The IR thinker

Problems of Post-Communism is a long-standing peer-reviewed academic journal that examines political, economic, security, and international developments in post-communist societies. First established in 1952 under the title Problems of Communism, the journal was originally published by the United States Information Agency and adopted its current name in 1992 to reflect the profound transformations following the end of the Cold War.Journal's homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/mppc20Editorial Board: https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/mppc20/about-this-journal#editorial-boardImpact Factor: 2.0 / 5-Year Impact Factor: 2.2Indexed: Scopus / Web of Science First Decision: 112 daysAcceptance Rate: 28%The current editor-in-chief is Dmitry P. Gorenburg, a political scientist and senior researcher at CNA, who oversees the journal’s editorial direction and its engagement with contemporary debates on the politics and international relations of post-communist countries.Dr. Gorenburg is also a Harvard Davis Center associate and previously served as executive director of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies (now the Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies, or ASEEES). His scholarship focuses on Russian military reform, Russian foreign policy, and security dynamics in the former Soviet Union, as well as questions of ethnic politics and identity in Russia. BLOG: Russian Military ReformContent00:00 – Introduction01:53 – Evolution of the Journal’s Mission After the Collapse of Communism05:20 – The Intellectual “DNA” of Problems of Post-Communism06:43 – Maintaining Intellectual Coherence Across a Broad Research Scope09:19 – The Role of International Relations in the Journal’s Scope: Thematic vs Territorial Focus10:26 – Disciplinary Balance: Comparative Politics, International Relations, and Area Studies11:07 – Major Intellectual Trends in Post-Communist Studies Over the Past Decade14:22 – Democratic Backsliding, Illiberalism, and the Impact of Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine on Research Agendas18:21 – Russian Scholars in Exile and Scholars Working Inside Russia21:05 – Underexplored Topics in Post-Communist Studies22:22 – Annual Publication Volume and the Pressure to Publish More26:31 – Preferred Research Methods and Methodological Approaches29:30 – The Most Common Mistakes in Manuscript Submissions40:51 – Ensuring Fairness and Efficiency in the Peer Review Process43:32 – Editorial Innovations that Improved Journal Quality and Consistency44:45 – The Role and Selection of the Editorial Board46:19 – Publishing Challenges for Scholars from Central Asia and the Post-Soviet Region52:30 – Growing Global Interest in Post-Communist Studies53:13 – Should Authors Suggest Potential Reviewers?55:14 – What Makes a Successful Article in Problems of Post-Communism59:25 – The Future Vision for the Journal

Myanmar occupies a unique position in contemporary international affairs, where the legacies of post-independence neutralism, decades of military rule, and a fractured post-coup order converge to produce one of the most complex foreign policy environments in the Indo-Pacific.Dr Naing is a visiting scholar at the Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, under the Taiwan Fellowship Program. At the moment, he is focusing on modern Myanmar’s domestic politics, democratisation, and international relations, with particular attention to Myanmar–Russia and Myanmar–China relations and their implications for regional security, political development, and social change.In this role, he conducts independent and collaborative research drawing on archival materials, historical documents, and qualitative sources. His current project, “Insights from Taiwan’s Democratisation: Implications for Upcoming Reform Processes in Myanmar,” examines how Taiwan’s experience of democratisation can inform prospective political reforms in Myanmar.Publications:Northern Myanmar Poses a Challenge to China’s Critical Minerals StrategyThe Dilemma of Sino-Myanmar Relations: The Case of Myitsone Hydropower Dam ProjectContent00:00 – Introduction02:19 – Neutralism, Military Isolation, and the Origins of Myanmar’s Strategic Hedging09:16 – Structural Drivers of the Contemporary Myanmar Political Crisis16:53 – The Influence of China and India on Myanmar’s Foreign Policy Orientation26:00 – The National Unity Government and the Fragmentation of Political Authority33:12 – Border Governance, Insurgency, and Security Dynamics in Myanmar’s Frontier Regions48:43 – Russia’s Role in Myanmar’s Strategic and Military Relations01:00:35 – ASEAN’s Five-Point Consensus and the Limits of the Non-Interference Principle

