ukraine

Due to its special geopolitical position, Ukraine has inadvertently been involved in international conflicts, conflicts that are mainly between the three powers of Russia, the European Union, and the United States. Due to the geographical and geopolitical position of Ukraine, the United States and the European Union are seeking dominance and influence in this country in competition with Russia, which represents the height of the differences and geopolitical competition between them. The foreign policy of each of the involved parties does not allow the fire of this crisis to be extinguished. In this research, using library sources and descriptive-analytical research method, we have sought to answer the question of what has been the foreign policy of the United States as a major global power in this field, because the ups and downs of the Ukraine crisis and its results are subject to the pattern It is the behavior of big powers like America in this field. Finally, we have come to the conclusion that America, as a superpower, has taken interests for itself everywhere in the world; This can also be seen in the Ukraine crisis. Confronting Russia's reassertion of power and playing a role as a hegemon is one of the factors affecting the US foreign policy in the Ukraine crisis. Analysis of the foreign policy of Russia and the United States regarding the crisis and war in Ukraine

Between 2020 and 2024, the South Caucasus experienced numerous geopolitical events that significantly changed the status quo in the region. Components of the South Caucasus security complex, such as social structure, polarity, the nature of actors, anarchy and borders can be explained within the framework of sub-regional security complex centered around Russia prior to the Ukrainian developments of 2022. However, with the changes that occurred between 2022 and 2024, the concept of sub-regional security complex has lost its explanatory power for application in the South Caucasus region. Therefore, the primary goal and subject of this research is to identify the type of security complex that governs the region and to explain how the components of the South Caucasus security complex are affected by new regional and international developments.

Research question:

 How has the South Caucasus security complex changed under the influence of developments between 2020 and 2024?Research hypothesis: Given these developments, components of the security complex – such as borders, the social structure, type of polarity and states influenced by the Second Nagorno-Karabakh and a result of the Ukrainan War. Ultimately, the region is witnessing a shift in trends, from moderate anarchy to increasing anarchy and greater regional autonomy.Methodology and theoretical framework: This study seeks to assess the components of the south Caucasus security complex using a quantitative approach and interpretive structural modeling (ISM). Buzan's original definition of a security complex is as follows: a group of states whose primary security concerns are so interconnected that their national security cannot realistically be considered in isolation from one another. The basic structure of a regional security complex consists of four variables. 1. Borders that separate the security complex from its neighbors. 2. Anarchic structure, meaning that a regional security complex comprises two or more autonomous units. 3. Polarity, which refers to the distribution of power among the units. 4. Social structure, which includes patterns of friendship and enmity among the units. Depending on the configuration of a security complex, three types of evolutionary processes can be observed in each complex: 1. Maintaining the status quo means not making fundamental changes to the fundamental structure of the complex. 2. Internal transformation, indicating that changes in the fundamental structure occur within the existing external boundaries. This could include changes in the structure of anarchy (due to regional integration), changes in polarity (due to divergence, mergers, conquest, low growth rates, etc.) or prevailing patterns of friendship and hostility (due to ideological transitions, wars, leadership changes, etc.). 3. External transformation refers to the opening or closing of external borders, changing membership in the regional security complex, and most likely changing the fundamental structure in other ways.

