The New Issue of “BINTEL” Journal

One of the latest articles by Victor Hvozd, who had headed the “Borysfen Intel” Independent Analytical Center for Geopolitical Studies for a long time, opens the next issue of the “BINTEL” Geopolitical Analytics Journal. Its title — “Ukraine at the Epicenter of the Confrontation Between Russia and the West” — clearly outlines the theme, which seems to continue all previous articles of the author, which appeared in the journal over the last six years and marked what he did professionally all his conscious life: defending the right of his Motherland to independence. This time, the author, observing and analyzing the latest events at the European Theatre, began to identify their geopolitical reasons, including how Ukraine once again in its history happened to be between two powerful players that again are in confrontation with each other, like during the Cold War.

The author writes: “As in the 1950s and 1980s, the parties are increasing their military potentials, deploying their troops not only at the European Theater but in different parts of the world, and demonstrating their power. However, Russia’s attack on Ukraine in 2014 can only be considered a catalyst for such a process, initiated by Moscow in the early 2000s. For example, after the economic and political situation in Russia stabilized at that time, and the Chechen problem was mostly solved, President V. Putin began to toughen Russian policy both in the post-Soviet space and in relations with the West”. He goes on to describe how the Russian leadership is trying to consolidate Russian society, using various hybrid methods of influencing the countries of the former Soviet Union, for which purpose it restores operational and combat training of the Russian Armed Forces and whom the Kremlin now considers its enemies and threatens not only with conventional but also with nuclear weapons.

It is clear that Europe and the world are forced to respond to such policy of the Russian leadership. Among other things, the author points out that the United States/NATO has also begun deploying full-fledged combat and ground forces, which will form the basis of the first echelon of their defense at the European Theater. In particular, in 2020, command structures and individual combat units of the V Corps of the US Army arrived in Poland. The V Corps was based in Germany during the Cold War and then returned to America. At the same time, the 2^nd Fleet of the US Navy, intended for operations in the Atlantic (including to ensure the deployment of American troops to Europe), is being restored. Instead of the principle of “rule of law” in international relations, today a different principle has appeared and finally taken root — “rule of force”. Traditionally, V. Hvozd provides a detailed list of military forces and means of both sides — the West and Russia — that may soon go in for an armed confrontation, which may become decisive in the worst sense of the word.

“German Geopolitical Thought and German Practical Geopolitics: Historical Interconnectedness and Modern Realities” is the title of Professor Myroslav Dnistryanskyi‘s article, which is traditionally published in the next issue and again corresponds to the topic of geopolitical order in Europe, in particular in Germany, “the people of which was known at that time for the relatively high level of ethno-national consciousness and socio-cultural development, but experiencing a period of political fragmentation”. It is clear that at the origins of geopolitics of that time in Germany were respected personalities. It was up to them to study and summarize current events, to publish their conclusions, to deny or confirm them, and all in the name of future generations who had to form the German nation. Those were the philosopher and writer J. G. Herder (1744–1803), who “emphasizing the singleness of language as the main objective factor of ethno-national unity (at that time it was especially important for the territorially and politically divided Germany), saw the nation as a natural organ of mankind, and the state as an artificial creation”; the economist F. Liszt (1789–1846), whose ideas are no less important in modern geo-economic and geopolitical conditions, given the imbalance in the relationship between national economies and various global economic structures; German biologist and geographer F. Ratzel (1844–1904), who “considered geopolitical problems in the context of political geography… and saw states as biological organisms with certain cycles of development, thus justifying the need to expand their living space”; R. Kjellén (1864-1922), who used the term “geopolitics” and introduced its components; the leader of German intellectuals, F. Naumann (1860–1919), who was impressed by the ideas of territorial and political reorganization of Central and Eastern Europe under the general name “Mitteleuropa” (Middle Europe), etc.

