No 8 (2024)

The article examines the influence of the balance of power on the status quo existing around the Korean Peninsula in Northeast Asia since the summer of 1953. The status quo that emerged then still exists. On July 27, 1953, an Agreement was signed on a temporary truce in the Korean war, signed on the part of the DPRK by the Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army, Marshal of the DPRK Kim Il Sung and the Commander of the Chinese People's Volunteers, General of the People's Liberation Army of China, General Peng De Huai, and on the part of the "UN troops "American General A. Clark. The Republic of Korea, a participant in that war, did not sign the Armistice Agreement either then or subsequently. The signatories of the Armistice Agreement represented their states and agreed to sign it because they understood the impossibility of victory in the Korean War due to the generally equal strength of the warring parties. It reflected the balance of power that had developed in the region by that time. Since then, there have been repeated attempts to somehow change it, on the one hand, and to keep it unchanged, on the other. Both supporters of changing the status quo and opponents of such a measure had their own reasons. This issue is especially acute now due to the significant change in the balance of power in the region to date.

The article analyzes the state and prospects of relations between the DPRK and the United States in the context of statements made in the spring of 2024 by the staff of the administration of J. Biden. They said the United States is ready to start a dialogue with the DPRK "on a wide range of issues", "without any conditions" and consider some "intermediate steps" towards the complete denuclearization of the DPRK. However, the US practical measures indicate that these "advances" are of a propaganda nature. It is unlikely that agreements with the DPRK on the nuclear issue and other issues of bilateral relations will be reached before the US presidential elections.

In the 30 years since China joined APEC, China has actively participated in various forms of economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region, and has been a firm and active supporter of Asia-Pacific economic cooperation. China has closely integrated Asia-Pacific economic cooperation and its own development. China has become the second largest economy in the world, and its role is also changing significantly. By promoting China's economic development - it has promoted economic development and social progress, improved people's living standards and made great contributions to development in the Asia-Pacific region. China is playing an increasingly important role in the world. It has played an active role in building an open world economy, supporting the multilateral trading system and guiding the development of economic globalization. China's rapid consolidation of its comprehensive state power has shattered the original power structure in the Asia-Pacific region and changed the original territorial pattern. Against this background, key economies in the region, such as the US, Japan and ASEAN, are also making strategic adjustments that have a significant impact on the order in the Asia-Pacific region. In recent years, the US has been trying to create a group political environment in the Asia-Pacific region in order to suppress and isolate China. The final shape of the changing order in the Asia-Pacific depends on the great power competition and the degree of China's development. Ultimately, the role China hopes to play may also be achieved.

The article is devoted to the issue of further integration of the United States and the Republic of Korea military-industrial complexes in the military-technical cooperation area. The paper researches the current conditions that make the expansion and deepening of joint work between Washington and Seoul on this issue necessary. The study investigates the mutual interests of the United States and South Korea in the defense industry through the prism of their interests in the field of national security and foreign policy.

The study of the strategies of American companies on the Russian market since February 24, 2022, occupies a special place in the research of modern Americanists and international experts. This is because no other country has experienced the Western "cancel culture" to the same extent as Russia. The article examines the main strategies adopted by American companies in 2021-2023, their main challenges and opportunities for continuing operations in modern geopolitical circumstances. As the analysis reveals, American business in Russia has taken several different paths: exiting the market, suspending operations, reducing investments, delaying the process of departure from the Russian market, and maintaining operations. The paper discusses various options for American companies to continue operating in Russia, analyzing the causes and effects of their withdrawal in the short and long terms. The final section of the paper is devoted to the prospects for the continuation of American businesses in the Russian market.