ERDOGAN AND VICTORY DAY: HOW THE TURKISH PRESIDENT IS OVERTAKING THE RUSSIAN PRESIDENT IN INFLUENCE

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (043) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
Mikhail Shevchuk
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
pp. 49-56
Author(s):  
Vasiliy Ryazhenov ◽  
Victoriya Andreyeva ◽  
Elena Zakharochkina

Russian President Vladimir Putin defined increase in life expectancy from 72.7 to 78 years by 2024 as a national aim in the Decree № 204 of May 7, 2018. Achievement of this aim depends on drug provision system among other factors. Strategy of drug provision for the population of the Russian Federation for the period until 2025 sets the goal of increasing availability of high quality, effective and safe medicines to meet needs of the population and the health system based on the formation of a rational and balanced system of drug provision for the population of the country with available resources. The health care system should expand the possibilities of using modern and effective mechanisms to ensure the financing of drug provision for the population.


Author(s):  
V. I. Denysenko

The failure to sign the Association Agreement with the EU in autumn 2013 has been investigated. The role of the Russian factor, which became decisive in the foreign policy reversal of the Yanukovych regime, has been revealed. The importance of Viktor Yanukovych’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on October 27, 2013, in the dramatic change of Ukraine’s international vector has been emphasized. On the basis of diplomats’ memoirs, the assumption about intimidation of the Ukrainian President by the Russian side has been substantiated. The timeline of the preparation of the 2013 Vilnius Summit, the position of EU structures and the attempts of the fourth President of Ukraine to win time to trade with the Russians have been reproduced. The thesis about the Donetsk clan’s attempts to prepare public opinion for a 180 degree turn in late October - early November 2013 has been presented. For this purpose, demonstration meetings were organized with representatives of Ukrainian business and trade unions, who called for revision of plans for European integration on their own initiative. The main role in manipulating public opinion rested on the government of Mykola Azarov and the Verkhovna Rada, which had a majority coalition led by the Party of Regions. Instead, Viktor Yanukovych continued his European integration rhetoric and reiterated to Western partners his own willingness to sign the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU. On November 21, the real position of the ruling elite was made available to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. According to it, the process of preparation for the signing of the Association Agreement was suspended, the proposal was made for the trilateral Ukraine-EU-Russia negotiations, and the ministries were tasked with developing measures to maintain economic ties with the CIS countries. The decision was rejected by European partners and led to Yanukovych’s attempts to find other ways to thwart the signing of the Agreement. It has been proved that this role was played by Yanukovych’s requirements for financial assistance from the EU amounting to about 160 billion euros, which aimed to prevent the signing of the Association Agreement. Key words: Viktor Yanukovych, association of Ukraine with the EU, эYulia Tymoshenko, European integration, Pat Cox, Alexander Kwasniewski, Vladimir Putin.


2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Galia Golan

Although Russian President Vladimir Putin has been faced with numerous crises since coming to office in 2000, most importantly the war in Chechnya, the Iraq War was the first major international crisis with which his administration was confronted. As in the case of Kosovo for Yeltsin, and the Gulf War for Gorbachev, the Russian President had to deal with conflicting domestic pressures and apparently still more conflicting Russian national and international interests. Indeed, one result of such a situation was a post-war accusation that Putin actually had no policy or at least no consistent policy with regard to the Iraq crisis [Golan, G., 1992. Gorbachev’s difficult time in the Gulf. Political Science Quarterly 107 (2), 213–230]. One may remember similar accusations of Gorbachev’s ‘‘zigzaging’’ in the Gulf War and claims that the Yeltsin government failed to forge a Kasovo policy altogether [Levitin, O., 2000. Inside Moscow’s Kosovo muddle. Survival 42 (1), 130]. Yet, a certain pattern did appear to repeat itself in the Iraqi crisis, namely, pre-war efforts to prevent a military conflict from breaking out, then gradual escalation of rhetoric if not actual involvement, and finally gradual but relatively rapid retreat to conciliatory posture toward the United States (in all three crises). Moreover, Putin was indeed consistent throughout the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods in his opposition to the Americans’ use of force against Iraq and in the need to remain within a United Nations framework. Actually, one might ask (and we shall below) why Putin did not abandon the first part of this policy, in order to maintain the second component, when it became certain that the U.S. was going to attack, with or without UN Security Council approval.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 077-093
Author(s):  
Marina Yu. Malkina ◽  
◽  
Vyacheslav N. Ovchinnikov ◽  
Konstantin A. Kholodilin ◽  
◽  
...  

The aim of this study is to analyze and assess the impact of institutional factors on political trust in various levels of government (federal, regional and local) in modern Russia. Data and methods. The study is based on microdata from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) “Life in Transition Survey” (LiTS). We examined such institutional factors of political trust as perceived government performance and level of corruption, as well as the level of interpersonal trust. The subjective decile of household wealth was an additional explanatory variable in our analysis. We estimated the model parameters using linear regressions with instrumental variables. Results and their application. First, we found that in 2016 the perceived effectiveness of the federal government was the main determinant of Russian trust in the president. At the same time, the perceived level of local corruption was a major factor of Russian citizens’ (mis)trust in local authorities. Second, we found that poor households turned out to be the most loyal groups of the population towards the Russian president, and we explained this phenomenon by the active redistributive policy of the federal authorities. Third, we revealed a significant positive relationship between political and interpersonal trust at the micro level. In conclusion, we made recommendations on the effective management of political trust in modern Russia.


