Change and continuity in Russian-US academic exchange programmes. A temporal analysis. 1946-2015

The answer to the second question includes an approach for analyzing critical junctures; kinds of reasoning; methods, and strengths and weaknesses of these methods. To sum up their arguments, the answer to the second question is: "we argue that because heightened contingency is a core characteristic of critical junctures, counterfactual analysis and narrative process tracing are particularly important and must be explicitly employed to study them. In this context, we also address specific issues relevant to both cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons of critical junctures" Ibid., p. 348. Giovanni Capoccia and R. Daniel Kelemen formulated the basic principles of the theory of path dependence, as well as the possibility of its application in the study of institutions. In addition, they gave recommendations how to apply these principles in a particular research.

1.4 Criticism of the theory of path dependence

Due to criticism, the theory does not stand still, but is being improved and supplemented. It is necessary to examine critical provisions concerning the theory of path dependence. This will help us to avoid subsequent mistakes, misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the concept. The growing popularity of the term in contemporary science has generated many interpretations of the concept of path dependence. This fact became the main source of criticism of the concept. The definitional divergence gives rise not only to the variety of interpretation, but also to the fragmentation of the concept. This generates two contradictions. The first, when the theory of path dependence is universally used, even where it is not suitable for analysis. The second is that all the diversity of its meaning is reduced to a very generalized understanding and assertion that history matters.

Paul A. David in his article pays attention to this conceptual problem: "What is `path dependence' anyway? Does it have a meaning more precise than the slogan: `history matters'? If we were to conduct a systematic survey, even one confined to the academic profession, it probably would confirm my casual impression that the rising popularity of the term `path dependence' has spawned a variety of usages, a perceptible measure of confusion, and even some outright misinformation" Paul A. David Path dependence, its critics and the quest for `historical economics'. All Souls College, Oxford & Stanford University (June 2000) p. 2. "If there are few who are prepared to dissent from the assertion that `history matters', there are more who wonder whether history matters in ways that are important to think about, and, there are many more who hold diverse and sometimes contradictory notions of how it comes about that history matters" Ibid..

P. A. David sets himself the task "to try to clarify the meaning and amplify the significance of path dependence" Ibid., p. 5. Regarding the clarification of the concept, he claims "In asserting that `history matters' I do not maintain that history always matters in the same ways. Nor would I contend that social and economic processes have worked in the same way throughout history. The issue of how much `importance' should be attached to the particular category of path dependent dynamical processes, in the sense of what proportion of the changes occurring around us can best be understood in such terms, remains for me one that can must be addressed by empirical inquiries" Ibid., p. 7. In order to prove the relevance of path dependence concept, he argues that "the very nature of the evidence that would be required to address it is prescribed by reference to alternative, analytical and statistical models that admit of historical changes that are not path dependent, and changes that are path independent" Ibid., p. 10. He also recommends the examination of particular cases that "may serve to illustrate the phenomenon of path dependence, to exemplify one or another methodology of studying it, and to identify and explore unresolved problems" Ibid., p. 11.

He proposes his own definition and explanation of path dependence concept. In fact, P. A. David gives two definitions of positive and negative option (by reductio ad absurdum). His positive definition is "path-dependence, as I wish to use the term, refers to a dynamic property of allocative processes. It may be defined either with regard to the relationship between the process dynamics and the outcome(s) to which it converges, or the limiting probability distribution of the stochastic process under consideration" Paul A. David Path Dependence: A Foundational Concept for Historical Social Science. Cliometrica 1(2): 91-114 (2007) p. 93. The negative option of definition is "processes that are non-ergodic, and thus unable to shake free of their history, are said to yield path dependent outcomes" Paul A. David Path dependence, its critics and the quest for `historical economics'. All Souls College, Oxford & Stanford University (June 2000) p. 13. He concretises the negative definition "at the most intuitive level we may draw a distinction between dynamic processes that are path dependent, and the rest. The latter, path-independent processes, may be said to include those whose dynamics guarantee convergence to a unique, globally stable equilibrium configuration" Ibid., p. 13. In the conclusion he said that "the policy implications of the existence of path dependence are shown to be more subtle and, as a rule, quite different from those which have been presumed by critics of the concept" Ibid., p. 16.

Thomas Rixen and Lora Viola in their article "Uses and Abuses of the Concept of Path Dependence: Notes toward a Clearer Theory of Institutional Change (2009)" also paid attention to the problem of variety of meanings and usages of path dependence concept. According to their view, the concept of path dependence "has the potential to help us understand how process, sequence, and temporality can be incorporated into explanations of institutional change because path dependence draws our attention to situations in which the set of choices available at any given moment are contingent on the choices made in previous periods. One obstacle to this potential, however, is that path dependence is often used in a variety of ways to mean a variety of things: often it refers to the vague notion that history matters or that the past influences the future, sometimes it refers to the idea of institutional "lock-in" which makes change impossible or unlikely, at other times it is argued that path dependence is compatible with a number of mechanisms for path change" Thomas Rixen and Lora Viola Uses and Abuses of the Concept of Path Dependence: Notes toward a Clearer Theory of Institutional Change (2009) p. 1.

