MOSCOW INSTITUTE OF ORIENTAL STUDIES OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

On May 12, 2008, a scientific and practical conference "Russian-Egyptian relations during the presidency of Hosni Mubarak" was held. The event was dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the birth of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. The conference was attended by diplomats of the Egyptian Embassy headed by Ambassador of Egypt to the Russian Federation Izzat Saad, representatives of the Russian Foreign Ministry and other state and public structures, scientists, and journalists.

Opening the meeting, the head of the Russian-Arab Dialogue Research Center of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor A. Z. Yegorin, said that in addition to reports on the life and work of Hosni Mubarak and his role in the revival and development of relations between Egypt and Russia, there will be a presentation of the book by A. V. Belonogov "Ambassador to the Land of Pyramids", to a significant date, and A. Z. Egorin's monograph "Egypt of our time", translated into Arabic and published by the Supreme Council of the Republic of Egypt for Culture.

Welcoming the forum participants, Deputy Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences V. A. Isaev highlighted the scientific and cultural component of Russian-Egyptian relations, which has a long history and is actively continued by the current generation of orientalists and Egyptologists.

Izzat Saad, thanking the organizers of the forum dedicated to the 80th anniversary of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, noted the aspects of Egyptian-Russian relations that Hosni Mubarak gave new impetus to. These include strategic political cooperation between the two countries, economic projects that resulted in trade turnover between the two countries exceeding $ 2 billion in 2007, tourism development (one and a half million Russians visited the pyramid country), and scientific and cultural ties.

Retired Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Alexander Belonogov, former Deputy Foreign Minister and USSR representative to the UN and Security Council, spoke about his work in Egypt during the difficult transition period, when after the collapse of Soviet-Egyptian relations by Sadat, the foundations of political and other ties between our country and President Hosni Mubarak's Egypt were being laid anew. The diplomat gave many details of his meetings with Hosni Mubarak and other members of the leadership of this key Arab country, shared memories of the difficult situation of those days in and around Egypt, which aroused particular interest of those present.

Retired Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary A. B. Podtserob, who now heads the Department of Comparative and Theoretical Studies at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, stated that the high level of bilateral relations that was achieved during the presidency of H. A. Nasser, was subjected to such a destructive political boom under Anwar Sadat that it fell to a level lower than even under King Farouk. In fact, A. B. Podtserob stressed, Hosni Mubarak had to start from scratch in relations with Russia. Moreover, he also had to stabilize the domestic political situation, implement party pluralism instead of the omnipotence of one political party, and reassure local businessmen who were wary of the dominance of foreign, especially American, capital. And only then did Hosni Mubarak gradually begin to restore relations with Moscow, and in such a way that it did not interfere with Egypt's ties with other countries of the West and East. "Today we are strategic partners supporting each other," A. B. Podtserob said.

page 141
V. V. Naumkin, Head of the Center for Arab Studies of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences and Editor-in-Chief of the magazine "Vostok (Oriens)", shared his memories of the 1960s, when the Soviet and Egyptian military, including Lieutenant V. V. Naumkin as an interpreter, together defended Egypt from Israeli aggression, as a result of which in August 1970 the warring parties the parties concluded a truce, although short-lived. The development of scientific and cultural ties, the exchange of scientists and students, the publication and translation of books into Russian and Arabic, mutual ethno - religious rapprochement, and not the use of force in various political conflicts-this is how V. V. Naumkin sees the future of Russian-Egyptian relations.

L. I. Medvedko, the author of a number of studies on the Middle East, including Egypt, positively characterized the development of Egyptian-Russian cooperation in our days. He noted that Hosni Mubarak, an outstanding Egyptian military leader and politician, finds support not only among his peers in Russia, but also throughout the Middle East.

Izzat Saad cordially thanked all those present for the warm words addressed to the President of Egypt.

Summing up the results of the meeting, A. Z. Yegorin said the following in his closing remarks:

"Hosni Mubarak is a participant in all the Arab-Israeli wars: in the 1948 war, he was a pilot, in the Suez crisis of 1956, commander of a large formation, in the 1967 war, commander of the Air Force, in the 1973 war, a representative of the stavka.

