About the Journal

The Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original results of fundamental and applied research of theoretical and practical significance in the field of political science, informing the domestic, regional and international political science community about the latest results of political science research. Manuscripts in all areas and methodologies of political research are welcome for consideration. The Journal is open to comparative research and especially welcomes those manuscripts that are based on interdisciplinary approaches to political science issues. The Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University is a public platform for the consolidation and structuring of the Armenian and regional political science network, ensuring the integration of Armenian and regional political science into international political science, contributing to the development of university political science education in Armenia and the region.

Current Issue

Vol. 5 No. 2(14) (2026)

Full Issue

In this Issue

  • In this Issue

    In this Issue

    View PDF
    Abstract

    The current geopolitical standoff between Russia and the West is characterized by unique features, including the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and hybrid and proxy conflicts waged by authoritarian regimes against Western democracies—all unfolding against the backdrop of modern advancements in artificial intelligence and information-communication technologies. These processes are driven by the ambition of Russia and China to establish global dominance within a new world order—a transition that has been underway for several decades. Amidst this new geopolitical landscape, many nations across various regions are reorienting their foreign and trade-economic policies. Polarization is intensifying not only between nations but also among individuals; social polarization has emerged as a top global risk in both the short and long term. Defined as a loss of social capital and the fracturing of communities—leading to diminished social stability, reduced individual and collective well-being, and lower economic productivity—social polarization is further fueled by a host of other risks, ranging from debt crises, inflation, and prolonged recession to climate-induced migration. Rising inequality and a widening values ​​gap pose an existential challenge to both authoritarian and democratic systems, as economic and social disparities translate into political divisions. Growing public discontent with government inaction manifested last year in frequent and unmanageable civil protests. The modern world is undergoing transformative crises; the trajectory of these profound changes amounts to a political, economic, social, and military earthquake. A crucial component of this contemporary mega-crisis is the internationalization of the Russia-Ukraine war, which has laid bare the essence of the geopolitical standoff between Russia and the West—a confrontation that has brought the world perilously close to the risk of nuclear war.

    References

    The current geopolitical standoff between Russia and the West is characterized by unique features, including the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and hybrid and proxy conflicts waged by authoritarian regimes against Western democracies—all unfolding against the backdrop of modern advancements in artificial intelligence and information-communication technologies. These processes are driven by the ambition of Russia and China to establish global dominance within a new world order—a transition that has been underway for several decades. Amidst this new geopolitical landscape, many nations across various regions are reorienting their foreign and trade-economic policies.

    The modern world is undergoing transformative crises; the trajectory of these profound changes amounts to a political, economic, social, and military earthquake. A crucial component of this contemporary mega-crisis is the internationalization of the Russia-Ukraine war, which has laid bare the essence of the geopolitical standoff between Russia and the West—a confrontation that has brought the world perilously close to the risk of nuclear war. The interplay of internal contradictions and conflicts, combined with the aspirations of the ruling elites in the Newly Independent States, has turned these nations into targets of Russian antagonism. In its bid to curtail the independence of these states, Russia justifies its aggressive actions as essential measures for bolstering its own national security. Clearly, Russia is employing a strictly confrontational model in its dealings with the Newly Independent States to tilt the strategic security balance in its own favor, thereby creating a zone of geopolitical alienation and marginalization for these nations.

    The West’s earlier sanctions pressure on Russia has evolved into a systemic strategic course; its implementation—particularly regarding technology—impacts not only post-Soviet states but also China, India, Iran, African nations, and others. These are no longer merely isolated crisis-related trends or manifestations, but a comprehensive array of crises whose internationalization has become a defining feature of regional, sub-regional, national, transnational, and international affairs.

Regional Policy

  • Regional Policy

    Fragile Independence in a World of Empires: Armenia and the Unfulfilled Promise of Sovereignty

    Vardan Atoyan, Lonce Bailey, Nushik Petrosyan, Maria Ohanyan, Diana Matevosyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article examines how formal independence translates into effective sovereignty in post-Soviet Armenia, where internal institutional weaknesses and external structural constraints interact. It argues that independence is continuously reshaped and reproduced through patterns of structural dependence. To assess the gap between formal independence and effective sovereignty, the study constructs a composite Structural Dependence Index (SIDI) that combines trade, energy, and military-security dependence on Russia, and applies it to all post-Soviet states over the period 1994–2024. Cluster analysis, combining SIDI values with V-Dem Liberal Democracy Index scores, groups the states by dependence and regime type, and a Markov transition model traces movement between dependence regimes, with Armenia as the focused case study. The results show growing polarization among post-Soviet states and a nonlinear, reversible trajectory for Armenia, whose dependence rises again after a period of partial diversification. Security reliance on an external patron, together with inherited institutional constraints, produces a mirage of sovereignty in which legal independence coexists with systematically limited autonomy. Armenia’s sovereignty is thus neither fully consolidated nor permanently lost, reflecting a structural inertia that limits sustained de facto autonomy. By demonstrating how post-imperial dependencies are actively reproduced over time, the article contributes to broader debates on sovereignty, small states, and the enduring hierarchies of the post-Soviet international order.

    References

    Abdieva, Raziiakhan, Damira Baigonushova, and Junus Ganiev. 2017. “Relationship between Government Expenditure and Economic Growth in Transition Countries: Case of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.” Bilig 83: 241-258.

    Adler-Nissen, Rebecca. 2014. Opting Out of the European Union: Diplomacy, Sovereignty and European Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Armitage, David. 2005. “The Contagion of Sovereignty: Declarations of Independence since 1776.” South African Historical Journal 52 (1): 1-18.

    Armitage, David. 2007. The Declaration of Independence: A Global History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Atoyan, Vardan, Logan Brosius, and Vahram Hovyan. 2023. “Comparative Analysis of National Security Strategies of Armenia in the Context of Political Realism, Liberalism, and Marxism.” Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University 2 (3(6)): 11–31. https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2023.2.6.011.

    Atoyan, Vardan, Sofya Ohanyan, Arpine Malkjyan, and Nane Movsisyan. 2022. “On Identification, Identity, and Security Issues in Modern Armenia.” Wisdom 2 (1): 5–14. https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v2i1.783.

    Beissinger, Mark R. 2002. Nationalist Mobilization and the Collapse of the Soviet State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Bunce, Valerie. 1999. Subversive Institutions: The Design and the Destruction of Socialism and the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Cheterian, Vicken. 2017. “The Last Closed Border of the Cold War: Turkey-Armenia.” Journal of Borderlands Studies 32 (1): 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2016.1226927.

    Clark, Ian. 1989. The Hierarchy of States: Reform and Resistance in the International Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Cornell, Svante E. 2001. Small Nations and Great Powers: A Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict in the Caucasus. London: Routledge.

    Drobush, Iryna, L. Kornuta, and Mykola Ukrainets. 2025. “Ensuring State Sovereignty as a Guarantee of the Country’s Economic Development.” Baltic Journal of Economic Studies 11 (3): 212-221. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2025-11-3-212-221.

    Elgie, Robert. 2011. Semi-Presidentialism: Sub-Types and Democratic Performance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Everitt, Brian S., Sabine Landau, Morven Leese, and Daniel Stahl. 2011. Cluster Analysis. 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Fish, M. Steven. 2005. Democracy Derailed in Russia: The Failure of Open Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Gvalia, Giorgi, David Siroky, Bidzina Lebanidze, and Zurab Iashvili. 2013. “Thinking Outside the Bloc: Explaining the Foreign Policies of Small States.” Security Studies 22 (1): 98-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2013.757463.

    Hale, Henry E. 2015. Patronal Politics: Eurasian Regime Dynamics in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Hedenskog, Jakob. 2023. The Armenian Dilemma after Azerbaijan’s September Attack on Nagorno-Karabakh. Swedish Centre for Eastern European Studies.

    Jervis, Robert. 1978. “Cooperation under the Security Dilemma.” World Politics 30 (2): 167-214. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009958.

    Katzenstein, Peter J. 1985. Small States in World Markets: Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Kemeny, John G., and J. Laurie Snell. 1960. Finite Markov Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Keohane, Robert O. 1969. “Lilliputians’ Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics.” International Organization 23 (2): 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002081830003160X.

    Krasner, Stephen D. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Lake, David A. 2009. Hierarchy in International Relations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Lees, N. 2012. “The Dimensions of the Divide: Vertical Differentiation, International Inequality and North-South Stratification in International Relations Theory.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 25 (2): 209-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2012.678300.

    Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan A. Way. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Mkrtchian, M. 2025. “From Neorealism to Neoliberalism: Armenia’s Strategic Pivot in Foreign Policy after the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict.” Caucasus Watch. Accessed May 2, 2026. https://caucasuswatch.de/en/insights/from-neorealism-to-neoliberalism-armenias-strategic-pivot-in-foreign-policy-after-the-nagorno-karabakh-conflict.html.

    The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. 2024. “Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” Accessed May 2, 2026. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript.

    Sahakyan, Naira. 2023. “The Rhetorical Face of Enmity: The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict and the Dehumanization of Armenians in the Speeches by Ilham Aliyev.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 23 (4): 863-882. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2022.2153402.

    Shcherbina, E., and E. Gorbenkova. 2016. “Transformation of Belarus and Russian Agricultural Settlement System in the New Economic Conditions (Post-Soviet Period).” MATEC Web of Conferences 86: 07002. Accessed May 2, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20168607002.

    SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute). 2024. “SIPRI Arms Transfers Database.” Accessed May 2, 2026. https://www.sipri.org/databases/armstransfers.

    Suny, Ronald Grigor. 1993. Looking toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Terzyan, Aram. 2017. “The EU vs. Russia in the Foreign Policy Discourse of Armenia.” Eastern Journal of European Studies 8 (2): 185–203.

    United Nations. 2024. “UN Comtrade Database.” Accessed May 2, 2026. https://comtradeplus.un.org.

    Vadai, E., and Galia Press-Barnathan. 2024. “The Making of Balance-of-Power Asymmetry.” Journal of Global Security Studies 8 (4). https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogad022.

    Varieties of Democracy Project. 2024. “V-Dem Dataset v14.” Accessed May 2, 2026. https://www.v-dem.net.

    Vasilyan, Syuzanna. 2006. “The Policy of ‘Regional Cooperation in the South Caucasus.’” Centro Argentino de Estudios Internacionales.

    Walt, Stephen M. 1987. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Way, Lucan A. 2015. Pluralism by Default: Weak Autocrats and the Rise of Competitive Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Zakaryan, Tigran. 2021. “Landlocked with Closed Borders: Armenia’s Problem of Access to the Sea.” Caucasus Survey 9 (2): 192-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2021.1922866.

