Pub Date : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00604007
I. Denisov, A. Lukin
This article examines the state and prospects of Russia’s policy toward China. We look at recent trends in the evolution of the world order, the history of Moscow-Beijing relations, and the changes in the balance of power between Russia and China to offer a forecast of Russia’s China policy in the near term. Special attention is paid to the role of the 2001 Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship, and Cooperation. The authors conclude that, despite the Treaty’s significance, the international situation – and indeed the relative strengths of the two countries – have significantly changed over the past 20 years. The new conditions will inevitably compel Russia to adjust its policy toward China. Moscow, as always, will seek to develop its political and economic partnership with Beijing. However, it will likely move toward hedging against risks that excessive dependence on China could bring about.
{"title":"Russia’s China Policy: Growing Asymmetries and Hedging Options","authors":"I. Denisov, A. Lukin","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00604007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00604007","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article examines the state and prospects of Russia’s policy toward China. We look at recent trends in the evolution of the world order, the history of Moscow-Beijing relations, and the changes in the balance of power between Russia and China to offer a forecast of Russia’s China policy in the near term. Special attention is paid to the role of the 2001 Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship, and Cooperation. The authors conclude that, despite the Treaty’s significance, the international situation – and indeed the relative strengths of the two countries – have significantly changed over the past 20 years. The new conditions will inevitably compel Russia to adjust its policy toward China. Moscow, as always, will seek to develop its political and economic partnership with Beijing. However, it will likely move toward hedging against risks that excessive dependence on China could bring about.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43790371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00604006
A. Kazantsev, S. Lebedev, S. Medvedeva
The article challenges the view that Russia’s goal in the post-Soviet space is to make the region an exclusive zone of Russian influence and keep other world powers out entirely. In fact, Russia has two policies towards the influence of other powers that are active in the region: a ‘business as usual’ approach, applied to China and Turkey; and a securitized ‘New Cold War policy’, applied to the US and West (especially towards their presence in Ukraine). Growing Chinese and Turkish influence has not been ‘securitized’, although the presence of both powers creates clear obstacles to the reintegration of former Soviet countries around Russia. The article draws on three bodies of literature (Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism) to explain this variation. While Moscow perceives growing Western influence in Ukraine as a threat to its domestic regime and identity as a great power and regional leader, it finds common ground with Beijing and Ankara in its concerns about the Western liberal democracy promotion agenda and views both powers as potential allies in the construction of a ‘multipolar world’.
{"title":"Russia’s Policies in the Post-Soviet Space: Between Constructive Relations and Fighting the New Cold War","authors":"A. Kazantsev, S. Lebedev, S. Medvedeva","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00604006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00604006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The article challenges the view that Russia’s goal in the post-Soviet space is to make the region an exclusive zone of Russian influence and keep other world powers out entirely. In fact, Russia has two policies towards the influence of other powers that are active in the region: a ‘business as usual’ approach, applied to China and Turkey; and a securitized ‘New Cold War policy’, applied to the US and West (especially towards their presence in Ukraine). Growing Chinese and Turkish influence has not been ‘securitized’, although the presence of both powers creates clear obstacles to the reintegration of former Soviet countries around Russia. The article draws on three bodies of literature (Realism, Liberalism and Constructivism) to explain this variation. While Moscow perceives growing Western influence in Ukraine as a threat to its domestic regime and identity as a great power and regional leader, it finds common ground with Beijing and Ankara in its concerns about the Western liberal democracy promotion agenda and views both powers as potential allies in the construction of a ‘multipolar world’.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45650471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00604008
V. Ryzhkov
Over the past thirty years, relations between Russia and the EU have gone from the idea of a ‘Common European home’ and ‘the unification of everything except institutions’ to periods of fading partnership, culminating in the post-Crimean crisis and the current systemic confrontation over geopolitics and values. Today, the EU and Russia seem to be irreconcilable in terms of values, domestic politics, and geopolitical approaches. For the time being, the most likely scenario for EU-Russia relations will be tense coexistence with cooperation restricted by a climate of general mistrust. The best prospects for constructive cooperation will come from a common commitment to pragmatic ‘neighborliness’. Nevertheless, given the turbulence and unpredictability of international politics a return to “Greater European” integration cannot be entirely ruled out. The fundamental conditions for such a rapprochement still exist, though critical internal processes and external issues need to be resolved before this process can begin.
