Since the mid-2000s, the American energy industry has undergone profound changes. Having made the so-called shale revolution and achieved impressive results in the field of energy efficiency and renewable energy, the United States of America has not only radically reduced its dependence on imported hydrocarbons, but has begun to increase exports of these commodities. Given the economic weight of the U.S., such changes have significantly transformed the global energy market, requiring leading oil and gas exporters (including Russia) to take non-standard steps (for example, the OPEC+ deal). They also created serious prerequisites for Washington’s revision of its traditional energy policy in the international arena. The author makes a conclusion that the United States has not yet come out of the paradigm of net oil importer, which was formed after the first world oil crisis of 1973-1974. This means that Washington is still committed to the traditional principles of it’s foreign energy policy: diversification of oil import sources; promotion of free trade in world energy; special relations with oil exporters in the Persian Gulf and the strategic importance of the Middle East; reliance on energy suppliers from the Western hemisphere, etc. However, having radically reduced oil and gas imports and having got the opportunity to export them, the United States could not help but bring something new to its energy policy. While still prioritizing security of energy supply, the U.S. under B. Obama has started talking about the American energy independence, and D. Trump has proclaimed the global energy dominance as a new key American goal. The author assumes that global energy dominance implies Washington’s aggressive promotion of the American energy exporters, as well as its intention to turn the U.S. into a technological leader and a key regulator in the global energy market. Moreover, the U.S. has become freer in the matter of sanctions and other pressure on major oil and gas exporters, guided by its geopolitical and economic interests. Due to the growth of the American oil and gas export potential, the confrontation between Moscow and Washington in the energy sector, which began during the Cold war, has now acquired an additional economic dimension. Previously, the United States has tried to restrain the development of the Soviet, later Russian energy industry, but acted purely in the logic of political rivalry, not economic competition. Thus, in the foreseeable future the United States is unlikely to abandon its attempts to politicize and discredit Russia as an energy supplier to Europe and other regions of the world.

This article examines the current state of nuclear power in the Middle East. The construction of nuclear power plants is closely related to the issues of energy security in the region. The necessity and prerequisites for diversification of the energy balance in the countries of the region, as well as the need for a reliable source of electricity, which will completely solve the problem of growing demand, are analyzed. The authors analyze the role of the Russian Federation in the development of nuclear energy in the Middle East and assess the prospects in the market of services in this sector, consider cooperation in the nuclear sector with all states of the region, identify the advantages and prospects of Russia’s possible participation in the implementation of nuclear power plant construction projects in the Middle East. The most promising direction for the development of nuclear energy today is the use of fast neutron technology and a closed cycle that allows the processing of spent nuclear fuel. The possession of such technologies has a significant potential for export and international cooperation and is a significant technological advantage of Russia. Rosatom group has competitive advantages in the market of nuclear technologies, including in the Middle East, as it has competencies in all parts of the production and technological chain of nuclear energy. The Russian Federation participates in many projects related to the construction of nuclear power plants and related infrastructure and plays a significant role in the development of nuclear energy in the Middle East, cooperates with all countries in the region that are promising for cooperation in this direction, having intergovernmental agreements, which include the construction of nuclear power plants with such States as Egypt, Jordan, Iran, UAE, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and memorandums of cooperation with Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman.

For the past few decades, the Arctic Ocean has experienced a rapid reduction in both the extent and amount of sea ice. These events, caused by global temperature increase, opened previously inaccessible sea shipping lanes and made possible the extraction of natural resources from deposits previously inaccessible. Such changes entailed an increase in the activity of states both belonging to the Arctic region and those outside it - this led to a gradual increase in rivalry between the leading powers for the development of resources in the Arctic and for the control of shipping routes. The author points out that in the Arctic, unlike other regions, a unique situation has developed due to the interdependence of all actors, which is associated with the special environmental conditions and the commonality of both economic and public interests. The author analyzes the way how the great powers interaction affects the Arctic region. Using the example of the growing Russian-American rivalry being key for the Arctic, the author stresses a softening effect of the institutional regional base. Against this background, the level of interest of another leading power in this region - the PRC - is also growing. Unlike the Russian Federation and the USA, China adheres to the non-confrontational path in the Arctic region, advocating peace and stability strategy, which is associated mainly with the natural resource potential of the Arctic and the possibilities of using the Northern Sea Route. As a result, the rivalry of states in the northern latitudes can be described in terms of the Cold War competition on a regional scale.

