This article develops a conceptual framework for analyzing national systems of international aid provision. It proposes an original definition of such systems that accounts for the multidimensional nature of this phenomenon and the plurality of actors and roles in the twenty-first century. The novelty of the approach lies in prioritizing specialization in aid-related activities. Dividing all elements into specialized and unspecialized allows for an abstract model of the aid system as a totality of two closely interconnected subsystems: (1) bodies of state and municipal governance and legal entities established and/or controlled by them; (2) private entities and individuals. Within each subsystem, a core – comprising inner and outer zones – and a periphery are distinguished. These zones differ in the degree of specialization of their elements and in their “temperature”, that is, the intensity of interaction. The central and “hottest” area is the inner core, which includes a bridge of hybrid structures belonging simultaneously to both subsystems. The article differentiates between unspecialized and specialized elements, drawing on examples from foreign states and the Russian Federation, and identifies three key flows for system functioning: financial resources, personnel, and signals. It analyzes the circulation of these flows within the system and between the system and its external environment and systematizes empirically observable forms of interaction between different types of elements. The findings contribute to the development of a methodology for case-oriented and cross-country studies of international aid systems, including their specific features, functioning, and adaptation to shocks of different origins and scales.

This study examines how the United States interpreted and framed its major military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq during the first two decades of the twenty-first century, taking into account the enduring influence of memories of the Vietnam War (1965–1973). That conflict generated a distinctive phenomenon commonly referred to as the “Vietnam Syndrome,” characterized by profound socio-politi- cal disorientation within American society throughout the 1970s and 1980s. The memory and perceived lessons of the Vietnam War remain an integral component of any debate concerning the possible use of U.S. military force. The article aims to identify the relevant discursive practices and communities and to elucidate the role of Vietnam War memory within these debates. The findings indicate the existence of several distinct discourses on the military and political lessons of recent wars, reflected in the discursive practices of the respective communities. In the broader public and political discourse–represented in commentary, investigative journalism, and public opinion–wars are assessed primarily in terms of losses and unjustified costs, the legitimacy of initiating military operations, and the responsibility of political leaders who authorized them. These discursive practices, which first crystallized during the Vietnam War, reappear in discussions of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and correspond to a “victimhood” discourse in the sense used in critical discourse analysis. Political leaders responsible for initiating military action tend to justify the legitimacy of the wars and shift responsibility onto military executors and onto the presidents who oversaw troop withdrawals. Military personnel, reflecting on their operational experience, generally attribute responsibility for failures to policymakers who launched the wars, emphasizing the dif- ficulty–or outright impossibility–of achieving political objectives through military means. Comparable discursive practices are found in U.S. Congressional documents and in executive-branch agencies that supervise the allocation and use of funds for war efforts. These communities typically articulate an “exec- utor” discourse and invoke analogous implementation problems from past military campaigns as “lessons” that have been only partially learned.

Using the course chosen by the Carter administration in relation to the Grenada Revolution as an example, this article examines attempts to reform the foundations of US foreign policy. To explore this issue, the author draws on realist constructivism, which suggests that the definition of national interests and the formation of a state's foreign policy strategy, along with strengthening its power and influence, are underpinned by its desire to preserve its identity and adhere to certain value systems. By legitimizing human rights and transforming them into a principle of respect for national sovereignty, Carter sought to challenge the Monroe Doctrine and the established Cold War practice of interference in the internal affairs of Latin American countries. Examining the imperatives of the US government's decision­-making regarding Grenada, the author concludes that, contrary to the widespread opinion in domestic and foreign historiography that the United States chose a path of confrontation with the revolutionary government of Grenada, discrediting it, and undermining the country's economic stability, during Carter's presidency Washington sought to establish a dialogue with the new government of this island state. The case of Grenada, like other Central America and Caribbean nations undergoing domestic political transformation, became embroiled in the internationalized conflicts characteristic of the Cold War. This context provides a critical lens for tracing the logic, contradictions and challenges inherent in Carter’s “moral” foreign policy. This paper illustrates how international dynamics and the balance of domestic political forces in both countries ultimately undermined this strategy, yielding consequences that often contradicted the reforms’ original objectives. Beyond its historical significance, this case offers valuable insights for scholars of International Relations theory. As an empirical study, it underscores the relevance and efficacy of recently proposed theoretical approaches, making it a compelling subject for both historians and IR theorists.