  • Regional Policy

    Beyond the Checklist: Advancing Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration Programs for a New Generation through the Lens of the Gendered Reintegration Experiences of Former PKK Guerrillas

    Kardo Rached, Ahang Habib Hawrami, Bunyad O. Mohmmed
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This study examines the reintegration trajectories of former Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) fighters in the absence of a formal disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) system, exploring how gender and political discourse shape post-conflict reintegration. It critically examines the traditional United Nations DDR model in the context of PKK’s non-mission setting and reframes reintegration as a socially and politically situated process rather than a primarily technical one. The mixed-methods design draws on 20 semi-structured interviews with 12 former PKK fighters (six women and six men) and eight community leaders, alongside a large dataset of Turkish-language content published on X (formerly Twitter) between 2010 and 2025, analyzed for topic and sentiment using OpenAI’s GPT-4o mini-model. The results show that disarmament occurred voluntarily and gradually without institutional recognition, while demobilization never developed as a systematic or state-sponsored process; former combatants instead relied on family support, informal labor markets, diaspora networks, and political connections to facilitate socioeconomic reintegration, though many reported significant declines in physical and psychological well-being. Drawing on feminist security theory, the study demonstrates that reintegration is deeply gendered, with female former combatants facing particular challenges and forms of exclusion. By integrating the personal experiences of former PKK fighters with broader societal and elite discourse, the study advances a new-generation understanding of reintegration and disarmament, arguing that it should be seen as a socially and politically negotiated process shaped by local context, gender relations, and public perceptions rather than a standardized technical intervention.

    References

    Al-Khafaji, Hayder. 2019. “Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Forces: The Possibilities for Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration.” LSE Middle East Centre Report. London: London School of Economics and Political Science. Accessed July 3, 2026. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102523/1/Al_Khafaji_Iraqs_popular_mobilisation_forces_published.pdf.

    Banholzer, Lena. 2014. “When Do Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration Programmes Succeed?” IDOS Discussion Paper 8/2014. Bonn: German Institute of Development and Sustainability. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://www.idos-research.de/uploads/media/DP_8.2014.pdf.

    BBC News. 2017. “Battle for Mosul: Iraq PM Abadi formally declares victory.” July 10, 2017. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40558836.

    Bruno, Greg. 2007. “Inside the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK).” Council on Foreign Relations, October 19, 2007. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounders/inside-kurdistan-workers-party-pkk.

    Dash, Monalisa, and Asif Haseen. 2026. “Exiting the Insurgency: The PKK’s Strategic Exhaustion in Turkey, 2016–2025.” Small Wars & Insurgencies, July, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09592318.2026.2697914.

    International Organization for Migration (IOM). 2018. Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration: Compendium of IOM’s Experience. Geneva: International Organization for Migration. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/ddr_compendium.pdf.

    Jachnik, Clive Vincent. 2020. “Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration – An underdeveloped diplomatic tool in Yemen.” SIRIUS – Zeitschrift für Strategische Analysen 4 (1): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1515/sirius-2020-1666.

    Jongerden, Joost. 2023. “Chronology of the PKK: From Group Formation to Party (1973–1980)”. The Commentaries 3 (1):123-136. https://doi.org/10.33182/tc.v3i1.3023.

    Lamb, Guy. 2008. Current Approaches to Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) Programme Design and Implementation. Bradford: Centre for International Cooperation and Security, University of Bradford.

    Mazurana, Dyan E., Susan A. McKay, Khristopher C. Carlson, and Janel C. Kasper. 2002. “Girls in Fighting Forces and Groups: Their Recruitment, Participation, Demobilization, and Reintegration.” Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 8 (2): 97–123. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327949PAC0802_01.

    Mojtahedi, Mohammad Hossein, Maarten P. Bolhuis, and Joris van Wijk. 2025. “Potential Tensions and Synergies between DDR and Transitional Justice in Relation to Pro-Government Militias: The Case of the PMF in Post-IS Iraq.” Conflict, Security & Development 25 (1): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2024.2436551.

    Mojtahedi, Mohammad Hossein, Maarten P. Bolhuis, and Joris van Wijk. 2025. “Potential Tensions and Synergies between DDR and Transitional Justice in Relation to Pro-Government Militias: The Case of the PMF in Post-IS Iraq.” Conflict, Security & Development 25 (1): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/14678802.2024.2436551.

    Muggah, Robert, and Chris O’Donnell. 2015. “Next Generation Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration.” Stability: International Journal of Security and Development 4, no. 1, art. 30. https://doi.org/10.5334/sta.fs.

    Mumford, Andrew. 2021. “Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) after Proxy Wars: Reconceptualising the Consequences of External Support.” Third World Quarterly 42 (12): 2956–2973. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2021.1981762.

    Öcalan, Abdullah. 2011. Democratic Confederalism. London: Transmedia Publishing / International Initiative Edition.

    Öcalan, Abdullah. 2013. Liberating Life: Woman’s Revolution. Cologne: International Initiative Edition.

    Parry, Jane, and Erin Burlinghaus. 2019. “Reintegration of Combatants in Iraq after ISIL.” IRIS Policy Report. Sulaimani: Institute of Regional and International Studies, American University of Iraq. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://auis.edu.krd/iris/sites/default/files/For%20WEB%20-%20Parry%20et%20al.pdf.

    Rodríguez Castellón, José M. 2024. “Evolution and Challenges of DDR: A Policy Review through the Prism of Colombia’s DDR Experience.” Heliyon 10 (13), art. e33361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33361.

    Rufer, Roland. 2005. Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR): Conceptual Approaches, Specific Settings, Practical Experiences. Geneva: Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces.

    Sawani, Youssef M. 2017. “Security Sector Reform, Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration of Militias: The Challenges for State Building in Libya.” Contemporary Arab Affairs 10, no. 2: 267-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/17550912.2017.1297564.

    Sjoberg, Laura. 2016. “What, and Where, Is Feminist Security Studies?” Journal of Regional Security 11 (2): 143-161. https://doi.org/10.11643/issn.2217-995X162SPS66.

    Tziarras, Zenonas, and Zana Gul. 2026. “Common Enemy, Colliding Policies: Neoclassical Realism’s Perspective on Turkey and Iraq during the Mosul Operation against ISIS.” Asian Journal of Political Science 34 (2): 316–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2025.2602425.

    United Nations Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (UN DDR). 2025. The DDR Bulletin, issue 2/2025. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://www.unddr.org/the-ddr-bulletin/the-ddr-bulletin-issue-2-2025/.

    United Nations Inter-Agency Working Group on Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration. 2010. Operational Guide to the Integrated Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Standards (IDDRS). New York: United Nations Peacekeeping. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://peacekeeping.un.org/sites/default/files/operational-guide-rev-2010-web.pdf.

    United Nations. 2000a. “Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration at Heart of Peacekeeping Efforts, Secretary-General Tells Security Council.” Press Release SC/6830, March 23, 2000. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://press.un.org/en/2000/20000323.sc6830.doc.html.

    United Nations. 2020b. “The International Dialogue on DDR (IDDRS).” UN DDR Resource Centre. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://www.unddr.org/the-iddrs/.

    Uppsala Conflict Data Program. 2006. UCDP Peace Agreement Dataset Codebook, version 1.0. Uppsala: Uppsala University. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://ucdp.uu.se/downloads/old/peace/ucdp-peace-10-2005.pdf.

    Wehrey, Frederic. 2018. “Armies, Militias and (Re-)Integration in Fractured States.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, October 30, 2018. Accessed July 3, 2026. https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2018/12/armies-militias-and-re-integration-in-fractured-states?lang=en.

    World Bank. 2010. Multi-Country Demobilization and Reintegration Program: Final Report—Overview of Program Achievements. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Yarkın, Güllistan. 2015. “The Ideological Transformation of the PKK regarding the Political Economy of the Kurdish Region in Turkey.” Kurdish Studies Archive 3: 30-54. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004706576_004.

  • Regional Policy

    Prerequisites for the Formation of Socio-political and Ideological Foundations for Armenia's Transition to Democracy

    Ashot Yengoyan, Paylak Yengoyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article examines the socio-political, ideological, and mental prerequisites that shaped Armenia's transition to democracy following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Adopting a qualitative political-science approach that combines the historical-institutional method with a comparative analysis of the socialist and liberal ideological platforms, the study traces how the gradual dismantling of Soviet totalitarianism—beginning with Nikita Khrushchev's de-Stalinization, mass housing construction, and the erosion of the “sacred” attitude toward state authority—created the social and psychological conditions for a positive reception of democratic values among Armenian citizens. The analysis further considers the pressures of economic liberalization, the ideological affinities between socialism and liberalism, and the historically rooted duality of the Armenian mentality, which combines a strong sense of individualism, creativity, and entrepreneurial drive with a conservative, collectivist orientation toward preserving national identity. The article argues that, paradoxically, many of the necessary prerequisites for Armenia's post-Soviet democratic transformation were formed during the Soviet period itself, well before the country achieved formal independence. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the socio-cultural foundations underlying post-Soviet democratization processes in Armenia and the South Caucasus more broadly.

    References

    Aganbegyan, Abel G. 1988. The Challenge: Economics of Perestroika. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Astourian, Stephan H. 2000. “From Ter-Petrosian to Kocharian: Leadership Change in Armenia.” Working Paper, Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies, University of California, Berkeley. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0c2794v4.

    Avdaliani, Emil. 2022. New World Order and Small Regions: The Case of South Caucasus. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4037-8.

    Barrett, Thomas. 2021. “Oligarchs and Judges: The Political Economy of the Courts in Post-Soviet Unconsolidated Democracies.” Ideology and Politics Journal 2 (18): 260-291. https://doi.org/10.36169/2227-6068.2021.02.00011.

    Bieńkowska, Joanna, and Sikorski, Czesław. 2024. “Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: A Balanced Approach to Management Research.” Eastern Journal of European Studies 15 (1): 345-360. https://doi.org/10.47743/ejes-2024-0115.

    Boettke, Peter J. 1993. Why Perestroika Failed: The Politics and Economics of Socialist Transformation. London and New York: Routledge.

    Brown, Archie. 2007. “Perestroika and the End of the Cold War.” Cold War History 7 (1): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14682740701197631.

    Brown, Archie. 2023. “Mikhail Gorbachev and the Politics of Perestroika.” Russian History 49 (2-4): 123-145. https://doi.org/10.30965/18763316-12340044.

    Dahl, Robert A. 1971. Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    de Waal, Thomas. 2003. Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan through Peace and War. New York: New York University Press.

    Doğan, Metehan. 2022. “The Democratic Legitimacy Hierarchy: The Scales to Determine Authorities’ Legitimacy in Democratic States.” Eastern Journal of European Studies 13 (2): 140–59. https://doi.org/10.47743/ejes-2022-0207

    Elgenius, Gabriella. 2011. National Symbols and Ceremonies: The Construction and Authentication of Boundaries. In: Symbols of Nations and Nationalism. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp. 12-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-31704-8_2.

    Ghulyan, Husik. 2021. “Conceiving Homogenous State-Space for the Nation: The Nationalist Discourse on Autochthony and the Politics of Place-Naming in Armenia.” Central Asian Survey 40 (2): 257-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2020.1843405.

    Gorlov, Vladimir. 2017. “N. S. Khrushchev i perekhod k massovomu zhilishchnomu stroitel’stvu v Sovetskom Soiuze [N. S. Khrushchev and the Transition to Mass Housing Construction in the Soviet Union].” Vestnik MGOU. Seriia: Istoriia i politicheskie nauki, no. 1: 71–81. https://doi.org/10.18384/2310-676X-2017-1-71-81

    Gudkov, Lev, Yuri Levada, Aleksei Levinson, and Leonid Sedov. 1988. “Bureaucratism and Bureaucracy: A Need for Clarification.” Kommunist 12: 71-87 (in Russian).

