<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Vestnik RUDN. International Relations</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Vestnik RUDN. International Relations</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Международные отношения</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2313-0660</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2313-0679</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Российский университет дружбы народов имени Патриса Лумумбы» (РУДН)</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">42197</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.22363/2313-0660-2024-24-4-563-575</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="edn">LUQGDZ</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>INTEGRATION PROCESSES</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>ИНТЕГРАЦИОННЫЕ ПРОЦЕССЫ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Geopolitics of Connectivity: The EU in Central Asia</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Геополитика коннективности: ЕС в Центральной Азии</trans-title></trans-title-group><trans-title-group xml:lang="zh"><trans-title/></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1150-0193</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">2097-5678</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Mazanik</surname><given-names>Sergey V.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Мазаник</surname><given-names>Сергей Владимирович</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname></surname><given-names></given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Postgraduate Student, Department of European Studies, School of International Relations</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>аспирант кафедры европейских исследований факультета международных отношений</p></bio><email>sergeymazanik97@gmail.com</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5199-0003</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">8791-1970</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Romanova</surname><given-names>Tatiana A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Романова</surname><given-names>Татьяна Алексеевна</given-names></name><name xml:lang="zh"><surname></surname><given-names></given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>PhD (Political Science), Associate Professor, Department of European Studies, School of International Relations</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>кандидат политических наук, доцент кафедры европейских исследований факультета международных отношений</p></bio><email>t.romanova@spbu.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Saint Petersburg State University</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Санкт-Петербургский государственный университет</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="zh"></institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2024-12-15" publication-format="electronic"><day>15</day><month>12</month><year>2024</year></pub-date><volume>24</volume><issue>4</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en">Preserving Identity in a Global World</issue-title><issue-title xml:lang="ru">Сохранение идентичности в глобальном мире</issue-title><fpage>563</fpage><lpage>575</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2024-12-27"><day>27</day><month>12</month><year>2024</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2024, Mazanik S.V., Romanova T.A.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2024, Мазаник С.В., Романова Т.А.</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="zh">Copyright ©; 2024, Mazanik S., Romanova T.</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2024</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Mazanik S.V., Romanova T.A.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Мазаник С.В., Романова Т.А.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="zh">Mazanik S., Romanova T.</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.rudn.ru/international-relations/article/view/42197">https://journals.rudn.ru/international-relations/article/view/42197</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The articulation of the concepts of strategic sovereignty and strategic autonomy in the official discourse of the European Union (EU) is indicative of its geopolitical turn. In this context, the purpose of this article is to clarify how the EU politically redefines the Central Asian space as part of its connectivity strategy (EU Strategy for Connecting Europe and Asia). The theoretical framework of the study is based on critical geopolitics, which, through a discourse analysis approach, makes it possible to identify the changes that EU representatives make in the spatial representation of Central Asia and the dynamics of the significance of this region in the EU’s connectivity strategy. First, critical geopolitics will be operationalized with an emphasis on analytical categories such as discourse, hegemony, identity and ontological security. Thereafter, drawing upon the long-standing academic tradition of considering the EU as a geopolitical actor, the paper clarifies how, under the sway of the ongoing debate on strategic sovereignty (autonomy), the EU deploys the logic of inclusion and exclusion in its relations with third countries. Subsequently, the European connectivity concept will be outlined and the transformation of Central Asia’s role within the framework of the EU’s connectivity strategy will be revealed. The study found that, in the EU’s official discourse, connectivity, which is characterized by both normativity and securitization, is a tool for achieving resilience for the EU and its partners in Central Asia, a means of protecting them from third countries’ attempts to politically and economically weaponize interdependence, a way of preserving the so-called rules-based order as a resource of the EU’s global normative influence, and a way of achieving strategic autonomy that the EU is willing to export as a model. The inclusion of Central Asia in the concept of EU connectivity and the exclusion of other actors promoting their own models of governance and connectivity in this region can turn Central Asia into one of the most important areas of normative confrontation between the EU and the proponents of an alternative world order.