This paper examines the Chinese energy policy in the post-bipolar era by means of three conceptual categories – reactivity, adaptivity, and proactivity. The article focuses on China's fundamental energy challenges related to its critical dependence on oil and gas imports, its heavy reliance on environmentally harmful coal, as well as the need for a fundamental overhaul of the Chinese energy industry and economy in a carbon-neutral way in compliance with the global trend. The author concludes that no simple reactivity exists in China's energy policy. Regarding the entire triad of challenges, the Chinese energy policy deals mainly with adaptivity, suggesting a set of solutions that are exceptional in their scale and variety. The clear intention of the Chinese leadership to make an ‘energy revolution’ implying the creation of a clean, low-carbon, safe and efficient energy system in the country points distinctly to adaptivity. There are also manifestations of proactivity in the Chinese energy policy. First, Beijing has decided to prioritize international mechanisms for trading and pricing hydrocarbons, where China calls the shots. Second, it has not only devalued the leadership of the West in the field of ‘green’ energy transition, but also has become a trendsetter in this global process, with real leverage on other countries, including Western ones. The very ‘energy revolution’ that Beijing seeks to make can be seen as proactive. It cannot be ruled out that in the future this Chinese example will be generalized and multiplied globally, with other states following suit. China's energy policy is a combination of adaptivity and proactivity. Given the dynamics of recent decades, proactivity is likely to increase in the Chinese energy policy.

The growing tendency to treat technological development as a matter of security among other things stimulates research on science, technology and innovation activities within military alliances. The article focuses on NATO science and technology (S&T) cooperation which has been among its least examined functions up to date. The topic’s relevance is created by the current effort to construct a new mission for the Alliance, namely sponsoring next-generation dual-use technologies known as emerging and disruptive technologies (EDTs). Cooperative S&T mechanisms have been functioning almost since the very beginning of NATO. The author introduces a structured concept of NATO’s S&T development. The goal is to find out the purpose of this non-core mission as well as to evaluate its impact on how the Alliance has evolved. Cooperative S&T projects were designed to strengthen the allied capabilities and, more significantly, compensate for intra-alliance rifts. Later they transformed into an additional venue to engage non-NATO countries. NATO S&T prompted internationalization of some transatlantic activities. However, its effectiveness was questionable and new collisions were induced. NATO’s shift to EDTs falls into the established pattern (ensuring Allied cohesion through functional expansion). At the same time the recently created tools for promoting innovation put the Alliance into a new position in the global technological race – as an active participant and major platform for steering Transatlantic technological development. Claiming this ambitious role poses a question about the sufficiency of the current political basis and the bounds of possibility.

Although studies have already found Freedom House’s* Freedom in the World rankings to be geopolitically biased, the index remains in use by academia (including Russian academia) with surprising frequency. This article provides detailed and quantitative evidence that Freedom House* is essentially part of the US Government and US political establishment, and is thus in principle liable to issue moral judgements that are distorted by the US’s attitude towards the states under judgement. The article then develops a more accurate formula for calculating a state’s democraticness according to the Polity index, and also develops an improved method, based on arms transfers and UNGA voting, of approximating states’ alignment with the US (and thus presumed US attitude towards states). It then uses these metrics to measure the effect of US attitude on Freedom House’s* evaluations of states’ freedom/democracy. This bias is found to be about half as powerful as the effect of actual regime type, approaching equal size in more recent years. Its magnitude is sufficient to, in some cases, completely transform a state’s regime type, from very democratic to very authoritarian or (less commonly) vice versa. These findings cast grave doubt upon the validity of Freedom House* metrics and confirm the US’s status as a universalistic state whose application of its own Cosmopolitan-Liberal ideology is deeply flawed, and they problematize political science in universalistic states as not only (or at all) a source of knowledge, but also (or instead) an important source of legitimation and motivation for such states’ international behavior.

