The article concentrates on foreign country studies. Although rooted in geography, this approach is to be treated as an interdisciplinary social science research that allows a comprehensive study of modern societies. In Russia, the contribution of economists, political scientists and historians, especially orientalists, to the study of foreign countries is very significant. At the same time, over the past 100 years, regional studies in the Soviet Union / Russia have been greatly transformed. Solely due to subjective reasons and the general crisis of fundamental research in the country, multi-volume publications that provided a lot of material for comparative studies have become a thing of the past. The theoretical baggage of foreign country studies accumulated in the second half of the XX century is almost not used, while linguistic training has been curtailed in a number of areas. In modern Russia, the “output” of scientific regional products does not meet the existing "demand". There are several explanations: the narrow scale of geographic research, the fascination with global issues by political scientists and economists, as well as the general shortage of specialists in the countries of the post-Soviet space and some other macro-regions. However, the state and big business, which should form a solvent and long term demand, also fail to cope with their social role. As a result, the discipline of country studies has found itself in a deep crisis. A way of this problem should be sought as soon as possible, while the traditions of domestic country studies and oriental studies are still alive. Otherwise Russia will have only recreational regional studies (the publication of guidebooks) and linguistic and regional research of the main nation states (as part of the new-fangled discipline of philologists and political scientists). At the same time, the lack of practical orientation of country studies has a detrimental effect on Russia's positioning in world economy and international relations.

The article raises and discusses six “provocative” questions about country studies in order to review, once more, its headings, facilities and, above all, its problems. The questions are as follows: (1) A discipline lacking its exact name, object and composition? (2) A science or...? (implicitly, not just science); (3) A theory-free science? (4) Сountry or state? (the question of the key object); (5) Degeneration or regeneration? (the nature of the evolution); and (6) Who and why needs it? (the fields of application). The answers are ambiguous and open to criticism. A finding from the reviewed problems of country studies is that they are numerous and serious. This is a truly interdisciplinary squad composed “from geology to ideology”, lacking a head coach, owner or even an internationally proprietary name, with a goal depending on the type (genre) of activity: research, informational, promotional or educational. Country studies as a science lacks clear understanding of its object, as well as its own theory (simplified reductions excluded), and self-confidence resulting in frequent tacks and relabeling. At the same time, its role is still great not as an “idiographer” and collector of any country information, but as a laboratory for searching and checking new development trends. The demand for a country scholar in the shape of a social order, not always explicit, is diverse and relatively stable. Hence the diagnosis: the patient is more alive than dead, and unlikely to die in the near future.

The authors carry out a periodization of the Russian comparative jurisprudence and development of comparative legal studies, starting from the pre-revolutionary (imperial) period and up to the present day. The uniqueness of the theoretical and methodological approaches of the Russian comparative school in the modern and current periods is established. Special emphasis was placed on comparative jurisprudence in the so-called post-reform epochs, in both Imperial and Soviet Russia, due to the need for reception and implementation of new legal concepts, principles and institutions of law. The authors highlight the specifics of the Russian-language conceptual and categorical apparatus and the functions of legal comparative studies. The traditional issues of the object, methods and goals are considered in the context of the development of Russian comparative science at the turn of two centuries. The article analyzes the allocation of sectoral and institutional directions in comparative legal science, their practical significance and methods of conducting such research at the level of individual legal structures and institutions.

The authors carry out a periodization of the Russian comparative jurisprudence and development of comparative legal studies, starting from the pre-revolutionary (imperial) period and up to the present day. The uniqueness of the theoretical and methodological approaches of the Russian comparative school in the modern and current periods is established. Special emphasis was placed on comparative jurisprudence in the so-called post-reform epochs, in both Imperial and Soviet Russia, due to the need for reception and implementation of new legal concepts, principles and institutions of law. The authors highlight the specifics of the Russian-language conceptual and categorical apparatus and the functions of legal comparative studies. The traditional issues of the object, methods and goals are considered in the context of the development of Russian comparative science at the turn of two centuries. The article analyzes the allocation of sectoral and institutional directions in comparative legal science, their practical significance and methods of conducting such research at the level of individual legal structures and institutions.

