ukraine is a European country, part of Europe. On the basis of these ideological provisions it was supposed to form a Ukrainian identity. As the article emphasizes, the national Ukrainian idea in this form contains a very large charge of conflict with Russia, inevitably leads to a clash of their geopolitical interests. The proclamation of Ukraine’s independence in 1991 meant the emergence of a second Russian state, whose population had to be transformed into a Ukrainian nation. The ruling political elite of the country with the support of the Ukrainian intelligentsia as the ideological basis for the construction of the Ukrainian nation state and the Ukrainian nation adopted the basic tenets of the Ukrainian national idea, which was formed in the first half of the 20th century and put them at the basis of its foreign and domestic policy. All Ukrainian Presidents, though with varying degrees of determination and consistency, implemented them. Kiev’s policy of strengthening the country’s independence implied independence from Russia, which is seen as the main threat to the national security of the young Ukrainian state. The article states that the presidential elections of 2019 and the defeat of P. Poroshenko showed that the majority of Ukrainian society does not accept such an identity. They need an identity on other principles, which in Ukraine have not yet developed and are not visible. So far, there are no political forces, political party, that could formulate them and put them in the basis of statehood and nation-building. The current President V. Zelensky in his policy is guided by old ideas and visions. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the formation of the New Independent States, Russia did not immediately realize the scale of the challenges and threats to the country’s security from Ukraine. Sobering occurred under the influence of the “Orange Revolution”, when Kiev abandoned the policy of multivectors and began to pursue a pronounced pro-Western policy. At the same time, Moscow begins to realize that it will not be able to enter the community of democratic states on its own terms, and begins to position itself as an independent center of power, opposing the West. Strengthening its positions in this confrontation, it connects with the consolidation of the post-Soviet states around itself within the framework of integration projects, first EvrAzES, and then the EAEU. Moscow linked their successful implementation with Ukraine’s participation in their implementation, because it believed that without it these projects would not be effective. However, Kiev did not want to support these plans, focusing “on entering Europe”. According to the author, from that moment the foreign policy strategies of both countries began to differ in principle and the two countries from strategic partners turned into geopolitical rivals. The West supported Kiev in its pro-Western foreign policy, considering it as an element of deterrence of Russia’s great-power ambitions. Both Moscow and the West tried to drag Kiev to their side. The coup d’etat carried out by nationalist forces in Kiev in February 2014 seemed to mean the West’s victory in this peculiar tug-of-war. In response, Moscow annexed Crimea and supported the struggle of the self-proclaimed DPR and LPR against the Kiev government. As a result, Ukraine has embarked on a tough confrontation with Russia, seeing it as an aggressor and an enemy. The author of the article comes to the conclusion, that overcoming the confrontation between them will take a lot of time and effort and for the foreseeable historical perspective the relations between them will be based on the principles of the zero-sum game. In these circumstances, there is no need to talk about partnership and cooperation, as it is a question of relations between two hostile States. The most that can be expected is to maintain a “cold peace” between them. But such a state can be achieved only if relations between Russia and the West are normalized, and a new Cold War is eliminated.

Kazakhstan, like most of the multi-ethnic post-Soviet states, in the course of state building, faced the problem of rallying the peoples living in the Republic. Two interrelated projects were being implemented on the political agenda of Kazakhstan: the construction of state institutions and the formation of a civil nation. In a multi-ethnic state, the project of a civil nation is difficult due to the attempts of the titular ethnic group to obtain additional advantages, which causes tension in interethnic relations. The identification of the population, often, occurs by ethnicity, therefore, the policy of civic identity in Kazakhstan is opposed to the “Kazakhization” of language, culture, and social practices. Nevertheless, the process of unification of the nation is successfully developing in the Republic, initiated by the political elite of Kazakhstan. Achievement of national unity was declared a strategic priority in the development of the country. The article analyzes the factors affecting collective identity in the Republic of Kazakhstan: demographic diversity, language policy, state symbols. The article concludes that Kazakhstan is building its statehood based on the domination of the Kazakh ethnic elite, while pursuing a policy of uniting different ethnic groups into a single Kazakh nation.

