World Politics
12+
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy > Editorial board
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Publications of Pripisnova Elena Sergeevna
Politics and Society, 2016-12
Pripisnova E.S. - On some aspects of EU policy in the area of management of the Arab-Israeli conflict

DOI:
10.7256/2454-0684.2016.12.17206

Abstract: The subject of this research is the policy of the European Union in the area of management of the Arab-Israeli conflict. EU declarations gradually confirm the commitment to the principle of resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict based on the right of two nations to self-determination if comply with the human rights and the norms of international law. For achieving these goals, the European Union uses multiple diplomatic and economic tools, and most importantly, the privity of contract with Israel and Palestine. The purpose of this work consists in the analysis of actions of the European Union, which reveals the gap between the claimed goals of the EU and their realization in practice. The nature of such gap is associated with the character of EU actions, according to which the European Union collectively decided to apply certain means that serve to the unestablished goals and interests. The methodological basis of this article is the general scientific theoretical position about consistency of the complicated political interests, as well as the idea on interconditionality of the factors determining the formation of political strategy of the states. The author concludes that the EU policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict abides by the interest of “higher order”. A suggestion is made that reconsideration of the EU goals will not cause the refusal from obligations in the area of human rights and international law. The European Union can reject the goal pertaining to the creation of two states, however, it can lead to the actual recognition of the expansion of Israeli settlements, as well as control over the occupied Palestinian territories.
National Security, 2016-4
Pripisnova E.S. - Approaches of the European Union towards resolution of conflicts in Africa

DOI:
10.7256/2454-0668.2016.4.17205

Abstract: The subject of this research is the approaches of the European Union towards regulation of conflicts in Africa. The article present the analysis of the main conceptual positions of EU policy aimed at minimization of conflictogenic potential in African countries within the timeframe of 2003-2009; their theoretical and political aspects are being reviewed. The author focuses his attention on the fact that the leaders of EU member-states pursue humanistic goals, as attempt to demonstrate their independence from the United States. Based on the empirical material pertaining to resolution of the interethnic conflicts by the European Union, the author makes a conclusion the EU is not committed to carry responsibility for the solution of Africa’s problems or create any missions under the leadership of a single great power, particularly France. The European interference into Africa’s affairs, if not pursuing the obvious economic interests, takes place only if the safety of the European troops is not at risk or unless there is a need to demonstrate the EU power on international level.
Genesis: Historical research, 2016-2
Pripisnova E.S. - On the certain issues of definition and work of the analytical centers in UK pp. 56-62

DOI:
10.7256/2409-868X.2016.2.17200

Abstract: This article analyzes the issues in studying the practical activity of the British analytical (think) centers in light of transformation of the state policy from Keynesian social democracy to free market (since 1970’s). The subject of the research is the UK think centers which act as “mediators” between the informed public opinion and political and government institutions. In the first part of the article, the author examines the problem of terminology of the “think centers”, as well as definition of these groups in the context of British politics of the XX century. In the second part, the author reviews the genesis of the think centers in UK, as well as the theoretical and practical aspects of their work. The following conclusions are made: there is no unified and accurate definition of the “think centers”; an opinion about the recent appearance of the thinks centers in UK is false; the work of the think centers is aimed at influencing the opinion of the establishment, and the provision of information for making the current decisions in the area of public policy.
Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website