“Geopolitical Disorder” in the World and Russia

The article considers the state of the modern international system, in connection with which are disputed the affirmations concerning its multipolarity or the already emerging bipolarity, embodied by the United States and China. Neither the first nor the second definition is based on the concept of “pole”, as it was formed during the years of opposition between the United States and the Soviet Union. The current situation can rather be described as a “geopolitical disorder”. Traditional and emerging powers are fighting for a higher place in the new hierarchy, forging new alliances, often opportunistic, that predetermines the volatility and instability of the system. For States that are inferior in total national power to the United States or China, particularly for Russia, this creates new opportunities, especially in the framework of multilateral diplomacy. At the same time Russia, due to its economic weakness and the threat of a general technological backwardness, risks losing its status of power or, at least, being seriously squeezed by competitors. Hence the need for it to moderate its ambitions as a power and concentrate on implementing reforms aimed at modernizing the economy. The predicted decrease for some time in the resources of the state, due to this, will also require to adapt its foreign policy priorities and to focus on vital national interests.

A Human Rights Agenda for the Biden Administration

The Biden administration has much to do to restore the United States’ credibility as a human rights leader and to strengthen the human rights system in an era of rising right-wing nationalism, authoritarianism, and competition for global power. In doing so, it needs to lead by example by putting its own house in order, and act with both courage and humility in the face of deep global skepticism and distrust. Specifically, the administration should pursue five stages of engagement on human rights: reverse and revoke measures taken by the Trump administration, reaffirm the United States’ traditional commitments to human rights at home and abroad, rebuild the State Department and diplomatic corps, reengage with international and regional mechanisms through bilateral and multilateral diplomacy, and reconceptualize the United States’ twenty-first century relationship to human rights. All of the other topics addressed in this symposium—climate, health, elections, migration, structural racism, and trade—implicate human rights. None can be adequately addressed without a robust U.S. human rights agenda.

The role of “personal factor” in British-Russian relations in 2016—2019

The article studies the key concepts and theories that had been forming the basis of Chilean multilateral diplomacy in 1990-2017. The author describes the essential pillars of Chilean foreign policy towards international organizations and offers its structured model-scheme which allows getting the systematic understanding of the related phenomena.

Conceptual and theoretical framework of multilateral diplomacy of Chile (1990—2017)

The article studies the key concepts and theories that had been forming the basis of Chilean multilateral diplomacy in 1990-2017. The author describes the essential pillars of Chilean foreign policy towards international organizations and offers its structured model-scheme which allows getting the systematic understanding of the related phenomena.

Brazilian Foreign Policy under Jair Bolsonaro

The paper focuses on the analysis of Brazilian for-eign policy under Jair Bolsonaro since his inaugura-tion as president in January 2019 up to the present moment. This study examines Jair Bolsonaro’s per-sonality and the influence of Brazilian president’s certain character traits on foreign policy decisions. The author concludes that Jair Bolsonaro has won presidential election in autumn 2018 largely due to disenchantment of Brazilians with socially oriented public policy. Due to the fact that Jair Bolsonaro adheres to the right-wing radical views, thinks of himself as anti-globalist and advocates the devel-opment of bilateral relations at the expense of multi-lateral ones, even before he came to power re-searchers and political experts had predicted Brazil’s rapprochement with the USA, Italy and Israel, a cold snap in bilateral relations with China, a coming rup-ture in relations with Cuba and Venezuela and Bra-zil’s withdrawal from the UN, the OAS, Mercosur, UNASUR and the BRICS. Reality, however, turned out to be much more challenging and the forecasts of political experts came true only partially. Since from the very beginning J. Bolsonaro was supported by such various groups as the military, evangelicals, representatives of agribusiness, economists, they often suggested to him absolutely contradictory foreign policy decisions. As a result, almost any step in the international arena was replaced by a retreat: criticism of China's expansion was followed by the signing of economic agreements with him, after the announcement of the intention to move the embas-sy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, followed by visits to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE. Although J. Bolsonaro criticized multilateral diplomacy, he achieved the signing of agreements between Mer-cosur and the EU, Mercosur and EFTA. Nevertheless, the President of Brazil has invariably adhered to the course of automatic alignment with the United States and developed relations mainly with regimes close to him in ideology. It is difficult to judge how correct this strategy was, but in the future the Brazil-ian government must first of all be guided by the interests of the country, remember the need for its autonomy and economic prosperity.