PSCRP-BESA Reports No 221 (July 28, 2026)
The key word in this issue of our monitoring, analyzing scientific publications and reports from June 2026, is «war». News reports have taught us that war is no longer a crisis, a brief storm between periods of peace, but the new norm. There is less and less research on war itself; more and more research on how war changes and transforms the everyday fabric of life. Israelis have known this for a long time, since the founding of our country. Now the rest of the world is feeling it along with us.
The article Political and social analysis of the impact of national identity and gender roles on national stability (in the context of Kazakhstan), authored by Nursulu Nurpeissova, Zhengisbek Tolen, Serikkhan Zhuzeyev, Makhpal Syzdykova, and Aigul Abdiramanova, represents a collaborative effort from Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Turan University, and Korkyt Ata Kyzylorda University. Published in Frontiers in Sociology in June 2026, this study offers a timely empirical investigation into the intertwined effects of national identity and gender roles on state stability in Kazakhstan. The central research question examines how the strengthening of national identity, alongside the conflict between traditional and modern gender roles, influences national stability in a post-Soviet context. The study’s scope is defined by a mixed-methods approach, integrating quantitative surveys with qualitative focus groups to capture both the statistical relationships and the nuanced social perceptions underlying them.
The theoretical framework of the research is grounded in the constructivist paradigm of nation-building, drawing on the foundational works of Anderson, Hobsbawm, and Gellner, while also engaging with the ethno-symbolic approach of Smith. The authors situate Kazakhstan within the broader discourse on civic versus ethnic nationalism, emphasizing that post-Soviet identity formation is shaped by state policies aimed at reviving historical memory and promoting inter-ethnic harmony. The study explicitly critiques the traditional dichotomy between civic and ethnic nationalism, aligning with scholars who argue that these forms are deeply interconnected in transitional societies. Methodologically, the research employs a sequential mixed-method design. The quantitative phase surveyed 284 respondents, predominantly urban youth, using a structured questionnaire with scales measuring national identity, attitudes toward gender equality, national stability, and a combined construct of «uniqueness and gender integration». Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, multiple linear regression, and factor analysis. The qualitative phase consisted of three focus group interviews with participants from diverse social backgrounds, which served to contextualize and explain the statistical findings. This methodological integration allows the authors to move beyond mere correlation and explore the latent social mechanisms at play.
The principal findings of the study reveal a complex and non-linear relationship between the variables. The strongest predictor of national stability was the variable «uniqueness and gender integration». which demonstrated a significant positive effect. National identity itself also exhibited a positive and statistically significant influence on stability. However, the variable measuring attitudes toward gender roles in isolation did not show a direct statistically significant effect. The Pearson correlation analysis confirmed this pattern, indicating no significant direct relationship between gender role attitudes and national stability. Qualitative data from focus groups provide a compelling explanation for this phenomenon. Participants expressed that gender equality, when perceived as a foreign or imposed discourse, is seen as separate from national stability, which is more closely tied to national unity and traditional values. There is a societal rejection of pure egalitarian modernization as a guarantee of state security, coupled with a latent resistance to Western gender discourses that are isolated from the national context. The factor analysis further supports this interpretation, demonstrating that national identity and gender integration form a single latent construct, while gender roles alone constitute a separate dimension. The authors interpret these findings as evidence that political stability in Kazakhstan is not achieved through the simple imposition of gender equality, but rather through its organic integration as a natural part of the national historical code.
The scholarly contribution of this publication lies in its empirical bridge between two often disparate fields: the study of national identity and the analysis of gender roles. The research addresses a significant gap in the literature by demonstrating that the intersection of these factors, rather than their isolated effects, is decisive for state stability in transitional societies. The article advances the theoretical discourse by challenging both conservative neo-traditionalism and uncontextualized Western modernization, proposing that a hybrid model of social cohesion is more effective. The study’s novelty is underscored by its empirical evidence that the integration of gender equality into the national narrative serves as a more powerful predictor of stability than national identity alone. For an Israeli academic readership interested in post-Soviet affairs, this study offers valuable insights into the complexities of nation-building in a multi-ethnic, transitional state. It highlights the delicate balance that post-Soviet regimes must strike between preserving cultural heritage and adapting to global egalitarian norms, a challenge that resonates with broader studies of nationalism, identity politics, and state legitimacy. The findings are particularly relevant for scholars examining the role of ideology, the politics of memory, and the social dimensions of security in the post-Soviet space. The study’s emphasis on a communication paradigm that integrates gender equality into the national narrative provides a concrete framework for understanding how ideological policies can be crafted to enhance social wellbeing and national security without provoking societal polarization.
