The challenges of modernity in the Mongolian world

The challenges of modernity in the Mongolian world

Litvinova T.N.,

MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia,

elibrary_id: 368821 |

Zheleznyakov A.S.,

Institute of Sociology of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia,

elibrary_id: 72929 |

Chuluunbaatar G.,

Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia,

Article received: 2021.03.05 17:11. Accepted: 2022.04.27 17:11
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.04.10

For citation:

Litvinova T.N., Zheleznyakov A.S., Chuluunbaatar G. The challenges of modernity in the Mongolian world. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 4. P. 120-133. (In Russ.).

The authors acknowledge support of RFBR and the Ministry of Culture, Education, Science and Sports of Mongolia, project N 19-511-44012 “Inter-civilizational interaction of Russia and Mongolia in the context of the Great Eurasian Partnership”.


The article is devoted to the problem of positioning Mongolia in the modern world. The research is based on a civilizational approach to understanding the Mongolian world and political realism. To determine the characteristics of the Mongolian civilization, the authors study philosophical thoughts and ideas about harmony, duality, specific understanding of time, and Buddhism – all those ideas that influenced the views of the Mongols on “nations”, history and geopolitics. From the point of view of political realism, the position of Mongolia is quite vulnerable. Mongolia currently has a difficult choice of foreign policy strategy. As a possible response to the growing threat of a potential conflict between the three main centers of world development – the United States, China and Russia, the authors consider the deepening of Mongolia’s cooperation with its closest neighbors Russia and China in a trilateral format. In this case, the role of Mongolia would increase sharply to the level of an equal subject of international relations, since the country appears as the core of the Mongolian world and a separate local civilization of Inner Asia. Mongolia willingly engages in new forms of cooperation, being an observer of the SCO, and even expressing its intention to join the EAEU in the future. At the same time, in the choice of Mongolia’s foreign policy strategy, the previously chosen line of the cautious “middle path” is clearly traced; it can only be understood by carefully studying the features of Mongolian civilization.

Mongolian civilization, national identity, foreign policy, multipolar world, economic corridor Russia-Mongolia-China.


Baranovitch, N. (2016). The 2011 Protests in Inner Mongolia: an ethnoenvironmental perspective. The China Quarterly, 225, 214-233.

Buckley, R., Ollenburg, C., & Zhong, L. (2008). Cultural landscape in Mongolian tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35, 1, 47-61.

Rong, J. (2010). Wolf totem. Ed. by Mend-Ooyo G. Ulaanbaatar: “Mon sudar” Prinitng LLC.

Schlesinger, A.M.Jr. (1992). The Disuniting of America: Reflections on a Multicultural Society. New York: W.W. Norton.

Yang, R., Xing, W., & Hou, S. (2020). Evaluating the risk factors influencing foreign direct investment in Mongolia’s mining sector: A complex network approach. Emerging Markets Review, 100692.


Batomunkuev, V.S., & Rygzynov, T.Sh. (2018). Russia-Mongolia border infrastructure improvement as factor of the China – Mongolia – Russia economic corridor development. Regional Studies, 3 (61), 126-132. (In Russ.)

Bazarov, V.B. (2019). Strategic partnership in Mongolia’s foreign policy. Vlast’, 27(6), 302-308. (In Russ.)

Dyomina, Y. (2018). Foreign economic relations of Mongolia: changing a key partner. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 62, 8, 104-109. (In Russ.)

Hegel, G.W.F. (1935). Philosophy of History. Vol. VIII. Moscow-Leningrad. (In Russ.)

Istoriya v trudakh uchenykh lam [History in the writings of learned lamas]. (2005). Ed. by A.S. Zheleznyakov, A.D. Tsendina. Moscow: Tovarishchestvo nauchnykh izdaniy KMK. (In Russ.)

Litvinova, T.N. (2017). The idea of Mongolian civilization as a concept of a multipolar world order. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 187-191. (In Russ.)

Litvinova, T.N., & Zheleznyakov, A.S. (2019). Mutual perception of images of Russia and Mongolia in the context of trans-civilization interaction. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniia, 5, 129-138. (In Russ.)

Rodionov, V.A., & Ayushieva, I.G. (2017). The “third neighbor” as an ideological political concept. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 420, 125-130. (In Russ.)

Snapkovskaya, S., & Chao Zhen. (2019). Steppe culture of domestic Mongolia in modern China. Vestnik Polotskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Series E: Pedagogical sciences, 15, 116-120. (In Russ.)

Sukhodolov, A.P., Davaasuren, A., Kuzmin, Yu.V., & Sukhodolov, Ya.A. (2021) Trade and economic relations of Mongolia and Russia: history and current state, challenges and prospects. Russian Economic Bulletin, 4(4), 318-329. (In Russ.)

Zhelezniakov, A.S. (2012). The Civilisational Dimension of Identity in Multipolar World. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences, 11, 11-21. (In Russ.)

Zhelezniakov, A.S. (2016). Mongol’skaya tsivilizatsiya: istoriya i sovremennost’. Teoreticheskoye obosnovaniye atlasa [Mongolian civilization: history and modernity. Theoretical justification of the Atlas]. Moscow: Ves mir. (In Russ.)


Bira, Sh. (2007). Tüüver zokhioluud. [Selected works]. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Dash-Yondon, B. (2012a). Setgelgeegee shinechlekh ni khyamralaas garch devjikhiin ündes mön [Updating of thinking is a way from crisis to growth]. Tsag üye: setgel bodrol, filosofi [Time: thoughts and philosophy]. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Dash-Yondon, B. (2012b). Töv üzel-setgekh arga [Teaching of the Middle way is the way of thinking]. Tsag üye: setgel bodrol, filosofi [Time: thoughts and philosophy]. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Lkhagva, O. (2011). Munkh tengerii i golografichyeskaya vsyelyennaya [Munkh tengri and golographic univers]. Tengerizm ba mongolchuud [Tengerism and Mongols]. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Luvsantseren, G. (2008). Buddyn gün ukhaany onol, tüükhiin asuudlaas [Issues of Buddhist philosophy and history]. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Mongol Ulsyn tüükh [History of Mongolia]. (2003). Vol. 1. In 5 volumes. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Mongolyn filosofiin tüükh (ХVII-ХIХ zuun) [History of Mongolian philosophy for XVII-XIX cc.]. (2001). Vol. 4. Ulaanbaatar: Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law, Mongolian Academy of Sciences. (In Mongolian)

Tseveen, Zh. (2000). Tüüverz okhioluud [Selected works]. Ulaanbaatar. (In Mongolian)

Zhugder, Ch. (2006). Mongolyn niigem uls tör, filosofiin setgelgeenii khögjil [Development of Mongolian social-political and philosophical though]. Ulaanbaatar: “Bembi san” Printing Company. (In Mongolian) 

Content No. 4, 2022

See also:

Rodionov V.A.,
Mongolia we never knew. – Polis. Political Studies. 2011. No4

Rutland P.,
Russia and China: Saga of Two Transitions to Market Economy. – Polis. Political Studies. 2009. No3

Melville A.Yu., Ilyin M.V., Makarenko B.I., Meleshkina Ye.Yu., Mironyuk M.G., Sergeev V.M., Timofeev I.N.,
Russian Foreign Policy as Seen by the Expert Community. – Polis. Political Studies. 2009. No4

Litvinova T.N.,
The Idea of Mongolian Civilization as a Concept of a Multipolar World Order. – Polis. Political Studies. 2017. No5

Sheynis V.L.,
Russia’s national security. durability trial. Part II. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No1



   2024      2023      2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991