Khylko, M. (2004) 'Philosophic and Outlook Basis of Ukrainian Geopolitical Thought'. The dissertation for Ph.D. in Philosophy, speciality 09.00.12 “Ukrainian studies”, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, 208 p. [in Ukrainian]

Tytarchuk, O. & Khylko, M. (2016) “NATO, the EU and the OSCE in the Handling of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict: Competitive Synergy or “Freezing” Crisis Management?”, in Goda, S., Tytarchuk, O. & Khylko M. (Eds.), 'International Crisis Management: NATO, EU, OSCE and Civil Society', IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 87-100, https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-641-5-87, https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000385791300008

Indexed in: Web of Science

Khylko, M. & Tytarchuk, O. (2017) “Human Security: World’s Practices and Ukraine’s Perspective”, in Khylko, M. & Tytarchuk, O. (Eds.), 'Human Security and Security Sector Reform in Eastern Europe', Regional Office of Friedrich Ebert Foundation to Ukraine and Belarus, Kyiv, pp. 5-13, https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/ukraine/13420.pdf

Khylko, M. (2021) 'Ukraine−Russia: Motivations, Potentials, Prospects for Developing Relations', Foreign Policy Council “Ukrainian Prism”, Kyiv, 26 p., http://prismua.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Russia_eng_.pdf

Khylko, M., & Khylko, О. (2024). Navigating Global South’s Ambivalent Stance on Russia-Ukraine War. Evropský politický a právní diskurz, vol. 11, iss. 3, pp. 5-15, https://doi.org/10.46340/eppd.2024.11.4.1, https://eppd13.cz/wp-content/uploads/2024/2024-11-4/03.pdf

Indexed in: Scopus

Khylko, M. & Shelest, H. (2022) “Perceptions of the Black Sea Region Security Amid the Russian Invasion of Ukraine: View from Ukraine”, in Caucasus Analytical Digest, No. 130, pp. 2-12, ETH Zürich, University of Bremen, CRRC-Georgia, University of Zurich, DGO, https://doi.org/10.3929/ethz-b-000579582

Tkach, O., Batrymenko, O., Tovmash, D., Liashenko, I., Khylko, O. & Khylko, M. (2023). “The system of political education as an institute for the professionalization of politics”, Cuestiones Políticas, vol. 41(77), pp. 654-675, https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4177.43, https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:001013087600043

Indexed in: Web of Science

Kashperska, D., Nazarchuk, O., Naumenko, O., Rykhlik, V., & Khylko, M. (2024). “Political elites in Western states: Recruitment principles and areas of responsibility”, Multidisciplinary Science Journal, vol. 6, https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024ss0712

Indexed in: Scopus

Khylko, O., & Khylko, M. (2024). Explanatory Potential of The Postcolonial Approach for Understanding The Russia–Ukraine War. Topos, (2), 18-41, https://doi.org/10.61095/815-0047-2024-2-18-41

Indexed in: Scopus

Khylko, M., & Khylko, О. (2024). Navigating Global South’s Ambivalent Stance on Russia-Ukraine War. Evropský politický a právní diskurz, vol. 11, iss. 3, pp. 5-15, https://doi.org/10.46340/eppd.2024.11.4.1

Indexed in: Scopus

Vysotskyi, O., Polishchuk, I., Korotkov, D., & Chevychalova, Zh. (2025). Ukrainian Economic Diplomacy during the Full-Scale Russian Aggression. Evropský politický a právní diskurz, 12, 1, 5-12. https://doi.org/10.46340/eppd.2025.12.1.1 (indexed in Scopus) : “Therefore, for our study, the works of scholars who analyzed support for Ukraine in the global world (Khylko & Khylko, 2024), as well as the value, legal, and political preconditions for its implementation in wartime (Danilyan et al., 2022; 2023; 2024; Lysyk & Shperun, 2024), served as a critical lens for understanding the various conditions and aspects of economic diplomacy during the Russian-Ukrainian war.”

Shea, E. & Jaroszewicz, M. (2021). Opening in times of crisis? Examining NATO and the EU's support to security sector reform in post-Maidan Ukraine, East European Politics, 37:1, 159-181, https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2021.1878151, https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000631745600001 (indexed in Web of Science) : "Conceptualisation of the potential influence of NATO and the EU as SSR actors, particularly towards post-Soviet transition states, has remained limited. The literature evaluating NATO or EU SSR missions from a policy studies perspective has largely focused on the Middle East or Africa (Sedra 2006, 2013; Schröder et al. 2013; Schröder 2014), rather than on Eastern European transition states (Simons 2012 on Georgia is an exception). In the “eastern neighbourhood”, NATO and the EU appear to approach SSR support differently in light of the geopolitical context (Tytarchuk and Khylko 2016; Jayasundara-Smits 2018)."