We presented the policy paper “Between Russia and Europe, between War and Peace? What is at Stake in Armenia’s Upcoming Election?” by Mikayel Zolyan, published by the French Institute of International Relations on June 5, 2026. Zolyan, a former member of the Armenian Parliament, offers a detailed examination of the pivotal parliamentary elections scheduled for June 7, 2026, framing them not as a routine political event but as a critical referendum on the foreign and security policy trajectory set by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. The study’s core focus is the contest between the incumbent government’s strategy of diversifying Armenia’s foreign policy away from Russia and a pro-Russian opposition seeking to restore the traditional alliance with Moscow. The primary research question explores which orientation will prevail and what the implications are for the fragile peace in the South Caucasus and Armenia’s internal political development.
The author adopts a political analysis framework, grounding his assessment in an interpretation of Armenia’s recent geopolitical shifts, domestic political dynamics, and public opinion trends. The analytical approach is largely descriptive and predictive, combining a review of the key contenders, their platforms, and the external pressures shaping the electoral environment. Zolyan’s conceptual assumptions rest on the idea that Armenia is at a crossroads, with its foreign policy no longer being a settled matter of Russian allegiance but a subject of intense national debate. The methodology is implicit, drawing on available opinion polls, political observations, and an insider’s understanding of the political landscape to project plausible post-election scenarios. The central argument posits that the election results will be decisive for the future of Pashinyan’s «peace agenda» with Azerbaijan and Turkey, which is contingent upon his policy of «diversification» and reducing dependence on Moscow.
The paper’s principal findings detail a highly polarized electorate and a fragile lead for Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party, which is currently polling at around 32 percent. The analysis underscores the three main pro-Russian opposition forces: Samvel Karapetyan’s «Strong Armenia». Robert Kocharyan’s «Armenia alliance». and Gagik Tsarukyan’s «Prosperous Armenia». Karapetyan, a Russian-Armenian billionaire with Kremlin support, emerges as the primary challenger. The empirical evidence Zolyan presents includes poll results, the history of Moscow’s passivity during crises for Armenia, and the specific elements of Pashinyan’s policy platform, such as the recognition of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity and the downplaying of the Genocide recognition issue in foreign policy. He notes that this pragmatic approach, while fueling economic growth, has also provoked a strong emotional backlash from those who see it as a betrayal of national identity. The author concludes that the most likely outcome is another term for Pashinyan, which would see a continuation of his delicate balancing act—moving closer to Europe and the United States while attempting to avoid a complete rupture with Russia. A victory for the pro-Russian opposition, though deemed unlikely, is presented as a scenario that could undermine the Washington Accords and the broader peace process, potentially leading to a return to conflict with Azerbaijan.
The paper’s originality is evident in its detailed portrayal of the actors involved, particularly the role of Kremlin-linked businessmen in opposition politics, and its assessment of the fragile state of Armenia’s democratic institutions. For an Israeli academic audience, this publication is significant for several reasons. It provides a case study in the complex navigation of regional conflicts by small states caught between rival powers, a theme with clear parallels to Israel’s own strategic environment. The analysis of how memory politics and identity shape foreign policy choices is relevant to understanding nationalist movements and irredentist claims in the post-Soviet space. Furthermore, the paper’s focus on the stability of the South Caucasus, a region of strategic importance, offers insights into broader Eurasian security dynamics and the potential for external interference to alter the trajectory of regional peace, which is of interest to scholars of security studies and international relations.
Zhanat Zakiyeva (National Academy of Sciences of Kazakhstan in Almaty), explores the dynamics of female participation in academic and policy-oriented research in her article “The role of women of central asia in political science: the case of Kazakhstan”, published in the International Journal of Research in Education Humanities and Commerce, Volume 07, Issue 03, May-June 2026. The study centers on the “female presence” in political science within research institutes and think tanks across Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, comparing the late Soviet period from 1980 to 1992 with the era of independence. Zakiyeva addresses the origins and consequences of the third wave of feminization in Soviet science, persistent gender asymmetry especially in senior positions, and the barriers and prospects for advancing women researchers in shaping regional scientific and policy discourses.
The author adopts a mixed qualitative and quantitative methodology grounded in comparative analysis of the five Central Asian states, supplemented by content analysis of official documents, government publications, and media materials, alongside case studies of women’s engagement on international platforms such as the UN and UNESCO. This framework draws on legal documents, national and international statistics including UN Women, OSCE, and ADB reports, academic scholarship, interviews, and public speeches, combining historical, systemic, institutional, statistical, and analytical approaches without relying on new primary fieldwork.