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Артикуляция концепций стратегического суверенитета и стратегической автономии в официальном дискурсе Европейского союза (ЕС) свидетельствует о его геополитическом повороте. В этом контексте цель исследования - прояснить, как ЕС политически переопределяет пространство Центральной Азии в рамках стратегии по связыванию Европы и Азии, или стратегии коннективности (connectivity). Теоретическую основу исследования составляет критическая геополитика, позволяющая с опорой на дискурс-анализ как метод выявить изменения, происходящие в пространственной репрезентации Центральной Азии в дискурсе ЕС, а также динамику значения данного региона в стратегии коннективности. Вначале критическая геополитика будет операционализирована с акцентом на такие аналитические категории, как дискурс, гегемония, идентичность и онтологическая безопасность. Затем, опираясь на давно существующие в академической литературе о европейской интеграции представления о ЕС как о геополитическом акторе, выявляется, как под воздействием современной дискуссии о стратегическом суверенитете (автономии) ЕС использует логику включения и исключения в отношениях с третьими странами. Далее будет изложено содержание европейской концепции коннективности и охарактеризована трансформация роли Центральной Азии в стратегии коннективности ЕС. Установлено, что в официальном дискурсе ЕС коннективность, для которой характерны нормативность и уклон в секьюритизацию, является инструментом достижения стрессоустойчивости Евросоюза и его партнеров в Центральной Азии, средством их защиты от попыток третьих стран использовать взаимозависимость как политическое и экономическое оружие, способом сохранения так называемого «порядка, основанного на правилах», - ресурса нормативного влияния ЕС в мире, и достижения стратегической автономии, модель которой ЕС готов экспортировать. Включение Центральной Азии в концепцию коннективности ЕС и исключение из нее иных акторов, продвигающих в данном регионе собственные модели управления и коннективности, может превратить Центральную Азию в одно из наиболее важных пространств нормативного противостояния ЕС и сторонников альтернативного миропорядка.</p></trans-abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="zh"/><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>geopolitical turn</kwd><kwd>critical geopolitics</kwd><kwd>resilience</kwd><kwd>strategic sovereignty</kwd><kwd>strategic autonomy</kwd><kwd>rules-based order</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>геополитический поворот</kwd><kwd>критическая геополитика</kwd><kwd>стрессоустойчивость</kwd><kwd>стратегический суверенитет</kwd><kwd>стратегическая автономия</kwd><kwd>порядок</kwd><kwd>основанный на правилах</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group><award-group><funding-source><institution-wrap><institution xml:lang="ru">Исследование выполнено за счет гранта Российского научного фонда № 22-28-00682, https://rscf.ru/project/22-28-00682/</institution></institution-wrap><institution-wrap><institution xml:lang="en">The research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 22-28-00682, https://rscf.ru/project/22-28-00682/).</institution></institution-wrap></funding-source></award-group></funding-group></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Agnew, J., &amp; Corbridge, S. (1995). Mastering space: Hegemony, territory and international political economy. London: Routledge.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Концепция стрессоустойчивости Европейского союза: артикуляция и ее последствия для России / под ред. Т. А. Романовой. Санкт-Петербург : Изд-во Санкт-Петербургского ун-та, 2019. EDN: MSJNVT</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Boedeltje, F., &amp; van Houtum, H. (2011). Brussels is speaking: The adverse speech geo-politics of the European Union towards its neighbours. Geopolitics, 16(1), 130-145. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2010.493791</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Романова Т. А., Коцур Г. В. От политической либерализации к геополитическому повороту (эволюция дискурса Евросоюза и связь нормативного и материального) // Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2022. Т. 66, № 8. С. 25–33. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-8-25-33; EDN: IJCKIP</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Browning, C. S. (2018). Geostrategies, geopolitics and ontological security in the Eastern neighbourhood: The European Union and the ‘new Cold War’. Political Geography, 62, 106-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2017.10.009</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Романова Т. А., Мазаник С. В. Влияние координационного дискурса о «стратегическом суверенитете» Евросоюза на его институциональный баланс // Вестник МГИМО-Университета. 2022. Т. 15, № 5. С. 79–112. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2022-5-86-79-112; EDN: OOIZHD</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Dalby, S., &amp; Tuathail, G. Ó. (1996). The critical geopolitics constellation: Problematizing fusions of geographical knowledge and power. Political Geography, 15(6-7), 451-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/0962-6298(96)00026-1</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Agnew J., Corbridge S. Mastering Space: Hegemony, Territory and International Political Economy. London : Routledge, 1995.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Dodds, K. J. (1993). Geopolitics, experts and the making of foreign policy. Area, 25(1), 70-74.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Boedeltje F., van Houtum H. Brussels Is Speaking: The Adverse Speech Geo-Politics of the European Union Towards Its Neighbours // Geopolitics. 2011. Vol. 16, no. 1. P. 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2010.493791</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Dzhuraev, S. (2022) The EU’s Central Asia policy: No chance for change? Central Asian Survey, 41(4), 639-653. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2022.2054951</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Browning C. S. Geostrategies, Geopolitics and Ontological Security in the Eastern Neighbourhood: The European Union and the ‘New Cold War’ // Political Geography. 2018. Vol. 62. P. 106–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2017.10.009</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Elden, S. (2010). Thinking territory historically. Geopolitics, 15(4), 757-761. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14650041003717517</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Dalby S., Tuathail G. Ó. The Critical Geopolitics Constellation: Problematizing Fusions of Geographical Knowledge and Power // Political geography. 1996. Vol. 15, no. 6–7. P. 451–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/0962-6298(96)00026-1</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Fawn, R. (2022). ‘Not here for geopolitical interests or games’: The EU’s 2019 strategy and the regional and inter-regional competition for Central Asia. Central Asian Survey, 41(4), 675-698. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2021.1951662</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Dodds K. J. Geopolitics, Experts and the Making of Foreign Policy // Area. 1993. Vol. 25, no. 1. P. 70–74.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Gaens, B., Sinkkonen, V., &amp; Vogt, H. (2023). Connectivity and order: An analytical framework. East Asia, 40, 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-023-09401-z</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Dzhuraev S. The EU’s Central Asia Policy: No Chance for Change? // Central Asian Survey. 2022. Vol. 41, no. 4. P. 639–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2022.2054951</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Godehardt, N., &amp; Kohlenberg, P. J. (2020). China’s global connectivity politics: A meta-geography in the making. In P. J. Kohlenberg &amp; N. Godehardt (Eds.), The multidimensionality of regions in world politics (pp. 191-214). London: Routledge.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Elden S. Thinking Territory Historically // Geopolitics. 2010. Vol. 15, no. 4. P. 757–761. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650041003717517</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Grygiel, J. (2015). The geopolitics of Europe: Europe’s illusions and delusions. Orbis, 59(4), 505-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2015.08.002</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Fawn R. ‘Not Here for Geopolitical Interests or Games’: The EU’s 2019 Strategy and the Regional and Inter-Regional Competition for Central Asia // Central Asian Survey. 2022. Vol. 41, no. 4. P. 675–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2021.1951662</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Haukkala, H. (2008). The European Union as a regional normative hegemon: The case of European Neighbourhood Policy. Europe - Asia Studies, 60(9), 1601-1622. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668130802362342</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Gaens B., Sinkkonen V., Vogt H. Connectivity and Order: An Analytical Framework // East Asia. 2023. Vol. 40. P. 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-023-09401-z</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Hoffmann, K. (2010). The EU in Central Asia: Successful good governance promotion? Third World Quarterly, 31(1), 87-103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590903557397</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Godehardt N., Kohlenberg P. J. China’s Global Connectivity Politics: A Meta-Geography in the Making // The Multidimensionality of Regions in World Politics / ed. by P. J. Kohlenberg, N. Godehardt. London : Routledge, 2020. P. 191–214.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Karjalainen, T. (2023). European norms trap? EU connectivity policies and the case of the global gateway. East Asia, 40, 293-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-023-09403-x</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Grygiel J. The Geopolitics of Europe: Europe’s Illusions and Delusions // Orbis. 2015. Vol. 59, no. 4. P. 505–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2015.08.002</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Lavenex, S., &amp; Schimmelfennig, F. (2009). EU rules beyond EU borders: Theorizing external governance in European politics. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(6), 791-812. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760903087696</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Haukkala H. The European Union as a Regional Normative Hegemon: The Case of European Neighbourhood Policy // Europe — Asia Studies. 2008. Vol. 60, no. 9. P. 1601–1622. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09668130802362342</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Makarychev, A. (2020). Illiberalism, post-liberalism, geopolitics: The EU in Central Asia. Acta Via Serica, 5(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.22679/avs.2020.5.1.001</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Hoffmann K. The EU in Central Asia: Successful Good Governance Promotion? // Third World Quarterly. 2010. Vol. 31, no. 1. P. 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436590903557397</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Moisio, S. (2002). EU eligibility, Central Europe, and the invention of applicant state narrative. Geopolitics, 7(3), 89-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/714000971</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Karjalainen T. European Norms Trap? EU Connectivity Policies and the Case of the Global Gateway // East Asia. 2023. Vol. 40. P. 293–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-023-09403-x</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Moisio, S. (2015). Geopolitics/critical geopolitics. In J. Agnew, V. Mamadouh, A. J. Secor &amp; J. Sharp. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to political geography (pp. 220-234). Chichister: John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118725771.ch17</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Lavenex S., Schimmelfennig F. EU Rules beyond EU Borders: Theorizing External Governance in European Politics // Journal of European Public Policy. 