He is neither left-wing nor right-wing, although he studied in the USSR, at the Yuri Gagarin Air Force Academy, and could "catch" Marxism or communism. This didn't happen.

When Gamal Abdel Nasser was president of Egypt, he was loyal to his regime, but did not support Nasser's socialist experiment in his country. He had little contact with former members of the Council of the revolutionary command that overthrew the royal regime in Egypt, because, in his opinion, the ambition of those who made the revolution did not strengthen, but undermined the interest of public opinion in the army in Egypt. An officer who saw blood and unnecessary sacrifices, he was one of the first to oppose the use of force in politics and supported the peace efforts in the region undertaken by A. Sadat, who succeeded Nasser as president of Egypt.

The removal of the Nasserists from leadership positions, which gave the country the impression of an exploding bomb, did not find the support of former members of the SRK, which led to the resignation of one of its members, Hussein Shafi'i. And then, in 1975, Egypt was named a new candidate for the vice-president - it was the commander of the Air Force, General Hosni Mubarak, who quickly brought order to the political Olympus of the country. He advocated political pluralism, which made it possible to transform the amorphous Arab Socialist Union into a bouquet of liberal parties. He opposed the rise of Islamic extremism in Egypt, supported the attraction of foreign capital, opened the Suez Canal for shipping, and was the developer of a peace treaty with Israel.

It was not Mubarak, however, who paid the price for all these reforms, but President Anwar Sadat, who was assassinated by Islamists in 1981 during a parade.

Instead of seizing the presidency through political combinations, Mubarak held a nationwide referendum on October 13 that made him a legitimate and recognized president.

Sadat's "infitah" policy - the "open door" policy for foreign capital-which was initiated back in 1974 - was clarified by Mubarak: the doors are opened as much as it is beneficial for national capital. He resolutely began to curtail the public sector, introduced preferential legislation for those Egyptians who decided to invest in the country's economy, waged an uncompromising fight against corruption, boldly established the convertibility of the Egyptian pound, and tried to convert socialist and capitalist ideas into a specific model of Egypt. All this gave him the opportunity to strengthen his position within the country and address regional and global problems without looking back.

In the region, it has found an opportunity to coexist peacefully with Israel, and for 35 years Egypt has not known what wars are. At the same time, it was not easy to return to an Arab family, but Mubarak did everything to make it happen within a generation of Egyptians, and it did. At the start of the 21st century Egypt has become one of the largest Powers in the region, playing a stabilizing role in all the problems that still exist in the Middle East. Its main idea is to move from strategic confrontation to strategic peace in the name of a prosperous region with the coexistence of all countries -

page 142
It has found many supporters in the Middle East and around the world.

Egypt largely follows in the wake of the policies of the leading Western countries, it receives about $ 3 billion annually from the United States in the form of subsidies and loans. But this does not prevent it from developing relations with both the North and the South.

Mubarak had to overcome many difficulties to restore relations with Moscow, which were interrupted by Sadat. He offered Russia an almost "zero-point option", which began a kind of "infitah" in the Russian-Egyptian dialogue that led to Hosni Mubarak's triumphant trip to Moscow in 1997, where he declared Russia a strategic ally and partner, as this country was under President Nasser. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, Mubarak visited Russia several more times, always confirming his position of friendship with it.

Mubarak likes discipline and order, which he has taught Egyptian officials. He is also strict, but caring, in relation to his family, in relation to Egyptian traditions. The Egyptian people have a worthy president and are proud of him."

After the speakers ' presentations, the above-mentioned books were presented and the forum participants met with their authors.

The event, dedicated to the 80th anniversary of President Hosni Mubarak, was positively evaluated by Egyptian and Russian participants and the media of the two countries.

A. Z. YEGORIN

* * *

On May 20, 2008, a group of historical scholars from Beijing visited the Institute to participate in a conference on archival science. Among the guests were Professor Cheng Chung-de, Director of the Institute of Qing History at the People's University of Beijing, Professor Chen Hua, Director of the Inter-Faculty Institute of Qing History at the same University, and Dr. Ye Bai-chuan, who are members of the National Commission for the Compilation of the Official History of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911). this commission.