The influence of highly developed criminal organizations, such as gangs and cartels, has expanded dramatically, enabling these entities to exercise forceful territorial control and supplant state authority in affected regions. This phenomenon poses a fundamental threat to state security, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean, where it transcends traditional organized crime. As criminal groups achieve sufficient organizational capacity, resources, and personnel, they evolve into criminal insurgents. This paper conceptualizes criminal insurgencies as a form of non-classical military conflict meeting the criteria for internal armed conflicts. Such insurgencies may proliferate through transnational criminal networks. This study aims to demonstrate, via a case study of a specific transnational criminal network, how the integration of criminal organizations into these networks facilitates the expansion or intensification of criminal insurgencies. Criminal organizations operating in states without pre-existing emergencies, but with conducive conditions can initiate insurgencies through integration into transnational criminal networks. This is attributed to faster evolution of criminal groups by exchanging information, organizational innovations, resources and by providing access to global illegal markets. Conditions for insurgencies emerge even in regions previously unaffected. Using social network analysis, this study maps a transnational criminal network comprising 27 gangs and cartels across six countries. The network’s topology is examined, identifying two subnetworks and the pivotal role of connector nodes. Findings indicate that participation in transnational criminal networks amplifies the spread and intensity of criminal insurgencies, which, as non-classical military conflicts, inflict damage on states and societies comparable to traditional military conflicts. The corruption factor in a number of Latin American and Caribbean countries and the connection of their governments with criminal organizations is shown. The commercial nature of these insurgencies, driven by non-state actors with criminal and economic incentives, underscores their destabilizing potential. Ultimately, the study argues that the foundation of criminal insurgencies lies in the evolutionary dynamics of criminal organizations, with transnational network participation serving as a critical precursor.

The aim of the article is to conduct a micro-level assessment of the effectiveness of Russian-Indian scientific and technological cooperation and to identify the potential for its enhancement through the instruments of science diplomacy. A brief terminological analysis of the concepts of "international scientific and technological cooperation" and "science diplomacy" is presented, outlining their essential characteristics and interrelation. The important role of scientific foundations as institutions of science diplomacy, whose activities are aimed at supporting international scientific and technological cooperation, is highlighted. India was chosen for this study due to its growing global influence in science and innovation, as well as the existing potential for expanding scientific and technological cooperation with Russia in the current geopolitical landscape. The research was conducted by surveying the leaders of Russian-Indian scientific projects that received grant funding from the RSF and RFBR (now RNF) between 2009 and 2024. The total number of such projects is 490. The overall sample consisted of 51 respondents, including 35 Indian and 16 Russian scientists. According to the results obtained, financial support is a determining factor for initiating Russian-Indian scientific and technological cooperation. Informal communication channels between scientists of the two countries play a significant role in establishing scientific ties. The main factors hindering cooperation include insufficient funding, differences in requirements (including performance indicators), and geopolitical risks. In some cases, after the grant ends, cooperation ceases or is reduced to academic correspondence, demonstrating its temporary and superficial nature. The systematization and concentration of efforts by Russia and India in the field of science diplomacy should be aimed both at supporting new scientific and technological links and at ensuring their long-term sustainability.

The growing demand from governing bodies of integration blocs for tools to assess the benefits and costs of integration has stimulated the development of monitoring and evaluation systems. Almost all integration groupings design their own assessment frameworks, yet no universally accepted indicator set or standard for measuring integration has emerged. A promising avenue is to evaluate regional economic integration through the state of non-tariff measures (NTMs). Building on advances in big data processing, the InterAgency Support Group (IASG) has proposed an index of “regulatory distance” that measures divergence in NTM regimes between member states. The index is based on the standardized count of NTM combinations by product that are applied identically by any pair of countries. It captures both the intensity and quality of NTM application, enabling international comparison and providing a tool for the operational management of integration. Its reproducibility and comparability depend on the standardization of data handling at all stages of NTM processing, as codified in the UN Secretary-General’s Data Strategy. In the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), however, this approach is not yet applied. Owing to the specific treatment of NTMs in the EAEU, available data are not directly comparable with UN and WTO databases, and require costly reformatting before use in regulatory distance calculations. As a result, the regulatory distance index for the EAEU remains underexplored. This article develops a methodology for calculating a matrix of regulatory distance indices for EAEU member states using international data and presents the first such calculation in Russian economic literature.