NATO-Russia’s conflictual relationship represents one of the main elements of the international system, at least since the end of the Cold War, having a significant impact in the rivalry involving Great Powers, such as: the United States, Russia, Germany, Great Britain, France and others. In fact, this intricate relationship between the Atlantic Alliance and Moscow has been tainted by mistrust, mutual accusations and ‘security dilemma’ situations, that has brought a constant state of tension in NATO-Russia interactions over the years. This paper aims to summarize, starting from the Cold War era, the main political events that led to the establishment of mistrust between these two actors, bringing forth both NATO’s and Russia’s views about how each other’s actions prompted long-standing perceptions of enmity that culminated in the current scenario of an almost ‘impending war’ due to the situation in Ukraine.
Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi are transformative leaders who aspire to leave their names in history. With a strong political portfolio and extensive growth in the economy, they are developing a confident and robust stance towards the role of their country in the global order. The paper aims to analyze the domestic and international strategies of Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi in order to explore the implications of their leadership on the border issue. The paper first explores the theoretical frameworks of leadership studies and their implications for security aspects. Then the contextual and individual characteristics of leaders are assessed. Further, the paper focuses on the foreign policy approaches of both leaders that impact the border issue and prospects for a border settlement. In the conclusion, the author summarizes the possible outcomes of the leaders’ policy on the development of the border issue.
Keywords: China, India, China-India relations, Leadership, Border issue
The paper analyzes the normative-formative framework that denotes the connection between memory and identity as a crucial origin of conflicts. In addition to concerns about memory politics, historical revisionism and ethnonational identity collectivism, the paper dissolves the connection between phenomena highlighting outcomes of the peace process, transitional justice, and its ethical/moral connotations. The study argues that Western Balkan’s sociopolitical stability depends on declining conflicting and contradictory memory order within radical sociopolitical processes. The revisionist contention memorializes
conflicts and wars as the fundamental concept of ethnicity/religion/nation. It overlaps with the neoliberal and neoconservative reduction of all competitive relations, in which only the stronger have the right to existence. Discarding dominant ethnopolitical narratives is essential for conflict transformation and transitional justice for all ethnoreligious communities. The Balkan historical events and conflicting memory (WW2, Yugoslav wars) caused sociopolitical dominion shaping the collective behavior of ethnic groups. The damaging ethnic/religious practice of genocide denial and honoring war crimes within people’s social lives can become a matrix for future conflicts. Placing memory politics with radical populism is a critical condition of collective identity politics in the former Yugoslavia. Scientific rationality can provide a solid
path through the anomalies in the form of political ideologies.
Keywords: Former Yugoslavia, National identities, Ethnopolitics, Historical revisionism, Social memory