In the course of a friendly conversation, Director of the Institute of Chinese Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences R. B. Rybakov spoke about the history and scientific activities of the Institute of Chinese Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, introducing his colleagues-sinologists: Acad. V. S. Myasnikov, A. A. Bokshchanin, A. Sh. Kadyrbaev, O. E. Nepomnin, A. N. Khokhlov and V. Ts.Golovachev.

In turn, the guests from China talked about their work. They reported that the National Qing History Commission was established in 2003 to write the official history of the last dynasty of imperial China. As is well known, China's millennia-old political tradition dictated to the rulers of each new dynasty the mission of compiling the official history of their predecessors. Moreover, the fulfillment of this mission was one of the proofs of the legitimacy of the ruling dynasty. In line with this tradition, in the 30s of the XX century, an attempt was already made in China to write a history of the Qing, which resulted in the appearance of a multi-volume work "Qing shi Gao" (Draft history of the Qing Dynasty). Now, the state and party leadership of the People's Republic of China has commissioned scientists to write an official history, giving it the status of a national project with an impressive budget of $ 100 million. About 2 thousand historians, including specialists on the Qing period from China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the United States, Europe and Russia, were involved in the work. The volume of this work will be 100 volumes (300 million rubles). hieroglyphs), 10 of which are photos, maps, and illustrations. The project, which is divided into 24 subprojects, will take 10 years to complete. But, according to the guests, it is already clear that due to the high complexity, as well as many difficulties, the real term will be at least 13-15 years. Among the difficulties are the need to go beyond the old patterns of imperial historiography and search for a new theoretical concept, the need to enter a huge body of local archives and written sources, take into account the experience of world Sinology, identify and attach documents from foreign archives to the work.

The latter task was the main reason for the arrival of Chinese guests who visited the archives in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Vladivostok and Kiev. Being aware of the specifics of the materials and some "national" features of the work of our archives, our colleagues

page 143
From China, they expressed hope for the help of their Russian colleagues in finding and processing the necessary materials. Real forms of cooperation could be joint publications, exchange of archival documents and their study.

Fellow Sinologists introduced their guests to the Russian project of writing a ten-volume history of China, dedicated to the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic of China. At the end of the meeting, B. S. Myasnikov presented the Chinese scientists with a valuable gift from the Institute - several dozen books about China published in recent years in Russia by the publishing house Vostochnaya Literatura.

V. C. GOLOVACHEV

On May 26-27, 2008, the scientific conference "State and Statehood in South Asia" was held, which its organizers, the Center for Indian Studies and the Department of Near and Middle East of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, dedicated to the memory of their recently deceased colleagues - Marina Andreevna (1938-2007) and Oleg Vasilyevich (1934-2004) Pleshov. They were a wonderful couple of highly professional Orientalists and highly respectable people, respected and loved by everyone who knew them.

The choice of the conference topic was determined, firstly, by its relevance for all the states of South Asia, which paradoxically combine the centuries-old traditions of statehood with the relative youth of modern states that emerged after liberation from colonial dependence, and secondly, by the scientific interests of the Pleshovs: Marina Andreevna dealt with the problems of the state structure of India, Oleg Vasilyevich was a specialist in the internal political problems of Pakistan.

The conference opened with a plenary session, which, in addition to the participants, was attended by friends and relatives of the Pleshovs. They, as well as their colleagues at work, shared their memories of these wonderful scientists. Then there was a presentation of the Russian edition of the book "Our Future: Consumerism or Humanism?" famous Indian futurologist Jagdish Kapoor.

The conference was held in three sections, where scientists from Moscow, Lipetsk, Ryazan and Irkutsk read 32 reports.

The section "Statehood in South Asia: History and Ideas" was chaired by L. B. Alaev and E. Y. Vanina and focused on various aspects of the evolution of state thought and public policy in South Asia. Four reports "The Sovereign in the" Arthashastra "of Kautilya (some remarks)" by A.M. Samozvantsev, "The community-state system of South India in the VI-XII centuries" by L. B. Alaev, "The Evolution of the tax system and the state in ancient and Medieval India" by E. N. Komarov, and " North Indian medieval charters as royal decrees A. A. Stolyarov's lectures were devoted to the ideas of tsarist power and administrative practice of the ancient and medieval states of India.

