The relationship between the two countries has been a complex and diverse subject of investigation and contemplation. The interconnection between the two countries can be described by the following central notions, such as economic cooperation, rivalry in terms of status acquisition of global hegemonic power, particularly in the Pacific region and beyond controversy mutual suspicion over each other’s intentions. Therefore, it is clearly justified that each state has elaborated and adopted a specific manner of conduct and attitude regarding each other as a potential adversary but has meanwhile maintained an extremely strong economic partnership. It is fair to state, that the relationship between both countries has been described by multiple world leaders and academics as the world’s most significant bilateral relationship of the 21st century. Due to the fact that Chinese economy has started to develop increasingly fast and PRC has strengthened its positions on the world’s arena, the United States started to perceive the Middle Kingdom as a direct threat to the established world order in its drive for regional hegemony in East Asia now as well as future aspirant for global supremacy. Beijing, by contrast rejects these notions, and continues its assertive policies and its quest for allies.

This paper focuses on relations between Japan and the two Koreas, the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Relations between Japan and the two Koreas can be simultaneously examined in three related contexts: the history of the national entities which is still subject to divergent interpretations, the post-Cold War East Asian security environment, and international relations (IR) theory, particularly the contrasts between neorealism, neoliberalism and neoclassical realism. In addition to traditional relations, the Japanese occupation of Korea (1910–1945) still serves as a relevant area of sensitivity between all three nations. The post-Cold War East Asian security environment is a complex mixture of vestiges of the Cold War and new regional paradigms and shifts of power, particularly against the backdrop of competing big-power interests converging on the region. Both the relations between these three nations and as well as the regional concerns of other state-actors have often been focused in recent years by North Korea’s developing nuclear weapons and missile technologies. Japanese-Korean relations present a contentious subject for IR scholars to debate the respective merits of various theoretical approaches. It is the opinion of the author that on balance, at least for the time being, neoclassical realism is a better lens through which to view these relations.

The Theory of Regional Security Complexes (RSC) provides a conceptual framework to encompass the emerging new post-Cold War international security order. It proposes a model of regional security which makes it possible to analyse, explain and predict the development of the situation in a given region. It is based on the assumption that it is the regional level, not the global or the level of a single state, that constitutes the optimal basis for conducting security analyses. So far, few researchers have attempted to challenge the theoretical assumptions of the RSC concept, and few have tried to develop or supplement it. At the same time, it is clear that the emerging new types of challenges, changing the state’s behaviour, force the revision or updating of some existing theoretical frameworks. It also applies to the Regional Security Complex theory and the adaptation of its conceptual framework to the surrounding reality so that it can continue to be reliably studied. This article considers the possibilities of further evolution of the RSC theory and, in particular, analyses the state of its development to date and proposes solutions to complement it and adapt it to newly emerging phenomena.

Factors determining the continuation of the Russian-Ukrainian war

On February 24, 2022, Russian troops attacked the territory of Ukraine, starting a new phase of the conflict that has been ongoing since 2014. Due to the difference in potential between Russia and Ukraine, most analysts expected a relatively quick end of military operation. Although several months have passed since the attack, there are no signs that the war will end soon. On the contrary, most indications indicate that the conflict will not end any time soon. The authorities of both sides declare their willingness to start peace negotiations, but they set preconditions unacceptable to the other side. Societies seem determined to continue the war, or at least there are no widespread symptoms of defeatism. Russia’s military potential has not reached a critical level that would make it impossible to wage a full-scale war, and the economic situation is better than predicted a few months ago. Ukraine’s continued resistance depends on the extent of assistance it receives from its allies. The article describes the factors that prove the continuation of military operations, but also the reasons for ending the war.