The author M. Dnistryanskyi pays special attention to the views of the political publicist P. Rohrbach (1869–1956), who was especially consistent in defending Ukrainian political interests in the international arena, sociologist M. Weber (1864–1920), who emphasized the socio-cultural isolation of Ukraine from Russia, the principled rejection of Ukrainian political self-determination even by “the most consistent Russian democrats”.

The reader will also be able to get acquainted with the views of the author of the German geopolitical doctrine K. Haushofer (1869–1946), which “were to some extent a guide to the expansionist policies of the Hitler regime”.

As for M. Dnistryanskyi’s conclusions in his article, they should be read carefully, because the author, as it is his tradition, consistently outlines the process of the development of geopolitical directions, demonstrating their reasons, logics and consequences, which today are reaped by the societies of many European countries.

The last but not the least for this issue was the material of the Ph.D. in History Oleksiy Volovych, — “Electoral Epic in Israel. The End of the Netanyahu Era?” The results of this election process were summed up in June, so the issue of “BINTEL” journal had to be postponed to summarize them. The author does not just record the very fact of the election. He gives a broader picture of it, tells about the political processes that accompany it, even explains the reason for certain actions of the main political statesmen and their views on Israeli geopolitics. “Domestic political processes in Israel have never been particularly stable, but the period 2019–2021 is characterized by extremely acute political turbulence: early parliamentary elections were held four times in a row — in April 2019, in September 2019, in March 2020 and in March 2021. The disproportionate ambitions of Israeli politicians cost Israeli taxpayers a lot — about 3 billion shekels (about 1 billion US dollars) for each election. The main final event of this long and dramatic election process was the resignation on June 13 of the charismatic Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had served as head of the Israeli government for the past 12 years, and a total of 15 years, which is a record in the 73-year-long history of the State of Israel”, the author begins his article which, no doubt, will attract the attention of not only narrow-focused specialists.

Our readers are well acquainted with the previous publications of our permanent author, Professor Ihor Datskiv. Most of his articles dealt with an extremely important and therefore interesting period in Ukrainian history — the establishment of the Ukrainian state’s diplomatic relations at the beginning of the last century. This time I. Datskiv continues this theme, presenting to readers his new work “The Status and Functions of the Ukrainian Foreign Policy Service During the Directory of the Ukrainian People’s Republic” , co-authored with Ph.D. in History Maryana Polych. The article deals, in particular, with the popularization of the Ukrainian cause in Europe, which was done by the Ukrainian embassies in Austria, Turkey, Romania, Switzerland, Greece, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Holland, Finland, Belgium, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (since 1929 — Yugoslavia) Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Baltic countries. By the way, Ukrainian diplomacy was helping the unrecognized at that time Belarus to find an agreement with Poland, “which insisted on a federation of Belarus with Lithuania”. The authors of this article also tell about the important role played by the Ukrainian military diplomacy. Military attaches, who were members of many diplomatic missions, collected information on the state of the armed forces of accreditation countries and other states in the view of future military alliances with them, the possibility of helping the UPR Army in the armed struggle for Ukraine’s independence. As we can see, our modern military diplomats can be considered full-fledged followers of those of their Ukrainian colleagues who happened to defend the Ukrainian state a hundred years ago.

Oleksandra Kovalyova, trainee at the Middle Eastern Section of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, writes about the geopolitical situation in the Middle East region, which is determined by the Israeli — Iran confrontation. The relevance of this topic is more than obvious, and we can only welcome the author’s approaches to the coverage of current events, in particular how she presents them in the historical and contemporary aspects. The article was published in the journal under the title “Iran in the Regional Policy of the State of Israel” .

Under the heading “VISITING BINTEL”, this time in an interview our questions were answered by Oleh Uruskyi, the Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine — the Minister for Strategic Industries of Ukraine. This interview — “We are still interesting to foreign partners, because our scientific and logistical base remains one of the most powerful in the world” — can be found on the website of the “Borysfen Intel” Centre, where we post such materials, usually in a shortened form.