2009. Vol. 16, no. 6. P. 791–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760903087696</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Olson, E., &amp; Sayer, A. (2009). Radical geography and its critical standpoints: Embracing the normative. Antipode, 41(1), 180-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2008.00661.x</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Makarychev A. Illiberalism, Post-liberalism, Geopolitics: The EU in Central Asia // Acta Via Serica. 2020. Vol. 5, no. 1. P. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.22679/avs.2020.5.1.001</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Romanova, T. A. (Ed.). (2019). The European Union’s concept of resilience: articulation and its consequences for Russia. Saint Petersburg: Izd-vo Sankt-Peterburgskogo un-ta publ. (In Russian). EDN: MSJNVT</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Moisio S. EU Eligibility, Central Europe, and the Invention of Applicant State Narrative // Geopolitics. 2002. Vol. 7, no. 3. P. 89–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/714000971</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Romanova, T. A., &amp; Kotsur, G. V. (2022). From political liberalization to geopolitical turn (evolution of the EU’s discourse, and the link between the normative and the material). World Economy and International Relations, 66(8), 25-33. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2022-66-8-25-33; EDN: IJCKIP</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Moisio S. Geopolitics/Critical Geopolitics // The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Political Geography / ed. by J. Agnew, V. Mamadouh, A. J. Secor, J. Sharp. Chichister : John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd., 2015. P. 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118725771.ch17</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Romanova, T. A., &amp; Mazanik, S. V. (2022). Coordinative discourse of strategic sovereignty tilting the European Union’s institutional balance. MGIMO Review of International Relations, 15(5), 79-112. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2022-5-86-79-112; EDN: OOIZHD</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Olson E., Sayer A. Radical Geography and Its Critical Standpoints: Embracing the Normative // Antipode. 2009. Vol. 41, no. 1. P. 180–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2008.00661.x</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Smith, K. E. (2005). The outsiders: the European neighbourhood policy. International Affairs, 81(4), 757-773. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00483.x</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Smith K. E. The Outsiders: The European Neighbourhood Policy // International Affairs. 2005. Vol. 81, no. 4. P. 757–773. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00483.x</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tocci, N. (2020). Resilience and the role of the European Union in the world. Contemporary Security Policy, 41(2), 176-194. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2019.1640342</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tocci N. Resilience and the Role of the European Union in the World // Contemporary Security Policy. 2020. Vol. 41, no. 2. P. 176–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2019.1640342</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tuathail, G. Ó. (1996). Critical geopolitics: The politics of writing global space. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tuathail G. Ó. Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press, 1996.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B26"><label>26.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tuathail, G. Ó. (1998). Postmodern geopolitics? The modern geopolitical imagination and beyond. In S. Dalby &amp; G. Ó. Tuathail (Eds.), Rethinking geopolitics (pp. 16-38). London: Routledge.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tuathail G. Ó. Postmodern Geopolitics? The Modern Geopolitical Imagination and Beyond // Rethinking Geopolitics / ed. by S. Dalby, G. Ó. Tuathail. London : Routledge, 1998. P. 16–38.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B27"><label>27.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tuathail, G. Ó. (1999). Understanding critical geopolitics: Geopolitics and risk society. Journal of Strategic Studies, 22(2-3), 107-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402399908437756</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tuathail G. Ó. Understanding Critical Geopolitics: Geopolitics and Risk Society // Journal of Strategic Studies. 1999. Vol. 22, no. 2–3. P. 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402399908437756</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B28"><label>28.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Tuathail, G. Ó., &amp; Agnew, J. (1992). Geopolitics and discourse: Practical geopolitical reasoning in American foreign policy. Political Geography, 11(2), 190-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/0962-6298(92)90048-X</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Tuathail G. Ó., Agnew J. Geopolitics and Discourse: Practical Geopolitical Reasoning in American Foreign Policy // Political Geography. 1992. Vol. 11, no. 2. P. 190–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/0962-6298(92)90048-X</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="B29"><label>29.</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Whittaker, N. (2018). Island race: Ontological security and critical geopolitics in British parliamentary discourse. Geopolitics, 23(4), 954-985. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2017.1390743</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Whittaker N. The Island Race: Ontological Security and Critical Geopolitics in British Parliamentary Discourse // Geopolitics. 2018. Vol. 23, no. 4. P. 954–985. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2017.1390743</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list></back></article>
