Towards a new Geopolitics. Reflections on the challenge of theoretical clarity, in the complexity of the new Millennium. – In a historical phase of accelerating change, persistent conflict, falling ideological veils, and recognition of the importance of the spatial element in influencing politics and conflict, contemporary Geopolitics is faced with a formidable historical challenge: that of developing theoretical clarity. This is a difficult task, however, because of some legacies of classical Geopolitics and differences in approaches. Nevertheless, contemporary global political changes make it possible not only to broaden horizons, overcoming the state-centric paradigm and the theoretical rigidities of the past, but also to reorder concepts and theories, maintaining at their basis the stability of the geographic factor, albeit bal-anced by human action. It can also be done by seeking to broaden the investigation into territoriality, geographic space, and the territorial concentration of power. This can be achieved not only by extending the multidisciplinary dialogue, but also by synthesizing the most solid findings generated by different approaches and schools, such as Critical and Neo-classical geopolitics, in the direction of a dynamic Geopolitics, able to approach, even if in small steps, a general theory.

The complicate role of violence in the interminable dissolution of multi-national territorial states. A comparison of Yugoslavia, the Soviet Empire and contempo-rary Russia. – The collapse in different ways of some multinational states at the end of the twentieth century (empires or micro-empires and apparent federations) prompted questions about the role that violence played in their disintegration. While some states have experienced peaceful separations (Czechoslovakia), others, such as the former Yugoslavia and only to a small extent the Soviet Union, have sought to violently hinder political-territorial disintegration, escalating violence and repres-sion to the extent of democides, genocides, ethnic cleansing, mass slaughter, and population displacement. This paper, developing personal reflections of the author and at the same time using a factual and theoretical analysis, aims to compare three case studies of disintegration (Yugoslavia, the Soviet Empire and contemporary Russia), seeking to identify the main factors (ideal and material) that stimulated, or conversely restrained, the use of violence in the course of disintegration. Indeed, these very factors may provide insight into whether those processes of disintegration have come to a halt or still underlie a long ongoing disintegrative phenomenon that former imperial centers are striving to stop with violence. While the degree of the latter may be limited and “settling” in the former Yugoslavia, contemporary Russia's attempt to restrain the long post-imperial disintegration for years has been involving a shift to open violence - that could affect even the internal dimension - along the lines of what occurred in Yugoslavia in the 1990s.