The globalized information society, which by its nature is a hybrid socio-technological interface between the global information space and a person, relies on digital communications technologies and networked information platforms. The information society remains one of the few pillars of globalization. In its essence, it is unlikely to be dismantled even in the event of the implementation of critical scenarios of global transformations; it can become one of the integrating platforms of various management subsystems both at the interstate and state levels – although in its pure form, probably in the foreseeable future, the management of medium-term processes within purely state systems seems unlikely. The information society, remaining an instrument of globalization and ensuring the relative integrity of global processes, begins to play an increasingly important role in the process of delimitation of the “world of globalization” into macro-regions. Through the mechanisms of the information society and through the division of the excessively hybridized management system, the most noticeable elements of real, rather than declarative, geo-economic regionalization are likely to be implemented. In the context of the globalization crisis, the information society acts as the basis for a system of non-force strategic management of socio-political and economic processes. As the institutional vacuum grows, the importance of the information society will grow. In addition to the functions of managing medium-term development trends, the information society has already acquired the functions of strategic management of socio-cultural processes, as well as universal political narratives. At this stage of global transformations, we are witnessing an intensive process of substitution of classical interstate institutionality by information (called “online”, although this does not reflect all the features of the phenomenon) technologies, that changes the essence of institutionality in principle. In the future, supranational regulation can also be replaced by information society technologies and corresponding digitalized algorithms. A fundamentally different space of global, and therefore transregional governance is emerging, which puts on the agenda a number of specific tasks for Russia.

The article provides analysis of Russian-German relations as a special ethnopolitical system. The author defines the ethnopolitical system at the interstate level as a relationship between two or more ethnic groups, which acquires a new quality expressed through the creation of a common political system. This system must include five components: a significant representation of one nation in another nation’s state; change in the quality of statehood of, at least, one of the participants; the emergence of new nations, intensive interaction between the participants and, finally, institutionalization. The author believes that Russian-German relations of the XVIII– XIX centuries were an example of such ethno-political system, which was characterized by all of the five listed characteristics. The development of this system included a number of stages: the emergence (the beginning of the XVIII century), the rise (XVIII – the beginning of the XIX century), zenith point (the second quarter of the XIX century), crisis (1850s), fall (the second half of the XIX century), and disintegration (the first half of the XX century) as the result of the two world wars. However, the modern ethnopolitical map of Eastern Europe, resulted from the Russian-German system, has a serious conflict potential.

The article examines Russia’s response to sanctions within a broader process of identity reconstruction after post 2022 Russia’s foreign policy realignments. The paper proceeds as follows. The first section reviews the literature situating this study within existing debates on sanctions, identity, and Russian foreign policy. The second section outlines the constructivist theoretical framework, emphasizing how normative pressures shape state identities. The third section examines how Russia’s leadership discourse, official rhetoric, and policy decisions reflect identity-driven responses to sanctions. The fourth and fifth sections examine Russia’s deepening diplomatic and economic engagements with China and the Global South. The article concludes that the constructivist perspective explains Russia’s diplomatic and economic realignment as a major shift for global governance and international order based on principles of sovereignty, non-interference, and resistance to Western liberal hegemony.

The article examines the “emotional turn” in the study of world politics and international relations. The main goal of the article is to systematize and summarize existing research related to the study of emotions in political usage. Using the example of content analysis of Pope Francis’s January 2025 speech, a conclusion is made about the use of the term “diplomacy of hope” in the international arena. The overall result is that emotions can influence nation states in forming political strategies. The spread of the concept of “soft” power and public diplomacy emphasizes the need to focus on attraction rather than coercion in modern international relations. However, negative feelings and emotions currently prevail in foreign policy rhetoric, since it is “easier” to unite communities with the help of feelings of fear, anger, hatred than with the help of hope and empathy, despite the fact that the latter actively function in diplomatic and political usage.

The article discusses the role of a new actor in the African security system – the Thabo Mbeki Foundation. The Foundation promotes dialogue on peace and security in Africa, complements the existing security architecture, created primarily on the basis of the African Union. The author reveals the values of the new Dialogue whose key objectives are a clear framing of the current security challenges facing Africa; uprooting the causes and drivers of the conflicts in the continent – both endogenous and exogenous; developing the peace architecture; understanding the nature and character of the prevailing conditions in the Horn of Africa and West Africa, and whether the multilateral efforts can make a modest contribution to achieving lasting peace in these regions. In organizing the dialogue between governments and nonstate acrors, the Thabo Mbeki Foundation tries to foster a culture of collaboration that transcended political divides and national borders. The African Peace and Security Dialogue tries to fill a gap by providing a platform to bridge the multilateral efforts in the attempt that a continent-wide dialogue might serve as a nexus where the insights, strategies, and recommendations from other negotiation fora are being synthesised.