Three reports - "J. Malcolm on the peculiarities of British policy in the Indian principalities" by T. P. Kalyanova (Irkutsk), "The Principality of Jaipur and the Raj: In the Footsteps of Lieutenant Colonel Lockett" by E. Y. Karachkova and "Press Censorship in India: the Colonial Version" by S. E. Sidorova explored various aspects of the colonial state and colonial politics. The colonial period, but not the colonial state, included the topics of two more reports - "An attempt to create an Indian state in East Africa" by L. D. Mashyanova (Ryazan) and "Indian Nationalism: Imagining Statehood" by E. Yu. Vanina, which considered various experiments on "imagining" or" designing " the state with nationalistic thought.

It was quite natural for the participants of the section to turn to the tragic experience of the partition of British India (reports by V. P. Kashin "From the prehistory of Indian federalism: the partition of Assam" and L. A. Chereshneva (Lipetsk)"The problem of independence and the partition of British India in 1944 - the first half of 1945: the struggle of political forces"). The reports "Secularism in the world" were devoted to the most important issues of interfaith relations and the situation of minorities in modern South Asian states.-

page 144
South Asian States: Different Fates "by Yu. E. Aryaeva and" Religious minorities in the process of Legal construction of Indian and Pakistani statehood" by P. V. Topychkanov. I. P. Glushkova's report "Pilgrimage: for yourself or for the state?" examined the functions of the modern Indian state in the sphere of religious policy (and politicized religion) on the example of organizing a pilgrimage to the Hindu shrine of Amarnath. K. P. Shresgpha's report "Some aspects of the concept of "New Nepal"" addressed the political situation in modern Nepal.

The section "The State in South Asia: Political and Economic Realities" was led by F. N. Yurlov, A. A. Kutsenko and V. N. Moskalenko. Some of the presented reports dealt with general problems of the socio-economic and political structure, civil society and democracy in South Asia ("Civil Society of India-composition and structure" by A. A. Kutsenko, " Multi-vector nature of political and economic processes in the East (problems of democracy)" by S. I. Lunev, "Indian Socialism and political reality" by F. N. Yurlova, "The political system of Pakistan" V. N. Moskalenko, "Features of the political culture of Pakistan" V. Ya. Belokrenitsky, "Changes in the structure of public administration in Pakistan" N. A. Zamaraeva). O. V. Malyarov ("Russia and India. General problems and approaches to their solution") undertook a comparative analysis of the approaches of Russia and India to solving socio-economic problems.

Two reports examined the most urgent problem of strengthening federalism and combating terrorism for modern South Asian states (and not only) ("Regionalism and State-building in India: Lessons from History and Modernity" by V. P. Titov, "Indian Federalism and the fight against terrorism" by E. N. Khodatenko). E. S. Yurlova ("The Party of the Majority of the People-up the steps of power"), Yu. N. Panichkin (Ryazan) ("Pashtuns and the state system of Pakistan") and A.V. Ustenko ("The political Crisis of 2006 in Bangladesh: causes, development and consequences") They devoted their reports to specific problems of the party-political and ethno-political situation in the studied countries.

The section "Geopolitics of South Indian States" was chaired by T. L. Shaumyan and S. N. Kamenev. In the report "India's Foreign Policy in a global and regional context" T. L. Shaumyan analyzed the foreign policy activities of the modern Indian state in the world and regional arena. Various aspects of this activity were considered by N. B. Lebedeva ("The Role of India in the evolution of cooperation in the Indian Ocean Zone (Problems and Prospects)" and A. E. Zhirnov ("International Security Issues in India's Foreign Policy"). S. N. Kamenev ("Russian-Pakistani Relations") and A. S. Bugrov ("India's Foreign Economic Policy: the Russian Direction") presented their reports on the Russian vector of foreign policy of the South Asian states.