Cordy, J. (2019). Ukraine: Five Years After the Revolution of Dignity. Report 133 CDSDG 19 E. NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Committee On the Civil Dimension of Security, https://www.nato-pa.int/document/2019-cdsdg-report-ukraine-five-years-after-revolution-dignity-cordy-133-cdsdg-19-e-rev-1 : “The lack of progress in the Minsk talks and Moscow’s continuing disregard for its obligations under Minsk II are the cause of much frustration in Ukraine, where Minsk II is increasingly unpopular. A number of proposals are being put forward, including expanding the ‘Normandy Format’ to include the United States and the United Kingdom. Another plan was proposed by Martin Sajdik, Special Representative of the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office in the Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine. The plan suggests the involvement of the United Nations, which, together with the OSCE, would set up a transitional administration in the areas not controlled by the Ukrainian government and hold local elections, while the European Union (EU) would set up an agency for the reconstruction of the Donbas. The plan is largely in line with Minsk II, but it will depend on whether or not Kyiv and Moscow would be able to agree to the modalities, such as the size of the UN/OSCE mission, the ability for displaced persons to participate in local elections, and the ability of Ukraine to regain control of its side of the border with Russia in Donbas (Khylko, 2019).”

Butler, M.J. (2018). Context, Process, and Structure: Correlates of Conflict Management in Foreign Policy Crisis, Journal of Global Security Studies, Volume 3, Issue 2, April 2018, Pages 163–180, https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogx027, https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000434813000005 (indexed in Web of Science) : "The importance of employing conflict management in crisis settings is not lost on statespersons and international organizations employing the tools of negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and adjudication to contain crises. Even a cursory glance at the mandates of the United Nations (UN), North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the African Union (AU), and the European Union (EU), as well as the foreign policies of numerous states affords copious evidence of the central role that managing violent conflict occupies in the crisis management strategies of various security actors (Goda, Tytarchuk, and Khylko 2016; Freedman 2014; Tercovich 2014; NATO 2010; Freedman 2014).

Klyukanov, I.E. (2014). Editor's forum: Russia and Ukraine: crossed communications, Russian Journal of Communication, 6:2, 160-164, DOI: 10.1080/19409419.2014.912999 (indexed in Scopus) : "For that reasons we am calling for studies which explore these events from a communication perspective. As Maksym Khylko writes in his article published in New Eastern Europe: A Quarterly Journal of Central and Eastern European Affairs (17 January 2014), 'the deficit of effective communication, both in the international arena and inside the state, is among the main problems facing contemporary Ukraine'. This view is echoed by others who emphasize the need for a better dialogue between the government and the opposition, as well as within the government and opposition themselves."

The project “Black Sea Cooperation for Stronger Security: Georgia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan”, implemented in 2022 by Georgian Institute of Politics (Georgia), Foreign Policy Council “Ukrainian Prism” (Ukraine), and Caucasus Policy Analysis Centre (Azerbaijan), supported by the European Union and the Black Sea Trust for Regional Cooperation. Type of participation: leading researcher from Ukraine. The project aimed to enhance cooperation among the wider Black Sea region countries: Georgia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan, to address the common security challenges stemming from Russia’s security posture. The project produced research, built on expert surveys, interviews and local discussions, as well as provided policy recommendations to the governments of Ukraine, Georgia and Azerbaijan, international actors, and local stakeholders. https://gip.ge/publication-post/black-sea-security-after-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine-views-from-ukraine-georgia-and-azerbaijan/

The project “Shaping a holistic socio-cultural space of Ukraine as a component of national consolidation strategies”, implemented in 2021 by a team of researchers of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. Type of participation: researcher and co-author. Within the framework of the project, a collective monograph was prepared, dedicated to the study of culture-forming factors of the unity of the Ukrainian space as an important factor in ensuring the stability and progressiveness of social development. http://www.irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/everlib/item/er-0004207

The project “Rethinking the de-occupation policy of Ukraine in the framework of Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine”, implemented in 2020 by eight Ukrainian think-tanks, supported by the International Renaissance Foundation. Type of participation: researcher and editor. The goal of this study was to outline the views of the interested actors on the de-occupation process, to analyse the motives and interests of Ukraine, Russia, and other international players; to study relevant cases of de-occupation and reintegration in other countries in the region, which should be taken into account by Ukraine; to analyse previous analytical findings on this issue and offer recommendations for a new policy of de-occupation of the Ukrainian territories temporarily occupied by Russian Federation. http://prismua.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Deoccupation-Summary-ENG.pdf ; http://prismua.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Analytical-Report-Deoccupation-2020.pdf ; https://www.facebook.com/PrismUA/videos/883713738700233/ 

The project “Russian military presence in Armenia, Moldova and Ukraine and its impact on human rights situation”, implemented in 2019 by Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor office (Armenia), East European Security Research Initiative Foundation (Ukraine), and Promo-LEX Association (Moldova), supported by the European Union and National Endowment for Democracy through the EaP CSF Re-granting Scheme. Type of participation: researcher and editor. The goal of the project was to study the impact of Russian military presence in Armenia, Moldova, and Ukraine on human rights situation in these countries. https://eesri.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-09_RusMil-HumanRights-Armenia-Moldova-Ukraine_Report_PB_ENG.pdf ; https://eesri.org/events-new/events/russian-military-presence-and-its-impact-on-human-rights-situation-2019/

The project “Human Security and Security Sector Reform in Eastern Europe”, implemented by East European Security Research Initiative Foundation (Ukraine) with partners from Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Belarus, Lithuania Slovakia, and Ukraine, supported by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation. Type of participation: project director, researcher and editor. The aim of the project was to analyse the human security issues in the context of reforming the post-totalitarian security sectors in the Central and Eastern European countries. https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/ukraine/13420.pdf ; https://eesri.org/2017/06/human-security-and-security-sector-reform-in-eastern-europe/