The desintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 demonstrated the instability of an ideological state system. Globalization of economic development outsourced some western industries to China, India and other countries with cheap labor. The transformation of Russian economy from socialist to capitalist system by "shock therapy" resulted in sharp decline of living standards. In 1998 Eugeny Primakov did return Russian policy to patriotic values. The sharp rise of oil and gas prices since 2001 did help to restore the growth of Russian economy. The attempt of Ukraine to join EU and to restrict the use of Russian language failed and resulted in loss of Crimea and Donbass. Belarus and Kazakhstan integrated their economies with Russia by creating the Eurasian Economic Union.

The last four years very different shocks fall on the integrated part of Europe persistently. Accidents in Europe’s relations with the USA have been added to these troubles recently. Combination of Brexit, migrant invasion, change of style America demonstrates in its communication with its allies as well as the prospects of the Ukrainian statehood implosion increasingly disturb the EU stability. Bewilderment of framework of a part of European countries’ overstressed association presents an unpredictable menace to security of the whole continent. The hollowing-out of relations and ties with Russia undertaken by the EU under joint American–German pressure enhances the progressing general crisis of the EU. Possibility to ensure a positive outcome of the present crises series in Europe depends on how soon the European politics will realize the vital necessity to restore reasonable basics of Europe-Russia interrelationship.

The article traces the views and positions of two figures of Russian social democracy G.V.Plekhanov and G.L.Pyatakov, who proved to be close enough in two very important situations – in 1912, when the crisis in the proletarian party reached its utmost importance and at the time of the choice of the strategy of the revolutionary movement in the spring of 1917. The reconstructed episodes show the complexity of social processes, the ambiguous choice of vectors for historical progress.

Many people still believe that the history as the science has begun to change accents in its approach to analysis of the past exclusively due to heroic, self-sacrifice conduct of the Annals school representatives of the French historiography or due to efforts of only foreign historians and has started to become, in the first place, a sphere of human beings study and only later the study of society. Meanwhile the process of the history animation included efforts of many generations of foreign and Russian historians, philosophers and representatives of many other branches of social sciences. However, the paradox is that until recently we have known about foreign scientists more than about our countrymen. Today, with good reasons we may maintain that the picture of the Russian science achievements in respect of anthropological, social psychological approach to analysis of the historical past is dramatic and impressive. The task of this article is to disclose some important aspects of this historiographic process.

Based on analysis of German conservative literature about Russia, as part of the political discussions in Germany in the second quarter of the 19th century, the paper discusses these polemic works as an example of a conservative "thinking style" that shaped the worldview of its bearers and attitudes towards Russia.

It is easy to understand why historians got used to put Peter the Great`s visit to England in 1698 into a wider context of the topic «Russia and Europe». Following in their steps the author of the article adds some subtler details to the discourse. The point is that for all Peter`s affection for Holland it was England that he singled out among other Western countries. The tsar was far from indiscriminate perception of local ways and mores but he found there a lot of things extremely useful for his motherland. As to the English political elite of the time, it looked at him with a mixture of arrogance, curiosity, and admiration. Some of the country`s higher officials did not hesitate to predict that their «strange guest» would leave an incredible trace in world history.

In February 2018 Russia and Serbia celebrate 180th anniversary of establishment of official diplomatic relations. Glorious common past helps our countries to look with confidence into the future. The historical facts being separately mentioned in the current review are just symbolic examples of our tough friendship whose ground are not only common Slavic roots but a profound understanding of the interests. The publication of this work seems to be up to date in conditions of a new round of allegations against Moscow and the frequent criticism towards Belgrade.

On the basis of analysis of the Russian satirical journals complex of 1917–1918 the article deals with the research of the formation and change of the images of the Orient in Russian public opinion and press in the period of Great Revolution and the beginning of the Civil War. The author proves the ambivalent attitude of Russian satirical journalists to the image of Turkey (hatred/empathy) as a satirical object. The context of such an attitude is common military, political and geopolitical situation of the epoch – the crash of old imperial regimes as a result of the Great War and revolutions.