Zakiyeva argues that Soviet policies enabled substantial female involvement in science, with women reaching parity or surpassing men in overall researcher numbers by the 1980s, particularly in humanities, social sciences, biology, and medicine, though political science, security, and economics remained male-dominated. Post-independence, patriarchal attitudes, institutional barriers, family responsibilities, and reduced scientific funding led to sharp declines in women’s leadership roles across the region, with women occupying only 10 to 20 percent of senior positions by 2025. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan show relatively higher representation—54 percent and 52 percent of scientists respectively, with targeted gender strategies—while Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan lag significantly, with women at 31 percent or lower in scientific workforces and minimal leadership presence. The text emphasizes that women researchers contribute soft power potential as mediators and experts in areas like sustainable development and water diplomacy, yet remain underrepresented as authors, panelists, and decision-makers in political science due to stereotypes, limited mentoring, and professional networks. Positive trends include gradual increases in educational attainment and state initiatives in Kazakhstan such as Bolashak and Nazarbayev University programs, alongside symbolic appointments like a woman heading the National Academy of Sciences. The study concludes that while gender empowering shows advancement, cultural and structural obstacles persist, recommending national strategies for STEM and political science education, expanded international cooperation, monitoring mechanisms, transparent recruitment, and integration of gender lenses into policy to foster inclusive scientific communities.
This publication contributes to regional scholarship by offering a comparative overview of women in Central Asian political science that highlights both Soviet legacies and post-Soviet divergences, filling noted gaps in empirical focus on this specific sphere and aligning with broader UN Sustainable Development Goals on gender equality. For Israeli scholars examining post-Soviet political development, ethnicity, nationalism, and international relations in Central Asia, the analysis illuminates institutional evolutions in think tanks and expert communities that influence foreign policy formation, regional cooperation, and responses to geopolitical pressures, providing a gender-informed lens on human capital and soft power dynamics in neighboring post-Soviet states.
The article “The Concept and Legal Framework of Local Public Administration Powers in the Republic of Moldova: Foundations and Practical Challenges,” published in Public Policies.bg, Volume 17, Number 3 (June 2026), is authored by Sergey Dimitrioglo, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Public Administration at Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski.” The study examines the legal and conceptual foundations of local public administration powers in the Republic of Moldova and situates this issue within the broader context of post-Soviet democratic transformation, decentralization, and European integration. The author seeks to clarify how local government competences have been defined, institutionalized, and implemented since the adoption of the Moldovan Constitution of 1994, while also identifying structural weaknesses that continue to affect the functioning of local self-government.
The article is grounded in doctrinal legal analysis supplemented by limited comparative analysis. Its primary sources include constitutional provisions, legislation regulating local public administration and administrative decentralization, legal acts concerning the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia, and relevant international norms, especially the European Charter of Local Self-Government. Rather than focusing on empirical outcomes, the study concentrates on the conceptual content and normative architecture of local authority powers. Comparative references to Romania, Georgia, and Ukraine are employed to place the Moldovan experience within a wider regional framework of post-communist administrative reform.
A central argument of the article is that Moldova possesses a formally developed legal framework for local autonomy that broadly reflects European standards, yet significant tensions persist between constitutional guarantees and practical implementation. The author traces the evolution of the concept of local public administration and demonstrates that Moldovan law combines a commitment to local autonomy with a system in which competences remain heavily dependent on statutory regulation. Particular attention is devoted to the distinction between competences and powers. Competence is defined as the overall sphere of authority assigned to a public body, whereas powers constitute the specific rights and duties through which that authority is exercised. According to the author, inconsistent use of these concepts in legislation has contributed to interpretive uncertainty and administrative difficulties.
The study analyzes the two-tier structure of local governance established by the key decentralization laws adopted in 2006. First-level authorities are entrusted with functions relating to local property, taxation, infrastructure, social services, environmental management, and local regulation, while second-level authorities perform coordinating and strategic functions. The author emphasizes the legal distinction between own, shared, and delegated competences, arguing that the absence of sufficiently precise criteria for delimiting these categories remains one of the principal weaknesses of the existing framework. This ambiguity, in the author’s assessment, often enables central authorities to retain substantial influence over areas formally assigned to local government.
A major theme of the article is the gap between normative commitments and institutional realities. Although Moldovan legislation requires delegated responsibilities to be accompanied by adequate financial resources, the author argues that this principle has not been consistently implemented. Fiscal dependence on transfers from the central government limits the effective exercise of local autonomy and weakens the practical significance of formally assigned competences. The discussion of subsidiarity further reinforces this point. While subsidiarity is embedded in both European and national policy frameworks, the transfer of meaningful decision-making authority has remained incomplete, partly because of concerns regarding the limited administrative and financial capacities of many local units.