    Gudkov, Lev. 1997. “Victory in the War: Towards a Sociology of a National Symbol.” Journal “Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes” 5 (31): 12-18 (in Russian).

    Hardman, Helen. 2012. Gorbachev’s Export of Perestroika to Eastern Europe: Democratisation Reconsidered. Manchester: Manchester University Press. https://doi.org/10.7228/manchester/9780719079788.001.0001.

    Harutyunyan, Gagik G. 2017. Constitutional Culture: The Lessons of History and the Challenges of Time. Revised English ed. Yerevan: Njar.

    Harutyunyan, Gevorg. 2024. “Dimensions of the Shadow Reforms of Yuri Andropov’s Bureaucratic Management: Lessons from the Myths of the Totalitarian Leadership of the USSR”. Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University 3 (1(7): 101-10. https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2024.3.7.101.

    Hermanto, Nicola, and Zuroff, David C. 2016. “The Social Mentality Theory of Self-Compassion and Self-Reassurance: The Interactive Effect of Care-Seeking and Caregiving.” The Journal of Social Psychology 156 (5): 523-535. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2015.1135779.

    Hough, Jerry F. 1997. Democratization and Revolution in the USSR, 1985–1991. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

    Iskandaryan, Alexander. 2018. “The Velvet Revolution in Armenia: How to Lose Power in Two Weeks.” Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization 26 (4): 465-482. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/707882.

    Karakhanyan, Susanna. 2018. “Armenia: Transformational Peculiarities of the Soviet and Post-Soviet Higher Education System.” In: 25 Years of Transformations of Higher Education Systems in Post-Soviet Countries: Reform and Continuity, edited by Jeroen Huisman, Anna Smolentseva, and Isak Froumin, 73-96. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52980-6_3.

    Khudoley, Konstantin. 2022. “The International Communist Movement in search of a new strategy in 1953–1956.” Petersburg historical journal 4: 121-136. https://doi.org/10.51255/2311-603X_2022_4_121 (in Russian).

    Koroleva, Larisa A., and Alexey N. Molkin 2014. “The Armenian National Movement in the USSR (1950-1980).” History and Archaeology 6. Accessed February 26, 2026. https://history.snauka.ru/2014/06/1062 (in Russian).

    Laycock, Joanne. 2009. “The Repatriation of Armenians to Soviet Armenia, 1945-49.” In: Warlands: Population Resettlement and State Reconstruction in the Soviet-East European Borderlands, 1945-50, edited by Peter Gatrell and Nick Baron, 140-161. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230246935_7.

    Levitsky, Steven, and. Way Lucan A. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Linz, Juan J., and Stepan, Alfred. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Lukina, Anna. 2021. “Legal Nurturing: The Educational Function of Law in the Soviet Union.” Ideology and Politics Journal 2 (18): 57-74. https://doi.org/10.36169/2227-6068.2021.02.00003.

    Lurye, Svetlana V. 1997. Istoricheskaia etnologiia [Historical Ethnology]. Moscow: Aspect Press.

    Manukyan, Armenak. 2022. “An Alternative to the Dissident Paradigm and Intersecting Civil Protests in Soviet Armenia: Equal but Different?” Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University 1 (3): 73–89. https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2022.1.3.073.

    Marshall, Alex. 2010. The Caucasus under Soviet Rule. London and New York: Routledge.

    Martyniuk, Roman, Datsiuk, Oleksandr, Romanov, Mykhailo, and Irkha, Yurii. 2025. “Does a ‘Super-Presidential Republic’ Exist? The Phenomenon of Super-Presidency Experienced by Postcommunist Countries of Eastern Europe and Asia.” Eastern Journal of European Studies 16 (1): 128–49. https://doi.org/10.47743/ejes-2025-0106.

    Matossian, Mary Kilbourne. 1962. The Impact of Soviet Policies in Armenia. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

    McNair, Brian. 1991. Glasnost, Perestroika and the Soviet Media. London: Routledge.

    Melkonian, Monte. 1993. The Right to Struggle: Selected Writings of Monte Melkonian on the Armenian National Question, edited by Markar Melkonian. Yerevan: Sardarabad Press.

    Musayeva, Gunel. 2022. “Socio-Political Struggle Concerning the Russian Language in Armenia”. Review of Armenian Studies, nos. 46: 67-83. https://izlik.org/JA58GL65US.

    O’Donnell, Guillermo, Schmitter, Philippe, and Whitehead, Laurence. 1986. Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Comparative Perspectives. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Ohanyan, Anna. 2021. “Conclusion: What’s Next for Armenia? Authoritarian Reserves and Risks in a Democratic State.” In Armenia’s Velvet Revolution: Authoritarian Decline and Civil Resistance in a Multipolar World, edited by Laurence Broers and Anna Ohanyan, 231-252. London: I.B. Tauris. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781788317214.0017.

    Palacios Cuéllar, Rodrigo. 2024. Armenia: From Authoritarian to Illiberal. San Pablo: Royal Institute for European Studies.

    Panossian, Razmik. 2006. The Armenians: From Kings and Priests to Merchants and Commissars. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Paturyan, Yevgenya Jenny. 2021. “Armenian Civil Society: Growing Pains, Honing Skills and Possible Pitfalls.” In: Armenia’s Velvet Revolution: Authoritarian Decline and Civil Resistance in a Multipolar World, edited by Laurence Broers and Anna Ohanyan, 101–18. London: I.B. Tauris. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781788317214.0011.

    Poghosyan, Gevorg A. 2003. Armianskoe obshchestvo v transformatsii [Armenian Society in Transformation]. Yerevan: Noyan Tapan.

    Pomeranz, William. 2021. “Russia’s Perennial Search for the Rule of Law: Origins, Detours, Revival, Impasse.” Ideology and Politics Journal 2 (18): 10-29. https://doi.org/10.36169/2227-6068.2021.02.00001.

    Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139172493.

    Rasuly-Paleczek, Gabriele, and Six-Hohenbalken, Maria. 2017. Migration and Its Impact on Armenia. Vienna: Vienna University Press.

    Rindlisbacher, Stephan. 2024. “Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh: The History of an Unsettling Relationship.” Studia Socjologiczno-Polityczne. Seria Nowa 1 (20): 171-186.

    Sarvazyan, Lilit. 2023. “Ideas of National Self-Determination and Sovereignty in the Political-Philosophical Concepts of Maghakia Ormanyan and Levon Shant.” The POLITNOMOS: Journal of Political and Legal Studies 1 (1): 33-47. https://doi.org/10.54503/2953-8165-2023.1(1)-33.

    Schmitt, Carl. 1996. The Concept of the Political. Translated by George Schwab. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Sebestyen, Victor. 2009. Revolution 1989: The Fall of the Soviet Empire. London: Phoenix.

    Sedaitis, Judith B., and Butterfield, Jim, eds. 2019. Perestroika from Below: Social Movements in the Soviet Union. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429301353

    Shain, Yossi. 2007. Kinship and Diasporas in International Affairs. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Spillman, Lyn. 2014. “Symbols of Nations and Nationalism: Celebrating Nationhood.” Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 43 (1): 83-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094306113514539m.

    Suny, Ronald Grigor. 1993. Looking toward Ararat: Armenia in Modern History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Tompson, William J. 2003. The Soviet Union under Brezhnev. Harlow: Longman.

    Travers, Ann. 1995. “The Identification of Self.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 25 (3): 303–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1995.tb00278.x

    Tucker, Robert C. 1979. “The Rise of Stalin’s Personality Cult.” The American Historical Review 84 (2): 347–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/84.2.347

    Tulenkov, Mykola, Gugnin, Eduard, Shtepa ,Serhii, Patynok, Oleksandr, and Lipin, Mykhailo. 2021. “Mentality as Category of Social Philosophy in the Post-Pandemic Society.” Postmodern Openings 12 (1 Sup1): 393-403.

    Wahlang, Jason. 2025. “Understanding Diaspora and Foreign Policy: The Case of the Armenian Diaspora.” In: Navigating Globalization, Diaspora, Foreign Policy and Sustainability, edited by Aditya Anshu, 147-162. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-9079-4_10.

    Zubok, Vladislav M. 2021. Collapse: The Fall of the Soviet Union. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1zvccnm.

Public Policy

  • Public Policy

    Bridging Sustainable Development and Good Governance Issues in Armenia: Observations on the Interrelationship of Domestic and International Measurements

    Narine Asryan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article analyzes the challenges of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and good governance in Armenia, based on international assessments. In this regard, the interdependent nature of sustainable development, economic prosperity, social justice, the environment and other factors and their significant impact on domestic viability and global progress are considered. The article examines the interdependence of good governance mechanisms and sustainable development outcomes, as well as the importance of policy coherence and stakeholder engagement. In this context, Armenia’s public administration system needs to strengthen its resilience in order to effectively achieve its sustainable development goals. In this context, the relevance of the study stems from the growing importance of the interconnectedness between sustainable development mechanisms and good governance in Armenia. It involves a comparative analysis of the interdependence between the internal and external dimensions of environmental, economic, climatic, and social factors as they shape governance processes within Armenia’s local, national, and international agendas. Beyond the integration of environmental and social development issues into the vast majority of the Armenian government’s policy documents, sustainable development has become a feature of key sectors, including construction, the energy industry, manufacturing, and the financial sector. Sustainable development extends beyond the realms of scientific and technical innovation and the political-strategic discourse within Armenian society.

    References

    Agere, Sam. 2000. Promoting Good Governance. Common Wealth Secretariat. London: Commonwealth Secretariat. https://doi.org/10.14217/9781848597129-en.

    Al Azizah, Ummu Salma, and Razali Haron. 2025. “The sustainability imperative: evaluating the effect of ESG on corporate financial performance before and after the pandemic.” Discover Sustainability 6, 529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01401-8.

    Aleksanyan, Ashot, and Arusyak Aleksanyan. 2024. “Resilience of Civiliarchic Democracy in the Face of Challenges and Gaps in European Integration: The Political Dimension of the Index of Civiliarchy.” Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University 3 (3(9): 97-138. https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2024.3.9.097.

    Best, Jacqueline. 2014. “New Governance Strategies.” In: Governing Failure: Provisional Expertise and the Transformation of Global Development Finance. Cambridge University Press, pp. 89-186. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139542739.

    Corporate Governance Center Armenia 2025. Projects. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://corpgov.am/en/.

    Council of Europe. 2023. Council of Europe Action Plan for Armenia 2023-2026. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.coe.int/en/web/programmes/armenia.

    El-Sheikh, Gehad, Ahmed O. El-Kholei, and Almoataz Bellah El-Buhairi. 2026. “Good governance drives human-centric smart cities toward resilience and equity.” Discover Cities 3, article number 7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44327-026-00190-7.

    Ginther, Konrad, and Paul J. L. M. de Waart. 1995. “Introduction: Sustainable development as a matter of good governance: An introductory view.” In: Sustainable Development and Good Governance. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, pp. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004637788_005.

    Hamzah, Zalfa Laili, Noor Adwa Sulaiman, and Maria Mohd Ismail. 2026. “Reasons for Non-Compliance of Good Corporate Governance.” In: Concepts of Corporate Governance and Public Governance. Springer, Singapore, pp. 145-153. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-2449-5_7.

