Abstract: The subject of the study is to identify the place and role of terrorist organizations in the system of international relations and global security from the point of view of strategic approaches of the Western expert-analytical community and official political institutions of nation states, the EU and NATO. Globalization, the growing influence of non-State actors, including armed groups, as well as changing views on the nature and essence of the State have contributed to the hidden or explicit subjectivization of many participants in the international political process. Special attention is paid in the article to the new concept of "hybrid actor", which is widely discussed among experts and scientists at the present time. For the first time, the paper attempts to compare the positions of the United States and its European allies on interaction with hybrid actors. Thus, in recent decades, non-State actors have evolved in terms of political, social and military capabilities. This trend is evident in the Middle East and North Africa region, where the combination of weak State institutions, the presence of conflicts and instability has provided fertile ground for the actions of armed groups. Non-State armed groups in the Middle East are extremely diverse and include local, tribal and communal formations, transnational criminal organizations and networks, classic rebel opposition groups and so on. Within this broad category, a number of non-State armed groups have evolved to perform political, social and managerial functions.

Abstract: The successful implementation of the Minsk Protocol has been impugned from the moment of its signing due to ambiguous interpretations of its nature and intentions. The main issues pertain to understanding of the conflict in the Southeast of Ukraine as an intergovernmental, internationalized or domestic political one, the legitimacy and status of the parties to agreement, as well as the role of the international community in settlement of the conflict. The indicated contradictions are also reflected in the difference of approaches towards definition of the conceptual apparatus, as well as its interpretation. The problem at hand goes beyond the scope of political science or legal analysis, and requires comprehensive examination based on the variety of theoretical and methodological approaches. The author agrees with the characterization of conflict in the Southeast of Ukraine as a formalized political unsettled situation. From the political and legal perspectives, the agreements on halting the war demonstrate typical examples of challenges and problems that emerge during negotiations and implementation of the internationalized peace treaties of the post-Cold War period. The refusal of one of the parties, usually the country which territorial integrity is disputed by the non-state party, to meet the other party in the course of peace negotiations is a typical complication of the negotiation processes. Direct negotiations, i.e. meetings where the parties to negotiation make eye contact, can be interpreted as the acts of implicit recognition of non-state parties, their representatives, as well as respective claims. Such different perspective on the mandate, accountability, responsibility, and the status of “direct” and “third” parties in course of negotiation and implementation of peace treaties are typical contradictions. Throughout the entire period of elaboration, signing, and implementation of the agreements, the clash of interests virtually shifted towards the interpretation of terminology.