Russian Science Diplomacy at a Crossroads

Nowadays science diplomacy tends to be one of most relevant and important fields of applied research in International Relations. In general, it can be regarded as a functional expression of both foreign and science policy conducted by states and non-state actors on the world arena. The emergence of the modern concept of science diplomacy has been taking place since the second half of the 2000s and is basically linked to a close intertwining of research and diplomatic practices. Still, most of the existing research works in the above area both in Russia and abroad can be described as somewhat fragmentary and focusing on specific case studies without providing a holistic picture of national science diplomacy models, including the Russian one. Considering this, the author of the article casts light upon the key features of the Russian science diplomacy complex based on a systematic approach and looks into its three main elements, i.e. "science in diplomacy", "diplomacy for science" and "science for diplomacy". In this context, he analyses the activity of the Russian science diplomacy main stakeholders in positive (how it is) and normative (how it should or could be) terms. The synthesis of the respective results reveals structural drawbacks of the system in question, which in 2020 have become even more acute than they used to be before. However, the outlined trends and tendencies infer that the ongoing pandemic did hardly bring on new problems, but can rather be seen as a catalyst for processes, which have already been witnessed in this field. Working from these premises, the author formulates a number of concrete and applicable policy recommendations aimed at optimizing the current practices, which might potentially be of use for decision-makers in Russian science and foreign affairs

Beginning of the Diplomatic Mission of the Ambassador of Spain J. M. Paez de la Cadena to the Russian Empire (1824—1825)

The question of the periodization and establishment of the chronological framework of the first stage of the work of J.M. Paez de la Cadena as head of the Spanish embassy in St. Petersburg after the Restoration of the monarchy  in Spain in 1823 is considered. An analysis of the available materials, during which it was revealed that there was  no exact dating of accreditation and the assumption of office of the named diplomat as a full-fledged member of the diplomatic corps, was carried out. It is shown that a number of humanitarian studies date the beginning of his mission to 1825, while in Russian historical works this issue is poorly and lapidarily covered. In order to clarify this information, work with the documents of the state archives of Madrid and Seville was carried out. By analyzing the dispatches stored in the corresponding funds, which have not yet been put into circulation within the framework of the Russian scientific discourse, it was established that Paez de la Cadena arrived in St. Petersburg no later than 1824. It is proved that by the beginning of 1825 he had already arrived to the Russian capital and corresponded with the central office of the Foreign Ministry in Madrid. Key issues that this correspondence dealt with are highlighted

Diplomatic Service of Italian Diplomat J.-C. de Ludolf (1805–1861)

The issue of periodization and  establishment of chronological frames of  the  stages of the diplomatic service of J.-C. de Ludolf, who represented the Kingdom of Naples abroad from 1805, and after its unification with the Sicilian Kingdom in 1816 and un  til the abolition  in  1861  —  the  Kingdom  of the Two Sicilies. It is shown that, despite Ludolf's many years of work in the Russian direction in various qualities, the coverage of the role and place of his figure in foreign policy processes is very fragmentary in Russian historiography. With the aim of the initial reconstruction of the key milestones in the diplomatic career of this historical person, study of foreign sources: materials from the State Archives of Naples, the memoirs of his daughter, as well as biographical works was carried out. By analyzing and systematizing the information presented in them, four periods of Ludolf's diplomatic activity are highlighted and briefly characterized. His most important achievements at each of the respective stages are outlined, while it is noted that a long stay in the service line in the Russian Empire at least had a significant impact on the professional development of a diplomat. It was revealed that St. Petersburg became the first and last point of his career path, during which he managed to work there as an attaché, plenipotentiary envoy and ambassador-at-large

Evolution of the Conceptual Foundations of Russian Scientific Diplomacy 1996-2016

The process of changing the conceptual foundations of Russian scientific diplomacy as an instrument of foreign policy and one of the forms of international scientific and technical cooperation over a twenty-year time span, the chronological boundaries of which are determined by the adoption of key strategic documents in this area, is examined. Based on the analysis of the regulatory framework, a sample of doctrinal sources related to the international aspects of the state scientific policy has been compiled. Through their analysis and parallel comparison with the Foreign Policy Concepts of the Russian Federation of 1993, 2000, 2008, 2013 and 2016, key transformations of the perception and vision of scientific diplomacy by decision-makers in the field are identified. Based on the results of the systematization of guidelines and value orientations reflected in the relevant political and determining documents, the periodization of the formation of scientific diplomacy was carried out with the identification of two stages. The first (1996 - mid-2000s) is characterized by a transition from a liberal paradigm to a realistic one, a certain politicization, and national interests at the forefront. The second stage (mid-2000s - 2016) is characterized by a reorientation to the economic dimension of international scientific and technical cooperation with a clear formation of scientific diplomacy as a concept in its modern form. It is shown that this evolution proceeded relatively smoothly in line with the objective changes in the international situation, Russia's position on the world stage, as well as adjustments to its foreign policy. Along with this, the role of E. M. Primakov as one of the ideological founders of modern Russian scientific diplomacy was identified and outlined

Soviet-American Scientific and Technical Cooperation in 1960s - Early 1970s: Science Diplomacy as a Factor of Détente