{"title":"From ‘Greater Europe’ to Confrontation: Is a ‘Common European Home’ Still Possible?","authors":"V. Ryzhkov","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00604008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00604008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Over the past thirty years, relations between Russia and the EU have gone from the idea of a ‘Common European home’ and ‘the unification of everything except institutions’ to periods of fading partnership, culminating in the post-Crimean crisis and the current systemic confrontation over geopolitics and values. Today, the EU and Russia seem to be irreconcilable in terms of values, domestic politics, and geopolitical approaches. For the time being, the most likely scenario for EU-Russia relations will be tense coexistence with cooperation restricted by a climate of general mistrust. The best prospects for constructive cooperation will come from a common commitment to pragmatic ‘neighborliness’. Nevertheless, given the turbulence and unpredictability of international politics a return to “Greater European” integration cannot be entirely ruled out. The fundamental conditions for such a rapprochement still exist, though critical internal processes and external issues need to be resolved before this process can begin.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48628853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00604001
Andrej Krickovic, R. Sakwa
An introduction to the special issue on Russian foreign policy prepared by a team based at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. We begin with an overview of some of the contesting views about the dynamics and drivers of Russian foreign policy and some of the key theories. We then present the substantive arguments of the contributors, assessing how they fit into the overall pattern of understanding the key issues in Russian foreign policy and larger global concerns. The Introductions ends with some broader considerations, noting the tension between ‘declinist’ and ‘revivalist’ approaches to Russia today, and suggest that the contributions on the whole steer a cautious path between extreme representations of these two perspectives, while warning of the dangers of triumphalism. We argue that Russian and Russian-based views can make a specific and important contribution to larger debates about the dynamics of Russian foreign policy and Russia’s contribution to the resolution of some of the pressing issues facing humanity.
{"title":"Introduction","authors":"Andrej Krickovic, R. Sakwa","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00604001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00604001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000An introduction to the special issue on Russian foreign policy prepared by a team based at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. We begin with an overview of some of the contesting views about the dynamics and drivers of Russian foreign policy and some of the key theories. We then present the substantive arguments of the contributors, assessing how they fit into the overall pattern of understanding the key issues in Russian foreign policy and larger global concerns. The Introductions ends with some broader considerations, noting the tension between ‘declinist’ and ‘revivalist’ approaches to Russia today, and suggest that the contributions on the whole steer a cautious path between extreme representations of these two perspectives, while warning of the dangers of triumphalism. We argue that Russian and Russian-based views can make a specific and important contribution to larger debates about the dynamics of Russian foreign policy and Russia’s contribution to the resolution of some of the pressing issues facing humanity.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43058174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00603001
I. Busygina, M. Filippov
The COVID-19 crisis has provided an opportunity to re-evaluate how the federal relations work in authoritarian Russia. In particular, the crisis has confirmed that the regional governors are an integral part of maintaining the stability of the non-democratic regime. Since the whole system and thus, the political careers of the incumbent governors depend on Putin’s popularity, they are interested in maintaining it, even at the expense of their own popularity with the population. In Spring 2020 the regional governors have demonstrated both loyalty and willingness to shield Putin from political responsibility for unpopular measures associated with the epidemic.
{"title":"COVID and Federal Relations in Russia","authors":"I. Busygina, M. Filippov","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00603001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00603001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The COVID-19 crisis has provided an opportunity to re-evaluate how the federal relations work in authoritarian Russia. In particular, the crisis has confirmed that the regional governors are an integral part of maintaining the stability of the non-democratic regime. Since the whole system and thus, the political careers of the incumbent governors depend on Putin’s popularity, they are interested in maintaining it, even at the expense of their own popularity with the population. In Spring 2020 the regional governors have demonstrated both loyalty and willingness to shield Putin from political responsibility for unpopular measures associated with the epidemic.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44284471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00603002
A. Lenton
This article explores developments in center-region relations between the Russian federal government and the Republic of Tatarstan, a federal subject of the Russian Federation. I argue that instrumentalist accounts are unable to satisfactorily explain several key moments in Tatarstan’s relations with the federal center, and that a focus on symbolic politics provides important analytical leverage. I examine three such episodes: aborted plans to introduce a Latin script for the Tatar language in 1999, the expiration of treaty-based relations and the assault on the region’s Tatar-language education policy in 2017, and the institution of the presidency – which exists to this day. In all three cases, interest-based explanations alone fail to account for what actually happened, whereas ideational explanations can help explain and interpret regional leaders’ actions. This has important implications for how we understand regional political dynamics in Russia amidst conditions of centralization.
