2023 Issue №4

The key commemorative practices associated with the name of I. Kant in the Kaliningrad region during the post-Soviet period have been examined in the article. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, due to the growing interest in the pre-war history of the region, there was an expansion of the landscape of “places of memory” related to and associated with Kant. This resulted in the establishment of the philosopher’s image in the cultural memory of the residents of Kaliningrad as a “local” historical figure. The main events of this period were the installation of the Kant monument, the restoration of the Cathedral (near the walls of which the philosopher’s tomb is located), and the inclusion of Kant’s name in the university’s title. Today, according to the results of mass sociological surveys, Kant remains an undisputed leader on the list of historically significant figures associated with the region. His name has firmly established itself as a tourist and marketing brand of the Kaliningrad region. Despite the integration of Kant’s image into the cultural memory of Kaliningrad residents, it retains a conflicting potential: there is a layer of “activists” in the region who perceive Kant as a foreign symbol, leading to “memorial clashes.”

The issue of the development of the observer state institution within the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) has been considered. An attempt has been made to assess the possibilities for the current observer states to acquire full membership and increase the number of observer states within the EAEU. Based on the analysis of regulatory acts and the application of comparative positional analysis, it has been established that the relatively recent institution only took on a more or less complete form by 2023. The main focus of the author’s work is on the international-political usefulness of the observer state status and the problems of its actual implementation. A comparison is made between the positioning of Moldova, Cuba, and Uzbekistan as observer states within the EAEU. Special attention is given to ranking the factors hindering and promoting the effective implementation of this specific international-political status. The conclusion is substantiated that among the hindering factors are the weakness of the national economy and domestic political instability, while among the promoting factors are the presence of political will from a consolidated ruling elite and social demand for the integration proposal. The author concludes that there are two fundamentally possible scenarios for the institutional development of the Union: a) deepening integration; b) expanding the integration space through the advancement of contractual policies. The list of potential future observer states within the EAEU is small: China, Vietnam, Iran, Serbia, and Singapore. As Armenian-Azerbaijani relations normalize and Uzbekistan progresses in integration, Azerbaijan and Tajikistan may potentially attain similar status.