It has become a tradition that young people actively participate in conferences held by the Center for Indian Studies. This time, young researchers, postgraduates, undergraduates, and even students of the Institute of Physics and Technology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the ISAA at Moscow State University, and MGIMO(U)performed with successMINISTRY OF Foreign Affairs OF THE Russian Federation.

E. Y. VANINA

NUSANTARA SOCIETY

On May 15, 2008, the regular "Malay-Indonesian Readings" discussed the parliamentary elections held in Malaysia in March of this year. Presentations were made by V. F. Urlyapov (IB RAS) and V. A. Pogadaev (University of Malaya), followed by a stormy exchange of views. Increased interest in the topic is caused by the fact that for the first time in independent Malaysia, the ruling coalition - the National Front suffered a crushing defeat, losing in a number of key and developed states of the country and losing an overwhelming majority of seats (two-thirds) in parliament for the first time. When assessing the political results of the elections, two opposing opinions were expressed. Most of the panelists saw the outcome of the election as a failure of the current Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi, and a weakening of the influence of the main political party

page 145
The Malays are OMNO. According to V. A. Pogadaev, the election results can nevertheless be counted as a plus for Prime Minister Badawi, since they provide an opportunity to liberalize political life in a country that was previously under strong pressure from the ruling coalition, and at the same time push the government to pursue a more socially oriented policy.

On June 26, 2008, the fourth interdisciplinary conference of young specialists" The Malay World: History, Philology, Culture " was held, organized by the Nusantara Society with the assistance of the ISAA at Moscow State University. These periodic conferences, initiated by the then Chairman of the Nusantara Society, B. B. Parnikel, began in 2001, and subsequent conferences were held in 2002 and 2004. The organizing committee of this year's conference included: V. V. Sikorsky (Chairman of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs), T. V. Dorofeeva (MSU ISAA, Executive Secretary), A. O. Zakharov (IB RAS), and M. O. Kulikova (IB RAS). The conference was attended by eleven speakers-undergraduates and postgraduates-from five universities and research institutions in Moscow: ISAA at Moscow State University, MGIMO University of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, the Eastern University, the Institute of Practical Oriental Studies (IPV).

Most of the reports were devoted to Indonesia due to the greater representation of this country and the Indonesian language in the higher education system and in the scientific community. Historical topics dominated: Y. Bakulina (IPV) "The new intelligentsia - an expression of the awakening national consciousness of colonial Indonesia: R. A. Kartini"; A. Blagodatskikh (IPV) "The Origin and initial stages of Sarekat Islam (1912-1923)"; M. Kulikova (Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences) "The Evolution of Ideas about Power in Indonesia" ; G. Suchkov (Eastern University) "The Keterbukaan phenomenon in the socio-political life of Indonesia in the late 1980s-first half of the 1990s"; A. Schenkova (IPV) "Thomas Stamford Raffles as a socio-economic reformer and researcher of Java"; M. Sosedova (MGIMO) " Foreign Policy aspects of the conflict in Aceh province".

Two reports were on the philological topic: P. Ziza (ISAA) "The role of medieval tradition in modern Indonesian prose on the example of comparing the hikayat" The Tale of Hang Tuah "and the novel" Tiger! Tiger!" Mokhtara Lubisa"; M. Frolov (ISAA) "The image of the tiger in the folklore tradition of Nusantara".

Students from MGIMO devoted their reports to Malaysia: E. Kozhina "Malaysia's place in the Organization of the Islamic Conference"; O. Golovko "The Chinese factor in Malaysia and its impact on China-ASEAN relations".

The Singapore theme was mentioned in one report on the economy: M. Geisherik (Institute of Africa of the Russian Academy of Sciences)"Trade and economic relations between Russia and Singapore at the present stage". D. Ignatieva's report covered the entire region as a whole: "Maritime trade in Nusantara in the XVI century." Abstracts were published based on the conference materials.

