The concept of empire has known different variants of theoretical understanding over a long period of its existence. By the 19th century, the focus of scholarly enquiry had shifted from the concept of empire to that of imperialism. In the 1860s-1870s, the idea of liberal imperialism, which was the harmonisation of liberal
ideology and values with imperial attitudes and principles, began to take shape among the British intellectual elite. Although today there is no consensus concerning the very notion of empire, it seems possible to identify a number of features (including legitimacy, universalism and the desire to change the status quo as a cornerstone of foreign policy) that are characteristic of this phenomenon. The authors proceed from the hypothesis that the historical experience of the British Empire and the United States is an experience of practical implementation of the idea of liberal empire. The authors focus on the analysis of the peculiarities of foreign policy of the British Empire and the USA in the 19th and early 20th centuries. The authors conclude that the British Empire is a paragon of a liberal empire. The expression of that was Pax Britannica, a world order based on the legitimate power
of the British Empire, which exported values under the guise of messianic ideas and played the role of arbitrator in maintaining “balance of power”. The authors conclude that it seems possible to consider the US as a post-colonial liberal empire (hegemony). Although there is a lot of talk about the crisis of liberalism and the erosion of American infl uence, the current world order still functions on the basis of the US-led international institutions and shared commitment of the developed countries to liberal values.

This paper analyses the causes of the Crimean War of 1853-1856 through the prism of objective national interests and subjective motivations of rulers and leading statesmen. The issue will be examined on the basis of the positions of the main parties to the conflict — the Russian Empire and the Kingdom of Great Britain. By analyzing the position of Emperor Nicholas I on the eve of the Crimean War, the authors come to the conclusion that the main motives for entering the conflict were objective and subjective factors in their combination. On the one hand, Russia's main objectives were to ensure security and stability in Central Asia and to secure control of the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits through a friendly regime in the Ottoman Empire. However, the achievement of these aims was hampered by Nicholas's erroneous subjective perception of the international conjuncture of the time — the hope for Austrian and Prussian support and the misjudgment of the success of the negotiations with Aberdeen. In the nineteenth century Britain became increasingly involved in Middle Eastern affairs in the form of trade links with the Ottoman Empire and political support for the Sultan's rule. The defence of Turkey can be explained by the intention to limit the expansion of the Russian Empire, a rival in the region, which was at the crossroads of trade routes and served as a link to India. However, the perception of the Middle East as a vital region for Britain is primarily due to the views of Henry John Palmerston - Foreign Secretary and then British Prime Minister - who used political influence to argue for the importance of keeping the 'sick man of Europe' safe. Disagreements within the British cabinet just before the outbreak of war, as well as misunderstandings among British politicians about the intentions of Nicholas I, also led to the choice of a hardline strategy towards the Russian Empire and, as a consequence, Britain's entry into the war.

The article considers the evolution of the social policy of the European Union, its current features and the directions for further development of integration in this sphere. This study analyzes the social policy of the EU using the concept of multi-level governance, which was developed within the framework of the neoliberal school of thought. The aim of this study is to determine the transformation features of common EU social policy in the context of significant socio-economic changes that characterize the member states of the association nowadays. With this aim, the article assesses the concept of multi-level governance as a tool for analyzing EU social policy, tracks the evolution of integration in this sphere and identifies modern features of its financing. The scientific significance of the research lies in the analysis of EU social policy both in retrospect and in the context of present changes, as well as in determining the potential trajectory of further transformations in social policy. The authors note that EU social policy is characterized by active interaction between actors located at diff erent territorial levels, which explains the productivity of the concept of multi-level governance for analysis in this sphere. Social policy has historically been a secondary track in the course of European integration, which can be explained by significant diff erences in national socio-economic models — for instance, manifested in the financing of social policy, makes it impossible to implement "hard" supranational management in the social sphere and necessitates using "soft" multi-level cooperation, for example, the open coordination method. At present, the coordination of social policy in the EU begins to cover new areas; this process is accompanied by a gradual harmonization of member states' economic development levels and is associated with the need to respond to modern internal and external challenges, in particular, the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors conclude that, in the future, the importance of supranational initiatives in the field of social policy will increase.

This article attempts to summarise the main features of the balancing behaviour of small states. It focuses on the foreign policy of Mongolia and Nepal, two buff er small states, which are similar in many respects and for which the successful implementation of the balancing strategy is a guarantee of political and economic sovereignty. A close look at the policies of these two countries reveals deviations from what would be considered rational in the context of balancing from a realist point of view. Despite the durability of the underlying principles of their foreign policy, the actions of these countries often bear the imprint of affective and traditional types of behavior, as well as of the internal political situation, which leads to the conclusion that it is necessary to include domestic (civilizational, institutional, etc.) variables in the analysis and prognosis of balancing policy. The tools offered by neoclassical realists, who, while not denying the importance of external stimuli, emphasise the interference of internal factors (strategic culture, personal qualities of leaders, political system, nature of institutions etc.) in the decision-making process, provide ample opportunities for the synthesis of theoretical and country-specific knowledge. The evidence from Mongolia and Nepal shows how understanding the realities of a country or region can significantly reduce the likelihood of errors in predicting the behavior of countries. In addition, the article clarifies the role of the "third force/third neighbor" in the balancing strategy, assesses the prospects for the use of transit potential for the purpose of this strategy, and demonstrates the possibility of successful balancing under the condition of asymmetry between competing centres of power.