They think that variety of meanings and usages may bring positive and negative attributes to the concept of path dependence. The positive attribute is "the concept's ability to "travel"" Ibid., p. 1; while negative is that "this variety indicates a problem with the path dependence literature - the propensity to engage in concept "stretching"" Ibid., p. 1. Thomas Rixen and Lora Viola identified two main aspects of their goal: "First, we want to show that current usages of path dependence are being unhelpfully stretched. Second, we propose a way towards conceptual clarity by developing a taxonomy of different sources of institutional change, of which path dependence is only one" Ibid., p. 2.

Thomas Rixen and Lora Viola argue that concept stretching has at least two negative consequences for scientific research. "First, in the instance of path dependence, we argue, stretching has led to an over-diagnosis of institutional path dependence. True path dependence occurs less often than is asserted in the empirical literature which tends to see path dependence at work in a wide and disparate field of cases. Second, concept stretching hinders effective and cumulative theory building because of the diversity of meanings ascribed to a single concept and the lack of distinction from different concepts. The danger with stretching path dependence is that other explanations of change are obscured or subsumed" Ibid., p. 2. They consider "recapturing the distinctions between path dependence and other processes of change, as we do with our taxonomy, is crucial for gaining a more precise understanding of institutional change" Ibid., p. 3.

They offered a solution to the problem of stretching of path dependence concept. It is "to taxonomically order the relevant concepts according to what Sartori calls the "ladder of abstraction"" Ibid., p. 4. "The ladder of abstraction provides a solution to the dilemma between travelling and stretching because it allows us to trade-off concepts according to the required level of abstraction rather than distorting a single concept to accommodate different cases" Ibid., p. 5. Their ladder of abstraction consists of four levels, from the most abstract to the diversity of concrete factors:

- Ladder Level 1 - "the broadest level of abstraction that captures the variation of institutional change. There are two dimensions of change: the pace of change and the source of change" Ibid., p. 15.

- Ladder Level 2 - "there are three possible sources of institutional change: exogenous, endogenous, and the interaction of these two" Ibid., p. 16.

Here it is important to mention that critical junctures are generally considered to be exogenous factors.

- Ladder Level 3 - "we disaggregate both exogenous and endogenous factors into three parallel but distinct processes of change. Exogenous factors can enforce, reinforce, or undermine an institution. Endogenous factors can lead an institution to self-enforce, self-reinforce, or self-undermine" Ibid., p. 18.

- Ladder Level 4 - "there are innumerable exogenous and endogenous factors that can be at work in creating the six dynamics of change at level 3. Which factors will be at work in any particular instance of institutional change will depend on the specific case at hand" Ibid., p. 21.

According to their view, using this taxonomy or ladder of abstraction, it is seen how different understandings of institutional development and change may operate together and what combinations of them would be useful for a particular research. They also constructed a schematic representation of their ideas See Thomas Rixen and Lora Viola Uses and Abuses of the Concept of Path Dependence: Notes toward a Clearer Theory of Institutional Change (2009) p. 20.

Finally, Thomas Rixen and Lora Viola argue that "applying path dependence to institutional analysis is highly productive for a better understanding of institutional change; however, not all of the additional mechanisms which scholars have identified as sources of path dependence can be subsumed under this concept. Rather, they should be given different places in a taxonomy of institutional change" Ibid., p. 25.

Summarizing theoretical findings of the first chapter, it is necessary to note that the most part of the principles of the above concepts will be used in our research. These contemporary theoretical elaborations of the concept of path dependence within the framework of critical junctures we consider the most important for the current research. Our study on evolution, transformation and persistence of the Institution of Academic Exchange between the US and Russia is based on these basic principles of the theory of path dependence. We examine external and internal factors that contribute to this. We analyze the main critical junctures on a political trajectory to understand how such external factors as foreign policy of the United States and Russia influence on the social institution of academic exchange, set the trajectory of development. Changes within the institution itself, which are not related to political decisions, are also possible. These internal factors and their influence on the development of the institution as a whole will also be analyzed in our research.

2. Chapter ii US-Russia (USSR) foreign policy between 1946 and 2015: an overview

2.1 USSR-US foreign policy during the Cold War (1946-1991)

During World War II, the USA and the USSR were allies. When the Second World War ended, there were first signs of hostility between these two countries. It escalated in the Cold War that lasted 45 years. It was a period of tense foreign relations between the two countries. However, there were periods of detente. During the Cold War, the two countries were holding opposite political and economic ideologies. Also, the US and the Soviet Union divided the spheres of international influence, according to their position in foreign policy. It generated a large geopolitical confrontation between two competed blocs of countries (the US with allies and the USSR with allies). Historians are not completely agree about the precise dates of the Cold War. Commonly, it is considered the period from 1946(7) to 1989(91). The usage of the term "Cold" could be explained by the fact that there was no direct fighting between the two blocs of countries The Library of Congress. Revelations from the Russian Archives. The Soviet Union and the United States https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/archives/sovi.html . Instead of this, there were regional or proxy wars around the globe.