In this episode, I speak with Professor Sergei Prozorov about biopolitics, one of the most provocative frameworks in contemporary political theory, and how it reshapes our understanding of power, life, and death across IR, philosophy, and Soviet studies. From Foucault to Mbembe to Stalin, this is a conversation that cuts to the heart of how modern states govern human existence.Sergei Prozorov is Professor of Political Science, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Finland. His research interests include contemporary political theory, continental philosophy, biopolitics, democracy and totalitarianism. Sergei’s work is positioned at the intersection of political philosophy, IR theory, and Soviet and post-Soviet studies, with sustained engagement with the thought of Michel Foucault, Giorgio Agamben, and Roberto Esposito.During 2010–2015, Prozorov held the Academy of Finland Research Fellowship with the project Biopolitics of Stalinism. During 2015–2019, he served as Principal Investigator of the Academy of Finland project Biopolitics and Democracy in Global Governance. Prozorov's work has accumulated over 2,800 citations on Google Scholar Google Scholar, reflecting his standing as one of the leading theorists of biopolitics in the international field. Peer assessments situate him among the most philosophically sophisticated scholars working at the intersection of IR and continental theory. His work represents one of the most ambitious re-articulations of the ontological and ethical foundations of universalism in contemporary political theory.Prozorov's latest book is Poses of the World, the third volume in his Void Universalism trilogy.Foucault, Freedom and SovereigntyAgamben and Politics: A Critical IntroductionThe Biopolitics of Stalinism: Ideology and Life in Soviet SocialismFoucault and Agamben on Augustine, Paradise and the Politics of Human NatureWhen did biopolitics begin? Actuality and potentiality in historical eventsBiopolitics After Truth: Knowledge, Power and Democratic LifeChapters00:00 — Introduction02:55 — Conceptualising Biopolitics09:05 — Actors and Agents in Biopolitics12:39 — Biopolitics and Mainstream Approaches in Political Science and IR18:20 — Biopolitics and Sovereignty: Engaging with Agamben26:16 — Biopolitics and Necropolitics: Mbembe’s Intervention31:05 — Studying Biopolitics Empirically: Approaches and Challenges33:06 — Researching Biopolitics: Professor Prozorov’s Preferred Methods38:58 — Common Pitfalls in Biopolitics Research: Advice for Early-Career Scholars41:53 — Biopolitics Beyond the West45:21 — The Motivation and Goals Behind Biopolitics of Stalinism (book)50:30 — Soviet Ideology Through the Lens of Biopolitics01:00:59 — Biopolitical Investment or Propaganda in the Soviet Project?01:03:39 — Professor Prozorov’s Upcoming Research and Future Directions

How does a country under heavy sanctions continue to win influence across Africa, the Middle East, and Asia? In this episode, Vladimir Liparteliani unpacks the full machinery of Russian soft power — from RT and Sputnik to educational diplomacy, cultural outreach, and religious projection.Vladimir Liparteliani is an associate fellow at the School of Modern Languages and Cultures, Durham University. As a scholar of international relations, he focuses on soft power and international power competition in the post-Soviet space.Selected Publications:Soft Power Competition Between Russia and the West: Contesting Georgian National Identity, 1991–2024The Art of Subtle Influence: Russian Soft Power and Georgia’s Conservative TurnContent00:00 — Introduction01:37 — Conceptualising Russian Soft Power: Beyond Nye’s Classical Framework05:58 — Russian Scholarly Perspectives on Soft Power07:10 — Soft Power, Strategic Communication, and Influence Operations in Russian Foreign Policy08:42 — Strategic Ambiguity: The ‘Blurriness’ of Russian Soft Power09:23 — Great Power Identity and the Logic of Russian Soft Power11:53 — Soviet Legacies and Their Influence on Contemporary Russian Soft Power14:21 — International Broadcasting as Soft Power: RT and Sputnik18:22 — Narratives and Messaging in RT and Sputnik Content20:52 — Global Accessibility and Restrictions on RT and Sputnik23:02 — Educational Diplomacy in Russian Foreign Policy26:22 — Education as a Soft Power Instrument28:41 — The Experience of International Students in Russia30:22 — Cultural Diplomacy and the Projection of Russian Culture34:13 — Global Reception and Participation in Russian Cultural Initiatives36:54 — The Russian Orthodox Church and Religious Soft Power41:15 — Narrative Effectiveness and Audience Reception in Russian Soft Power43:52 — The Interaction of Soft and Hard Power in Russian Strategy46:49 — Soft Power within Russia’s Military and Security Agenda49:09 — Adapting Russian Soft Power to New Political Realities51:50 — The Impact of Sanctions on Russian Soft Power Adaptation54:31 — Opportunities and Constraints for Russian Soft Power in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia57:27 — Research Motivation: Studying Russian Soft Power