The features of the Soviet-American cooperation in the field of science and technology in the 1960s - early 1970s are studied. The issue of initially observed imbalances in scientific exchanges and differences in approaches to assessing the effectiveness of the implementation of the fundamental Lacy—Zarubin agreement from the standpoint of reciprocity and symmetry is considered. Two documentary sources are put into circulation - letters from W. S. Lacy, Special Assistant for East-West Exchanges to the US Secretary of State, and G. B. Kistiakowsky, Special Assistant to the President of the United States on Science and Technology, addressed to Secretaries of State J. F. Dulles and K. A. Herter, respectively. Based on the analysis of these documents, it is concluded that there is no consensus on the issue of measuring the effectiveness and intensity of scientific and technical cooperation between the USSR and the USA, as well as the absence of a special methodology. It was revealed that problems concerning the Lacy—Zarubin agreements implementation that existed at the first stage were largely eliminated by the end of the 1960s. Despite the fundamental differences in institutional and human resources strategies for conducting scientific exchanges and related events, which are also subject to analysis, Moscow and Washington were able to find the necessary points of contact to effectively stimulate bilateral scientific cooperation. It was noted that an important role in the process of reaching consensus was assigned to the participants of the exchange programs themselves, among whom there were many world-famous scientists. It is concluded that the researched interaction along the scientific track can be considered as one of the factors of détente in the era of bipolar confrontation

Institutional Framework and Practice of Russian Science Diplomacy

The research deals with a relatively recent phenomenon of science diplomacy as a tool of Russian foreign policy. One of the science diplomacy tracks is 'diplomacy for science. The article investigates this track’s macroand micro-level practices to assess the overall effectiveness of Russian science diplomacy. The authors conducted an indepth analysis of primary sources and semi-structured interviews with academics and diplomats. They conclude that at the micro-level, 'diplomacy for science' is hindered by a lack of legal information on travel rules, poor consolidation of the ‘research diaspora,' and the absence of a regulatory framework to identify those eligible for consular and diplomatic support. A distrust in communication between scholars and diplomats further aggravates the uneven support for scientists across Russian diplomatic missions. At the macro-level, the institutional framework of scientific cooperation between Russia and other states appears vague, featuring non-binding memoranda of understanding and very few detailed agreements

Lacy—Zarubin Agreement of 1958: Origins of Soviet-American Science Diplomacy

The Agreement between the USSR and the USA on exchanges in the field of culture, technology, science and education, signed on January 27, 1958 in Washington DC by W. S. Lacy US Secretary of State Special Assistant for East-West Exchanges, and G. N. Zarubin, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the USSR to the USA is considered. The question is raised about the role of this agreement in the Soviet- American science diplomacy of the late 1950s — early 1960s. Based on a review of the biographies of senior officials who participated on the American and Soviet sides in its conclusion and implementation, the personality factor in these scientific and diplomatic processes was investigated. It is proved that their high professionalism, pragmatism and the similarity of career paths had a positive impact both on reaching mutual understanding regarding the interstate agreement being concluded, and on giving the latter an extremely specific character. Particular attention is paid to the provisions of the Lacy—Zarubin agreement, which regulated the visits of scientists and researchers, as well as academic exchanges. To assess the effectiveness of the treaty implementation in this part, the Report of the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations dated August 20, 1959, prepared under the leadership of Senator J. Fulbright, was introduced as a source and analyzed in detail. It is noted that the clarity in determining the goals, means and ways to achieve them allowed the Lacy—Zarubin agreement to become a solid and resistant to juncture fluctuations in the conditions of the Cold War, the basis for scientific and technical cooperation between the USSR and the USA, which determined the vector of their development over the decade and a half that followed the signing of the document

Situação e perspectivas da abacaxicultura na Bahia.

O abacaxizeiro é planta típica de regiões tropicais e subtropicais, com boa capacidade de adaptação a condições ambientais com limitações de suprimento hídrico estacional. O seu fruto é um dos mais apreciados pelos consumidores mundo afora em função do seu visual exótico imponente e suas qualidades gustativas e nutricionais. Tais características, e a grande demanda decorrente, foram um atrativo especial para a sua domesticação e o desenvolvimento de técnicas para o seu cultivo comercial.Palestra

Relations between USSR and FRG in 1955—1982: Energy Aspect

The initial period of energy relations between the USSR and the FRG is considered. The question is raised about the role of economic diplomacy in the development of bilateral dialogue. Particular attention is paid to the impact of sanctions factors and political pressure from third parties on the oil and gas partnership between Moscow and Bonn. Transcripts of Bundestag meetings of the 1960s and the archives of the German Foreign Ministry during the specified period were put into circulation and used as sources. It analyzes how the establishment of bilateral energy cooperation was due to the need to restore and strengthen the economies of countries after the Second World War, the crises in the Middle East in the energy exporting countries, as well as the increased foreign policy and foreign economic activity of the USSR and the FRG in the 1950s-1960s. It is proved that the parties maintained close ties in the field of energy, despite the sanctions pressure and political differences between states during the Cold War. At the same time, it was noted that the pragmatism of the leaderships of the Soviet Union and West Germany in the area under study became the reason for the sustainable nature of the energy dialogue in the following decades, already in a completely different international political environment