The COVID-19 pandemic has tested the preparedness of Russia’s public health system to respond to a nationwide crisis, and the ability of its broader welfare state to cushion the population against the economic impacts. This essay puts these developments in the context of recent reforms of the health care and welfare systems, showing how they affected the population’s vulnerability to the pandemic’s health and economic shocks, and the government’s ability to manage both.

Russia has become a magnet for migrant workers from other post-Soviet countries, especially Central Asians. Although Russian business elites generally welcome this cheap labor source, the government has deferred to, and at times encouraged, xenophobic popular sentiment. Steadily tightening immigration rules have forced many foreign workers into the informal economy, where they are vulnerable to exploitation. The pandemic and accompanying lockdowns have only added to their difficulties.

This essay considers the nature of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in Central Asia. Rather than a “grand strategy” coordinated by Beijing, it is better seen as a decentered, contradictory network of transnational clientelist relationships and semiautonomous profit-seeking institutions. While building much-needed infrastructure, these projects serve to enrich local political elites while fueling resentment and suspicion among their populations. Evidence for this argument is presented from three spheres: the principal implementers of the BRI, the main projects that have been enacted under its auspices in Central Asia, and examples of how these projects have been marred by elite corruption and local protest.

By examining how power is constructed and maintained in Russia with the help of hydrocarbons—oil and gas—this article shows why this system is detrimental to Russia in the context of global environmental, technological, and geopolitical changes. While promoting a hydrocarbon culture as central to national identity, the Kremlin has failed to adapt to the global transition toward renewable energy. But external actors such as the European Union could encourage change from within to develop Russia’s untapped potential as a green power, given its vast endowments of renewable resources.

Drawing from over a decade of experience researching Crimean identities, the author highlights key developments and transformations from the past six years of Russian occupation to show how the annexation of Crimea represents not a “reunification,” as the Kremlin claims, but rather a recolonization. Promises of economic gains have not been met, and liberties have been restricted. The Crimean Tatars have suffered most of all; in a reprise of their forced displacement under Stalin, many have gone into exile on the Ukrainian mainland.

The long-ruling president has manipulated World War II history and downplayed the lasting effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. His similarly dismissive approach to the pandemic provided a spark for an unprecedented election challenge and popular resistance.

A new history of a border zone between Russia and China shows how traders from across Siberia and Mongolia operated under the shadow of competing empires and their railroads.

China faced the arrival of COVID-19 armed with new infrastructure, tools, and personnel that it had developed as part of a nationwide overhaul of its public health system in the wake of the 2003 SARS epidemic. The country learned two major lessons from SARS: it needed to increase its scientific professionalism and transparency, and it needed to build upon the successes of its authoritarian disease control capabilities. These two lessons were on full display during China’s COVID-19 response. The goals and methods they implied were sometimes in contradiction with each other, however, and ultimately they failed to prevent a catastrophic pandemic.

South Korea and Taiwan effectively suppressed the coronavirus without the authoritarian measures imposed in China or the lockdowns used elsewhere. They responded quickly, communicated clearly and consistently about the threat. Both governments had prior experiences with contagions to prepare for an epidemic. And both states had introduced universal health care during their periods of democratization, shaping a consensus among citizens about equity, solidarity, and the role of government in protecting public health. Their strategies provide replicable and repeatable models.

While a number of nations have used high-tech surveillance, mass testing, contact tracing, and draconian stay-at-home laws to manage the ongoing pandemic, Japan’s official response has been less energetic. The country also faces tremendous challenges with an aging population, high population density, and broad use of public transportation systems. Yet it has managed to achieve strong COVID-19 outcomes, with far lower death rates than many other advanced industrial democracies. This article traces Japan's weak response and potential explanations for its pandemic miracle, focusing especially on the role of social ties and silver linings that have emerged during the pandemic.

A tradition of multilateral cooperation among the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has helped the region effectively respond to the coronavirus pandemic and curtail its spread, after early missteps by some governments. While some nations elsewhere have turned inward and have struggled to cope, ASEAN members were able to mobilize regional mechanisms to coordinate a response. ASEAN has demonstrated the advantages of a rules-based regional order capable of addressing a nontraditional threat to security.

Southeast Asia was one of the first regions hit by the spread of COVID-19. The region’s public health response varied, with some states like Vietnam proving models for the world, while others, like Indonesia and the Philippines, faltered badly. However, they have generally taken a common approach in one area: nearly all have used the pandemic to crack down on political freedoms and civil liberties.

Under Xi Jinping, China has stepped up its efforts to strip Hong Kong of its autonomous status and stamp out dissent in the territory, culminating in its moves to impose a new national security law in 2020. At the same time, Beijing has ratcheted up its pressure on Taiwan, demanding that it agree to reunification with the mainland. Chinese pressures on both fronts have provoked local resistance. Taiwan may now become a haven for pro-democracy exiles from Hong Kong.

China was once mocked by Westerners as the “Sick Man of Asia.” That caricature provided motivation for a long campaign of national rejuvenation. Now the tables are turned after China’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic proved more effective than that of the United States and other Western nations.

A legal scholar’s searing critiques of Xi Jinping’s government draw much of their power from China’s rich literary language and centuries-old tradition of eloquent, principled dissent against unjust rulers.

Sudan's weakened legal infrastructure and its enduring respect for the rule of law remain the country's best hope for achieving sustainable peace and justice.

Africa's informal transport sector is likely to continue to drive mass mobility well into the future and remain central to urban economies and the production of new city forms.