    Human Rights Watch. 2023. “We Had No Choice”: Forced Displacement in Nagorno-Karabakh. New York: Human Rights Watch. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/10/05/we-had-no-choice/ethnic-armenians-nagorno-karabakh.

    International Crisis Group. 2021. Nagorno-Karabakh: Risks of a New War. Brussels: International Crisis Group. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-asia/caucasus/nagorno-karabakh-azerbaijan/nagorno-karabakh-risks-new-war.

    International Monetary Fund. 2023. Republic of Armenia: 2023 Article IV Consultation and Second Review Under the Stand-By Arrangement and Request for Modifications of Performance Criteria and Monetary Policy Consultation Clause—Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director. IMF Staff Country Reports 2023 (416). Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400262418.002.

    Juška, Žygimantas. 2024. “The Soft Power of the European Union in Four Regions. In: Soft Power of the European Union: Mastering the Language of Power Politics. Springer, Cham, pp. 69-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56384-3_4.

    Kaufmann, Daniel, Aart Kraay, and Massimo Mastruzzi. 2010. “The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues.” Policy Research Working Paper 5430. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-5430.

    Kaur, Navdeep, Aastha Verma, Rajeev Kumra, and Wamika Sharma. 2026. “Advancing sustainable entrepreneurship to achieve sustainable development goals (SDGs): current trends and future directions.” Management Review Quarterly: 1923-1989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-025-00520-w

    Khan, Amjid, Bushra Ashiq, Tauqeer Ahmed Qadri et al. 2025. “Nanotechnology Solutions For Advancing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Integrating Nanomaterials For Global Sustainability.” BioNanoScience15, 590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12668-025-02214-9.

    Kotai, Hemanshi K., and Rashmi Soni. 2026. “From Governance to Sustainability: Bridging Corporate Governance with ESG Principles.” In: Sustainable Management, Responsible Leadership, and Corporate Behaviour in the Age of Environmental Crisis, edited by Shinu Vig and Alok Pandey, 95-114. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-2717-5_6.

    Lewis, Douglas (ed.). 2006. Global Governance and the Quest for Justice. Volume I: International and Regional Organisations. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Luykx, Jurjen J., and Elisabetta Burchi. 2025. “A Call for the Scientific Community to Adopt Environmental, Social and Governance Principles.” Anthropocene Science 4: 329-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44177-025-00105-y.

    Martines, Francesca, and Samantha Velluti. 2026. “Sustainable Development in Free Trade Agreements of the European Union.” In: EU Values and International Law: How the EU Upholds and Promotes its Values in the Wider World through its International Agreements, edited by Leonardo Pasquali, 149-200. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-20521-6_7.

    Mišić, Jana, Rinie van Est, and Linda Kool. 2025. “Good governance of public sector AI: a combined value framework for good order and a good society.” AI Ethics 5: 4875-4889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00751-3.

    Nilsson, Måns, Griggs, Dave, and Visbeck, Martin. 2016. “Policy: Map the Interactions between Sustainable Development Goals.” Nature 534 (7607): 320-322. https://doi.org/10.1038/534320a.

    Onofrei, Mihaela, Florin Oprea, and Elena Cigu. 2025. “Reforming Public Administration and Governance Systems in the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood Countries: What Role for European Neighbourhood Policy?.” In: Resilience and the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood Countries: Crisis, Transformations and Policies, edited by Gilles Rouet and Gabriela Carmen Pascariu, 243-267. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-73379-6_10.

    PACE. 2023. Humanitarian situation in Nagorno-Karabakh. Report (Doc. 15840), October 10, 2023. https://pace.coe.int/en/files/33069/html.

    Post, James E., and Mellis, Marilyn. 1978. “Corporate Responsiveness and Organizational Learning.” California Management Review 20 (3): 57-63. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165282.

    Sachs, Jeffrey D., Guillaume Lafortune, and Grayson Fuller. 2024. Sustainable Development Report 2024: The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future. Dublin: Dublin University Press. https://doi.org/10.25546/108572.

    Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). 2024. “SIPRI Military Expenditure Database.” Accessed August 2026. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.sipri.org/databases/milex.

    Sustainable Development Goals Lab Armenia. 2025. Projects & Approaches. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.sdglab.am/projects.

    The Council of the EU and the European Council. 2026. Armenia. Accessed June 4, 2026. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/armenia/.

    UN Secretary-General, and World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: “Our common future” [Brundtland report]. New York: UN. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811?ln=en&v=pdf.

    United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2011. Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity—A Better Future for All. New York: United Nations Development Programme. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2011.

    United Nations ESCAP. 2009. “What Is Good Governance?” Policy Brief, July 10, 2009. Bangkok: UN ESCAP. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.unescap.org/resources/what-good-governance.

    United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). 2023. “Nagorno-Karabakh Situation.” Geneva: UNHCR. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.unhcr.org/emergencies/nagorno-karabakh-situation.

    United Nations. 1992. “Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.” In Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, annex I. A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I). New York: United Nations. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/parties_publications/C8394/Respondent%27s%20documents/RL%20-%20Legal%20Authorities/RL-0150-ENG%201992-06-13.pdf.

    United Nations. 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1. New York: United Nations. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda.

    World Bank. 1992. Governance and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/604951468739447676/pdf/Governance-and-development.pdf.

    World Bank. 2023. “Worldwide Governance Indicators: Armenia.” Accessed July 3, 2025. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/worldwide-governance-indicators.

    World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Accessed July 3, 2025. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/139811?v=pdf.

    Wright, Ewan, Moosung Lee, Allan Walker, Darren Bryant, Soobin Choi, and Kanwal Hassan. 2025. “Developing the next Generation of Leaders: A Global Study of Student Leadership.” Educational Studies 51 (3): 327-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2023.2216331.

  • Public Policy

    Determinants of Legislative Longevity and Survival in the United States Congress: Evidence from Cox Proportional Hazards and Weibull Survival Models

    Oloruntoba Oyedele
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This study investigates the determinants of legislative longevity and survival in the United States Congress using survival econometric techniques. Drawing on congressional data from the 46th to the 117th Congress obtained from Voteview, the study examines how ideological positioning, party affiliation, chamber membership, demographic characteristics, and legislative participation influence the duration of congressional service. The analysis employs the Cox Proportional Hazards Model as the primary estimation technique, complemented by a Weibull survival model for robustness testing. The results indicate that ideological extremity significantly increases the probability of congressional exit. Specifically, NOMINATE Dimension 1 increased the hazard of exit by 54.1% (HR = 1.541, p < 0.01), while NOMINATE Dimension 2 increased the hazard by 12.4% (HR = 1.124, p < 0.05). Senate membership reduced exit risk by approximately 40.2% (HR = 0.598, p < 0.01), whereas greater legislative participation and older cohorts were associated with longer congressional survival. Party affiliation was not statistically significant. Marginal-effects estimates reveal that ideological extremity reduces expected congressional tenure by up to 1.84 years, while Senate membership increases expected survival duration by 4.36 years. Robustness checks using the Weibull model confirm the consistency of the findings, and proportional-hazard diagnostics indicate that the Cox model assumptions are satisfied. The study concludes that congressional longevity is primarily shaped by ideological positioning, institutional advantages, accumulated political experience, and legislative engagement rather than partisan affiliation. These findings provide important insights into the dynamics of congressional careers and the broader consequences of political polarization for democratic representation and legislative stability.

    References

    Aka, Binda Godlove, and Michael K. Dzordzormenyoh. 2026. “Determinants of Political Polarization and Consensus in the U.S. Congress: An Analysis of Policy Issues and Institutional Factors (1991–2020).” International Social Science Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.70046

    Aldrich, John H., and Richard D. McKelvey. 1977. “A Method of Scaling with Applications to the 1968 and 1972 Presidential Elections.” American Political Science Review 71 (1): 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400259339

    Alexander, Dan, Christopher R. Berry, and William G. Howell. 2016. “Distributive Politics and Legislator Ideology.” The Journal of Politics 78 (1): 214–231. https://doi.org/10.1086/683643

    Algara, Carlos. 2019. “The Conditioning Role of Polarization in U.S. Senate Election Outcomes: A Direct-Election and Voter-Level Analysis.” Electoral Studies 59: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2019.02.006

    Algara, Carlos, and Joseph Zamadics. 2022. “Ideological Cross-Pressures or Random Error? An Analysis of Spatially Inconsistent Voting in the U.S. House and Senate.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 28 (2): 243–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2021.1874686

    Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Philip Edward Jones. 2010. “Constituents’ Responses to Congressional Roll-Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (3): 583–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00448.x

    Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder III, and Charles Stewart III. 2001. “Candidate Positioning in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 45 (1): 136–159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669364

    Bafumi, Joseph, and Michael C. Herron. 2010. “Leapfrog Representation and Extremism: A Study of American Voters and Their Members in Congress.” American Political Science Review 104 (3): 519–542. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055410000316

    Barber, Michael J., and Nolan McCarty. 2015. “Causes and Consequences of Polarization in the U.S. Congress.” In Solutions to Political Polarization in America, edited by Nathaniel Persily, 15–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316091906.002

    Brady, David W., Kara Buckley, and Douglas Rivers. 1999. “The Roots of Careerism in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 24 (4): 489–510.

    Brant, Hanna K. 2024. “Polarization and the Ties That Bind: Congressional Staff Turnover.” Congress & the Presidency 51 (3): 324–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2024.2372251

    Burke, Richard, Justin H. Kirkland, and Jonathan B. Slapin. 2021. “Party Competition, Personal Votes, and Strategic Disloyalty in the U.S. States.” Political Research Quarterly 74 (4): 1024–1036. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920953210

    Butcher, Jordan. 2023. Navigating Term Limits: The Careers of State Legislators. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39423-2

    Cain, Bruce E., and Marc A. Levin. 1999. “Term Limits.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 163–188. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.163

    Carey, James R., Brinsley Eriksen, and Arni S. R. Srinivasa Rao. 2023. “Congressional Symmetry: Years Remaining Mirror Years Served in the U.S. House and Senate.” Genus 79: 5, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41118-023-00183-z

    Claessen, Clint. 2024. “Accruing Career Capital: How Party Leaders with More Political Experience Survive Longer.” Party Politics 30 (4): 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1177/13540688231170381

    Clarke, Andrew J., Craig Volden, and Alan E. Wiseman. 2024. “The Conditional Lawmaking Benefits of Party Faction Membership in Congress.” Political Research Quarterly 77 (1): 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/10659129231196566

    Cox, Gary W., and Mathew D. McCubbins. 2007. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810060

    Crosson, Jesse, Geoff Lorenz, and Alexander Furnas. 2025. “Pivots or Partisans? Proposal-Making Strategy and Status Quo Selection in Congress.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 20 (2): 139–181. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00023042

    Curry, James M., and Frances E. Lee. 2020. The Limits of Party: Congress and Lawmaking in a Polarized Era. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226716497.001.0001.

    DiSalvo, Daniel. 2012. Engines of Change: Party Factions in American Politics, 1868–2010. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199891702.001.0001

    Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.