Author(s):  
O. Kondratenko

The essence of the internal geopolitics of the Russian Federation (RF) and its influence on the foreign policy of Moscow is analyzed in the article. It was found that on the background of Russian nationalism the activation of separatist sentiments in the Russian national autonomies had occurred, particularly in the North Caucasus (Chechnia, Dahestan).Eventually, it caused two Chechen wars, as well as to the formation of dissatisfaction with the Center’s actions in Tatarstan, South and East Siberia and others. However, after internal politics and internal economy shocks of the 1990-th Russia has outlined a course to restore the status of a great state. An important factor for the Russian government is the support of its foreign policy by the population. It is traced that the level of electoral support of the Russian president entirely depends on the success of the Russian Federation on the international arena. Kremlin actively cultivates and uses imperial mood of society in order to justify the return of its “unjustly deprived” great power status. Therefore, governmental expansionist geostrategy obtains active support among theintelligentsia and broad social strata.


Author(s):  
E.V. Bakshutova

This article summarizes the author's research experience in 2018-2020 on the possibility of script implantation in online discussions of an aggressive nature to prevent their destructive impact on personality and social consent. At this stage, script implantation is conceptualized by us as network peacekeeping to reduce the level of aggression in communications. The work analyzes how peacemaking is presented in scientific literature of various directions - military, philosophical, political science, conflictological, and it is revealed that the psychological aspects of peacekeeping are of increasing interest, since the practice of peacekeeping is fraught with many problems. Moreover, the practice of network peacemaking as work with language and group sociocognitive psychology is offered for the first time. The study was conducted in 2018-2020 in the Russian-speaking sector of the social network Facebook. It is shown that the analysis of 5022 comments in 2018, 2458 - in 2019, 3139 - in 2020 allows identifying such trigger topics of online discussions as “It is good or bad to be Russian”, “President of Russia”, “Ukraine”, “Protests”. Social issues: the problems of pensioners, childhood, medicine, education - are discussed, but with less intensity. Summarizing the experience of search experiments, the author shows in which categories and subcategories such phenomena as collective fears, resentment, aggression, separatism and terrorism are represented. Work on creating script templates for networked peacekeeping is noted. An expert assessment of the selected texts allows us to assert that the management of triggered discussions is possible. The research is financially supported by the Russian Foundation for Humanities, project no. 18-013-00171 А.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 531-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell A. Orenstein

Europe is again a divided continent. When it comes to governance, political economy, or values, two contrasting poles have emerged: one Western, liberal, and democratic, another Eastern, statist, and autocratic. The dividing line between them has become ever sharper, threatening to separate Europe into two distinct worlds. This new divide in Europe arises from a clash between two geopolitical concepts for the continent: One is the Western project of a “Europe whole and free,” an enlarging zone of economic cooperation, political interdependency, and democratic values. The other is the Russian project of a “Eurasian Union” to rival the European Union. This article shows how these two sides of Europe have grown further apart in their conceptions of the European space, their values, governance, and economic models. It explores the reasons for the belated Western responses to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s program to divide Europe. The Russo-Georgian war was a turning point, but the West took a long time to recognize the full implications of Putin’s policy. The current confrontation between Russia and the West is not exactly like the Cold War. Russia’s position is weaker. And the battle will be fought out primarily with economic instruments. However, it is clear that this conflict places Central and Eastern Europe back on the front lines of a divided Europe, raising any number of demons from the past.


Author(s):  
Andrea Kendall-Taylor ◽  
Natasha Lindstaedt ◽  
Erica Frantz

Totalitarian regimes 37 Contemporary approaches to disaggregating autocracy 40 Blended regimes and changes over time 48 Conclusion 49 Key Questions 50 Further Reading 50 In Chapter 2, we defined democracy and identified the key characteristics of democratic regimes. In this chapter, we turn our attention to the other side of the political ledger and delve into the world of authoritarianism. Even a casual scan of international news headlines—filled with stories on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s latest feats, China’s rise, and Turkish President Erdoğan’s consolidation of power—reinforces the notion that today’s autocrats are resurgent. After a turbulent decade following the end of the Cold War, many authoritarian regimes have regained their footing and grown bolder and more capable of dealing with dissent....


2019 ◽  
pp. 553-590
Author(s):  
Craig A. Miller

The era of 1990–2008 sees the establishment of the MicroMed organization to further collaboration with NASA on a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). The High School for Health Sciences in Houston is named for DeBakey. DeBakey is consulted in the heart surgery case of Russian President Boris Yeltsin. Baylor and Methodist Hospital celebrate DeBakey’s 50th anniversary in Houston, but then split. Hurricane Katrina disrupts Tulane Medical School, and DeBakey is instrumental in a temporary transfer of personnel and students to Baylor. DeBakey suffers aortic dissection at age 97, but survives the operation—a procedure which he had helped to develop. He continues in his role as medical statesman. DeBakey receives the Congressional Gold Medal, and there is rapprochement between DeBakey and Cooley. Dr. DeBakey dies in 2008, mourned across the globe and recognized as one of the all-time greatest physician-scientists in history.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document