This study presents an analysis of the psychological dimensions underlying the ideological positioning of political groups within the tenth European Parliament, utilizing E.V. Minchenko’s theory of political archetypes as its conceptual framework. The research was conducted through systematic content analysis of official party documents, public declarations, and media representations of the parliamentary factions. Three predominant archetypes emerged from this examination: the Warrior archetype, embodied by the European People’s Party, Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, Greens/EFA, and The Left; the Rebel archetype, represented by Patriots for Europe and Renew Europe; and the Seeker archetype, characteristic of European Conservatives and Reformists and Europe of Sovereign Nations. The Warrior-aligned factions demonstrate a pronounced orientation toward maintaining the status quo, with their platforms emphasizing security measures, the preservation of traditional EU values, and opposition to political forces advocating nationalist agendas. In contrast, Rebel factions promote a radical transformation of European politics, combining Eurosceptic positions with anti-establishment rhetoric that calls for fundamental changes to the existing European order. Seeker factions occupy an intermediate position, proposing moderate reforms that balance criticism of supranational institutions with pragmatic approaches to current challenges. This distribution of archetypes reflects deep- seated polarization within the European political landscape. Nearly half of the parliamentary groups (four out of eight) are committed to preserving the current system, while the remainder either explicitly reject it (Rebels) or seek negotiated alternatives (Seekers). Such division underscores the absence of societal consensus regarding the future trajectory of the European Union and highlights the growing tension between pro-European and national-conservative political forces. The research also revealed instances of archetype hybridization among certain factions. The Greens, for example, combine Warrior characteristics— particularly their vigorous defense of liberal values—with Everyman traits that emphasize their connection to ordinary citizens. Similarly, The Left merges Warrior elements with Caregiver attributes, focusing on issues of social justice. These hybrid configurations illustrate the strategic adaptation of political parties to evolving voter expectations and preferences. The study concludes that the current composition of the European Parliament operates within a context of systemic legitimacy crisis, with the identified archetypal conflicts serving as indicators of broader instability in the EU’s political agenda.

The late 1980s and early 1990s were a period of major changes in the modern history of Eastern Europe. The destabilization of the countries of the socialist camp and its subsequent dismantling led to the emergence of new pockets of instability in the region. This process was accompanied by the emergence and growth of an internal political crisis in post-socialist countries, which, in rare exceptions, could lead to the transition of the conflict stage from a latent phase to a hot one. The consequences of these conflicts continue to have a direct impact on the current situation in the former socialist countries of Europe. In this regard, the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina is particularly indicative. The interethnic conflict that took place in this region from 1992 to 1995 ended with the signing of the Dayton agreements, which prevented three years of bloodshed. However, it is worth noting that the countries of the Euro-Atlantic community had the following interest in signing these accords: to prevent the emergence of a new state in the post-Yugoslav space that would unite the Western Balkan nations and claim the role of a regional leader. Despite the freezing of the interethnic conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1995, at the present stage, Euro-Atlantic structures are striving to dismantle the Dayton architecture. The problem lies in the increased global tension, which intensifies the great-power rivalry in various regions of the world for influence. Bosnia and Herzegovina is no exception in this case. In the space of this state entity, a rivalry is unfolding between Moscow, which relies on the Republika Srpska, and Brussels, which relies on the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In connection with the intensification of the great-power confrontation in the Balkans at the present stage of the development of international relations, this article attempts to assess the likelihood of Euro-Atlantic integration of Bosnia and Herzegovina in conditions of ethnic division of society. In conducting the study, the authors relied on the theory of structuration by E. Giddens and structural realism, supplemented by the concept of J. Mearsheimer. As a working definition, «ethnos» is used in the interpretation of the Soviet ethnographer Yu.V. Bromley, supplemented by a characteristic indicating an increasing role of ethnicity as a tool used by political leaders in the struggle for power.

The article examines the evolution and prospects of Japan-US relations amid political transitions in both countries. It focuses on two key periods: Donald Trump’s presidency (2017–2021) and recent developments under Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. The study explores core aspects of bilateral ties, including economic cooperation, military-strategic partnership, and regional security in the Indo-Pacific. The second section evaluates the Biden- Kishida era, noting continuity in economic pragmatism and deepened military cooperation. However, the 2024 leadership changes—Trump’s return and Shigeru Ishiba’s rise in Japan—introduced new uncertainties. The article highlights risks for The first section analyzes the Trump administration’s policies, marked by the US withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and stricter trade terms for Japan, particularly in the automotive sector. Despite these challenges, Japan sought to preserve the alliance by boosting investments in the US economy and enhancing defense collaboration. Simultaneously, Tokyo diversified its foreign policy by strengthening dialogue with China, Russia, and India. Japan, such as potential US tariff escalations, alongside opportunities for closer defense ties, including debates over revising Japan’s pacifist Article 9. The conclusion forecasts two scenarios: either maintaining an asymmetric partnership favoring the US or Japan diversifying its regional alliances to counter Washington’s isolationist tendencies. Nonetheless, a complete cutoff of bilateral relations with the US is deemed unlikely due to Japan’s entrenched economic and security dependencies.