    Eckman, Sarah J., and Amber Hope Wilhelm. 2025. Congressional Careers: Service Tenure and Patterns of Member Service, 1789–2025. CRS Report R41545. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

    Everson, Philip J., Richard M. Valelly, Arjun Vishwanath, and Jim Wiseman. 2016. “NOMINATE and American Political Development: A Primer.” Studies in American Political Development 30 (2): 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X16000067

    Fowler, Anthony. 2026. “Do Party Leaders Influence Roll-Call Voting in Congress.” Political Science Research and Methods: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2025.10071

    Fraga, Bernard L., and Hans J. G. Hassell. 2021. “Are Minority and Women Candidates Penalized by Party Politics? Race, Gender, and Access to Party Support.” Political Research Quarterly 74 (3): 540–555. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920913326

    François, Abel, and Emiliano Grossman. 2015. “How to Define Legislative Turnover? The Incidence of Measures of Renewal and Levels of Analysis.” The Journal of Legislative Studies 21 (4): 457–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2015.1082311

    Gill, Jeff. 2021. “Measuring Constituency Ideology Using Bayesian Universal Kriging.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 21 (1): 80-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532440020930197

    Green, Matthew N. 2019. Legislative Hardball: The House Freedom Caucus and the Power of Threat-Making in Congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108677011

    Grynaviski, Jeffrey D. 2010. Partisan Bonds: Political Reputations and Legislative Accountability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511676055

    Hare, Christopher, David A. Armstrong III, Ryan Bakker, Royce Carroll, and Keith T. Poole. 2015. “Using Bayesian Aldrich-McKelvey Scaling to Study Citizens’ Ideological Preferences and Perceptions.” American Journal of Political Science 59 (3): 759–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12151

    Hibbing, John R. 1991. “Contours of the Modern Congressional Career.” American Political Science Review 85 (2): 405–428. https://doi.org/10.2307/1963167

    Hirano, Shigeo, James M. Snyder Jr., Stephen Ansolabehere, and John Mark Hansen. 2010. “Primary Elections and Partisan Polarization in the U.S. Congress.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 5 (2): 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00008052

    Holman, Mirya R., and Anna M. Mahoney. 2023. “Take (Her) to the Limit: Term Limits Do Not Diminish Women’s Overperformance in Legislative Office.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 48 (3): 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/lsq.12406

    Iyengar, Shanto, Gaurav Sood, and Yphtach Lelkes. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (3): 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs038

    Jessee, Stephen. 2016. “(How) Can We Estimate the Ideology of Citizens and Political Elites on the Same Scale?” American Journal of Political Science 60 (4): 1108–1124. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12250

    Kirkland, Justin H., and Jonathan B. Slapin. 2017. “Ideology and Strategic Party Disloyalty in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Electoral Studies 49: 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2017.07.006

    Koger, Gregory, Masket, Seth, and Hans Noel. 2010. “Cooperative Party Factions in American Politics.” American Politics Research 38 (1): 33–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X09353509

    Krehbiel, Keith. 1993. “Where’s the Party?” British Journal of Political Science 23 (2): 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400009741

    Kujala, Jordan. 2020. “Donors, Primary Elections, and Polarization in the United States.” American Journal of Political Science 64 (3): 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12477

    Ladewig, Jeffrey W. 2021. “Income Inequality and Ideological Positions in the U.S. Congress.” Political Research Quarterly 74 (3): 599–614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912920922318

    Lee, Frances E. 2009. Beyond Ideology: Politics, Principles, and Partisanship in the U.S. Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470771.001.0001

    Lee, Frances E. 2015. “How Party Polarization Affects Governance.” Annual Review of Political Science 18: 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-072012-113747

    Lee, Frances E. 2016. Insecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226409184.001.0001

    Levita, Gabriel, and Cristian Márquez Romo. 2023. “Assessing Congressional Institutionalization and Political Elites’ Renewal in Latin America through Legislative Amateurism.” Journal of Politics in Latin America 15 (3): 287–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1866802X231212571

    Matland, Richard E., and Donley T. Studlar. 2004. “Determinants of Legislative Turnover: A Cross-National Analysis.” British Journal of Political Science 34 (1): 87–108. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712340300036X

    McCarty, Nolan. 2011. “Measuring Legislative Preferences.” In The Oxford Handbook of the American Congress, edited by George C. Edwards III, Frances E. Lee, and Eric Schickler. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199559947.003.0004

    McCarty, Nolan. 2017. “Polarization, Congressional Dysfunction, and Constitutional Change.” Indiana Law Review 50 (1): 223–240. https://doi.org/10.18060/4806.1136

    McCarty, Nolan M., Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. 2016. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Mixon, Franklin G. Jr., Chandini Sankaran, and Kamal P. Upadhyaya. 2019. “Is Political Ideology Stable? Evidence from Long-Serving Members of the United States Congress.” Economies 7 (2): 36, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies7020036

    Moskowitz, Daniel J., Jon C. Rogowski, and James M. Snyder Jr. 2024. “Parsing Party Polarization in Congress.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 19 (4): 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00022039

    Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal. 1985. “A Spatial Model for Legislative Roll Call Analysis.” American Journal of Political Science 29 (2): 357–384. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111172

    Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Stone, Walter J., Sarah A. Fulton, Cherie D. Maestas, and L. Sandy Maisel. 2010. “Incumbency Reconsidered: Prospects, Strategic Retirement, and Incumbent Quality in U.S. House Elections.” The Journal of Politics 72 (1): 178–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381609990557

    Theriault, Sean M. 2008. Party Polarization in Congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790652

    Wolak, Jennifer. 2020. Compromise in an Age of Party Polarization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197510490.001.0001

Security Policy

  • Security Policy

    “Big Brother” or “False Ally”: Perception of anti-Russian sentiment in the context of the results of the 2026 parliamentary elections in Armenia

    Artur Mkrtichyan
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article presents a comparative analysis of the geopolitical and regional aspects—as well as the significance—of the elections to the National Assembly of the Republic of Armenia held on June 7, 2026. Particular attention is paid to the actions of the political opposition, which sought to capitalize on Armenia’s economic dependence on Russia. Pro-Western political forces in Armenia relied on support from the US and the EU, leveraging the fact that Russia had pursued an unfriendly foreign policy in recent years by drawing closer to Azerbaijan and Türkiye. The image of Russia as a military ally—which had replaced the Soviet-era "Big Brother" myth—was undermined by the 44-day war in Artsakh in 2020, the subsequent occupation of part of Armenia’s sovereign territory, and Russia’s failure to honor its allied obligations during the ethnic cleansing of the Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh carried out by Azerbaijan starting in 2023. A negative perception of Russia took hold in Armenian public discourse, leading to the defeat of pro-Russian political forces in the parliamentary elections of June 7, 2026. These results demonstrate that, for Armenia’s re-elected leadership, security issues and the prospects for developing cooperation with the EU—as well as implementing the strategic partnership agenda between Armenia and the European Union—are of paramount importance, particularly in light of Armenia’s integration into regional transport networks.

    References

    Aleksanyan, Ashot. 2025. “Russlands hybrider Einfluss auf die europäische Integration Armeniens durch den 44-Tage-Krieg: Lehren für Armenien.” In: Russische Schockwellen. Politik, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft im Spannungsverhältnis der Regionen Südosteuropa und Mittlerer Osten, Hrsg. von Olaf Leiße, 219-235. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-46812-5_11.

    ARKA News Agency. 2026. “Net inflow of remittances to Armenia from abroad increased nearly 2.7-fold in four months.” June 3, 2026. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://armbanks.am/hy/2026/06/03/274021/ (in Armenian).

    Atanesyan, Arthur V., and Arem E. Mkrtichyan. 2022. “Armenia between Russia and the West: Foreign Political Priorities in Public Opinion.” Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies] 12: 88-100.

    Atanesyan, Arthur V., and Arem E. Mkrtichyan. 2023. “Russia as an ally: the dynamics of public perceptions in Armenian society before and after the 2020 Karabakh war.” Polis. Political Studies 2: 9-26. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.02.02 (in Russian).

    Atanesyan, Arthur V., Bradley M. Reynolds, and Artur E. Mkrtichyan. 2024. “Balancing between Russia and the West: The Hard Security Choice of Armenia.” European Security 33 (2): 261-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2023.2258528.

    Atoyan, Koryun, Lusine Karapetyan, and Vardan Atoyan. 2023. “Migration Trends in Armenia: Issues and Challenges.” Scholars Bulletin 9 (4): 37-44, https://doi.org/10.36348/sb.2023.v09i04.001.

    Harrod, Michael M., and Richard T. Serpe. 2026. “Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory: An Empirical Examination.” In: Identity Development and Maintenance in Context: Cases from Higher Education, Health Care, and Other Settings, edited by Kelly L. Markowski, Michael M. Harrod, and Philip S. Brenner, 37-68. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-12082-3_3.

    Hergnyan, Seda. 2025. “$4.3 Billion Outflow: The Geography of Money Transfers To and From Armenia in 2024.” Hetq, April 4, 2025. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://hetq.am/hy/article/173571 (in Armenian).

    Khojabekyan, Vladimir. 2002. Population Reproduction and Movements in Armenia in the 19th-20th Centuries and at the Threshold of the 21st Century. Yerevan: NAS RA “Gitutyun” Publishing House (in Armenian).

    Lurie, Svetlana V. 2017. “The Image of Russia and Russians in Contemporary Armenian Consciousness.” Historical Psychology and Sociology of History 10 (2): 206-227 (in Russian).

    MFA of the RF. 1997. “Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Armenia.” Accessed July 20, 2026. https://mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/international_contracts/international_contracts/2_contract/47338/ (in Russian).

    MFA of the RF. 2026. “Comment by Official Representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry M.V. Zakharova regarding the parliamentary elections held in Armenia. June 8, 2026. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/2115743/ (in Russian).

    Mkrtichyan, Artur, Harutyun Vermishyan, and Sona Balasanyan. 2016. Independence generation: youth study 2016 - Armenia. Yerevan: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.

    OSCE ODHIR. 2026a. Armenia, Parliamentary Elections, 7 June 2026. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://odihr.osce.org/node/662896.

    OSCE ODHIR. 2026b. Armenia, Parliamentary Elections, 7 June 2026: Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions.” June 8, 2026. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://odihr.osce.org/sites/default/files/documents/official_documents/2026/06/ARM%20Parliamentary%202026_PS_08.06.2026.pdf.

    Shestopal, Elena. 2018. “The Image of Russia in Contemporary Russian Society: Political and Psychological Analysis.” PCS - Politics, Culture and Socialization 1 (2): 65-80. https://doi.org/10.3224/pcs.v9i1-2.04.

    Tagesspiegel. 2020. “Konflikt um Berg-Karabach: Tradition russisch-türkischer Absprachen: Prekärer Status seit vielen Jahrhunderten: Ein Gastbeitrag zur Vorgeschichte und Gegenwart des Krieges in und um Berg-Karabach.” November 25, 2020. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://www.tagesspiegel.de/wissen/tradition-russisch-turkischer-absprachen-4212226.html (in German).

    Tass. 2020. “Rossotrudnichestvo has named the countries where Russia is most loved; among them are Tajikistan, Serbia, and Armenia.” December 24, 2020. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://tass.ru/obschestvo/10345319.

    The Central Electoral Commission of the RA. 2026. “Elections to the National Assembly, 2026.” Accessed July 20, 2026. https://elections.am/Elections/Parliamentary.