From 2020 to 2024, the border of South Caucasus security complex has witnessed internal and external developements. Internally, the full restoration of Azerbaijan's territorial sovereignty after the war led to the country's increased border expansion with its two neighbors, Iran and Armenia. Externally, the South Caucasus has transformed from an arena of competition primarily between Russia and the West into a new geopolitical space in which where more than six powers are competing for influence. This shift challenged Russia's monopoly position and the status quo that had dominated the region for 200 years. The decline of Russia’s geopolitical power created a closer connection between the South Caucasus and the greater Middle East and Middle Eastern countries see the South Caucasus as a natural extension of their territories. Regarding anarchic Structure of the region, the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020, which resulted in a ceasefire agreement, emphasized the Russian military presence as peacekeepers, the restoration of Soviet-era routes under Russia control and the return of refugees. Russia's military presence in Karabakh somewhat moderated the turbulent nature of the region. However, normalization talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan failed to materialize after Azerbaijan fully restored sovereignty over Nagorno-Karabakh in a one-day war in 2023. By 2024, Russia withdrew its military forces from Nagorno-Karabakh following bilateral agreements with Azerbaijan. This withdrawal, coupled with Russia's planned withdrawal from the border areas of Armenia and Iran in 2025, is expected to exacerbate the turbulent situation in the region. In terms of Polarity, Armenia’s military and economic capacity is incomparable to Azerbaijan's, whose advantage is evident in defense budgets and economic growth. Before the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War in 2020, the regional polarity was balanced between the three countries due to alliances such as Armenia's military partnership with Russia and its membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). However, the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War shifted the regional polarity to a unipolar structure centered on Russia, which lasted until 2022. By 2024, several factors, including Russia’s military withdrawal from Nagorno-Karabakh, the suspension of Armenia’s membership in CSTO and Armenia’s reduction in reliance on Russian arms imports (from 90% to 10%), significantly weakened Russia's central role in the region. Regarding Social Structure, between 2020 and 2024, the Hobbesian nature of hostility in the region has decreased compared to previous years. Historically, the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis and the conflict in Abkhazia and South Ossetia have played a key role in shaping patterns of hostility and friendship in the South Caucasus. After 2020, the processes of resolving these conflicts entered certain stages in the transformation of the social structure of the region.

Regional and international developments between 2020 and 2024—such as the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War, the Russo-UkrainianWar, the restoration of Azerbaijani political sovereignty in Khankendi in 2023, the Georgian parliamentary elections in 2024, and Armenia's shift from idealistic to realist southern policies—had a significant impact on the policies of the South Caucasus. These events have led to transformations across all structural components of the regional security order. In this context: borders have experienced both internal changes and external developements due to the increasing inter-connectedness of developments in the South Caucasus with West Asia. The social structure has undergone a fundamental change, shifting from a Hobbesian framework of hostility to a Kantian framework driven by changes in Armenian pragmatic politics. The polarity has shifted from a sub-regional security complex after the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War to a standard regional structure influenced by the Ukraine War. Anarchy has moved from moderation to escalation, leading to greater regional autonomy. Overall, geo-economic dynamics—such as energy transit routes, trade corridors and transportation networks—have increasingly become the focal point of competition between regional and international powers, surpassing geopolitical factors in importance. The Second Nagorno-Karabakh War reinforced this trend, while the Ukraine War and Russia's efforts to replace Western partners with Eastern ones for economic stability further strengthened it.

Researchers have divided the cause of the 2014 and 2022 Crises in Ukraine into three categories. Some have attributed the 2014 and 2022 crises in Ukraine to Russia's efforts to prevent the expansion of the European Union and NATO and the bordering of these institutions with this country and another group links the cause of these crises to Russia's desire to gain power and return to the greatness of Soviet era, as well as Ukraine's western policies. But from the authors' perspective, the cause of these crises should also be examined from another perspective, which is the role of the West in the emergence of these crises and their prolongation. Accordingly, this article attempts to analyze the West’s role in the occurrence of the 2014 and 2022 crises in Ukraine and their prolongation, using the propositions of the theory of offensive realism.

Research question:

 What role did the West play in the outbreak and prolongation of the 2014 and 2022 crises in Ukraine?Research hypothesis: The research hypothesis is because the West, through three strategies of baiting, balancing, interventon, prepared the ground for the 2014 and 2022 crises in Ukraine and their prolongation in order to prevent Russia from gaining power.

Methodology and theoretical framework: 

A qualitative multiple case study method was used to answer the research question and test the hypothesis. The data was collected using a library resource and analyzed using a descriptive-analytical approach within the  framework of the theory of offensive realism.

The results indicated that the diferent strategies have been used by west to prevent Russian from prolonging presence of Russia on Ukrain territory and impact the sitiation. However, sofar results are not in faveore west and Russia has upper hand in Ukrain. Of course, the futre of Ukrain crisis is not so clear and has comelications for both sides. In fact, Ukraine has effectively played the role of two poles of power, a victim of the competition between Russia and the West and a prey and tool for the West's goals against Russia.

