RUSSIA’S QUEST FOR INTERNATIONAL STATUS DURING VLADIMIR PUTIN’S THIRD PRESIDENTIAL TERM (Master's thesis) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Russia as a Great Power and the Quest for International Recognition
Revista de Stiinte Politice. Revue des Sciences Politiques, 2019
The article analyzes the quest for international validation of Russia's great power self-image, by drawing from the insightful literatures on state identity recognition and ontological security. After mentioning the main Russian foreign policy schools and their convergence on Russia as a great power in global affairs, the discussion unfolds why this ongoing journey has been particularly problematic. It unpacks the elusive notion of "great power", which goes beyond achieving a set of somewhat objective conditions. A state's great power status heavily relies on the identity verification of salient external audiences or already established great powers. Faced with nonrecognition, elite discourses under the Putin administration have gradually securitized state identity. Russia's great power self-image has been recently redefined to challenge the absence of international recognition, indicating a high level of identity anxiety or ontological insecurity, with troubling effects on the state's foreign policy conduct.
Historical aspirations and the domestic politics of Russia's pursuit of international status
Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 2014
What determined Russia’s national interests and grand strategy in the first decade after the Cold War? This article uses aspirational constructivism, which combines social psychology with constructivism, to answer this question. Central to aspirational constructivism are the roles that the past self and in-groups, and their perceived effectiveness play in the selection of a national identity and the definition of national interests. This article explains why Russian political elites settled on a statist national identity that focused on retaining Russia’s historical status as a Western great power and hegemon in the former Soviet Union and in engaging the country in bounded status competition with the United States.
Special Issue -Contemporary Russia in International Relations -Introduction
estudos internacionais, 2024
The Russian launching of the Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine in February 2022 brought Russia back to the agenda of international politics. Due to the unprecedented nature of what was instantly called a "full scale invasion" or a "war of aggression" by NATO allies, the irrelevance conferred to Russia in the last decades gave place to a prominent role in world affairs. Like it or not, it seems that Russia's continental size, abundant wealth in natural resources, military prowess and long history as a diplomatic broker are once again making the headlines of mainstream media and filling the pages of specialized journals worldwide. This is the context of this special issue of Estudos Internacionais. After the end of the USSR, President Boris Yeltsin and his minister of foreign affairs, Andrei Kozyrev, strove to assure the international society that Russia had a western lineage. All in all, Russia adopted human rights discourse, defended the advantages of multilateralism, and reassured members of the "global community" that free markets were needed to guarantee political freedom. The leaders even affirmed that the communist period was a gap in the Soviet countries' history of learning with the West. Nonetheless, in spite of these efforts, Russia's conciliatory discourse was not recognized by the West. The Western State's lack of political will to solve Russia's economic problems and continuing worries about the country's military revival ensured that the self-image Russia was trying to sell about herself was not convincing. The consequent lack of support for Russia's leaders resulted in social animosity against the West. Neocommunists and ultranationalists, both political groups with clear
Putin, the State, and War: The Causes of Russia’s Near Abroad Assertion Revisited∗+
International Studies Review, 2016
Moscow's annexation of Crimea and meddling in eastern Ukraine are the latest signs of Russia's increasingly assertive behavior in the post-Soviet space. Not surprisingly, Moscow's actions have become the source of much debate. This article maps the fast-growing literature on the subject and assesses four types of explanations: (1) decision-maker explanations focusing on Putin's personality traits and worldviews; (2) domestic political accounts emphasizing the Kremlin's efforts to deflect attention from internal failures; (3) ideational accounts explaining Russia's near abroad assertion with reference to its national identity and desire for international status; and (4) geopolitical accounts highlighting power and security considerations. The article shows that each approach offers some valuable insights but fails to provide a convincing stand-alone explanation. It is argued that to overcome the identified shortcomings, scholars need to devote more attention to building synthetic accounts. A theoretical model is outlined that specifies how geopolitical pressures, ideas, domestic political conditions, and decision-maker influences interact in shaping Russia's near abroad policy.
New Eastern Europe, 2016
The vast majority of historians and anthropologists unequivocally believe that Russia is a part of European civilisation due to a variety of common cultural features. Dispute arises mainly when Russia’s European identity is considered in terms of philosophy and politics. Once the Soviet Union collapsed, it looked like the public controversy over Russia’s identity had purportedly ended with the new Russian government’s decision to conduct democratic reforms and pursue membership in major European and international organisations. Therefore, the question is why didn’t this discourse subside under Yeltsin and Putin’s rule? Why does Russian society return to it over and over again? Why has Russia changed its strategic priorities in the 2000s, displaying little interest in European integration and gradually sliding into a confrontation with the West? Finally, what outcomes can we expect from the public discussions about Russia’s identity?
Since the end of the Cold War Russia has been treated as a defeated state. Western countries usually perceive Russia not only as a defeated state but also relating it to Soviet Union. Beyond that the West has Orientalized Russia, segregating it from the “western club” of developed states. But Russia’s recovery from the collapse of the 90’s made it more assertive towards the West. It’s proposed here that this assertiveness is due to it’s orientalization, it’s inferior status perceived by the West. The inferior perception by the West has triggered a process of identity’s reconstruction which will be analyzed through a perspective of ontological security. The more Russia has it’s great power status denied, the more aggressive it becomes regarding it’s foreign policy. As the international hierarchy continues to treat Russia as that of “behind” the modern states, and the more it feels marginalized, it will double down on efforts to regain its great power status it will have to dispose power. Russia’s ontological insecurity might lead it to a path of aggressiveness.
2014
The statements made in recent weeks by Russian officials, and especially President Vladimir Putin, in connection with Moscow’s policy towards Ukraine, may suggest that the emergence of a certain doctrine of Russian foreign and security policy is at hand, especially in relation to the post-Soviet area. Most of the arguments at the core of this doctrine are not new, but recently they have been formulated more openly and in more radical terms. Those arguments concern the role of Russia as the defender of Russian-speaking communities abroad and the guarantor of their rights, as well as specifically understood good neighbourly relations (meaning in fact limited sovereignty) as a precondition that must be met in order for Moscow to recognise the independence and territorial integrity of post-Soviet states. However, the new doctrine also includes arguments which have not been raised before, or have hitherto only been formulated on rare occasions, and which may indicate the future evolution...
GWU Russia Program Papers, 2023
It has long been noted that when public figures and politicians start talking obsessively about their country’s great “originality,” “special path,” or “unique mission in the world,” it is a sure sign they are facing mounting problems with forging a modern democratic polity, civic nation, and respectable international identity. Contemporary Russia is a case in point. Its new foreign policy doctrine, signed into law by President Vladimir Putin on March 31, 2023, is a truly remarkable document, as it has for the first time declared at the highest official level Russia’s civilizational uniqueness.