On 22nd of February 1946, George F. Kennan (an officer of the American Embassy in Moscow) sent his "long telegram" from Moscow to Washington. In this telegram he presented an analysis of Soviet statements on the various international financial institutions that emerged after the war. The main objective was to clarify the true goals and motives of Soviet leaders in their post-war policy Panarin, Igor The First Information World War. Collapse of the USSR Part 54 of 122. Kennan and his "long telegram" http://www.x-libri.ru/elib/panrn000/00000054.htm . This telegram helped the US government to formulate their opposite position in relation to the Soviet Union and to create a foreign policy strategy toward the USSR. In March 5, 1946 (less than two weeks after this "long telegram"), Winston Churchill (a British Prime Minister) delivered his "Fulton speech". This speech is also known as "Iron Curtain" speech. It was a call to the Anglo-American alliance against the Soviets, whom he charged with a creating of "iron curtain" "from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic" Pamela C. Harriman The True Meaning of the Iron Curtain Speech. Finest Hour 58, Winter 1987-1988. The Churchill Centre. Archived from the original (October, 15 2007) http://www.winstonchurchill.org/the-life-of-churchill/senior-statesman/71-publications/finest-hour/finest-hour-153/174-the-true-meaning-of-the-iron-curtain-speech .

In September 1947, the USSR established Cominform, the idea of its creation was to control the International Communist Movement through coordination of communist parties within the Eastern Bloc John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 27. The response by the US side was the establishment of Containment in order to restrain the influence of the USSR and the expansion of communism. In addition, the US President Harry Truman presented the Truman Doctrine that described the conflict as a struggle between totalitarian regime and free people Ibid., p. 28-29. The declaration of the Truman Doctrine led to the consensus on foreign policy issues between Democratic and Republican parties. It generated a bipartisan policy, concentrated on deterrence. Although this consensus weakened during the Vietnam War and the movement against nuclear armament.

In 1947, the United States adopted the Marshall Plan in accordance with the Truman Doctrine. With the Marshall Plan, they offered economic assistance to all European countries, which wish to participate in it, including the USSR. The goals of the plan were as to strengthen European economic and democratic systems, as well as to oppose communist parties, which tried to influence, using revolutions. Then H. S. Truman launched the National Security Council (NSC), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and a Department of Defence by signing the National Security Act of 1947 http://www.texascollaborative.org/SilverblattModule/act2-1.php . They were the main instances that develop and implement foreign policy of the US throughout the period of Cold War. Stalin in his turn presented the Molotov Plan as the Soviet alternative to the Marshall plan. In the beginning of 1949, it became known as the Comecon. It suggested trading with eastern and central Europe and subsidization from the Soviet side http://www.wehse.ru/cgi-bin/wpg/wehse_wpg_show_text_print.pl?term1302254090 . The purpose of Molotov Plan was to maintain the Soviet control within the countries of Eastern Bloc.

In 1948, the United States with their allies from Western Europe entered into an agreement on the merger of western German regions into a federal system of governance. According to the intention of the Marshall Plan, they began reindustrialization and rebuilding of the German economic system. Furthermore, the new German currency was introduced Roger Gene Miller To Save a City: The Berlin Airlift, 1948-1949. Texas A&M University Press (2000) p. 18-31. Soon after these events, Stalin initiated a blockade of Berlin that lasted from 24 June 1948 to 12 May 1949. This marked the beginning to the first major crisis during the Cold War. The Berlin Blockade was preventing the supply of food, different types of products, equipment and etc. into the western part of Berlin. The USA and the allied them countries, among them Canada, UK, Australia, France and others, organized the so-called "Berlin Airlift" in order to establish the supply of provisions from the air Ibid., p. 65.

The Soviet side was not satisfied with policy changes. After the municipal elections in Berlin (December, 5 1948), the city was divided into West and East parts. The preponderance of the vote was not in favor of the Communist Party. Then Stalin removed the blockade in May 1949 Ibid., p. 77. In the same year, Germany was divided into two parts: eastern and western. On 23 September 1949, areas of Germany occupied by the US, Britain and France united into the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). German Democratic Republic (GDR) located in the east of the country was formed on 7 October. GDR was headed by Walter Ulbricht (Stalin's protege), the first secretary of the Socialist United Party of Germany Minibaev B., Kuzmina E. International relations and foreign policy of the USSR during the early post-war years (1945-1955) // Young scientist №12 (2013) pp. 743-745.

