In this article, we argue that Central Asian (CA) states' approach to the Ukrainian crisis should be defined as strategic silence. Such foreign policy reflects how CA's ideological and geographic factors and a shared information space, largely dominated by Russian and Russian-language media, facilitate the understanding of historical continuity among Russian and CA leaders. However, we also demonstrate that CA public officials' and general public's uses of strategic silence reflect the complicated reality of CA states. Their leaders and populations are cognizant of both their dependence on educational and labor opportunities in Russia and their necessity for postwar coexistence with Russia, China, and other states that are not sympathetic to the intentions of the European Union/USA in CA. Therefore, strategic silence is an approach for CA states to voice their disagreement with Russia's approach to Ukraine while avoiding being victimized by Russia and its allies for an openly anti-war stance.

This paper explored public willingness to act when exposed to cases of intimate partner violence against women, by analyzing the influence of perceived severity and personal responsibility on two types of responses: mediating and reporting to the police. Results (N = 419) yielded main effects of personal responsibility for both types of responses. No main effects of perceived severity were found. A significant interaction between perceived severity and personal responsibility was found only for reporting responses. Results are discussed in light of the helping behavior research tradition. Implications for public education and advocacy programs are also considered.