T. V. DOROFEEVA

KYRGYZSTAN

June 11-12, 2008 on the picturesque shore of the lake. Issyk-Kul hosted the international scientific conference "Afghanistan, the SCO, Security and Geopolitics of Central Eurasia", organized by the A. Knyazev Public Foundation (the Republic of Kyrgyzstan), the Ahmad Shah Massoud Foundation (Afghanistan) and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (Germany). Scientists, journalists, public and state figures, and diplomats from Russia, the United States, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Afghanistan, China, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Iran took part in its work - a total of 51 people.

Russia was represented by V. G. Korgun (IB RAS), A. Sh. Kadyrbaev (IB RAS), V. N. Plastun (Novosibirsk University), V. S. Boyko (Altai Pedagogical Institute). State Adviser, former Trade Representative of the Russian Federation in Afghanistan V. N. Ivanov, A. N. Medvedev (Institute of Central Asia and the Caucasus).

The report "The SCO in Regional Geopolitics" was delivered by V. G. Korgun, who highlighted and analyzed two important issues - "The SCO and the West" and "The SCO and Afghanistan". Speaking about the potential participation of the SCO in the settlement of the Afghan problem, he stressed the need to study the relations of the SCO and the SCO member states with the International community.

page 146
NATO is committed to finding possible ways and forms of cooperation between the two alliances in Afghanistan. Having determined the practical identity of the policy of the United States and other NATO member countries in Afghanistan, the speaker highlighted the positions of American political circles in relation to the SCO. At the same time, he criticized the views of a number of leading US figures who see the SCO's activities as a threat to Washington's goals and interests in the Central Asian region and do not want to cooperate with the SCO in solving the Afghan problem.

V. G. Korgun dwelled on the possibilities and forms of SCO participation in Afghan affairs. He suggested several options for the organization's cooperation with Afghanistan, excluding its participation in military operations on the territory of the country. The speaker noted with regret that the SCO is not yet ready to fully participate in the reconstruction of the Afghan economy, both from a financial, economic and political point of view. As for attempts at a political settlement of the conflict in Afghanistan with the assistance of the SCO, V. G. Korgun expressed his conviction that they will be fruitless or at least ineffective without the full membership of all Afghanistan's neighbors, including primarily Pakistan and Iran.

According to V. G. Korgun, it is unlikely that in the near future the SCO will be able to become a key player in the Afghan political field, entering into rivalry or competition with NATO. However, efforts to find ways to cooperate with the international anti-terrorist coalition in Afghanistan need to be intensified.

A. Kadyrbayev made a detailed analysis of the place and role of Kazakhstan in the SCO and the balance of power in Central Asia in the report "Kazakhstan and the SCO in the context of resolving the Afghan problem". Having considered the specifics of Kazakhstan's membership in the organization (balancing between Russia and China), he showed the republic's capabilities in solving regional problems within the SCO. The speaker criticized the policies of the region's ruling regimes for their desire to often act in their own selfish interests to the detriment of the SCO's interests.

In his report on the political situation in Afghanistan presented at the conference, V. N. Plastun convincingly demonstrated the inability of NATO to solve the problems of economic recovery, the elimination of drug trafficking and the elimination of Islamic extremism in the country. Without knowing the history, traditions and customs of Afghanistan, the speaker stressed, and without using the Soviet experience of participating in the Afghan war, the efforts of the Western anti-terrorist coalition in the fight against terror are doomed to failure.

V. S. Boyko highlighted the problem of multilateral regional cooperation within Greater Eurasia, focusing on the role of the Altai public and business circles in establishing good-neighborly relations with Afghanistan.

In the speeches of the Afghan participants of the conference, among whom were well-known political figures: the president of the A. S. Masood Foundation-the national hero of the country, a member of parliament, senator, adviser to the President of the country, hope was expressed for assistance and assistance to Afghanistan from the SCO member states. At the same time, while refraining from openly criticizing NATO, they spoke rather sharply about the Afghan policy of Washington, which suppresses the initiative and independence of the Afghan government. According to some Afghan delegates, it is necessary to gradually withdraw foreign troops from the country and step up the negotiation process with the Taliban.