In April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed by 12 countries Author's note: At that time, the USA, Canada, Iceland, the UK, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark, Italy and Portugal became members of NATO. in the US. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was established as a military-political bloc that unites the majority of European countries, the US and Canada. It is operating as a "transatlantic forum" of allied states for consultations on any issues affecting the vital interests of its members, including events that could endanger their safety. NATO was founded to protect Europe from the Soviet influence http://www.nato-pa.int/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=8 . In August of the same year, the first Soviet atomic bomb was tested in Kazakh SSR in the city of Semipalatinsk Presidential Library named after B. Yeltsin. Test of the first Soviet atomic bomb. August 29, 1949. http://www.prlib.ru/History/Pages/Item.aspx?itemid=653 . The atomic monopoly of the United States ended. In the beginning of the 1950s, the United States were engaged in a rearmament of Western Germany. Then in 1955, the US ensured Germany's membership in NATO http://www.nato-pa.int/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=8 .

In 1946, Civil war in China between the communists (headed by Mao Zedong) and the Kuomintang Nationalist Government (headed by Chiang Kai-shek) broke out. The United States supported Chiang Kai-shek's Government, while the Soviet Union provided support to Mao Zedong's People's Liberation Army, which won the war in 1949. After it, the USSR established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China, which was created after the end of the civil war John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 39. After the Chinese communist revolution and testing of atomic device in the USSR, the US administration began to expand policy of containment. The National Security Council published a confidential document in 1950 (NSC-68), where it was suggested to strengthen Western cooperation and to increase defense expenditure Ibid., p. 164. The officials of Truman's administration began to expand containment policy in Latin America, Africa and Asia. Since the Soviet Union financed the communist parties in these regions, seeking to provoke a revolutionary movements. In the beginning of 1950s, United States signed allied agreements with countries, such as New Zealand, Thailand, Japan, the Philippines and Australia. The most significant alliances were ANZUS Author's note: the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (established in 1951) and SEATO Author's note: Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (introduced in 1954) Peter Byrd Cold War. The concise Oxford dictionary of politics. Oxford University Press. First chapter (2008).

In 1950, the Korean War broke out between North and South. The US provided political, financial and armed assistance to South Korea, while the Soviet Union supported North Korea. As a result, none of the warring parties did not achieve a decisive military advantage. After the death of Joseph Stalin, a peace was established in July 1953 Minibaev B., Kuzmina E. International relations and foreign policy of the USSR during the early post-war years (1945-1955) // Young scientist №12 (2013) p. 745. However, the division of Korea into two states remains till now. Further dynamics of the Cold War was changed due to the change of leaders in the United States and the Soviet Union in 1953. The change of leadership is one of the most significant factors that generate policy changes. This is what happened. In the United States, D. Eisenhower was elected as a next president. He reduced the defence budget. In the USSR, N. Khrushchev became the First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. In 1956, he delivered the list of Stalin's crimes during the 20th Congress of the Soviet Communist Party Russian history. XX Congress of the CPSU. Khrushchev's speech about Stalin's personality cult http://histrf.ru/ru/lenta-vremeni/event/view/xx-siezd-kpss-doklad-khrushchieva-o-kul-tie-lichnosti-stalina .

In 1955, the Soviet Union formed a military alliance with the Eastern Bloc - the Warsaw Pact, counterweight to NATO Minibaev B., Kuzmina E. International relations and foreign policy of the USSR during the early post-war years (1945-1955) // Young scientist №12 (2013) p. 745. Up to 1961, N. Khrushchev officially mentioned the possibility of nuclear war with the West. J. F. Dulles (the US secretary of state) positioned the policy of containment in a new way, by saying that in wartime it is necessary to rely on nuclear weapons, and thus respond to any aggression by the Soviet Union. He called it the doctrine of "massive retaliation" Eric Bradner Newly released documents reveal U.S. Cold War nuclear target list. CNN (December 22, 2015). In October - November 1956, the Hungarian Revolution occurred. It was an armed uprising against the pro-Soviet regime. At all levels of government, even in the state security bodies, it was demanded a resignation of Matyas Rakosi (Hungary's Stalinist leader).

The Soviet Union intervened and removed the Hungarian leader from his position. However, his resignation did not cause any real changes in government policy, neither in its composition. Anti-Soviet and anti-socialist uprisings began. The decision to establish free elections and the intention to withdraw from the Warsaw Pact were proclaimed. The uprising was suppressed by the Soviet invasion. The Hungarian Revolution was one of the most important events during the period of Cold War, demonstrated that the USSR was ready to keep the communist regimes in the countries of the Warsaw Pact by military force http://www.coldwar.ru/conflicts/hungary/hungary2.php .

Then Khrushchev changed the strategy and no longer spoke of the inevitability of global war between communism and capitalism. Instead, he proclaimed that the capitalization would collapse by itself and peaceful coexistence John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 70.