Russia and non-regional States have recently shown fresh interest in the countries of the former Soviet Union. The rivalry between Russia and the United States for the post-Soviet territory, beginning after the collapse of the USSR, has broken new ground. Russia considers the post-Soviet space as an area of vital interests. Economic and political relations with its neighbors, the internal political situation in the former Soviet Republics have a direct impact on the development of Russia. These determinants can explain the renewed interest in Eurasian integration and an integration project — the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). However, the USA hardly welcomes such aspirations of Russia and the support for the integration project on the part of some post-Soviet countries. The American side has no interest in the newly emerging regional centers of influence in the post-Soviet space, regarding this as a threat to its interests. Countering the development of Eurasian integration and strengthening the EAEU influence is the focus of US policy in this regard. The EAEU member countries are consistently taking steps to develop integration despite obstacles from the West. The long-term objectives, defined in various documents by the countries, should put them on a new path of economic cooperation. Eurasian integration faces a number of difficulties along with the successes, achieved since the creation of the EAEU. The world economy problems, in addition to internal ones, exert a considerable influence. They intensified after the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, which negatively affected the development of the EAEU countries. The internal political problems faced by the EAEU countries adversely affect integration. The internal political crisis in Belarus, beginning in the later 2020, the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh, worsened internal political struggle in Armenia and Kyrgyzstan are the factors that influenced the work of the EAEU last year and early 2021. Nevertheless, economic difficulties and political events in specific countries, the pursuit of non-regional states to influence the elites of the former Soviet states have not altered the foreign policy priorities of the EAEU member states.

The Black Sea region is an important geopolitical and geostrategic area where the interests of various authors of world politics — both regional and global — intersect. The importance of the region as a transit area of energy resources and an important transport hub attracts the attention of the European Union as well. The EU’s interests in the Black Sea region cover a number of areas: economy, energy transit, security, environmental and climate issues, social and cultural initiatives. Energy and transport flows through the Black Sea region, as well as access to broad markets, are key factors in the EU’s interest in the region. Since the 1990s, the European Union has consistently increased its interest in the Black Sea region. Among the key initiatives in this direction, it is necessary to highlight the “Black Sea Synergy” and the “Eastern Partnership” program, which allow the EU to progressively increase its presence in the region and influence individual countries geographically related to it. The EU’s attention to the region and its policies are in conflict with the foreign policy interests of the Russian Federation in this geographical area.

На примере еврорегионального сотрудничества в статье делается попытка уточнения основных направлений трансграничной политики Румынии. Автором прослежена эволюция значения «границ», а также представлены базовые научные подходы в изучении. В статье дан обзор «еврорегионов» с участием Румынии. Выявлено, что в их институализации преобладало два этапа (в1997 г. и в2002 г.). Сам процесс тесно связан с установлением договорно-правовой базы межгосударственного сотрудничества. Одновременно он связан и с тенденциями внутриполитического и внешнеполитического курса Румынии и приграничных стран. Субрегиональное сотрудничество развивалось под воздействием таких факторов как построение рыночной экономики и демократии, интеграция в Западные организации. При этом негативное влияние на трансграничную политику оказывал комплекс межгосударственных проблем. На современном этапе Румыния установила со всеми приграничными странами формат еврорегионального взаимодействия. При этом их анализ позволил автору проследить особенности реализации трансграничной политики страны.

The paper considers the tendencies of the international cooperation in the Black-Caspian Seas region. Since the collapse of the USSR in 1991, there has been formed the conditions for expanding the cooperation and strengthening the economic relations between the states of the Caspian and Black Seas Region. The paper analyses the international positioning and priorities of the cooperation applied by the regional states, on the basis of which key areas and formats of their interaction are implemented. The results of the cooperation are being studied. They include the creation of intergovernmental organizations and new transit routes for the supply of goods. The influence of the issue of the the legal status of the Caspian sea on cooperation in the Black-Caspian Seas region is also considered. In the context of the conflict of the foreign policy interests, the concept of the regional cooperation has not been formed both on state the intergovernmental level. However, due to the high transit potential of the region, international economic ties are being formed, which is in the interest of all regional states. Regional cooperation is pragmatic and has a limited scale. Expansion of the cooperation is so far possible between the parties that do not have opposing positions on ethnopolitical conflicts.

In this article, the importance ofAfghanistanfor South andEast Asiaand for regional security is assessed.Asiaas a whole and the south Asian region in particular is playing an increasingly important role in world politics and economy. It’s believed that south Asia is moving forward and will be in a much better position both in politics and economy in the future of Asia and world. The region has been characterized by the dynamic inter-play of security, economic and diplomatic factors reinforcing each other owing to the complex nature of territorial claims and religious extremist activities.Afghanistanstrategic location is so important for south Asian countries likePakistan,Indiaand also forChina,IranandRussiastability and security in the region. AsAfghanistanis still a safe haven for international terrorists’ groups and Taliban, therefore it’s a serious threat to the region and world. Due to the geo-strategic Location of Afghanistan any problem will affect the region stability and security as it did in the past too. Further Successive regimes inPakistanhave tried their best to impose a favorable government inAfghanistanbut those policies harmed them only. ForChina, the importance ofAfghanistanbecomes evident from the internal security in Xinjiang region.Iranwould like to seeAfghanistanfree fromUSexistence. From other sideRussiaworry about the inflow of opium and other narcotics fromAfghanistanto the centralAsia.