{"title":"Communicative Distraction?: Russia’s and the European Union’s Rival Perception Managements","authors":"James Headley","doi":"10.54648/eerr2021043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the nature and implications of the current information/propaganda battle between Russia and the EU by placing it in the context of conceptions of argument and dialogue in international politics. Both sides are engaged in ‘perception management’ by which they try to defend their actions and influence positively the opinions of foreign publics. This seems far removed from ‘communicative action’, the Habermasian notion of engagement in argument and dialogue between equals. The article argues that the current crisis in Russia-EU relations is partly the result of the perception on the Russian side that there never was such communicative action – because Russia was not treated as an equal partner in dialogue, and its views/interests were ignored in a number of cases. On this account, Russia therefore became more assertive, culminating in the Ukraine crisis and Russia’s outright aggression which it tried to defend using perception management, echoed by the EU’s counter-disinformation campaign. We are therefore closer to ‘communicative distraction’ – attempts to control image and opinion – rather than the debate and dialogue inherent in communicative action. Nevertheless, the article argues that even within these rival perception managements, there is engagement in argument over norms and the application of norms in specific cases. In the present crisis of Russia-EU relations, we cannot expect more; but the fact that there is some form of argument might still provide a potential basis for fuller dialogue in the future.\nRussia, EU, Perception Management, Information Warfare, Communicative Action","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European foreign affairs review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2021043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article examines the nature and implications of the current information/propaganda battle between Russia and the EU by placing it in the context of conceptions of argument and dialogue in international politics. Both sides are engaged in ‘perception management’ by which they try to defend their actions and influence positively the opinions of foreign publics. This seems far removed from ‘communicative action’, the Habermasian notion of engagement in argument and dialogue between equals. The article argues that the current crisis in Russia-EU relations is partly the result of the perception on the Russian side that there never was such communicative action – because Russia was not treated as an equal partner in dialogue, and its views/interests were ignored in a number of cases. On this account, Russia therefore became more assertive, culminating in the Ukraine crisis and Russia’s outright aggression which it tried to defend using perception management, echoed by the EU’s counter-disinformation campaign. We are therefore closer to ‘communicative distraction’ – attempts to control image and opinion – rather than the debate and dialogue inherent in communicative action. Nevertheless, the article argues that even within these rival perception managements, there is engagement in argument over norms and the application of norms in specific cases. In the present crisis of Russia-EU relations, we cannot expect more; but the fact that there is some form of argument might still provide a potential basis for fuller dialogue in the future.
Russia, EU, Perception Management, Information Warfare, Communicative Action