  • Security Policy

    Polycrisis and the Transformation of International Order: A Systemic Complexity Framework

    Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan Farag
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article analyzes issues surrounding the polycrisis and the transformation of the international order through the lens of systemic complexity. The growing intertwining of geopolitical rivalry, economic shocks, technological competition, climate change, health crises, and resource security challenges has fundamentally altered the nature of contemporary international politics. These crises do not merely unfold in isolation; they increasingly reinforce one another, generating cascading effects and systemic vulnerabilities that challenge traditional conceptions of the international order. While existing international relations theories offer insight into specific aspects of instability, they often fail to explain the mechanisms of interaction between simultaneous crises and their broader consequences. This article develops a conceptual model based on the principle of systemic complexity to explain how the polycrisis drives the transformation of the international order. Drawing on complexity theory and systems thinking, the authors conceptualize the international order as a complex adaptive system comprising multiple actors operating across closely interconnected domains: security, the economy, technology, the environment, and public health. Through mechanisms of interdependence, spillover effects, feedback loops, and adaptive responses, the polycrisis generates non-linear dynamics that reshape patterns of cooperation, competition, and governance. Based on qualitative conceptual analysis and illustrative examples, the article argues that the polycrisis constitutes a systemic state rather than a mere temporary accumulation of disparate shocks. The proposed approach offers a complexity-theory perspective on contemporary global transformations and provides a foundation for further research into the evolving architecture of the international order.

    References

    Allison, Graham. 2017. Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap? Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Baldwin, Richard, and Beatrice Weder di Mauro, eds. 2020. Economics in the Time of COVID-19. London: CEPR Press.

    Bibeau, Alexis, Sophie Schriever, Philippe Bourbeau, and Julie Fournier. 2025. “Parties’ Platforms, Migration, and Security: Patterns and Determinants.” Geopolitics 30 (1): 378-404. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2024.2321499.

    Cairney, Paul. 2012. "Complexity Theory in Political Science and Public Policy." Political Studies Review 10 (3): 346–358.

    Creswell, John W., and J. David Creswell. 2018. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Edmond, Chick, and Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan Farag. 2026. “ The Role of the European Union in Managing African Crises Between Development Aid and Geopolitical Interests.” World Affairs 189: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/waf2.70050.

    Edmond, Chick. 2026. “Resource Geopolitics and Domestic Power Bargains: How the 21st-Century Scramble for Africa Reshapes Security and Democratic Space”. International Journal of Politics and Security 8 (1): 26-53. https://doi.org/10.53451/ijps.1891206.

    Farag, Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan. 2025. “Middle Powers in a Multipolar World: The Case of Turkey's Foreign Policy Repositioning.” International Journal of Contemporary Security Studies 1 (2): 175-188. https://doi.org/10.18485/fb_ijcss.2025.1.2.13.

    Farag, Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan. 2026a. “Addressing Asymmetric Security Threats in the Mediterranean: Facing Reality and Adaptation Strategies.” Scientific Journal of the Faculty of Economic Studies and Political Science 11 (21): 790-857. https://doi.org/10.21608/esalexu.2025.372816.1299.

    Farag, Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan. 2026b. “From Primacy to Fragmented Multipolarity: Systemic Change through Power-Conversion Channels.” Political Issues 84: 130-156. https://doi.org/10.58298/842026810.

    Farag, Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan. 2026c. “Local Climate Action and Policy Implementation in Egypt and Somalia: A Multilevel Governance Perspective.” Innovation Journal of Social Sciences and Economic Review 8 (1): 92-102. https://doi.org/10.36923/ijsser.v8i2.366.

    Farag, Mohamed Ibrahim Hassan. 2026d. “Reshaping the Regional Order in the Middle East under the New Multipolarity: An Analysis in Light of Structural Realism.” Journal of Politics and Economics 30 (29): 296–317. https://doi.org/10.21608/jocu.2026.432610.1487.

    Farrell, Henry, and Abraham L. Newman. 2019. “Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion.” International Security 44 (1): 42-79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351.

    Farrell, Henry, and Abraham L. Newman. 2023. Underground Empire: How America Weaponized the World Economy. New York: Henry Holt.

    George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Hale, Thomas, David Held, and Kevin Young. 2013. Gridlock: Why Global Cooperation Is Failing When We Need It Most. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Holland, John H. 1992. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Homer-Dixon, Thomas, et al. 2022. "Synchronous Failure: The Emerging Causal Architecture of Global Crisis." Ecology and Society 27 (3): 6.

    Ikenberry, G. John. 2018. "The End of Liberal International Order?" International Affairs 94 (1): 7–23.

    IPCC. 2023. “Sections.” In: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 35-115. https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647.

    Keohane, Robert O., and Joseph S. Nye. 1977. Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown.

    Laborde, David, Will Martin, and Rob Vos. 2021. "Impacts of COVID-19 on Global Poverty, Food Security, and Diets." IFPRI Discussion Paper.

    Lawrence, Michael, Scott Janzwood, and Thomas Homer-Dixon. 2024. "What Is a Polycrisis? And How Is It Different from a Systemic Risk?" Cascade Institute Working Paper.

    Miller, John H., and Scott E. Page. 2007. Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Morin, Edgar. 2008. On Complexity. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Newman, Mark. 2018. Networks. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Tooze, Adam. 2022. "Welcome to the World of the Polycrisis." Financial Times, October 28.

    Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Yergin, Daniel. 2020. The New Map: Energy, Climate, and the Clash of Nations. New York: Penguin Press.

  • Security Policy

    Geopolitical Rivalry and Economic Vulnerability in Africa: Assessing the Impact of U.S.–Iran Tensions on Trade, Energy Markets, and Macroeconomic Stability

    Yinka Ibrahim Agbeyinka
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This study analyzes the impact of geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and Iran on Africa’s political economy and security architecture, focusing specifically on transmission mechanisms, security implications, and response strategies. Employing a comprehensive approach that combines quantitative analysis of macroeconomic indicators with a qualitative assessment of security dynamics and policy measures, the study identifies oil price volatility as the primary channel through which these geopolitical tensions affect African economies. The findings indicate that oil-exporting nations face revenue instability, while oil-importing countries experience rising inflation and fiscal pressure. Trade disruptions and financial market volatility exacerbate these effects, constraining economic resilience. In the security realm, the study identifies signs of increasing militarization in strategically important regions—such as the Red Sea basin—and the proliferation of “proxy actors,” which heighten instability in vulnerable states. Despite their development, regional security structures face significant resource and institutional constraints in addressing these complex challenges. In response, African states employ a mix of diplomatic maneuvering, economic adaptation, and security cooperation, though the effectiveness of these strategies varies according to specific contexts. The study concludes that while Africa remains structurally vulnerable to external geopolitical shocks, mechanisms for resilience and strategic adaptation are beginning to emerge. The authors recommend accelerating economic diversification, regional integration, and security cooperation to enhance the continent's capacity to withstand challenges stemming from great-power rivalry.

    References

    African Digital Democracy Observatory. 2026a. “How Sahel juntas are silencing the press.” August 31, 2026. Accessed April 1, 2026. https://disinfo.africa/how-sahel-juntas-are-silencing-the-press-7e41da364ca8.

    African Digital Democracy Observatory. 2026b. “Research + Insights.” Accessed April 1, 2026. https://disinfo.africa/subpage/e99f7ecd92fe.

    Afşar, Muharrem, Onur Polat, Aslı Afşar, and Güntülü Özlem Kahraman. 2026. “Dynamic Interlinkages between Oil Price Shocks and Stock Markets: A Quantile-on-Quantile Connectedness Analysis in Emerging Economies.” Applied Economics 58 (11): 2188-2204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2025.2473121.

    Agostinelli dos Santos, Isabela, and Reginaldo Mattar Nasser. 2026. “Iran’s Foreign Policy Under US Economic Sanctions: Fostering Strategic Relations with China in a Multiplex World Order.” Middle East Critique, July, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2026.2704364.

    Asafo-Adjei, Emmanuel, Anokye M. Adam, and Patrick Darkwa. 2024. “Can Crude Oil Price Returns Drive Stock Returns of Oil Producing Countries in Africa? Evidence from Bivariate and Multiple Wavelet.” Macroeconomics and Finance in Emerging Market Economies 17 (1): 59-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/17520843.2021.1953864.

    Bellos, Sotirios, Petros Golitsis, and Kyriakos Emmanouilidis. 2026. “Investigating the Impact of Geopolitical Risks and Global Uncertainty on the EU-27 Economies.” Journal of East-West Business 32 (1): 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/10669868.2025.2546297.

    Billah, Mabruk, Muneer Shaik, Sinda Hadhri, and Faruk Balli. 2025. “Unveiling the Impact of Oil Price Shocks on Global Sukuk Markets: A Focus on Quantile Coherence and Time-Frequency Connectedness.” Applied Economics 57 (58): 9905-9931. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2024.2424500.

    Bøås, Morten, and Francesco Strazzari. 2026. “Borders Ending Nowhere: The Geopolitical Imaginaries and Practices of Russia’s Spheres of Interest in Africa.” Geopolitics 31 (4): 1319-1343. https://doi.org/10.1080/14650045.2025.2585297.

    Cilliers, Jakki, Barry Hughes, and Jonathan D. Moyer. 2011. African Futures 2050 - The Next Forty Years. ISS Monograph No. 175. Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria, South Africa. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2690239.

    Cobb, Adam. 2014. “Proxy Warfare.” The RUSI Journal 159 (2): 96-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2014.912812.

    Ekpo, Charles E., Samuel Oyewole, and Christopher Isike. 2026. “Trump 2.0 and the Dynamics of the US Soft Power in Africa.” International Review of Sociology, August, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2026.2710610.

    Eslami, Mohammad, and Shahram Akbarzadeh. 2025. “Israel’s 12-Day War on Iran and the Russian Fighter Jet Exports: A Geopolitical Analysis.” Mediterranean Politics, October, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2025.2578077.

    Idahosa, Stephen Osaherumwen, Denis Andreevich Degterev, and Solomon Ijeweimen Ikhidero. 2021. “Securitisation Initiatives and the Lingering Security Challenges in Sub-Saharan Sahel Region: An Appraisal.” African Security Review 30 (3): 338-367. https://doi.org/10.1080/10246029.2021.1970597.

    Idowu, Dare Leke. 2026. “Hedging the Great Powers: Africa Exercising Agency in the US-China Competition in the 4IR.” South African Journal of International Affairs 33 (2): 221-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2026.2686189.

    Jiang, Zhen. 2026. “Israel and the Shaping of US Sanctions Against Iran: A Study of the D’Amato Act.” Middle East Critique 35 (3): 1001-1017. https://doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2025.2541336.

    Joseph, Juliet Eileen. 2024. “Critical Factors to Consider in the Trade–Security Nexus of the African Continental Free Trade Area: A Catalyst for Establishing Peace.” African Security Review 33 (2): 131-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/10246029.2024.2303459.

    Kalina, Irina, and Kazi Sohag. 2026. “Oil, Sanctions, and Survival: Fresh Insights into Iran’s Financial (in)-Stability.” Applied Economics 58 (36): 7481-7498. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2025.2532891.

