Romanian new leadership have not succeeded (one may think they lack the will) to impose intrinsically new directions on our foreign policy. The causes may be seen both personal, determined by the nature of those responsible, but also constitutional, influenced by the relations between the state institutions. Moreover, Romania is a state known for its predictable principles ...
Foreign policy constitutes one of the strong pillars of every nation-state; I wouldn’t say that is the most important (this depends from state to state), but for sure, is one of the dominants. Hence, the foreign policy decision making process has ...
... process for elaborating it, and the mechanism for coordinating state and private interests in order to achieve a complete vision for national policy. And our project is intended to get these people involved.
In order to attract the expert community or society?
Actually, we would like to engage both, because the national interest has become a cliché. What are the guidelines for Russia's foreign policy? – They should be the national interests. It looks as an obvious cliché that doesn't imply the next question about the content.
This issue is much more advanced in the United States, where relevant commissions have been set ...
... only 15 percent of Russians feel friendly toward Ukrainians who respond similarly. Even if a magic wand were to make the conflict disappear (with Crimea remaining as is), this newfound enmity toward Russia has already put down deep roots in Ukrainian society and elites. The focus is on momentary things like movements of forces, Mariupol, Donetsk and Minsk accords, but all these seem like trifles. The map shows that the conflict area covers only five percent of Ukrainian territory. And what about the ...