South Africa has been involved in nuclear development for more than 75 years. In 1948, the Atomic Energy Act established the Atomic Energy Board (AEB) — only two years after the United States created its own Atomic Energy Commission. South Africa's first nuclear research reactor, SAFARI-1, went critical in 1965, and the country's first large nuclear power station, Koeberg, came online in 1984.In February 2010, the South African government announced it would stop funding the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) programme. Over US$1.3 billion had been invested in the project since 1993, making its cancellation one of the most consequential decisions in South African energy history.But the technology did not disappear. A group of nuclear engineers and scientists pressed on independently, channelling the PBMR's intellectual legacy into a new design: the HTMR-100, an advanced Generation IV helium-cooled reactor. That effort eventually gave rise to Stratek Global, and it is an honour to speak with its Chairman and CEO, Dr Kelvin Kemm.Kelvin KemmDr Kelvin Kemm is a nuclear physicist and Chairman of Stratek Global, based in Pretoria, South Africa. He is the former Chairman of the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) and has been involved in South Africa's small modular reactor programme since its inception — a journey spanning more than two decades.Dr Kemm has briefed the US Senate and Congress in Washington DC, and is a sought-after international speaker on nuclear energy, technology, and strategic development, having addressed audiences across Africa, Europe, Asia, and the United States.Above all, he brings over 25 years of hands-on experience building small modular reactor technology from the ground up — making him one of the most knowledgeable voices in the field today.Content00:00 – Introduction and Overview of the Discussion02:49 – Historical Development of Nuclear Reactor Technology in South Africa17:29 – Eskom’s Operational and Financial Challenges: Assessing the Crisis23:32 – Koeberg Nuclear Power Station: Operational Performance, Modernisation, and Life Extension27:12 – Nuclear Fuel Procurement and Supply Chains for Koeberg31:43 – Radioactive Waste Management at Koeberg Nuclear Power Station36:04 – Development Status of South Africa’s HTMR-100 Small Modular Reactor39:03 – HTMR-100 Reactor Concept: Design Principles, Mobility, and Scale43:32 – Advanced Fuel Architecture of the HTMR-100 Reactor47:58 – International Cooperation in Deploying HTMR-100 Nuclear Power Plants51:09 – Nuclear Science and Engineering Education in South Africa: Training the Next Generation55:09 – The Geopolitics of Nuclear Energy57:49 – Debates and Critiques of Renewable Energy Policy in South Africa01:03:10 – Pan-African Institutional Support for Nuclear Energy Development in Africa

This episode features a conversation with the historian Philip Snow on the evolution of relations between Russia and China. Drawing on archival research, the discussion traces the relationship from the early border settlements at Nerchinsk and Kyakhta to contemporary geopolitical and economic cooperation, highlighting how frontier regions such as Manchuria, Mongolia, and Xinjiang have shaped interaction between the two powers.The interview examines key turning points, including the Sino-Soviet split, as well as structural constraints (geography, distance, and technology) that have historically limited escalation along the border. It also explores post-Soviet asymmetries, energy interdependence, and projects such as Power of Siberia 2.Finally, the conversation considers the implications of contemporary Sino-Russian alignment, addressing their views on multipolar order, persistent frictions in the Russian Far East, and China’s potential capacity to lead globally without Russia.Philip SnowPhilip Snow has been travelling in Russia and China since the 1960s, and has spent nearly two decades researching what is arguably the most consequential bailateral relationship of our era.Selected Publications:Snow, P. (1989). The star raft: China’s encounter with Africa. Cornell University Press.Snow, P. (2003). The Fall of Hong Kong: Britain, China, and the Japanese occupation. Yale University Press.Snow, P. (2023). China and Russia: Four Centuries of conflict and Concord. Yale University Press.Content00:00 – Introduction01:10 – Archival Research and Interpreting Russian–Chinese Narratives06:21 – Nerchinsk and Kyakhta: Origins of Long-Term Stability10:46 – Manchuria, Mongolia, and Xinjiang as Strategic Pivot Zones14:18 – Mongolia’s Role in Sino-Russian Relations14:51 – Structural Constraints on Escalation and Major War18:51 – The Role of Distance and Technology in Military Encounters19:28 – Manchuria and the Historical Foundations of Chinese Strategic Mistrust24:17 – The Sino-Soviet Split and the Limits of Ideological Alliances27:05 – Energy Interdependence and Post-Soviet Asymmetry31:20 – Power of Siberia 2: Economic Logic and Geopolitical Stakes32:12 – Why Sino-Russian Decision-Making Is Often Slow32:40 – Surface Alignment vs Structural Frictions in the Russian Far East39:54 – Sino-Russian Alignment in Opposition to the West42:45 – Do Russia and China Share a Vision of Multipolar Order?45:44 – China’s Capacity to Lead Without Russia46:45 – Critiquing Philip Snow’s Interpretation48:21 – How to Study China and Russia More Effectively