    Lazarus, Suleman, and Gargi Sarkar. 2026. “Strait of Hormuz: The Geopolitical to Cybercrime Cascade Framework and the 2026 US-Israel-Iran Conflict.” Deviant Behavior, August, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2026.2710402.

    Lebakeng, Teboho Josiah. 2023. “Repositioning African States to Prudently Engage the Global (Dis)Order and Advance Peace, Security and Development.” Global Change, Peace & Security 35 (1): 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2024.2412638.

    Liu, Si. 2025. “Beyond the Battlefield: Economic and Geopolitical Reverberations of the 2024 Israel-Iran Escalation in the Middle East, South Asia, and East Africa.” Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies 19 (2): 130-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/25765949.2025.2553258.

    Lob, Eric, and Hakan Yilmazkuday. 2025. “A Political Economy Analysis of Changes and Continuities in Iran–Africa Trade Relations: A Case of South–South Dependency?” Review of Social Economy 83 (1): 106–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2024.2353580.

    Márquez-Velázquez, Alejandro. 2025. “Political Cycles and the Persistence of the Resource Curse in Venezuela: The Impact of Oil Price Volatility on Public Investment.” Forum for Social Economics, December, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/07360932.2025.2594520.

    Melkon, John, Brock A. Salgado, and Dries Putter. 2025. “Network-Centric US Military Intelligence Strategy for Africa’s Evolving Geopolitical Landscape.” African Security Review 34 (4): 420-435. https://doi.org/10.1080/10246029.2025.2528706.

    Meng, Kui, Mohd Naved Khan, Tomiwa Sunday Adebayo, and Victoria Olushola Olanrewaju. 2024. “How Do Oil Price Uncertainty and Economic Policy Uncertainty Influence Achievement of Net-Zero Emissions Targets by 2050? A Quantile-Based Analysis.” International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology 31 (7): 892-911. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2024.2344860.

    Mensah, Isaac. 2023. “The African Union’s Policy Frameworks, Institutional Mechanisms and Challenges in Countering Terrorism in Africa.” Terrorism and Political Violence 35 (6): 1410-1421. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2022.2043287.

    Muyeba, Singumbe, and Abigail Kabandula. 2025. “Incremental Change or Transformation? Changes in US Foreign Policy towards Africa since 2001.” Journal of Contemporary African Studies 43 (3): 422-440. https://doi.org/10.1080/02589001.2025.2568383.

    Ndou, Eliphas, and Nombulelo Gumata. 2025. “Oil Price Passthrough to Consumer Price Inflation in South Africa: The Role of the Inflation Environment.” Journal of Applied Economics 28 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2025.2509228.

    Odo, Augustine C., Modesta C. Iduma, Joseph Chukwudi Odionye, Nathaniel E. Urama, Emeka Steve Emengini, and Farah Yasin Farah Abdelkhair. 2026. “Quantifying the Heterogeneous Effects of Oil Price Shocks on Domestic Inflation of Oil-Rich Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.” The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development 35 (2): 611-651. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2025.2463391.

    Okafor-Yarwood, Ifesinachi Marybenedette, and Freedom C. Onuoha. 2023. “Whose Security Is It? Elitism and the Global Approach to Maritime Security in Africa.” Third World Quarterly 44 (5): 946–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2023.2167706.

    Rabbani, Mustafa Raza, Syed Mabruk Billah, Madiha Kiran, Muneer Shaik, and Umar Nawaz Kayani. 2025. “From Crude to Capital: Unveiling the Dynamic Interplay Between Oil Prices and African Stock Indices.” Journal of African Business, November, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228916.2025.2591972.

    Raineri, Luca, Abdoul Wahab Cissé, and Laura Berlingozzi. 2025. “What Is Deradicalization? Translating Security Practices in the Maghreb and the Sahel.” Terrorism and Political Violence, October, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2025.2558162.

    Sadeqi Mohammadi, Setareh, and Christopher Weaver. 2025. “Resistance Economies: An Analysis of Resilience against US Sanctions on Iran and Cuba.” Middle East Critique, June, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/19436149.2025.2509996.

    Shah, Syed Afzal Moshadi, Aqil Waqar Khan, Noureen Fatima, Abdullah Hamoud Ali Seraj, Ilknur Ozturk, and Khalid Zaman. 2026. “A Ticking Time Bomb: Phased Global Scenario Analysis of the Economic, Energy, and Geopolitical Consequences of a Prolonged Iran–U.S. War.” Global Change, Peace & Security, July, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781158.2026.2695771.

    Shang, Jin, and Shigeyuki Hamori. 2024. “The Response of Oil-Importing and Oil-Exporting Countries’ Macroeconomic Aggregates to Crude Oil Price Shocks: Some International Evidence.” Eurasian Economic Review 14 (4): 933-980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40822-024-00281-z.

    Sweidan, Osama D., and Nasr G. Elbahnasawy. 2026. “Geopolitical Risk Spillovers and Interconnectedness: Evidence from the MENA Region and Key Global Powers.” Defence and Peace Economics 37 (3): 343-366. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2025.2505471.

    UNCTAD. 2025. “Africa’s vulnerability to global shocks highlights need for stronger regional trade.” February 10, 2025. Accessed April 1, 2026. https://unctad.org/news/africas-vulnerability-global-shocks-highlights-need-stronger-regional-trade.

    United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2026. Impact of the Iran–U.S. Military Escalation on African Economies. UPAS-UNDP-CO Sénégal. Accessed April 1, 2026. https://www.undp.org/africa/waca/publications/impact-iran-us-military-escalation-african-economies.

    Vivoda, Vlado, Ron Matthews, and Jensine Andresen. 2025. “Securing Defense Critical Minerals: Challenges and U.S. Strategic Responses in an Evolving Geopolitical Landscape.” Comparative Strategy 44 (2): 281-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2025.2456427.

    Vivoda, Vlado, Ron Matthews, and Jensine Andresen. 2025. “Securing Defense Critical Minerals: Challenges and U.S. Strategic Responses in an Evolving Geopolitical Landscape.” Comparative Strategy 44 (2): 281-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2025.2456427.

    Zarnadze, Aleksandr, and Hongsong Liu. 2026. “Maritime ringside: Trump’s overseas port policies amid US–China rivalry.” Marit Econ Logist 28: 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-026-00345-8.

Geopolitics

  • Geopolitics

    Multiculturalism and the BRICS+: Exploring Emerging Issues and Prospects

    Esther Oluwaseun Idowu, Oladele Daniel Idowu
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This study examines the challenges and prospects of multiculturalism within the context of emerging global alliances, with a particular focus on the BRICS+ bloc. While globalization has facilitated unprecedented interconnectedness across cultures, economies, and political systems, it has also increased asymmetries and cultural hierarchies that risk reproducing hegemonic structures within multilateral formations. Despite BRICS+’s growing significance as a driver of global economic growth, limited scholarly attention has been paid to the cultural dynamics that underpin its cohesion and long-term sustainability. Drawing on globalization theory and deploying qualitative analysis of secondary data, this study examines how cultural diversity within BRICS+ shapes internal relations, policy coordination, and global positioning. It argues that although multiculturalism provides a framework for inclusivity and cooperation, it simultaneously generates tensions such as ethnocentrism, majoritarian dominance, and latent supremacist ideologies that may undermine collective identity. The findings reveal that the success of BRICS+ as a geopolitical and economic bloc is dependent not only on economic complementarities but also on its capacity to negotiate cultural differences through inclusive and non-hegemonic structures. The study advances the concept of “bounded identity” as a strategic model for engendering unity without eroding cultural distinctiveness. It further demonstrates that multiculturalism, when effectively managed, can promote cross-cultural understanding, strengthen institutional cooperation, and support more equitable global engagements.

    References

    Appelbaum, Richard, and William I. Robinson. 2005. Critical Globalization Studies. New York: Routledge.

    BRICS. 2015. “About the Informal Group of States.” Accessed August 28, 2024. http://en.brics2015.ru.

    Bhattacharya, Sriparna. 2024. “Decoding Africa’s Interest in BRICS.” Observer Research Foundation. Accessed April 4, 2025. https://www.orfonline.org.

    Cashmore, Ellis. 1996. Dictionary of Race and Ethnic Relations. 4th ed. London: Routledge.

    Chakrabarty, Malancha, and Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. 2020. Global Multilingualism and the BRICS: Language Politics and Policy. Cham: Springer.

    Cummings, Milton. 2003. Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: A Survey. Washington, DC: Center for Arts and Culture.

    Erediauwa, Aisosa. 2024. “Nigeria, BRICS+, and the Evolving Global Economic Order.” Seminar paper presented at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Lagos.

    Famiyesin, Michael. 2025. “The Economic and Foreign Policy Implications of Nigeria’s Engagement with BRICS: A Critical Analysis.” Seminar paper presented at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Lagos.

    Grishaeva, Elena B. 2012. “Multiculturalism as a Central Concept of Multiethnic and Poly-Cultural Society Studies.” Journal of Siberian Federal University: Humanities & Social Sciences 7 (5): 916–922.

    Gutmann, Amy. 2003. Identity in Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Hofstede, Geert. 1991. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    InfoBRICS. n.d. “History of BRICS.” Accessed August 28, 2024. http://www.infobrics.org.

    Khasru, Syed Munir. 2021. The BRICS+ Pivot: New Dynamics in International Development. London: Routledge.

    Kymlicka, Will. 1989. Liberalism, Community, and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Kymlicka, Will. 1995. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Luo, Huiqun, and Liu Yang. 2022. “Equality and Equity in Emerging Multilateral Financial Institutions: The Case of the BRICS Institutions.” Global Policy 13 (2): 279–290.

    Nye, Joseph S. 2010. The Future of Power. New York: PublicAffairs.

    Robinson, William I. 2007. “Theories of Globalization.” In The Blackwell Companion to Globalization, edited by George Ritzer, 125–143. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Rosado, Caleb. 1997. Change in Human Systems. Chicago: Rosado Consulting.

    Song, Sarah. 2010. “Multiculturalism.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/multiculturalism/.

    Stuenkel, Oliver. 2015. The BRICS and the Future of Global Order. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

    Summaya, Ismail. 2023. “Can BRICS End ‘Apartheid’ against the Global South?” Council on Foreign Relations. Accessed August 28, 2024. https://www.cfr.org.

    Taylor, Charles. 1992. “The Politics of Recognition.” In Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition, edited by Amy Gutmann, 25–73. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Taylor, Charles. 1994. Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Toloraya, Georgy. 2016. “Where Is BRICS Headed? On the Results of the Goa Summit.” Russian International Affairs Council. Accessed August 28, 2024. https://russiancouncil.ru.

    Tripathi, Jitendra. 2023. “The BRICS Summit 2023: Seeking an Alternate World Order?” Council on Foreign Relations. Accessed August 28, 2024. https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils.

    Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Geopolitics

    Assessing the Effectiveness of United Nations Humanitarian Interventions in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 1999–2024

    Halidu Agaba, Aaron Ayeta Mulyanyuma, Charles Akinsola, Yusuf Abdulganiu Adegbite
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This paper evaluates the success of the UN’s humanitarian interventions in the DRC (‘MONUC/MONUSCO in the DRC’ 1999-2024) through the prism of one of the most protracted humanitarian emergencies on earth – its stability aspect. Inspired by Liberal Institutionalist and Human Security theoretical perspectives, the study analyzes how multilateral diplomacy, institutional vulnerabilities, and a human-centric approach to security shaped the DRC humanitarian outcomes. Applying a longitudinal quantitative perspective, the article examines secondary data sourced from UNHCR, FAO, OCHA, and ACLED to test for the presence of relationships between levels of UN intervention and a range of core humanitarian variables, including internally displaced persons, civilian casualties, food insecurity, and delivery of basic services. The results show that while UN interventions have significantly alleviated some of the most immediate forms of suffering – saving lives, improving food security, and protecting civilians – their impact overall has been severely undermined by ongoing conflict, poor governance, logistical constraints, and minimal local ownership. Although regression analysis shows a modest positive trend between aid intensity and progress in humanitarian sectors, the durability of this progress is still vulnerable. The study asserts that better integration of humanitarian assistance and peacebuilding, more effective regional cooperation, and improved local governance will be integral in securing long-term peace and stability and human security in DRC.

    References

    Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED). 2024. “Conflict Data for the Democratic Republic of the Congo (1999–2024).” Accessed February 14, 2026. https://acleddata.com.

    Autesserre, Séverine. 2010. The Trouble with the Congo: Local Violence and the Failure of International Peacebuilding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761034.

    Autesserre, Séverine. 2021. The Frontlines of Peace: An Insider's Guide to Changing the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Bellamy, Alex J., and Paul D. Williams. 2015. Understanding Peacekeeping. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Boshoff, Henri. 2020. Assessing MONUSCO’s Role in Stabilising the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Institute for Security Studies (ISS) Report.

    Coicaud, Jean-Marc. 2025. International Legitimacy and International Authority. In: The Law and Politics of International Legitimacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 242-256. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139026420.018.

    De Carvalho, Benjamin, and Niels Nagelhus Schia. 2011. “The MONUC Experiment: Civilian Peacekeeping in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” NUPI Working Paper 778. Oslo: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.

    De Waal, Alex. 2018. Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Evans, Gareth, and Mohamed Sahnoun. 2001. The Responsibility to Protect: Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). Ottawa: International Development Research Centre (IDRC).

    Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2024. “State of Food Security and Nutrition in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.” FAO. Accessed February 14, 2026. https://www.fao.org.

    Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Nye, Joseph S. 2009. Understanding International Conflicts: An Introduction to Theory and History. New York: Pearson Longman.

    Nzongola-Ntalaja, Georges. 2013. The Congo from Leopold to Kabila: A People's History. London: Zed Books.

    Omotola, J. Shola. 2025. Peacebuilding Perspectives and Herder-Farmer Conflicts in Africa. In: Herder-Farmer Conflicts in Africa: Perspectives and Lessons for Sustainable Peacebuilding. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 31-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-80821-0_2.

    Paris, Roland. 2001. “Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air?” International Security 26 (2): 87-102. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228801753191141.

    Prunier, Gérard. 2009. Africa’s World War: Congo, the Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental Catastrophe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Stearns, Jason K. 2021. The War That Doesn't Say Its Name: The Unending Conflict in the Congo. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1nwbr0n.

    Thakur, Ramesh. 2016. The United Nations, Peace and Security: From Collective Security to the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316819104.

    Tull, Denis M. 2018. “The Limits and Unintended Consequences of UN Peace Enforcement: The Case of MONUSCO in the DRC.” International Peacekeeping 25 (2): 167–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/13533312.2017.1404908.

    United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). 2023. Education and Child Protection in Conflict-Affected Areas of DRC. New York: UNICEF.

    United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 1994. Human Development Report 1994: New Dimensions of Human Security. New York: Oxford University Press.

    United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). 2024. “Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2023.” UNHCR. Accessed February 14, 2026. https://www.unhcr.org.

    United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). 2024. “Humanitarian Needs Overview: Democratic Republic of the Congo 2024.” OCHA. Accessed February 14, 2026. https://www.unocha.org.

    United Nations. 2023. "United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) – Mandate and Activities." United Nations Peacekeeping. Accessed February 14, 2026. https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/mission/monusco.

    Weiss, Thomas G. 2016. Humanitarian Intervention: Ideas in Action. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    World Food Programme (WFP). 2023. “WFP Operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Annual Report.” World Food Programme. Accessed February 14, 2026. https://www.wfp.org.

    World Health Organization (WHO). 2023. “Health Response to Emergencies in the DRC: Situation Report.” WHO Regional Office for Africa. Accessed February 14, 2026. https://www.afro.who.int.

  • Geopolitics

    Digital Colonialism and the Reproduction of Hegemony in Africa: A Postcolonial Approach

    Asma Hemaidia, Khadidja Bouamer
    View PDF
    Abstract

    This article presents a critical analysis of contemporary manifestations of digital colonialism in Africa, focusing on how global technology powers reproduce traditional patterns of domination through modern digital infrastructures and platforms. Drawing on a postcolonial analytical framework, the authors examine how data extraction, technological dependency, and regulatory asymmetries reinforce new forms of digital hegemony across the continent. The study argues that Africa’s digital vulnerability stems from structural inequalities and external control over data, networks, and governance models. Through an analysis of various national and pan-African initiatives, the article explores both the successes and limitations of current efforts to achieve digital sovereignty. Finally, it proposes a comprehensive set of counter-strategies—including technological innovation, policy harmonization, and epistemic decolonization—that could enable African nations to reclaim their agency and build an autonomous digital future. This research contributes to the critical discourse on power, technology, and postcoloniality in the digital age within the African context.

    References

    Atintande, M’Bawine. 2020. “Digital Communication in Africa at Crossroads: From Physical Exploitation in the Past to Virtual Dominance Now.” In: Digital Communications at Crossroads in Africa, edited by Kehbuma Langmia and Agnes Lucy Lando, 41-69. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42404-6_3.

    Ayodele, Odilile. 2021. “The Digital Transformation of Diplomacy: Implications for the African Union and Continental Diplomacy.” South African Journal of International Affairs 28 (3): 379-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2021.1968944.

    Birhane, Abeba. 2023. “Algorithmic Colonization of Africa.” In: Imagining AI: How the World Sees Intelligent Machines, edited by Stephen Cave and Kanta Dihal, 248-249. Oxford: Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192865366.003.0016.

    Botha, Sven, Markus Kornprobst, and Cori Wielenga. 2026. “Digital Pathways to Peace in Africa.” South African Journal of International Affairs 33 (2): 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2026.2695733.

    Bouke, Mohamed Aly, Sameer Hamoud Alshatebi, Azizol Abdullah, Korhan Cengiz and Hayate El Atigh. 2023. “African Union Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection: Challenges and Future Directions.” ArXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.01966. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.01966.

    Choi, Miseon. 2026. “Navigating Digital Colonialism: A Postcolonial Approach to AI and Global Justice.” Religious Education 121 (1): 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344087.2026.2627112.

    Coleman, Danielle. 2019. “Digital Colonialism: The 21st Century Scramble for Africa through the Extraction and Control of User Data and the Limitations of Data Protection Laws.” Michigan Journal of Race and Law 24: 417-439. https://doi.org/10.36643/mjrl.24.2.digital.

    Daceus, Christelle Glaphira, and Abigail Bryant. 2025. “Combatting Virtual Exchange’s Predisposition to Digital Colonialism: Culturally Informed Digital Accessibility as a Tool for Achieving the UN SDGs.” In: Intercultural Competence Through Virtual Exchange: Achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals, edited by Kelly A. Tzoumis and Elena D. Douvlou, 265-277. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-76418-9_17.

    Dahiya, Bhavna. 2023. “Digital Colonialism: Neo-Colonialism of the Global South.” Global South Studies Series, January 25, 2023. Accessed March 12, 2025. https://globalsouthseries.in/2023/01/25/digital-colonialism-neo-colonialism-of-the-global-south/.

    Folorunso Adebola et al. 2024. “Compliance and Governance Issues in Cloud Computing and AI: USA and Africa.” Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances 21 (02): 127-138. https://doi.org/10.30574/gjeta.2024.21.2.0213.

    Fritzsche, Kerstin, and Daniel Spoiala. 2022. “The EU–AU Digital Partnership: Between Digital Geopolitics and Digital Sovereignty.” In: Africa–Europe Cooperation and Digital Transformation, edited by Chux Daniels, Benedikt Erforth, and Chloe Teevan, 17-31. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003274322-2.

    Gravett, Willem. 2020. “Digital neo-colonialism: The Chinese model of internet sovereignty in Africa.” African Human Rights Law Journal 20 (1): 125-146. https://doi.org/10.17159/1996-2096/2020/v20n1a5.

    Hendricks, Vincent Fella, Mads Vestergaard, and Silas Marker. 2018. “Digital colonialism on the African continent.” IOL Business Report. Accessed April 5, 2025. https://www.iol.co.za/business-report/opinion/opinion-digital-colonialism-on-the-african-continent-17493010.

    Ilori, Tomiwa. 2024. “A Postcolonial Legal Critique of Online Expression in Africa.” Journal of African Law 68 (3): 283-300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021855324000111.

    Kwet, Michael. 2019. “Digital Colonialism: US Empire and the New Imperialism in the Global South.” Race & Class 60 (4): 1-20. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3232297.

    Kwet, Michael. 2021. “Digital Colonialism: The Evolution of US Empire.” Longreads TNI, March 4, 2021. Accessed March 14, 2025. https://longreads.tni.org/digital-colonialism-the-evolution-of-us-empire.html.

    Masters, Lesley. 2021. “Africa, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and Digital Diplomacy: (Re)Negotiating the International Knowledge Structure.” South African Journal of International Affairs 28 (3): 361-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2021.1961605.

    Menon, Sunita. 2023. “Postcolonial Differentials in Algorithmic Bias: Challenging Digital Neo-Colonialism in Africa.” SCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society 20 (2): 383-399. https://doi.org/10.2218/scrip.20.2.2023.8980.

    Mwema, Esther, and Abeba Birhane. 2024. “Undersea Cables in Africa: The New Frontiers of Digital Colonialism”. First Monday 29 (4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v29i4.13637.

    Onyango Ouma, Stephen. 2025. Neo-colonialism, Global Economic Structures, and Africa’s Development: Rethinking Dependency and Economic Sovereignty. In: Indigenous Systems, Colonialism, Colonial Legacies, and Africa’s Economic Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 179-198. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-00317-1_8.

    Salami, Aishat Oyenike. 2024. “Artificial Intelligence, Digital Colonialism, and the Implications for Africa’s Future Development.” Data & Policy 6: e67. https://doi.org/10.1017/dap.2024.75.

    TeleGeography. 2025. Submarine Cable Map. Accessed April 5, 2025. https://www.submarinecablemap.com/.

    Timcke, Scott. 2024. “AI and the Digital Scramble for Africa.” Review of African Political Economy. Accessed October 14, 2025. https://roape.net/2024/07/11/ai-and-the-digital-scramble-for-africa/.

    Venske, Tyler. 2024. “Navigating Digital Sovereignty in Africa: A Review of Key Challenges and Constraints.” The Africa Governance Papers 1 (4). Africa-China Reporting Project. Accessed October 14, 2025. https://africachinareporting.com/navigating-digital-sovereignty-in-africaa-review-of-key-challenges-and-constraints/.

View All Issues