During the discussion, certain differences were revealed between the various participants of the conference in assessing the forms and methods of solving the Afghan problem, which was reflected in the refusal of the Afghan delegation to support the draft final declaration prepared by the organizers of the conference following its results. As a result, the latter were forced to offer to agree on the positions of the parties after the conference and receive support from delegates via electronic communication.

Despite this incident, all participants of the conference highly appreciated the fact of holding the forum, the nature of the discussion of important issues and its results, which contained a number of practical recommendations on the problems of cooperation between the SCO and NATO in Afghanistan. They stressed the need to step up joint efforts in the fight against drug trafficking and Islamic extremism in Afghanistan, primarily on the part of its neighbors. Although the discussion was often dominated by rhetoric, the conference demonstrated a fairly high scientific level.

page 147
the professional level of its participants, as well as the desire to bring together the positions of different countries in solving the Afghan problem.

The conference materials received media coverage in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and China.

V. G. KORGUN

ULAANBAATAR

The first trilateral international scientific forum "Mongolia, Russia and China" was held on June 16-17, 2008.: together for development in the XXI century", held under the auspices of the Prime Minister of Mongolia S. Bayar. It was organized by the Ministry of Education and Science, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia, the Academy of Sciences and the Institute of International Studies of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia. At the invitation of the organizers, the forum was attended by delegations of scientists from academic institutes in Moscow, Chita, Beijing and Huhe-hoto (ARVM). The most numerous Mongolian participants included researchers from various humanitarian institutes of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia, the Mongolian National University, specialists from the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The meetings were also attended by the Cultural Adviser of the Russian Embassy in Mongolia, V. TS Ganzhurov, a well-known German Mongol scholar Udo Barkman, and others.

Great importance was attached to the Forum: first, it was the first event of its kind in the history of cultural relations between Russia, Mongolia and China; second, it discussed extremely important issues related to the development of strategic partnership and interaction between the three countries; third, it was held in the midst of the election campaign for the election of the Great State Khural-the highest legislative body This made it more relevant for the Government of Mongolia.

The meetings were held in the Government Palace, the delegates were received by Prime Minister S. Bayar, Mongolian television, radio, and the press paid a lot of attention to the forum. S. Bayar's welcome message was read out at the opening ceremony. Then the Minister of Education and Science N. Bolorma made a big speech, emphasizing the great scientific and practical significance of the conference. B. Chodra, President of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia, and R. Rybakov, Head of the Russian delegation and Director of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, addressed the audience with greetings. Head of the Chinese delegation, Director of the Institute for the Study of

Zhan-Yun-an, Asia-Pacific Director of the Academy of Social Sciences of the People's Republic of China, welcomed the participants at the evening session.

The meetings were alternately chaired by the head of the Mongolian delegation, one of the main organizers of the forum, Director of the Institute of International Studies, L. Haisandai, and the heads of the Russian and Chinese delegations. A total of 18 reports were heard and discussed, covering three main groups of issues. The central place among them was occupied by the problems of developing, improving and expanding political, economic and cultural cooperation between the three countries, as well as their interaction in the international arena.

B. Enkhtuvshin, Vice-President of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia, set the tone for the entire forum with a keynote address titled "Mongolia's Development Strategy and the factor of cooperation with the Russian Federation and China". It thoroughly analyzed the main directions, role and significance of Mongolia's comprehensive cooperation with Russia and China, both in the success achieved in Mongolia's development along the democratic path, as well as further progress in the stable growth of the market economy, the standard of living and culture of Mongolia, as well as ensuring peace and security in Northeast Asia and the Asia-Pacific region in general.

The problems of trilateral cooperation were also widely covered in the reports "Relations between Mongolia, Russia and China: state and Prospects" (X. Ayuurzana, D. Battulga, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia), "Strategic Regulation of the Regional Industrial system of China, Mongolia and Russia" (Chung-Shan, Institute for Asian Studies of the People's Republic of China), "Trade and economic relations between Russia, Mongolia and China: main trends and Prospects "(V. V. Graivoronsky, Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences), "Actual issues of Development of Cross-border trade between China, Russia and Mongolia and their current situation" (Tumentsec, Institute for the Study of Neighboring Countries of the ARVM University), etc.