This interview with Professor Mark N. Katz explores one of the central debates in contemporary international relations: the transition from unipolarity to a more complex multipolar world. Drawing on historical cases and current geopolitical developments, the discussion examines whether multipolarity is truly the global norm, how great powers are defined, and what the post-Cold War “unipolar moment” tells us about today’s shifting balance of power.The conversation also addresses the rise of emerging actors such as BRICS, the strategic behaviour of smaller states, and the evolving role of alliances, norms, and regional rivalries—from the Middle East to the Global South. Ultimately, it offers a nuanced assessment of whether a multipolar world necessarily produces a stable and coherent international order, and highlights key research questions shaping the future of global politics.Mark N. KatzMark N. Katz is Professor Emeritus of Government and Politics at George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, where he taught from 1988 until his retirement in 2024. A specialist in Russian foreign policy, great-power competition, and the international politics of the Middle East, his research has long focused on Soviet and Russian engagement with the developing world and revolutionary movements in international politics. Publications:Personal BlogAmerican Foreign Policy: Can the U.S. Get Out of a Difficult Situation?The Multipolar World Is Nothing New: Why the Return of Many Powers Does Not Mean the Birth of a New OrderThe Soviet Roots of Putin’s Foreign Policy Toward the Middle EastThe Third World in Soviet Military ThoughtThe USSR and Marxist Revolutions in the Third WorldContent00:00 – Introduction02:03 – Is Multipolarity the Historical Norm?04:08 – The Liberal Order During the Cold War04:53 – What Makes a Country a Great Power?09:36 – Understanding the Unipolar Moment12:19 – When Did Unipolarity End?15:41 – 9/11, Terrorism and the Limits of Polarity Theory21:51 – The Sino–Soviet Split and a Brief Tripolar World25:26 – BRICS and the Rise of Multipolarity27:25 – Multipolar World vs Multipolar Order30:27 – Global South Views on Multipolarity33:15 – How Small States Play Great Powers Against Each Other38:00 – If China Dominates...41:25 – Do Alliances Limit a Country’s Power Ambitions?43:45 – Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel in a Multipolar Middle East47:06 – What the Arab Spring Reveals About Multipolarity50:49 – Do International Norms Still Matter?53:12 – Key Research Questions on the Future of Multipolarity

In this interview, political scientist Marc Sanjaume‑Calvet examines the constitutional status of Catalonia, the distribution of powers within the Spanish state, and the evolving debates surrounding Catalan autonomy and identity. The discussion also explores Catalonia’s external action, from its relations with the European Union and international organisations to the constraints imposed by Spanish constitutional law, including the legacy of the 2017 referendum and Article 155.Marc Sanjaume-CalvetMarc Sanjaume-Calvet is Associate Professor of Political Science at Pompeu Fabra University. He has also served as an advisor at the Self-Government Studies Institute, a research centre linked to the Government of Catalonia. His work sits at the crossroads of federalism, self-determination, and territorial conflict, with broader interests in national and ethnic conflicts. Publications:Asymmetry as a Device for Equal Recognition and Reasonable Accommodation of Majority and Minority Nations. A Country Study on Constitutional Asymmetry in SpainThe Political Use of de facto Referendums of Independence The Case of CataloniaDefensive Federalism: Protecting Territorial Minorities from the "Tyranny of the Majority"The Exodus That Never Was? An Empirical Analysis on Territorial Conflict and Foot-VotingThe Politics of Independence Referendums: Never Mind the BallotsContent00:00 – Introduction01:50 – Constitutional Status of Catalonia05:21 – Identity and Demography in Catalonia08:15 – Distribution of Competences11:46 – The Future of Catalan Autonomy16:10 – “Unity of Foreign Action” in Spanish Constitutional Law and Its Constraints on Regional Diplomacy21:04 – Coordination and Tension between Catalonia’s External Action and Spain’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs23:39 – Catalonia and the European Union29:40 – International Agreements and Catalonia’s Network of External Delegations33:53 – Catalonia’s Interaction with International Organisations and Multilateral Forums37:51 – The 2017 Independence Referendum and Article 15544:21 – Emerging Research Agendas in the Study of Catalonia’s Autonomy