For the Netherlands as a small state under the US nuclear umbrella, the formation of its position on nuclear disarmament is conditioned by the necessity of fulfilling alliance obligations. At the same time, the country actively participates in all multilateral negotiation processes related to this issue. The aim of this study is to identify the factors that determine Amsterdam's choice in favor of its commitments to NATO at the expense of its traditional adherence to the idea of nuclear disarmament. The theoretical framework of the study is based on interpreting Dutch foreign policy as that of a small state compelled to compensate for a lack of power resources to ensure its own security. Subordinating its foreign policy strategy to alliance obligations means that the Dutch leadership perceives NATO as a "shelter," allowing the country's leadership to resolve the issue of national security through stronger allies. Concurrently, the political discourse maintains the perception of the Netherlands as a driving force in the process of nuclear disarmament, which requires corresponding reinforcement through specific diplomatic initiatives. Reliance on stable and shared perceptions of their roles and models of behavior among actors is characteristic of the concept of ontological security. The author concludes that the Netherlands' policy in the sphere of nuclear weapons is predominantly determined by the necessity of complying with alliance obligations, which corresponds to shelter theory, against the backdrop of heightened security problems in Europe. The concept of ontological security can only play a complementary role in explaining Amsterdam's steps in the nuclear weapons sphere. Approaches to nuclear disarmament according to which the Netherlands should become a locomotive of this global process are characteristic only of non-governmental organizations, a majority of the population, and certain left-wing political forces, and they exert a certain influence on the country's official position. Their potential is significantly limited by the high degree of tension in international relations and the marginal position of left-wing forces in the political system. Given the persistent nature of these factors, radical changes in the Netherlands' foreign policy course on the issue of nuclear weapons appear unlikely in the foreseeable future.

This article examines the evolution of Azerbaijani-Syrian relations across three distinct phases: the postSoviet period, the era of Bashar al-Assad’s rule, and the emerging dynamics in post-Assad Syria. It offers a comprehensive analysis of the bilateral relationship, focusing on its structural challenges, developmental patterns, and strategic prospects. The study argues that the outbreak of the Syrian conflict in 2011 and the subsequent deterioration in Turkish-Syrian relations indirectly shaped Syria’s cautious posture toward Azerbaijan, given Baku’s close strategic alignment with Ankara. Despite a prolonged period of stagnation spanning over a decade, no overt diplomatic rifts developed between Baku and Damascus. The recent installation of a pro-Turkish Islamist government in Syria in December 2024, combined with the retreat of Iranian and Russian influence, has opened new strategic avenues for Azerbaijan to expand its regional presence. Supported by Ankara, Baku sought to advance cooperation with Syria through multilateral frameworks, with particular emphasis on the energy sector. Furthermore, the article explores Azerbaijan’s emerging role as a mediator between Turkey and Israel, Syria and Israel, following al-Assad’s departure, suggesting that this shift may signal Baku’s broader ambitions to position itself as a balancing actor in the Middle East. However, these ambitions are not always crowned with success. While these developments reflect Azerbaijan’s aspiration to become an independent regional player, the analysis underscores that this role, particularly in the Syrian context, remains heavily contingent on continued Turkish support. The article also addresses the declining influence of the Armenian community in Syria and examines how Azerbaijan’s diplomatic engagement with Damascus may serve to undermine Armenia’s regional standing. Overall, the study provides a nuanced analysis of a previously understudied bilateral relationship, contextualizing it within the evolving dynamics of the conflict-affected Middle East.

An analysis of Geopolitica’s publications devoted to borders and frontiers makes it possible to assess the current state of geopolitical research in Italy, its relationship to classical geopolitics and other national schools, as well as the development of new concepts. The issue under consideration shows that contemporary Italian geopolitics builds on updated readings of classical ideas while actively drawing on the methodological toolbox of the social sciences and humanities. The theoretical and methodological repertoire mobilized in these studies spans classical and critical geopolitics, geostrategic analysis, neogeography and exogeography, quantitative and digital methods, politico-legal institutionalism, historical sociology, and normative political theory. The material also highlights the applied dimension of the field: geopolitical analysis remains in demand in debates over national political and military strategy. The traditional geopolitical problematique of borders and frontiers is reinterpreted in light of shifting spatial practices and governance regimes; in particular, digitalization reshapes spatial imaginaries and contributes to the emergence of neogeography as a distinct area of inquiry.