While the scope of the paper is to assess the actions undertaken by the European Union towards the FSU-CIS (the former Soviet Union, Commonwealth of Independent States) which was manifested through the Eastern Partnership Initiative in the years 2008–2014, the focus will be centred on theoretical concepts and their ‘explanatory power’ rather than actions undertaken by European or Russian decision makers. Taking that into the account, this essay will critically assess the explanatory power of the neorealist school of thought which although overtly criticized, still remains a viable tool in explaining the processes occurring in international relations.

After the collapse of the bipolar international system, a new line of “soft” division in Europe has been established in East-Central Europe. The article seeks to verify the hypothesis that Central and Eastern Europe is an international relations area but is not a cohesive, tightly-knit region united by common institutions, historical experience and the resulting awareness of a separate identity and a sense of community vis-à-vis the external world whereas the international order herein is a dynamic process undergoing evolution. Despite the passage of over twenty years since the collapse of the bipolar system, this process has not yet been completed.

This article is based on the idea that it is necessary to develop a quantitative method to calculate power of international actors, which will enable scholars to analyse international conflicts. The Global Potential Power Distribution Chart, which is calculated based on three main characteristics of international actors, namely population, territory and economic power, shows “potential power of states and international organisations”. It may be called “Durmuş Scale of Power (DSoP)”. The chart is a comprehensive indicator with considerable accuracy and 100 % objectivity. In this article, potential powers of international actors have been calculated for years 1987, 2004 and 2015, which gives a clear overview of the potential power distribution (balance of power) of the World regarding states and as well as international organisations. Potential military powers of some states and international organisation in year 2015 have also been calculated. This research proves by means of a contemporary approach applied and a quantitative method developed that, the World is multipolar since 2004, and China is, potentially, the most powerful state of the World since 2015. The method introduced in this article were sufficient enough to explain the effects of the enlargement of NATO and EU, EU after BREXIT, reform of the Security Council of the United Nations and instrumental enough to provide a peaceful understanding for the self-determination issue of Kosova. There are three conclusions to this research: 1) The method “Durmuş Scale of Power” is calculated is reliable because everybody with a scientific calculator or a computer can easily calculate potential power of a state provided that he or she has reliable data for territory, population and GDP. 2) “Global Potential Power Distribution Chart” is a comprehensive Chart which shows “balance of power” at a specific year. It enables us to compare power of states and international organisations in different years. 3) It is convenient to use “Durmuş Scale of Power” while analysing issues of international relations.

The paper deals with the view of contemporary world politics presented by American libertarians. Specifically, it examines the claims of Murray N. Rothbard and his successors with regard to the role of the United States of America in the international arena. The article argues that since the Cold War, the libertarian account of international relations has been staunchly critical of the US, while exhibiting a soft spot for competing powers, particularly the USSR and the Russian Federation. As the article submits, this asymmetry is supported by two flawed theoretical contentions: the liberal imperialism thesis (LIT) and the American hegemony thesis (AHT). Moreover, the article shows how anti-Americanism impinges on libertarian analyses of contemporary Central- Eastern European politics, in particular the war in Ukraine.