The colonial powers such as Britain and France lost their colonies after the World War II. Countries that were liberated from colonial dependence, formed the so-called "Third World". The countries of the "Third world" received military and economic support from the Soviet Union. In the USSR they were called "the countries of socialist orientation" Minibaev B., Kuzmina E. International relations and foreign policy of the USSR during the early post-war years (1945-1955) // Young scientist №12 (2013) p. 751. In some regions and countries, such as Indochina, Indonesia and Guatemala, were nationalist movements, supported by communist groups. Against this background, the Soviet Union and the United States intensely competed for influence in Third World countries during the 1950s and early 1960s Philip Towle Cold War. In Charles Townshend. The Oxford History of Modern War. New York, USA: Oxford University Press (2000) p. 160. The US were using the CIA to support allied them Third World governments. They even implemented "Ajax" operation in order to overthrow the Prime minister of Iran (Mohammad Mosaddegh). The new Iranian shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi ban the communist party and repressed a political dissent with a help of the intelligence and security agency Ibid..

In Guatemala, the Central Intelligence Agency organized a military coup. The new government, leaded by Carlos Castillo Armas, created a National Committee of Defence against communism. During the crisis in the Republic of Congo, colonel Mobutu, supported by CIA, carried out a military coup d'йtat and seized power Ibid., p. 162. According to the Geneva conventions, the territory of Vietnam was temporarily divided at the 17th parallel (a demilitarized zone) in two parts. North Vietnam came under control of the Vietminh (pro-Soviet administration). South Vietnam remained under the local authority, appointed by the French (pro-Western) administration. The conflict started in 1957. There were not only civil contradictions in North and South Vietnam. Vietnam was embroiled into a global geopolitical conflict, namely the Cold War between the communist and capitalist blocs Spencer C. Tucker The Encyclopedia of the Vietnam War: A Political, Social, and Military History http://books.google.com/?id=qh5lffww-KsC .

In March 1965, the US began bombing North Vietnam. Since the middle of 1965 till the end of 1967, there was continual escalation of fighting in South Vietnam. In November 1968, Richard Nixon won the presidential elections in the United States. He performed under the slogan about the end of the war in Vietnam. In April 1975, the Communists raised their flag over the Palace of Independence in Saigon - the war ended with a victory of North Vietnamese troops. Thus, the North and South Vietnam were united Ibid.. Many developing countries of Latin America, Africa, and Asia preferred not to choose any particular side in the competition between the West and East. In 1955, many Third World countries announced their decision to stay away from the Cold War during the Bandung Conference in Indonesia. In 1961, it resulted in a creation of the Non-Aligned Movement John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 126.

In 1956, the Sino-Soviet split happened, due to misunderstanding between Soviet and Chinese leaders. It was one of the major occasions during the Cold War, like the Berlin Crisis, the war in Vietnam or the Cuban Missile Crisis. In 1957, the USSR launched the ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile), which was the first in the world. In Cuba, the President Fulgencio Batista was deposed by "July 26 Movement" in 1959. After his fall, diplomatic relations between the US and Cuba did not last long. In 1960, Cuba began negotiations about the procurement of weapons from the Eastern Bloc. In the beginning of 1961, the US government officially severed diplomatic relations with Cuba. The USSR promised to provide a support to Fidel Castro Joseph Smith The Cold War 1945-1991. Oxford: Blackwell (1998) p. 95.

Kennedy's administration tried different ways to invisibly promote the overthrow of the government in Cuba. They introduced the so-called "Cuban Project", a covert program aimed to remove forcibly the Cuban government from power. In 1962, in the Soviet Union was learned about the US plans regarding Cuba. The response of the USSR was the arrangement for the installation of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba. During the summer-fall of 1962, 42 Soviet missiles with nuclear warheads and bombers capable of carrying nuclear bombs were stationed in Cuba. The US administration, led by Kennedy began to discuss countermeasures. Then Kennedy proclaimed that the US begin a naval blockade of Cuba with the installation of nuclear missiles. Khrushchev suggested to John F. Kennedy to pledge not to invade Cuba; then the USSR would take out its weapons from the island. The American side pledged not to invade Cuba. On October 28, the Soviet Union removed its missiles and bombers from Cuba. On November 20, the US lifted the naval blockade http://www.coldwar.ru/conflicts/cuba/rocket_crisis.php .

The Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 shook the whole world, bringing it closer to nuclear war than ever before. The aftermath of the crisis brought to the first attempts of improving relations and nuclear disarmament. Thus, the Cuban Missile crisis forced the Soviet Union and the United States to make mutual concessions in foreign policy.

In 1961, the Berlin Crisis occurred. The reason of it was the movement of emigration from the Eastern part to the West Berlin. The emigrants were using a so-called "loopholee" in the existing system between East and West Berlin. The Soviet Union decided to deal with this issue by building a barbed-wire barrier, which then will be expanded into the Berlin Wall in order to close the "loophole" John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 114. In 1964, the resignation of Khrushchev was organized by his colleagues in the Kremlin. He was accused of incompetence, ruin of agriculture in the USSR; as well as the fact that he put the world on the brink of nuclear war Ibid., pp. 119-120.