The Polish question has been of vital importance since the XVIII century, when the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth ceased to exist and its territories were divided between Russia, Austria and Prussia. The creation of the Duchy of Warsaw, as well as the beginning of the Foreign campaign, revived the previously solved problem. The previous policy of Russia, Austria and Prussia towards the Rzeczpospolita became the basis for the claims of the countries on the territory of the Duchy. An active diplomatic work was carried out in parallel with military operations; one of the agendas was the fate of the Duchy. Each of the countries had a position that reflected their interests. That is why the aim of the research is to consider the evolution of the position of Russia, Austria and Prussia on the future of the Duchy of Warsaw as military operations moved to the West. Austria’s position was to limit the French interference in the affairs of the three countries, including the Duchy issue. Austria wanted to obtain the Duchy, or at least see it as part of Prussia. Prussia’s position was the idea of a divided Duchy of Warsaw, and almost all the territories Prussia wanted to take for itself. Russia claimed the entire territory of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw; its claims were conditioned by its leading role in the defeat of the Napoleonic army. Alexander I wanted to see the Duchy under the Russian monarchy. Consequently, during the discussion of the fate of the Duchy, a confrontation was formed between the similar positions of Austria and Prussia and the position of Russia. As a result, it was not possible to come to a specific solution to this issue. The question had to be postponed to the Congress; however, the positions that the European powers had been developing during the VI anti-French coalition became the basis for the diplomatic work in Vienna.

The article explores the historical and cultural foundations of the ideological rivalry between Greater Iran and Great Turan and their influence on Iran and Türkiye’s foreign policies in the South Caucasus. Due to the limitations of a scholarly article’s format, the study focuses on the key historical milestones of the millennial evolution of the given concepts rather than claims to provide a comprehensive coverage of the process in question. Based on historical, network, and comparative analysis alongside constructivist approaches, the study explores cultural and religious differences as factors in the confrontation considered and the historical dynamics of Iran-Türkiye wars. Special attention is given to the instrumentalization of Pan-Iranism and Pan-Turkism, as well as the region’s strategic importance. Iran-Türkiye wars as part of the rivalry between the two countries are analyzed through network analysis, with the South Caucasus as a central node, characterized by high centrality and density of conflicts. Local and global clustering coefficients show the interconnectedness of conflict zones and a triangular area of competition. A comparative analysis of the concepts of Greater Iran and Great Turan reveals differences in the ideological and strategic approaches of Iran and Türkiye to regional dominance. The concepts of Greater Iran and Great Turan do not resemble official strategic documents, yet they serve as the ideological reasoning behind Iran’s and Türkiye’s foreign policy priorities in the South Caucasus. Iran relies on cultural and civilizational heritage, while Türkiye pursues a more politicized strategy focused on ethnic unity. The confrontation is further intensified by religious differences and conflicting economic interests. The findings emphasize that the contemporary rivalry between Iran and Türkiye in the South Caucasus continues historical trends and remains relevant for both states in terms of ideology, national security, and economic interests.

The purpose of this work is a comprehensive analysis of public-private partnership (PPP) in the economies of the EAEU, SCO, BRICS+ and CIS countries, with an emphasis on identifying common trends, specific problems and development prospects. Within the framework of the study, tasks were set to study existing PPP models, compare their effectiveness, analyze the legislative and institutional framework, as well as assess the impact of international cooperation on the development of PPP. The scientific novelty of the work consists in an interregional comparison of the PPP experience, which allows us to identify universal and specific factors of success and failure, as well as to propose innovative approaches to solving emerging problems. The theoretical framework of the study is based on the concepts of institutional economics and the theory of public choice, which allows us to consider the interaction between the state and the private sector through the prism of institutional mechanisms and incentives. Research methods include quantitative analysis of statistical data on implemented PPP projects and qualitative content analysis of documents, as well as expert surveys of representatives of government agencies, business and the scientific community. The main conclusions of the study confirm that PPP is an effective tool for solving the problems of infrastructure modernization and attracting investments in the EAEU, SCO, BRICS+ and CIS countries. The greatest success is achieved in the presence of a favorable institutional environment and political support. The main problems include a lack of competencies, bureaucratic barriers and difficulties in risk allocation. Recommendations for improving PPP mechanisms include the development of educational programs, simplification of procedures and the creation of specialized support institutions. The study also revealed the need for further study of cultural factors and social effects of PPP, as well as the integration of innovative technologies into projects.