The article deals with the analysis of Japanese studies evolution in Russia and its key milestones on the base of problem-oriented historical approach since the very start in the late 17th century. The development of area studies on Japan in Russia was determined by many factors, such as geopolitics, domestic and foreign policy, socio-economic changes in all public authorities. Russian Japanology is presented as a complex science that has incorporated a number of scientific areas (language, history and culture, literature and art, ethnography and ethno-psychology, geography, economics, and politics). The Japanology specificity in Russia is the preservation of the unity and integrity of Japanese studies as a sign of respect for the classical traditions of Oriental studies. Among the main stages of development, the author considers the origins of Japanese studies in Russia, starting from the 17^th century, the formation in the classical form at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, the crisis lines of 1905, 1917, 1937-1938. The next two stages, marking the completion of the review, can be considered as signs of certainly impressive results in scholarly publications for the Russian Japanese studies. The comprehensive analysis that had appeared in the scholarly works and literary translations of Russian Japanology scholars (from the mid-forties till perestroika-time, 1945-1985) was the result of a well-planned policy to promote Oriental studies based on a stable ideology and regular funding. The names of the most prominent scholars, twists and turns of their life activities and achievements are widely presented. The essay concludes with an overview of the situation at the turn of the XX-XXI centuries, touches on the pros and cons that emerged in Japanese studies at the post-Soviet stage.

The article is focused on the evolution of Soviet Indian studies in the course of the 1970s and 1980s, i.e. the period of the discipline’s indisputable academic upsurge. The present author maintains that factors instrumental of Indian studies’ ascendant development were many; among the latter foreign policy imperatives as well as high quality intellectual talent available are distinguished to explain the advancement of this area of social science research to the status of socially significant professional activities. Socio-economic, history and political studies are taken to demonstrate the academic accomplishments of Soviet scholars who exploited their own “wisdom” to comprehend India’s complex social reality and, also, utilized critical assessment of the existent social science research paradigms circulating in Indian scholarship. The “crisis” of Indian studies dating back to the late 1980s is discussed in basic aspects. The social and political origins of the “crisis” are being highlighted. The evolution of Soviet Indian studies during the late 1980s is investigated at the backdrop of sociopolitical development in the years preceding the USSR’s dismemberment. Tentative factors instrumental of the eventual “comeback” of Indian studies as an academic discipline of high societal stature are estimated.

A brief analysis of the general trends in Southeast Asian studies carried out by the authors of the article showed that during the Soviet era, for a long time, this region was studied in two practically unrelated aspects. The first one was closed and subordinate to the tasks of the world revolution, and the second one was opened, devoted mainly to history of the countries of Southeast Asia and certain aspects of the anti-colonial struggle. It was only in the 1950s that the formation of the Southeast Asian school of studies began, but this process was complicated by the need to withstand work in the spirit of the “general line” of the party and government. A new, one might say “golden period” on the region study began after 1991 in modern Russia. The opening of archives, the expansion of communication opportunities and the removal of ideological barriers, as well as the highest qualifications of the majority of domestic scientists made it possible to bring the research of Southeast Asia to a new level. At the same time, an important motivational component, the connection between science and power, was almost completely lost. In the ruling structures, interest in scientific research through academic institutions was largely lost in favor of “strategic centers” close to the authorities, which began to perform expert functions. Scientists began to receive beggarly salaries, many under pressure of circumstances were forced to leave the country or even leave science. However, it was during these difficult years that scientists were able to prepare and publish world-class works, which for a long time will be the main reference points for all those who study the history, politics, economy and culture of the Southeast Asian countries. The authors did not set themselves the goal of presenting a complete bibliography of publications on Southeast Asia and the South Pacific region, do not claim to fully cover the entire problem, they can be subjective in their assessments, referring only to key works that characterize, in their opinion, the main periods and main directions studies of the countries of the region.