In the period of the 1960s - 1970s, the pattern of international relations became more complicated. The division of the world into two clearly opposing blocs was no longer relevant. Less powerful countries became more resistant to the pressure from the superpowers. Alignments of Third World countries, such as the Non-Aligned Movement and OPEC Author's note: The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries - an international intergovernmental organization created by oil-producing countries in order to control oil production quotas (1960) appeared. In addition, economy of Eastern Bloc countries stagnated. The USSR was forced to pay attention to deep-seated domestic economic issues. During this period, the new Soviet leader, Leonid Brezhnev, introduced the concept of "dйtente" John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 212.

In 1968, there was a period of the "Prague Spring" in Czechoslovakia. This period was marked by political liberalization, including freedoms of speech, movement and press, as well as the possibility of a multiparty government. Withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact also was considered. The reaction of the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies was immediate. They invaded Czechoslovakia. The invasion triggered protests in Romania, Yugoslavia and China, as well as the response from communist parties of Western Europe BBC News Russia brings winter to Prague Spring (10 June 2008) http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/21/newsid_2781000/2781867.stm . In the same year, Brezhnev presented the "Brezhnev doctrine". According to it, he argued the possibility of violation sovereignty of any state, which intends to replace communism with capitalism John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 150.

The US President R. Nixon decided to use the Sino-Soviet split in order to change the allocation of power towards the Western bloc. Rapprochement with the United States was also beneficial for China. It was the possibility to obtain an advantage over the Soviet Union. In 1972, Richard Nixon officially announced this rapprochement Ibid., pp. 149-152. At the same time, the Vietnam War weakened US influence in Western Europe and in Third World countries. Tensions between the superpowers began to decline in 1970s. Then Nixon arrived to Moscow to meet with Brezhnev. Their negotiations were named "Strategic Arms Limitation Talks" and culminated in the signing of agreements on arms control (SALT I and the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty). Both presidents proclaimed the beginning of new policy of peaceful coexistence or "dйtente". In the years 1972-1974, the US and the USSR decided on strengthening economic relations between the two sides Richard Nixon Presidential Library. "The President" (27 March 2009) https://www.nixonlibrary.gov/thelife/apolitician/thepresident/index.php.

During the period of dйtente, indirect contradiction between the Cold war powers continued; however, it was not lasting. There were contradictions in the Third World, especially during political crises in Angola, Ethiopia, Chile and in the Middle East. Also, in 1979, revolutions took place in Iran and Nicaragua, where pro-American regimes were overthrown. In December of the same year, there was the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan Walter LaFeber America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-1992. McGraw-Hill (1993) pp. 194-197. The US President Jimmy Carter responded to the USSR's intervention. He imposed embargoes on technology and grain supplies to the Soviet Union and demanded to increase military expenditure. In addition, he announced that the US would ignore the Summer Olympics in Moscow in 1980 John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 211. In 1980, the new US President Ronald Reagan called the USSR an "evil empire" and said that communism would found itself on the "ash heap of history" bid., p. 214. Prior to 1985, Reagan's position was known as "Reagan Doctrine"; the essence of which was not only in the policy of containment, it pursued the aim to subvert existing communist regimes Graebner, Norman A., Richard Dean Burns & Joseph M. Siracusa Reagan, Bush, Gorbachev: Revisiting the End of the Cold War. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press (2008) p. 76.

In 1985, M. Gorbachev became a General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. By the time, the economy of the Soviet Union was not only stagnated, but faced a significant fall in foreign currency proceeds. This was facilitated by the drop in oil prices during the 1980s. The Soviet economy required deep structural changes. Therefore, in 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev declared a necessity of economic reform that was called restructuring or "perestroika" John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 pp. 231-233. This reform allowed private ownership of enterprises and gave a permission for foreign investment. "Perestroika" was aimed at the redistribution of state resources from the defence sector to civilian. Gorbachev also introduced a policy of openness or "glasnost". This policy made state institutions more transparent and allowed freedom of press. "Glasnost" contributed to the expansion of contacts between the citizens of the USSR and the West, including the United States. It accelerated "dйtente" between the two states.

Due to Gorbachev's actions, Reagan decided to renew negotiations, regarding the reduction of the arms race and economic matters. During the first meeting in Geneva in 1985, two leaders agreed to reduce nuclear capabilities by 50 percent. The second summit took place in Reykjavнk, Iceland, but it was unsuccessful. During the third meeting in 1987, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) was signed Ibid., pp. 236-238. Thaw in relations was rapidly growing during the late 1980s. In 1989, the final summit was held in Moscow. George H. W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev signed the "START I arms control" agreement. After it, Gorbachev officially announced that the USSR would not interfere into the affairs of their allies in Eastern and Central Europe. In 1989, Soviet troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan. The reunification of Germany was completed in 1990 Ibid., p. 255.

At the Malta Summit on 3 December 1989, George H. W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev declared that the Cold War is over BBC News Malta Summit Ends Cold War, 3 December 1989 (11 June 2008) http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/3/newsid_4119000/4119950.stm . In 1989, all the Soviet-style communist regimes were peacefully overthrown in Eastern and Central Europe John Lewis Gaddis: The Cold War: A New History. 1st ed. New York: The Penguin Press (2005) ISBN 1-59420-062-9 p. 247. A growing number of Soviet republics intended to secede from the Soviet Union. On 21 December 1991, the Commonwealth of Independent States was launched as a successor of the USSR. After two days on 25 December, the Soviet Union was officially dissolved.