According to the propositions of offensive realism, achieving a position of hegemony is the goal of great powers. Great powers always try to become hegemon by increasing their power and when they become hegemons, they use various strategies to increase their power and manage and control their rivals to prevent the hegemony of other powers. In fact, the West has always tried to take full advantage of the country's desire to get closer to the West by inciting and encouraging Ukrainian officials to join Western institutions in line with its strategic goal of expanding its sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and geopolitically encircling Russia, in this regard Ukraine has been a tool in the hands of the West to use this country's card to counter its traditional threat. Therefore, after independence, this country has always been the scene of competition between the West and Russia and has witnessed serious conflicts and various political-security crises.

In March 2003, the European Commission established a new policy with the title "New Neighborhood Policy of the European Union", which was later renamed "European Union Neighborhood Policy". The main goal of this policy was to expand peace and security and economic development and democracy in neighboring countries in order to stabilize and develop stability and security within the European Union. The ENP is designed to give new impetus to cooperation with the EU’s neighbours following enlargement.The ENP should reinforce the EU’s contribution to promoting the settlement of regional conflicts. Although the European Neighborhood Policy has been an effective policy in creating a peaceful environment across Europe, the implementation of its instruments must take into account the expectations of other major actors who have vital interests in that particular region. This research tries to explain the active regional policies of the European Union under the European Neighborhood Policy, which is considered by Russia as a security threat. The aim of the current research is to investigate the European Union's neighborhood policy under the theory of normative power of this Union in relation to the Ukraine crisis.In this article, using a descriptive-analytical research method and based on library studies and reliable internet sources, by analyzing the approach of the European Union towards Ukraine, it is concluded that the policy of the European Union negatively led to the escalation of tension in the region, which in turn The operation of the neighborhood policy itself has also disrupted it.

Combined war is known as one of the newest methods of fighting in the current era in the conflicts of countries. Non-linear, insurgency-oriented or limited war is one of the titles used for it. In the war between Russia and Ukraine, which includes military, cyber, intelligence, etc. dimensions, the use of combined warfare has been prioritized by both countries. Russia, as a great power, has started a conflict with a country that is not very prominent in wars, which has not achieved some goals in addition to its progress. Western aid to Ukraine, the formation of operational cyber war units, information war, influence, etc. are all concepts that play a role in this. The current research will answer a question with this theme: How effective was the process of actions, the extent of Russia's power and its progress in the combined war against Ukraine? The hypothesis has been expressed as an answer to it, factors such as weak military planning, low combat readiness, Western aid in various offensive, defensive and cyber fields, infiltration of the warring forces such as the Wagner group, are among the factors. which have caused the erosion of the Russian army in the Ukraine war, and along with the progress, they have also caused setbacks for Russia. Qualitative-analytical method, based on library documents and international scientific journals, is the method used in writing this research. Finally, the findings of the project stated that due to some miscalculations, Russia is involved in a war of attrition, which will sink into its swamp if there is no reasonable and acceptable solution.

On February 24, 2022, according to Putin, Russia launched a "special military attack" against Ukraine. According to Vladimir Putin, the aim of this attack was individual legitimate defense against threats from NATO and the West, as well as collective legitimate defense in the form of the security agreement between Russia and the Luhansk and Donetsk People's Republics and in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. The findings of the research show that according to the history of legitimate defense in customary law, the text of the United Nations Charter, the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations, as well as the cases related to legitimate defense in the International Court of Justice, Russia's special military operations constitute the illegal use of force and Based on the criteria set in international law, Russia's justification for legitimate defense is invalid; Because there was no armed attack against Russia, and also the claim of collective legitimate defense is not legitimate. And also assuming that the threats of NATO and the West are a danger to Russia and that the regions of Luhansk and Donetsk are independent countries and even if they were members of the United Nations, this attack still violates the principle of non-use of force in international law; Because the methods of peaceful settlement of disputes were still available and Russia should have used that tool. The present research method is descriptive-analytical

Due to its geopolitical, geostrategic and geoeconomic features, the position of Ukraine has made it the scene of conflict between two long-standing rivals in the international system, namely Russia and the United States. On the one hand, the United States is trying to promote Western values ​​in Ukraine based on the criteria of liberal democracy and make this country a member of the European Union and NATO, on the other hand, Russia is also trying to, through measures according to the existing trends and contexts. Among the culture and identity of Ukrainian residents, prevent Ukraine from turning towards the European Union and the West. Therefore, in this research, we are trying to answer the question, how can Russia's military attack on Ukraine be explained based on the theory of defensive realism? The findings of the research show that Russia considers the actions of the West, such as the expansion of NATO to Russia's foreign countries, the joining of Ukraine to the European Union, and the West's support for the democratic movements around it, in order to limit itself, and as a strategic threat. is Therefore, this action of Russia can be explained based on 4 components of defensive realism, which include: overall power, geographical proximity, offensive power and aggressive intentions, in order to prevent Russia from being limited and repel possible actions against itself.

It seems that the main cause of Russia's 2022 war in Ukraine is America's greed, breach and sabotage in Ukraine's politics. The other ones are the predominance of individualistic and hedonistic spirit among Ukrainian people and politicians, corruption among rulers, execution of the World Bank's economic policies in the country, lack of belief in a transcendental ideology and being trapped in racism. Nato's wrong policies after Ussr's collapse, distortion of facts by the empire of mainstream medias and western obstructionism in the process of peace agreements have transformed Ukraine into an unsolvable problem. In spite of myriad weapons given to Ukraine by the west, Russia already has the upper hand and in the new international order, could prevent Nato expansion toward its borders and converted Ukraine into a rump and non-functional state.
   In the status quo, there is no chance of a stable peace agreement. In the distant future, in some points, the two parts might come to a ceasefire which will lead to a frozen conflict. The United States wants to decrease the power of Russia's army in Ukraine's battlefield, wreck its economy and degrade its ranking in the hierarchical order of international politics.

Today,we witnessed the separation of Crimea from Ukraine and South Ossetia from Georgia under the leadership of Russia.This article is an answer to the question that what are the common&different aspects of Russia's strategy towards these 2separatist phenomena?In response,we can put forward such a hypothesis that the common factor in both crises is Russia's military intervention.For the secession of South Ossetia,Russia has followed the strategy of direct military intervention without annexing the territory, &for the Crimean Peninsula &Ukraine,it has adopted the strategy of holding a referendum for secession &then annexing the territory of the Crimean Peninsula to Russia to create legitimacy.Using the theoretical framework of Copenhagen school,compare the reasons and consequences of the separation of South Ossetia from Georgia, as well as the separation of the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine, &explain the reasons for Russia's strategy against these separations.The results show that the similarities &differences of the two separatisms include demographic and ethnic diversity &the claim of Russia's defense of the Russians of the neighboring lands as common features &territorial annexation to Russia regarding the Crimean peninsula &the non-annexation of South Ossetia to Russia as features.The difference between the two is separatism.It can be concluded that due to Russia's sense of danger from NATO approaching its territorial borders &the joining of countries that are considered Russia's backyard,it caused Russia to enter into a new cold war with the West in the framework of competition with America, &Georgia and Ukraine be the playground of this new war.

What is important in the Ukraine crisis is not Ukraine's internal problems or the fight against corruption and dictatorship, but rather an international conflict over power and influence in the region that has brought Russia and America to face each other. In all the years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia on one side and European countries and America on the other side have been competing with each other. The developments in Ukraine and issues such as regime change as well as its subsequent consequences such as the secession of the Crimean peninsula and the continuation of unrest, instability and war in this country can be considered as a serious example of the conflicting interests of Russia and America in the international system. In the present study, which is descriptive, historical and analytical in nature, the required data and information have been collected using a library method, and while addressing the geopolitical position and importance of Ukraine for Russia and the United States, the impact of the war between Russia and Ukraine on the decline of the United States and the acceleration of Change in the new world order is discussed. The result of the present research shows that Russia's war against Ukraine has not only caused America to fail to achieve its goals, but has also caused the American hegemony to decline. In the current research, a qualitative method of explanatory type and electronic and written sources have been used.

Political psychology deals with the understanding of politics, politicians and political behavior from a psychological perspective and psychological processes using socio-political perspectives. The purpose of this article is to investigate the impact of Volodymyr Zelensky's personality and psychological characteristics on the war between Russia and Ukraine. In this article, we are looking for an answer to the question, what effect did Zelensky's personality traits have on the war between Russia and Ukraine? A war that has greatly affected the state of various global markets, including food and energy. From the perspective of political psychology, influential people as important decision makers of human societies, whose output of decisions and actions can determine the fate of individuals and countries, are good cases for examining personality traits. In this article, we have tried to use the theories of political psychology that overlap with the analysis of political roles. In this regard, using the descriptive-analytical method, we came to the conclusion that the war between Russia and Ukraine is undeniably linked to the personality and psychological characteristics of Volodymyr Zelensky. Personality and psychological characteristics that have a direct role in his leadership style and can be examined from the perspective of political psychology paradigms.

The war between Russia and Ukraine is one of the most important developments of the new century, which has faced different reactions of international actors. In fact, The war between Russia and Ukraine is one of the historical milestones in the transition period of international relations, which can cause many changes in the international arena due to the presence of many actors involved in it. This war, which is referred as the beginning of the new order or the end of the transition period, although it took place in Europe, it has involved many regions and actors. In the meantime, Saudi Arabia, as one of the strategic players in the Middle East, has pursued a conservative approach despite its strategic partnership with the United States. This research seeks to answer the main question, what is the foreign policy of Saudi Arabia towards the Ukraine war and how and by the influence of which variables have it formed?

The research methodology employed is qualitative. By using the descriptive-analytical method and in the framework of neoclassical realism, the data collected from internet and library sources have been analyzed.

One of the geo-strategic and geo-economic regions that directly and indirectly entered this crisis is the Persian Gulf region. The states of Persian Gulf Cooperation Council, due to their position and importance, especially in the field of energy, indirectly see themselves in the war campaign in Ukraine. Among these states, Saudi Arabia by considering of its place and role in the international system has acted and reacted more than other states of this council towards this crisis. This issue is mostly affected by the position of Saudi Arabia as one of the largest oil exporting states and its strategic partnership with the United States, which has also developed relations with Russia in recent years.The available evidence shows that Saudi Arabia has displayed a balanced policy regarding the Ukraine war with regard to its internal and external variables. The foreign policy of Saudi Arabia, influenced by its strategic culture, is solely formulated and implemented by the authoritarian rules. Therefore, Saudi leaders' perception of their position and regional and international developments play a very important role in the country's foreign policy. The Ukraine war, from the point of view of the Saudi leaders, is affected by the expansion of NATO to the east, and practically the meeting point of the West and the East. Therefore, from the point of view of Saudi Arabia, which has always had a threatening perception of the expansion of Iran's influence in the region, especially after the Arab Spring and especially in Yemen since 2015, Russia's reaction in the form of an invasion of Ukraine to counter the expansion of NATO is completely understandable. Nevertheless, the importance of maintaining the special and strategic relations between Saudi Arabia and the West has caused this country to take a stand against Russia in its declaration policies and foreign policy positions. Another important point that should not be neglected is that the leaders of Saudi Arabia are dissatisfied with the policies of the United States in recent years, especially towards Iran and the pivote to Asia policy and decentralization from the Middle East, as well as realizing the declining position of the United States in the international system and the need to rebuild its foreign relations in the new world order.

The Ukraine war in 2022 is considered one of the most important proxy wars between West and Russia after the Cold War. The importance of this issue has caused different states to adopt different policies towards it according to their political, security and economic relations with each of the two sides of the conflict. In the meantime, although many states, including Arab governments, have criticized Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but despite their political-security orientation towards the West, most of them, especially Saudi Arabia, have adopted a balanced foreign policy in this war between Russia and the West.In sum, The findings of this research show that a set of variables such as the perception of the  Saudi Arabia's elites about the nature of the Ukraine war along with the performance of the United States in recent years in response to the developments of the West Asian region, especially towards the Islamic Republic of Iran and the pursuit of the buck passing strategy and reduction of its obligations in this region, the requirements of Saudi Arabia's 2030 vision and structural changes in the international system caused saudi to adopt a "balance" (not "neutral") policy toward Ukraine war in order to maintain relations with both sides of the conflict.

Although the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is interpreted based on geopolitical propositions such as the expansion of NATO to Eastern Europe, Russia's invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022 under the code of special military operations can be an external example of the multi-order world and reflect the current reality of the world. Therefore, the research question is that; What is the basis of Russia's strategy under the leadership of Vladimir Putin in the 2022 Ukraine war, and how has Russia's Eurasianism strategy with China's support played a role in the formation of a multi polar world? The answer to the article's hypothesis is that; Russia's Eurasianism strategy, such as the military presence in Ukraine and the annexation of the Crimean peninsula and the autonomous regions of Ukraine to this country in 2022, show the civilizational turn of Russia and the renewal of traditional values as the main strategic elements of the Kremlin's foreign policy in search of its position as a great power and China's cooperation with Russia in the Ukraine crisis provides the basis for the creation of a powerful Eastern bloc and the transition from a uni polar system to a multi polar system. For this purpose, this article has come to the conclusion that Russia, with its set of actions after Ukraine, together with China, provides the necessary ground for a new powerful block and confirms and emphasizes the existing hypothesis. This research will be explained using descriptive-analytical method.

The Russian Military intervention in Ukraine was one of the most serious international crises in international relations since the end of the Cold War because it included the threat of a large-scale conflict in Europe, between Russia on the one hand, and the United States of America, the European Union and NATO on the Other hand. The study specifically examines the dimensions, determinants, characteristics, and features of US policy towards the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, and its repercussions on NATO, In its axes, the study focused on the dimensions and developments of the Ukrainian crisis, the strategic importance of Ukraine in the Russian and American perspectives, the determinants of US policy towards the Russian-Ukrainian war, the repercussions of the Ukrainian crisis on NATO, and the expected scenarios for the end of the Russian-Ukrainian war. This article reached several important results using a descriptive-analytical approach; Among other things, the American policy towards Russia's attack on Ukraine is multifaceted and includes diplomatic efforts, preventing further aggression, economic sanctions, military aid to Ukraine, and strengthening NATO's deterrence and defense capabilities in the region. Also, the Russia-Ukraine war restored the coherence of the North Atlantic Treaty in an unprecedented way and made it more coherent than before. This pushed European countries towards more armaments and significantly increased European military spending, prompting neutral countries such as Finland and Sweden to formally apply to join NATO, signifying developments that it is not in the interests of Russia.

The foreign policy of the countries shows the goals that the governments are trying to achieve in the foreign field. The goals and national interests of countries are considered in the decision-making process and based on national values and beliefs and the decision-makers' understanding of them, determining the means and facilities for their provision is considered. Therefore, the main question of this research is how to examine Russia's foreign policy towards Ukraine from the perspective of aggressive realism between 2000 and 2020? What was the purpose of this research on Russia's foreign policy towards Ukraine based on the theory of aggressive realism between 2000 and 2020, and what was the internal view of Russia's foreign policy in the contemporary era, especially during the presidency of Vladimir Putin, and what was Russia's role in the current crisis in Ukraine? It is the amount that I will explain. The method of data collection in this research is based on the documentary method, descriptive analytical library and data collection in the form of a library and with a survey tool. The results and findings of the research showed that Russia is based on the principle of normative power; and increasing its power against the limitations of the West and NATO, economic modernization, achieving its rightful position in the processes of global competition, and restoring Russia's position in the international arena as a major world power, making the aggressive process against Ukraine the basis of its foreign policy have given.

The territory of Ukraine is one of the most important strategic regions of the world, especially the Eurasian and Eastern European regions, which after the collapse of the Soviet Union has become a field of conflict and competition between the most important poles of global power, especially the United States and Russia. In this regard, this research aims to "examine the position of Ukraine in the global geopolitical scene" and based on the theoretical framework of the combined approach of Sir Halford Mackinder's geopolitical theory of the "Heartland of the World" and the theoretical approach of defensive realism, especially Stephen Walt's "Balance of Threat" theory, and with a descriptive and analytical method, examines the strategies of the United States and Russia to dominate Ukraine during the years 2014-2024. The findings of this study indicate that after the Orange Revolution of 2024 and the developments of the "Maidan Revolution" of 2014, Westerners seized absolute power through civil disobedience. This led to a sense of threat, increased concerns and hostility by the Russians, and ultimately the occupation of the Crimean Peninsula and a full-scale war between the two countries in 2022. As a result, the European and American fronts took over Ukraine's logistical support in confrontation with the Russians, and both countries, in their opinion, are seeking absolute dominance over Ukraine as the "key to the global heartland," that is, Eastern Europe.

After a long period of diplomatic tension between Russia and Ukraine, these two countries entered into a direct military conflict at the end of February 2022. This conflict has changed a wide field of international politics to a large extent. America is seeking to expand the borders of NATO towards the western borders of Russia in order to tighten the encirclement ring of this country, this issue has caused great tension in Eastern Europe. The purpose of this article is to investigate the influential variables in the adoption of policies of the Biden government towards the 2022 war between Russia and Ukraine. Therefore, it seeks to find the answer to the question of what factors influenced the American foreign policy in response to Russia's attack on Ukraine and how can it be explained? The findings of the research show that the behavior of the American foreign policy is a mixture of which the teachings of neoclassical realism in the behavior of the American foreign policy are a mixture of the interaction of external factors (international system) and internal factors (internal structure and power and the type of perception of the decision-making elites of the American foreign policy) and it can be explained from the point of view of the neoclassical realism approach. The present research method is descriptive and analytical, using library resources and websites.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 not only damaged Ukraine’s economy but also put so much pressure on Russia and European countries in gas trade due to the loss of big trade partners. This article aims to answer two main questions: 1- What are the impacts of Russia and Ukraine’s war on the United States and the European Union in the energy area? 2-Does it impact the position of Iran in the energy part in global markets? This research has been done based on the narrative review approach. The findings show the gradual loss of former position in global markets for Ukraine, Russia, and the European Union and the increasing dependency of European countries on the United States in the energy area. If European countries avoid cooperating with huge oil and gas resource-owning countries like Iran, besides aggravating their dependency on the United States, they deprive themselves of cheaper energy resources.

The current study in the framework of realism paradigm based on international political economy and emphasizing the importance of the concept of food security has investigated the impact of the war between Russia and Ukraine on the wheat economy in Egypt through the analysis of indicators of food gap, self-sufficiency and foreign dependence. The Egyptian government has designed a package of measures to reduce the pressure of the crisis on its citizens, one of the most important of which is to encourage wheat farmers to produce more by increasing the guaranteed purchase price and completing strategic sheds and increasing storage capacity. Continuing to expand the area under cultivation of cereals, especially wheat, through horizontal development, continuing to support scientific and technical studies related to wheat, especially new varieties, diversifying imported markets and reducing the percentage of losses of produced and imported wheat are among the most important suggestions of this study.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has grappled with the specter of decline and the prospect of losing its status as one of the world's great powers. The increased military engagement between Ukraine and the West indicated that Ukraine (or Ukraine along with NATO) might one day challenge Russia in the foreseeable future. A country that was a buffer country of great strategic importance for Russia, so it took practical action against it. Russia's invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, marks the resurgence of war on the European continent and a final attempt to reform the Western-led system that has prevailed since the end of the Cold War. Before this war, Russia used to complain about the world order in its declarations, but with this war, it has practically challenged the world order. Now this question is raised, what are the causes of the war between Russia and Ukraine? Russia's war with Ukraine has caused the emergence and expansion of what concepts in the international order? By expressing the conceptual framework of order in an explanatory way, the expansion of NATO is considered to be the cause of Russia's war with Ukraine, and in line with the definition of the new Russian order, the expansion of the concept of Russkimir, the expansion of the concept of Greater Eurasia in the form of a multi-order world, challenging the concept of liberal order and international laws in It examines the polycentric order