The article devotes special attention to Gagauzia, whose autonomous status introduces an additional layer of complexity into Moldova’s territorial organization. The coexistence of a general local government regime and a special autonomy regime creates legal ambiguities concerning competence allocation and institutional authority. The author argues that Gagauzia’s broader self-governing powers, distinct budgetary arrangements, and legislative prerogatives require a separate analytical framework and continue to generate unresolved jurisdictional questions.
The study’s contribution lies in its systematic synthesis of the conceptual and legal dimensions of local public administration powers in Moldova. By connecting constitutional principles, legislative provisions, and broader debates on decentralization, it highlights the relationship between legal design and democratic governance. The article concludes that meaningful local autonomy requires not only clearer legislation but also stronger fiscal foundations, improved administrative capacity, and greater commitment to the principle of subsidiarity. For Israeli scholars interested in post-Soviet political development, governance reform, regional autonomy, and state-building, the study offers a detailed examination of how decentralization and territorial diversity shape institutional development in a transitional state.
“Conscription, Scaling-up and Regional Defence: Perspectives from the Baltic Sea States” is a policy-oriented report prepared by Fredrik Weibull of the Hanken School of Economics in Helsinki and Karl Ydén of the Swedish Armed Forces for the Geopolitics and Security Studies Center (GSSC) in Vilnius and published on 19 May 2026. The study examines how Lithuania, Sweden, Finland, Poland, and Germany are responding to changing security conditions in Europe through reforms of military manpower systems, with particular attention to compulsory military service and the challenge of expanding defence capabilities.
The report is driven by a central research question: which models of conscript training can be adapted by European states seeking to increase the volume of trained personnel. Rather than offering a comprehensive survey of regional security, the authors focus on regional defence understood as the practical organization and management of military capabilities. Their approach combines historical analysis, comparative policy examination, and institutional assessment. Particular emphasis is placed on Sweden and Finland, whose experiences provide the richest empirical material and contrasting examples of military recruitment systems. The study employs a selective comparative framework that investigates military service policies, recruitment structures, training systems, reserve forces, demographic constraints, and political-cultural factors shaping defence reforms.
A significant part of the report situates contemporary debates within a broader historical and conceptual context. The authors trace the evolution of conscription from early modern European state-building and the “reason of state” tradition through the rise and decline of mass armies in the twentieth century. They argue that the post-Cold War predominance of all-volunteer forces reflected changing geopolitical conditions, technological developments, and market-oriented approaches to military recruitment. In their interpretation, recent developments in Europe have revived interest in conscription and national service as states reconsider the relationship between sovereignty, territorial defence, and military preparedness.
The country studies reveal distinct trajectories. Lithuania reintroduced conscription in 2015 and is gradually expanding a system that combines volunteers with lottery-based selection. Sweden reinstated conscription in 2017 after a period of reliance on an all-volunteer force but continues to face limitations related to infrastructure, equipment, and training capacity. Finland stands out as the most consistent example of a large-scale mobilization model, having maintained conscription throughout the post-Cold War period while continuously adapting training methods and reserve structures. Poland has pursued rapid military expansion through voluntary service and reserve-building rather than renewed conscription. Germany, meanwhile, is engaged in an ongoing debate over the future of military service as it confronts recruitment difficulties and broader questions regarding defence policy.
The principal conclusion of the report is that the Finnish system offers the most useful model for states seeking to expand military manpower efficiently. The authors highlight Finland’s ability to process large cohorts, maintain extensive reserves, and organize overlapping training cycles that maximize personnel throughput. Building on this example, they recommend shorter and more focused training periods, greater use of reservists and non-regular personnel as instructors, increased training intensity, and closer cooperation between military institutions and technological education. The report also examines gender-neutral conscription, demographic decline, casualty sensitivity, technological specialization, and the future of mass armies, arguing that contemporary defence systems increasingly require highly skilled personnel rather than merely large numbers of recruits.
The study’s contribution lies in linking historical debates about conscription with current policy challenges in the Baltic Sea region. By comparing diverse national experiences and focusing on practical mechanisms of military expansion, it provides a framework for understanding how states can adapt manpower systems under conditions of strategic uncertainty. For an Israeli academic audience interested in security studies, military sociology, state capacity, and comparative defence policy, the report offers a detailed examination of how European states balance recruitment, training, reserves, and societal legitimacy while attempting to strengthen territorial defence in a changing regional environment.