2.2 Russian-US foreign policy after the Cold War till date (1991-2015)

After the collapse of the USSR, Russia declared itself the legal successor to the Soviet Union, thus inherited a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Foreign relations between the United States and Russia greatly improved and continued to develop following the end of the Cold War. In 1992, President of Russian Federation B. Yeltsin visited the US and then attended the Washington Summit. On June 17 of the same year, both countries signed an Agreement Concerning Cooperation in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space for Peaceful Purposes https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9546/954610.PDF . At the beginning of 1993, Russian President Boris Yeltsin and US President George H. W. Bush signed the START II treaty in Russia American President: George H. W. Bush Front Page. Foreign Affairs. Miller Center. University of Virginia. History. Policy. Impact (February 6, 2014) http://millercenter.org/president/biography/bush-foreign-affairs . In 1993, leaders of both countries met in Vancouver, Canada. There were negotiations, regarding a new aid package aimed to support Russian entrepreneurs with loans, as well as funding of medical supplies and food assistance Thomas L. Friedman Summit in Vancouver; Clinton Presents Billion to Yeltsin in U.S. Aid Package. The New York Times (April, 1993) http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/04/world/summit-in-vancouver-clinton-presents-billion-to-yeltsin-in-us-aid-package.html .

On May 30 1994, Russian Federation and the United States decided to eliminate the situation with their strategic nuclear missiles directed at each other. At the same year, Russia officially joined the Partnership for Peace program United States Relations with Russia: After the Cold War. Chronology. Office of the Historian Washington, DC. U. S. Department of State. Archive. Information released online from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009 http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/85962.htm . On May 9 1995, Russian and US presidents met in Moscow to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in Europe. During the 9th and 10th of May, they held a summit in Moscow, devoted to European Security. On March 1996, Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin visited the Summit of the Peacemakers in Egypt and declared that they support the Middle East peace process. On May 1997, the representative of Russia visited the NATO Summit in France. Then the "NATO-Russia Founding Act" was signed. It was the ground of cooperation between Russian Federation, NATO and the United States. On June 22 of the same year, Russia joined the G8 Ibid..

From November 18-19 of 1999, Russian and American presidents met in Turkey at the summit of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. They discussed events in Chechnya. Bill Clinton noted that Russia has every right to protect its territorial integrity http://www.nti.org/learn/treaties-and-regimes/organization-cooperation-and-security-europe-osce/ . On June 2000, Bill Clinton met with newly elected President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin. At the same year, both presidents attended the United Nations Millennium Summit in the USA, New York City. On June 2001, Vladimir Putin met with the next US President George W. Bush at the summit in Slovenia. On the next day after the attacks on 11th September, Russian President expressed his support to the US. On May 2002, V. Putin and G. W. Bush signed the declaration about the new way of strategic relationships between the Russian Federation and the United States. On October of the same year, George W. Bush expressed condolences to Russia concerning the terrorist attack during the theatre hostage crisis in Moscow United States Relations with Russia: After the Cold War. Chronology. Office of the Historian Washington, DC. U. S. Department of State. Archive. Information released online from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009 http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/85962.htm .

In 2003, Russian administration opposed the US invasion of Iraq. Although Russia did not use its veto power in the UN Security Council Walter Pincus Russia Warned U.S. About Iraq, Putin Says. The Washington Post Page A11 (June 19, 2004) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53096-2004Jun18.html . At the same year, the US in collaboration with the United Nations, the European Union and the Russian Federation developed the "Roadmap for Peace" treaty and presented it to the Palestinian Authority and Israel. In 2004, George W. Bush expressed his condolences to Russia, regarding the Beslan school hostage crisis. On July 2006, V. Putin and G. W. Bush organized the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. Then Russian and American sides jointly condemned the first launch of nuclear weapon in North Korea United States Relations with Russia: After the Cold War. Chronology. Office of the Historian Washington, DC. U. S. Department of State. Archive. Information released online from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009 http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/85962.htm . In 2007, the United States publicly announced their decision to establish a missile defence installation in Poland. The US explained their intention by the protection of Europe and the US itself from a possible nuclear attack by North Korea or Iran. However, Russian authorities considered it as a potential threat. Russian Federation reacted by testing the RS-24, intercontinental ballistic missile. V. Putin claimed that it would defeat any system of defence. Russian officials decided to increase defences on Russia's borders. They also said that they expect the damage in bilateral relations with the US Rose Gottemoeller Talk of the Nation Strained Russian Relations Greet Bush in Europe (June 5, 2007) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10741255 .