The article analyzes the development of French studies in contemporary Russia. It is shown that serious changes took place in the Russian social sciences in the post-Soviet period. Scientists have abandoned the monopoly of Marxism in favor of methodological pluralism. Thanks to the application of new approaches, the interpretation of such fundamental historical phenomena has been expanded and deepened. In the study of contemporary France, attention is focused on current political and foreign policy events. Great attention is paid to political parties and election campaigns. The topic of immigration and integration of foreign cultural communities is being intensively developed. Serious gaps appeared in other directions. The loss of the country's position in the global economy has led to a decrease in interest in this side of French life. French society has been poorly studied, although there is an understanding that it is precisely social shifts and changes in public attitudes that lead to large-scale changes in the political space. In the context of the crisis of modern globalization and the COVID-19 pandemic, interest in the national experience is returning, and therefore in the near future we can expect the emergence of new works devoted to topical issues of the history and modern development of France.

The article is dedicated to major findings of Russian scholars on a broad range of topics in the field of British studies. The works selected are mainly focused on the analysis of political, security and socio-economic models of development and trends in the UK from 1991 to 2021. The topics, which were most elaborated in the 1990s, related to the phenomena of Thatcherism, Third Way, the party-political system, social and economic model, British monarchy. Later the problems of devolution and constitutional reforms, identity politics, Euroscepticism, Brexit and migration, the concept of Global Britain shifted to the centre of attention. The study shows that Russian specialists tend to rely not only on empirical studies and approaches but have accumulated a rich experience in profound theoretical and conceptual understanding of the processes under scrutiny and demonstrate a high degree of critical reflection on the research implemented by foreign experts on British studies. Russian scholars pay interest both to structural and institutional processes and to concrete personalities and subjective factor in history. The undertaken research demonstrates a high degree of net working in cooperation among Russian specialists on British Studies, who represent different academic, educational centres and scientific schools.

The article covers the development of German area studies in modern Russia. The authors note that over the past three decades the discipline has passed a rather difficult and winding path that has yet to be comprehended. After the Soviet Union collapsed, science funding was reduced drastically, which in turn led to the "washout" of an entire generation of researchers. The methodological crisis of Russian science, which had to look for new ways of development in an era of changes, became painful as well. In the mid-2000s, the position of German area studies in Russia improved a bit both due to the expansion of cooperation with German scientific foundations and institutes and to the appearance of young researchers in science. By this time, the main directions of research of scientists and graduate students were outlined. In the field of historical science, the main emphasis was on the study of the 1930-1940s, Russian-German relations, etc. Political scientists and international affairs specialists focused on the transformation of Germany's foreign policy, transatlantic relations, and elections. The main research topics for geographers and economists were the entry of Germany into the global economy, Russian-German cooperation in the energy sector, geography of industry, etc. At the same time, by the mid-2010s, a number of problems emerged that needed to be solved. The most important of them are the lack of a middle generation of researchers, insufficient funding, focus on narrow topics, lack of basic research, etc.

The current stage of development of studies of Central and Eastern Europe is characterized by a number of specific and common problems for the whole scientific direction. Systemic transformation in the states of the region at the turn of the 1980s-1990s led to a decrease in the level of their foreign economic and foreign policy relations with Russia, which influenced the interest in the study and accumulation of knowledge about Central and Eastern Europe in our country. In particular, the demand of state bodies for regular country studies of the region decreased, which affected the publication activity of scientific centers and the training of new scientists by specialized university departments. Central-Eastern Europe ceased to be considered as a separate region as its thirteen states were involved in European integration processes, and the number of scientific institutions and research teams for its study decreased. The disunity of specialists dealing with Eastern European problems and the low level of their scientific interaction leads to the formation of an "archipelago" of research centers. On the basis of open data, we found nine, oft en small, scientific teams for the study of history (from the middle of the 20th century), economy, society, domestic and foreign policy of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and analyze the results of their activities in 2010-21 (including topics and territorial scope of works). It is worth to note that in the Russian regions, the corresponding research within the framework of research teams is not carried out, they have survived only in Moscow. Such a key characteristic of country studies as complexity is gone – in the conditions of methodological stagnation and in the absence of the possibility of conducting comprehensive country studies, scientists tackle its components separately, and some of them have been abandoned. The predominance of the reductionist approach over the holistic one also applies to geographical coverage: our analysis of the specialization of scientists shows that many countries in the region remain outside the research field, and interest in two or three of them is due to cultural and historical ties and foreign policy agenda. The training of researchers and teachers at the departments of universities is carried out in an insufficient level for personnel renewal, the age of twothirds of the specialists is over 40 years old. In order to assess the prospects for solving this problem, we analyzed the topics of dissertations defended over ten years in 24 Russian universities and academic institutes in history, politics, economics and economic geography of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