The concept of multipolarity has come a long way from its categorical rejection by Western politicians and scholars to the strong necessity of taking into account the realities of a multipolar world even by US closest allies. The article is devoted to the analysis of the official discourse, normative and positive concepts of the study of polarity, including system models of international relations, an empirical assessment of the current distribution of power in the world, as well as forecasting the further development of world dynamics. An analysis of the political discourse on polarity over the past 25 years is made and the most significant political figures are highlighted - defenders of multipolarity (BRICS and EU countries) as well as adherents of the unipolar world (NATO countries). The basic theories (mainly of a normative nature) that conceptualize both unipolar discourse (hegemonic stability theory) and multipolar one (theory of multipolar world) are shown. The intellectual segregation between two main approaches to the study of international systems is provided - abstract verbal models of systems vs empirical (quantitative) system research. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the real distribution of power in the international arena. The main approaches and related methodological challenges are considered. Analysis of the relative shares of USA, Russia (USSR) and China in world power based on Composite Index of National Capability (CINC) is provided. The assessment of material potential is complemented by a multifactor (more than 30 parameters) comprehensive study of both “hard” and “soft” power of three countries. The main theoretical approaches to the concept of multipolarity are clarified. The empirical analysis revealed the formation of a “new bipolarity” (USA and China) while maintaining the leading role of the Russian Federation in the field of high politics and global security. It is predicted that China is gradually “trying on” the role of a new hegemon and is already less interested in a radical revision of the current world order. The strategic adaptation of the closest US allies to the realities of a multipolar world is shown.

Since the independence of the continent, there have been failed attempts to industrialize it using import-substitution policy, which gave rise to the idea of regional integration as an instrument to facilitate structural transformation in Africa. Consequently, African countries have embraced regional integration as an essential element of their development strategies principally driven by the economic rational of overcoming the restraint of small and fractioned economies working in isolation. The establishment of the Organization for African Unity (OAU) in 1963 believed to contribute to many integration initiatives. Even after the transformation of OAU to AU, leaders of the continent once again emphasized their dedication to the idea of regional integration. Obviously, even in the future the issue will continue to be one of the main economic agendas of the continent as there is a widely shared belief that regional cooperation is crucial to tackle development challenges that cannot be addressed at a national level. The cardinal objective of this paper is to assess the obstacles of regional integration in the Horn of Africa. Hence, the findings show that political instability, conflicts, overlapping membership and weak infrastructure are the main challenges for regional integration in East Africa.

Belarusian-Azerbaijani relations are characterized by quite gradual development. Initially both republics were not seriously interested in each other. As a result, diplomatic relations were not immediately established. This state of practical affairs determined the lack of research interest in the Belarusian-Azerbaijani dialog. Nevertheless, from time to time the BelarusianAzerbaijani relations influence the economic confrontation between Belarus and Russia. Therefore, the study of this issue becomes relevant, as it helps identifying the real state of cooperation, prospects for its development and problems that Belarus and Azerbaijan may face while developing bilateral relations. The key research focus is on studying different areas of Belarusian-Azerbaijani cooperation and on analyzing the way how the practical results of this area cooperation contribute to solving specific problems faced by the Belarusian and Azerbaijani authorities. Analysis and synthesis are the main methods used for achieving the research goals. The study of specific areas of bilateral cooperation - energy, military, economic, political and others will make it possible to understand the crucial importance of each of the areas. Consideration of the problem as a whole on the basis of the analyzed material will allow finding out the reasons of the specific political decisions and actions. As a conclusion, the author assumes that Azerbaijan’s interest in cooperation with Belarus is mostly based on economic and military considerations. Belarus has helped Azerbaijan in establishing a licensed assembly of civilian equipment, and also sells it military equipment, including the most modern, which the Republic possesses. In its turn, Belarus’ interest in Azerbaijan primarily lies on energy and ideological components, which are tightly interlinked. With Azerbaijani energy carriers, Minsk tried to demonstrate to Moscow that the option of replacement for Russian oil was real. In addition, Belarus could get a loan from Azerbaijan to repay its debt to Russia. This gave the Belarusian President a reason to put relations with Azerbaijan higher than with closer allies in the Collective Security Treaty Organization, which caused distrust of Belarus on the part of some of its members.

The article presents the summary of the political psychology scientific research, fully corresponding to the academic traditions of the Department of Sociology and Psychology of Politics of Moscow State University. The study was devoted to a political and psychological analysis of the personality traits of populist-type politicians. The objectives of this study included psychological diagnosis and assessment of the personality of US President Donald Trump. A number of general scientific principles were used, including the principle of complexity, systematicity, subjectivity, integrability, reflexivity and optimality. The identification of basic psychological characteristics and the analysis of the most pronounced personality traits of Donald Trump were carried out using a methodology that combines wide research capabilities of of political science, psychology and sociology. The specificity of the research predefined using distant methods of data collection and processing, due to the inaccessibility of the studied personality. The biography method, content analysis and observation method were chosen as guiding. Scientific research concluded with forming a political and psychological profile of the American leader’s personality. According to the typology proposed by R. Ziller, he belongs to the category of “apolitical politician”, which indicates an overestimated self-esteem, nonconformism, and no dependence on the opinions of those around him. In addition, according to the L. Etheredge’s typology of styles of interpersonal relationships, Donald Trump is an extrovert with a high level of dominance. The political behavior of the President of the United States corresponds to the type of “agitator” in accordance with the typologies of G. Lasswell.

Stanislav Zakharovich Zhiznin is the founder of energy diplomacy in Russia and in the world, the author of the term “energy diplomacy”, a leading Russian expert on energy policy, diplomacy and international energy security. Prof. Zhiznin published first Russian textbook on energy diplomacy and many monographs on energy diplomacy, in Russian, English, and Chinese [Zhiznin 2005]. S.Z. Zhiznin graduated from the Kharkiv Aviation Institute in 1969 with a degree in electrical engineering, then - from the Diplomatic Academy of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1977 with a degree in international economic relations. In 1998 he defended his Candidate’s thesis on the issue “Energy diplomacy of Russia at the turn of the 20th - 21st centuries (foreign economic aspects)”, and in 2001 - his Doctor’s dissertation on “Strategic interests of Russia in world energy” and became a Doctor of Science (Economics). He has been working in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation since 1977. S. Zhiznin has a Diplomatic Rank of 1st Class Counsellor. Until the end of 2010, he was the chief adviser to the Department of Economic Cooperation of the Russian MFA. S. Zhiznin is currently a professor at the Department of International Dimension of Fuel and Energy Industry named after N.P. Laverov, MGIMO. He contributed to the development of the information materials for the Russian delegation for the meetings of G8 (now G7), OPEC, IEA, Gas Exporting Countries Forum, International Energy Forum, APEC, etc. S.Z. Zhiznin is the President of the Center for Energy Diplomacy and Geopolitics, established in 2003 with the participation of the Union of Oil & Gas Producers of Russia and support of the Russian MFA. In 2011, he became an OSCE expert on energy diplomacy and energy security. The interview presents the formation of energy diplomacy as a science, covers the evolution of the concept of “energy diplomacy”, discusses the energy factor influence on the policies of Russia and other countries, analyses the role of TNCs in shaping the state’s energy policy. Energy diplomacy, as S.Z. Zhiznin points out, is a complex symbiosis of economics, geopolitics, and technological sciences; so, research in energy diplomacy is inextricably linked with these sciences. At present, energy diplomacy is being heavily influenced by the technology development, which makes states take into account this factor while forming their energy strategies.

The article analyses the prospects for the implementation of the largest international scientific and technical project (“mega-science” project) ITER of controlled thermonuclear fusion. With the depletion of fossil fuel reserves, the role of new energy sources, including those that have not yet been developed, is increasing. Due to the extremely high costs and ambitious scientific goals facing the project, its practical implementation and funding are possible in close international scientific and technical cooperation in the energy sector. The role of an international group of seven participants (Russia, the EU, Japan, China, India, the Republic of Korea and the USA) in the creation of laboratory fusion facilities is noted. The choice of a Tokamak-type design for the ITER international reactor being built in France is the recognition of Russian’s decisive role. The article reveals the main parameters of international partnership, the specification of which is carried out on a regular basis at ITER coordination meetings with the participation of representatives of national ITER agencies. The parameters of interaction with scientific institutions of countries that are not members of the consortium are given. The evolution of the project since its launch in 1985 as a joint Soviet-American initiative is shown. Four options for the initial placement of the reactor are considered: in Spain, France, Canada and Japan. The features of the organizational and legal regulation of the international consortium for the management of ITER are disclosed, including the establishment of the ITER International Organization for Thermonuclear Energy for the joint implementation of the ITER project in 2006. The role of the in-kind contribution of countries in international projects in the exchange of unique world-class technologies is discussed. The main goals set by the countries participating in the project and the time horizons for their practical achievement are listed. The parameters of Russia's participation in the project are given, the prospects for further cooperation in this area are evaluated. Particular attention is paid to the peculiarities of the political interaction of the participating countries, as well as to the intermediate results already achieved during the implementation of the ITER project.

The relevance of the research topic is due to the growing role of student mobility as a form of internationalization of higher education in Russia. In recent years higher education has become more widespread and available, influenced by the development and distribution of educational services export and its transformation into a global educational market. In the context of “mass” higher education the special role of Russian education is of special interest for practitioners and researchers in the field of international educational cooperation. The article focuses on academic mobility in the field of higher education based on the experience of RUDN University. The aim of the study is to identify the effective participation of Russia in the global process of education on the example of international academic mobility of students on the basis of a comparative analysis of the works of Russian and foreign researchers. The objectives of the research are to study the best practices and implement the best developments in Russian conditions; to form the infrastructure and institutional basis for the mobility of students and researchers at all levels. Obviously, mobility is an integrative and determinative part of integration processes in the educational field. The article describes the experience of implementing academic mobility on the example of RUDN University using the comparative analysis of statistical data. All-inclusive academic mobility strategy serves as a tool for internationalization of higher education. The problem of competitiveness of Russian higher education in the dimension of internationalization is thoroughly discussed.

-

-