In 2008, Russian-US relations were strained because of Russian invasion of Georgia. Russia supported Abkhazia and South Ossetia Georgian regions, while the US supported Georgian government in the conflict Charles King The Five-Day War. Managing Moscow After the Georgia Crisis. Foreign Affairs (December, 2008) https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2008-11-01/five-day-war . On November 14-15 of 2008, the next President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev visited the G-20 summit in the US, Washington D.C. On April 1 2009, The President of the United States Barack Obama and the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev met in London at the G-20 Summit. On 25 May 2009, North Korea carried out a second nuclear test. Russia and the United States jointly disapproved this act. On July 6 2009, Russian and US presidents declared the creation of the "Obama-Medvedev Commission" aimed to improve cooperation and communication between both countries. At the end of the same year, Russian side allowed NATO and US troops to pass to Afghanistan through the territory of Russia United States Relations with Russia: After the Cold War. Chronology. Office of the Historian Washington, DC. U. S. Department of State. Archive. Information released online from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2009 http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/85962.htm .

On March 2010, Russian and American sides agreed to reduce their arsenals of nuclear weapon. On April 8, both presidents signed a "New START" treaty William J. Burns The United States and Russia in a New Era: One Year After "Reset". Center for American Progress Washington, DC. U. S. Department of State (April 14, 2010) http://www.state.gov/p/us/rm/2010/140179.htm . On May 9 2010, US soldiers took part in the Victory Day Parade in Moscow Foreign troops join Russia's Victory Day parade http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8670589.stm . On June of the same year, Russia and the US asked Iran to refuse of their nuclear weapons program. On September 2010, US and Russian foreign ministers discussed the perspective areas of collaboration, among them fight against terrorism, the situation in Afghanistan and ways to strengthen security in Europe. A month later, Russian and US Special Forces destroyed laboratories that producing heroin in Afghanistan. On April 15 2011, ministers from NATO, the United States and Russian Federation discussed the situation in Afghanistan and Libya during their meeting in Berlin. The future missile defence cooperation between the US, NATO and Russia also was on the agenda Angela E. Stent The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton University Press (2014) http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i10483.pdf .

On May 2 2011, Russian authorities congratulated the US that they killed Osama bin Laden. After two days, Military Chiefs of Defence of NATO, US and Russia discussed cooperation and military operations during their meeting in Belgium. On July 4 2011, ambassadors from NATO, US and Russia met in Sochi in order to declare their interest in continuing a missile defence cooperation and the collaboration in other security areas of mutual interest. On September 2011, Russian, US and NATO diplomats declared that they succeed in the fight against terrorism and strengthening of the Afghan transit. Towards the end of 2011, US delegation arrived to Moscow to meet with military staff in the Ministry of Defence and with officials of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They discussed military cooperation between Russian Federation, the United States and NATO Ibid..

On December 4 2011, the Protest movement in Russia started. There were multiple mass political actions of Russian citizens, which began after the elections to the State Duma of the VI convocation and continued during the campaign for the election of the President of Russia. They also continued after the presidential elections that were held on March 4 2012, in which Vladimir Putin won in the first round. The protesters claimed that the elections were accompanied by violations of the law and falsifications Vladimir Milov How Putin outsmarted the opposition. Gazeta.ru (5 March 2012) http://www.gazeta.ru/column/milov/4026641.shtml . The main slogan of the majority of the protests was "For Fair Elections!". The symbol of the protest was a white ribbon. Protests were also anti-Putin oriented. On May 6 2012, the campaign, called the "March of Millions", was held in Moscow in order to protest against the inauguration of Vladimir Putin. The main slogan was "For honest government! For Russia without Putin!" Grani.ru "March of Millions": Chronicle (June 12, 2012). Then clashes with the police and detention of protesters began. The US Congress and the American human rights organization "Freedom House" condemned repression against the Russian opposition Solidarity, the United Democratic Movement The US Congress and the "Freedom House" condemned repression against the Russian opposition http://rusolidarnost.ru/novosti/glavnoe/2012-05-08-kongress-ssha-i-%C2%ABfridom-khaus%C2%BB-osudili-repressii-protiv-rossiiskoi-oppozi .

On June 18 to 19 in 2012, Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Barack Obama met in Mexico at the 7th meeting of G-20 and urged for an end to the civil war in Syria. In August 2012, Russian "Akula-class" submarine patrolled the territory near the Gulf of Mexico being undetected. Anti-submarine warfare capabilities of the US Navy were alarmed by this action Bill Gertz Silent Running. Free Beacon (August 14, 2012) http://freebeacon.com/national-security/silent-running/ . On August 22 2012, Russian Federation joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) and began trading with the US Angela E. Stent The Limits of Partnership: U.S.-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton University Press (2014) http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i10483.pdf . On 14 December 2012, the US President Barack Obama signed the so-called "Magnitsky Act" that imposed restrictions on Russian human rights abusers. On 28 December 2012, V. Putin responded by signing a bill (the "law of Dima Yakovlev") that rejected any US citizen to adopt Russian children http://ria.ru/theme/Magnitsky_list_USA/ .