In general, the current state of trilateral relations and cooperation has been very good.

page 148
It was evaluated positively, but the speakers noted that the existing huge potential for its significant expansion is still not being used enough.

The concept of including India in the system of cooperation between Mongolia, Russia and China was proposed by G. S. Yaskina (Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences) in her report, justifying it by the ancient civilizational ties of these countries and the commonality of modern development vectors.

The second group of reports dealt with the current state and prospects of development of bilateral relations between Mongolia-Russia and Mongolia-China.

Thus, the problems of updating the traditional relations of good neighborliness and close cooperation between Mongolia and Russia, bringing them to new, higher frontiers of strategic partnership were considered in the reports "Relations between Mongolia and Russia: traditions and reforms" (O. Batsaikhan, A. Nyamdolzhin, IMI, Academy of Sciences of Mongolia)., "Russia and Mongolia: Partnership in the XXI century "( E. V. Voikova, IV RAS), "Actual aspects of Russian-Mongolian cooperation in the context of globalization" (V. V. Kuznetsov, G. G. Vasiliev, Trans-Baikal State Humanitarian and Pedagogical University, Chita).

The reports "On China-Mongolia Bilateral Relations" (N. Ulan-Od, ARVM University, China) and "International Relations in the NEA and Strategic Partnership of China and Mongolia" (Piao Zhan-yi, Institute for the Study of the Asia-Pacific Region,China) set out the tasks of making cooperation between China and Mongolia of strategic significance. Caller ID of the People'S Republic of China). Piao Ran-yi convincingly showed the constructive impact of cooperation between China and Mongolia on the stability of the international situation in NEA.

The third group of reports dealt with a number of topical issues of Mongolia's internal development in the context of trilateral relations, as well as an analysis of the overall situation in the region.

Thus, in the report " The state and prospects of foreign direct investment in Mongolia "(T. Dorzh, Institute of Economics. Mongolian State University, Balgar University, IMI Academy of Sciences of Mongolia) it was shown that Mongolia has favorable conditions for broad attraction of foreign capital, especially in the mining industry, in the development of new rich mineral deposits. The most important role of Mongolia's economic cooperation with Russia and China in developing mineral resources and solving the food problem was highlighted in the report "Two Neighbors and the Problem of Mongolia's Economic Security" (L. Haisandai, L. Oyungerel, IMI of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia).

In the report "The impact of oil price fluctuations on the balance of power in the world", Zhan Yun-an, using a political and economic methodology, substantiated the main thesis about the dependence of the energy security of China and other Asian countries on the political climate and the overall balance of power in the region, on the international policy pursued there. The reports "Development of transport infrastructure - the main factor in strengthening integration in North Asia" (S. Batbayar, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, D. Shurkhuu, IMI of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences) and "Asian Policy of Mongolia" (Tumurchuluun, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia) also aroused great interest.

Thus, all the main areas of partnership relations between Russia, Mongolia and China on a bilateral and trilateral basis, their strategic importance for the further stable development of Mongolia, as well as for peace and security in Asia were considered in the reports of the forum participants.

Two reports "Mongolia's foreign policy in the research of Russian and Mongolian scientists" (I. Altantsetseg, Institute of International Relations). MONSu Relations) and "Problems of Mongolia's National Security in the Assessments of Western Authors" (M. M. Golman, Institute of International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences) were of a historiographical nature and contained recognition of the great merits of Russian and Chinese researchers in studying Mongolia's foreign policy and an objective description of the contradictory position of the West in assessing threats to Mongolia's security.

In general, this first experience of joint consideration and discussion of the problems of strategic partnership between Russia, Mongolia and China by social scientists of the three countries, according to the forum participants, was very fruitful and had not only scientific, but also practical significance. Based on this, it was decided to hold it annually.

It should be noted that the forum was held on the eve of the 40th anniversary of one of the leading divisions of the Academy of Sciences of Mongolia-the Institute of International Studies, which was solemnly celebrated on June 18, 2008 at the kind invitation of the Mongolian side by foreign delegates of the forum.

M. I. GOLMAN

Permanent link to this publication: