No 2 (2024)

The article analyses the key trends in the Anglo-American Special Relationship during Joseph Biden’s presidency. The U.K. and the U.S. re-launched the ideological component of the relationship by signing the New Atlantic Charter. The military-political pillar was further strengthened, as Congress authorised funding for the W93 SLBM warhead for the U.K.’s Trident II D5, the U.K. and the U.S. sent a carrier strike group to the South China Sea, and the U.S., the U.K. and Australia signed the AUKUS pact. London relied on the alliance with the U.S. in the implementation of its Global Britain strategy; it had to seek the balance between its activity in the Euro - Atlantic region and the need to show its presence in the Indo - Pacific. Nevertheless, the countries’ interests do not always coincide: Washington’s unilateral decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan without consultations with its allies, including the U.K., was a tough challenge. Moreover, brexitiers’ hopes for a trade agreement with the U.S. failed to materialise; Trump’s punitive tariffs on steel and aluminium were rolled back only to be replaced by tariff rate quotas. Besides, a weak pound resulted in a number of takeovers of UK defence companies by American firms. The U.S. sided with the EU when Britain attempted to review the Northern Ireland Protocol. Still, disagreements on political issues between the leaders did not impede the strengthening of the institutional basis of the Anglo-American Special Relationship.

The nature and content of the U.S. - German dialogue have been significant for shaping the distribution of influence and responsibility in Euro-Atlantic community. This article examines the extent to which the Federal Republic of Germany's (FRG) security and defense policy in the early 2020s aligns with U.S. interests. Under J. Biden`s administration the USA effectively rejected the FRG`s initiative to create a format for intergovernmental consultations. This initiative could have served as institutional “insurance” against the degradation of interstate dialogue experienced during D. Trump's administration. The signing of an agreement with the Taliban (recognized as a terrorist organization and banned in the Russian Federation) by D. Trump, and its implementation under J. Biden, forced Germany to end its strategic presence in Afghanistan. In an attempt to compensate for these losses, Germany has sought strategic engagement in the Indo-Pacific region and significantly increased its military activity under NATO in Europe to “contain” Russia. The article explores the role of Germany in the distributing responsibility between Western democracies in their concurrent confrontations with Russia and China. Among the large NATO member states in Europe, including the U.K., Germany has held special military-practical importance for the USA. The White House was interested in the Bundeswehr as the framework nation in different forms in NATO Forward Presence Force, NATO Response Force, and New NATO Force Model. Germany in agreement with the USA, has supported the use of the EU and palliative structures (first of all, the Rammstein format) for the «discharge» of NATO on the most provocative for Russia tracks of the military assistance to Kiev.

The article is devoted to the study of one of the manifestations of the so-called affirmative action phenomenon - the policy of racial preferences in the field of higher education, which is followed by a significant number of American universities and colleges. The paper examines the formation of the affirmative action practices in the 1960s, as well as the emergence of legal opposition to the spread of politics of racial preferences in subsequent decades. Particular emphasis is placed on the consideration of the main arguments of supporters and opponents of considering race as of the factors influencing admission to postsecondary institutions in the USA, as well as on consideration of the peculiarities of American public opinion on this issue. Finally, the article analyzes the change in the position of the US Supreme Court regarding affirmative actions, which led to the recognition of the policy of racial preferences in admission to American universities and colleges as a violation of the US Constitution in June 2023.

The article provides a comparative analysis of pan-ethnic terms “Hispanic” and “Latino” that are used to refer to Hispanics in the U.S. The article reveals the reasons for their introduction by Congress, it identifies fundamental differences between them, their advantages and disadvantages, which cause contradictions. Moreover, the article evaluates the neologisms "Latinx" and "Latine" and analyzes other alternatives such as “Chicano”, “Boricua”, “Latin American” and others. Furthermore, the article identifies the perception of pan-ethnic terms within the community itself and establishes a relationship between generations and identifying oneself with the U.S. Hispanic community.