The article provides an overview of the areas of Russian Arabic Studies except linguistics. Since Eastern regional studies are inconceivable without knowledge of the language and culture of the regions under study, the analysis of studies in the modern Arab world is preceded by a review of key works that explained the specifics of the literature and philosophy of the Arab world. Thus, the first section examines key figures in the study of classical and modern literature of the Arab countries, the medieval history of this region. The second section is devoted to the philosophy

of the Arab East. The largest third section is focused on the study of economic, social, and political processes in Arab countries in the XX century. It is indicated that Russian scientists, despite the forced domination of Marxist-Leninist dogmas in the social sciences, managed to create numerous scientific works that are among the distinguished Arabic Studies worldwide. The final section contains an analysis of contemporary studies of the Arab world in Russia. The article highlights key achievements of the scientific schools of Russian Arabic Studies providing information on more than two hundred monographs.

The article provides a detailed analysis of the development in Russia of African studies throughout the entire period of its existence - from the first fragmentary knowledge about the African continent, brought to Russian soil by individual travelers and enthusiasts to modern comprehensive research in Africa by the largest Russian scientific centers, among which, of course, the leading positions are held by the Institute for African Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The work exposes the evolution of the development of African studies as a science through the pre-revolutionary, Soviet and post-Soviet periods. A powerful impetus for the study of Africa was given in the late 1950s. This was due to the victory of national liberation movements in African countries and the formation of independent states on the continent. The author shows the increased interest in African studies at the present stage of development of our country, when the African vector of Russian foreign policy is becoming more and more in demand. Despite the limited human, organizational and financial resources, Russian African studies are currently on the rise. The international recognition of the achievements of Russian African studies imposes an additional obligations on Russian scientists. Taking into account the practical significance of their works, the conclusions and proposals they contain for the development of Russian-African relations, they feel even greater responsibility. The latest vivid example of this was the active participation of Russian African scientists in the preparation and successful holding of the first Russia-Africa Summit and Economic Forum in Sochi on October 23-24, 2019.

This article analyzes the range of research approaches of domestic scientists to the study of socio-economic and political processes developing in Latin America and the Caribbean. The text fixes the change in theoretical paradigms that took place in the post-Soviet period, when new methods of scientific research for domestic social scientists came to replace the class Marxist-Leninist approach that did not stand the test of time: Positivism, structuralism, comparative studies, constructivism, systemic, invent and functional analysis. The peculiarity of the article is the chosen angle – priority attention to country studies, forming, according to the authors, the supporting structure of the entire building of modern Russian Latin American studies - social science, in a complex studying the problems of Latin America, comprehending the past and present of this large region. The theoretical, methodological and subject framework of the article is determined on the basis of priority selection by the authors of the most relevant, in their opinion, problems of modern Latin American studies. In other words, the article is not aimed at offering an exhaustive picture of domestic Latin American studies at the present stage, does not pretend to the indisputability of the opinions expressed and the truth in the last instance. The purpose of the authors is to broadcast their own, deeply subjective view of the subject of research, allowing to add new ideas and ac cents to its study, to focus on those problems of this. scientific directions, which until now have not received a sufficiently deep development. The study was based on the scientific publications of the staff of the Institute of Latin America of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which celebrated its 60th anniversary in 2021.

The article discusses the development of the American studies in the Soviet Union, in Russia, with focus on the key fields of investigations, the main centers for the United States studies; and periodicals where the results of these studies are being published. Different areas of the United States development have been the point of interest in Russia as long as they exist. The main contemporary centers for the American studies on a permanent basis were founded at the second half of the 20-th century. The American studies in the main centers of academic research, such as the Institute for the US and Canada studies, IMEMO, the Institute for General History, the Gorky Institute of World Literature, other academic institutes are being developed along with those in the leading universities, such as Moscow university, Saint Petersburg university; mgimo and many other universities (representing a wide number of regions in Russia) where American studies have become one of the academic disciplines. In focus - the periodicals where the results of the studies on different aspects of the United States policy, economic development, history, the views on American literature and culture are being published.