{"title":"Office Politics: Tatarstan’s Presidency and the Symbolic Politics of Regionalism","authors":"A. Lenton","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00603002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00603002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article explores developments in center-region relations between the Russian federal government and the Republic of Tatarstan, a federal subject of the Russian Federation. I argue that instrumentalist accounts are unable to satisfactorily explain several key moments in Tatarstan’s relations with the federal center, and that a focus on symbolic politics provides important analytical leverage. I examine three such episodes: aborted plans to introduce a Latin script for the Tatar language in 1999, the expiration of treaty-based relations and the assault on the region’s Tatar-language education policy in 2017, and the institution of the presidency – which exists to this day. In all three cases, interest-based explanations alone fail to account for what actually happened, whereas ideational explanations can help explain and interpret regional leaders’ actions. This has important implications for how we understand regional political dynamics in Russia amidst conditions of centralization.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48472783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00603003
L. Issaev, K.S. Eremeeva
The research studies the features of coverage of the Syrian conflict by Russian media. In scientific discourse, there are a number of works studying the information support for the civil war in Syria, which is explained by its specificity – a multilateral, multi-level protracted conflict creates an opportunity for a varied interpretation of events and causal relationships. The way events in Syria are presented in various regions of Russia is of particular interest. In the course of this study, a database of media articles, both federal and regional (Dagestan, Tatarstan, Chechnya), was collected. The articles were then analyzed from the point of view of the prevailing semantic codes, which made it possible to identify how the Syrian conflict is framed, as well as the similarities and differences of different regions’ frames.
{"title":"Framing of the Syrian Conflict in the Russian Media","authors":"L. Issaev, K.S. Eremeeva","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00603003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00603003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The research studies the features of coverage of the Syrian conflict by Russian media. In scientific discourse, there are a number of works studying the information support for the civil war in Syria, which is explained by its specificity – a multilateral, multi-level protracted conflict creates an opportunity for a varied interpretation of events and causal relationships. The way events in Syria are presented in various regions of Russia is of particular interest. In the course of this study, a database of media articles, both federal and regional (Dagestan, Tatarstan, Chechnya), was collected. The articles were then analyzed from the point of view of the prevailing semantic codes, which made it possible to identify how the Syrian conflict is framed, as well as the similarities and differences of different regions’ frames.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47559423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00603005
Maksim Kulaev
Protests in today’s Russia are still influenced by trends emerged in the 2000s. According to Graeme B. Robertson, in the second half of the 2000s, the repertoire of the Russian protest changed and direct actions were replaced by symbolic actions. The article argues that protest trends and changes in the repertoire of actions were accompanied by the formation of widespread political perceptions among protesters. These perceptions reflected and influenced transformations of Russian protest movements. The article analyzes political discourses of three lifestyle media outlets, namely Afisha, Bol’shoi Gorod, Esquire, GQ and Epic Hero. All of them drew attention to protests and elaborated their own vision of preferable protest methods. This vision denounced direct actions and advocated constructive and non-antagonistic relations between protesters and the authorities.
{"title":"Lifestyle Media and Changing Political Perceptions Among Russian Protesters in the Second Half of the 2000s","authors":"Maksim Kulaev","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00603005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00603005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Protests in today’s Russia are still influenced by trends emerged in the 2000s. According to Graeme B. Robertson, in the second half of the 2000s, the repertoire of the Russian protest changed and direct actions were replaced by symbolic actions. The article argues that protest trends and changes in the repertoire of actions were accompanied by the formation of widespread political perceptions among protesters. These perceptions reflected and influenced transformations of Russian protest movements. The article analyzes political discourses of three lifestyle media outlets, namely Afisha, Bol’shoi Gorod, Esquire, GQ and Epic Hero. All of them drew attention to protests and elaborated their own vision of preferable protest methods. This vision denounced direct actions and advocated constructive and non-antagonistic relations between protesters and the authorities.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49494986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-29DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00603004
Derek S. Hutcheson, I. McAllister
In July 2020, Russian voters gave strong support to a package of constitutional reforms that reconfigured the Russian political system and enshrined social guarantees and conservative identity values, consolidating the regime that has been built over a 20-year period. This was achieved through an alteration that ‘zeroed’ presidential terms that commenced before the constitutional change, potentially allowing President Vladimir Putin to overcome term limits and continue in office beyond 2024. The article explains how such a far-reaching and important change was successfully endorsed by the Russian electorate. The analysis shows that the main explanation rests with variations in voting patterns across the regions, a pattern that has been evident in previous Russian elections and resulted in strong pro-Putin support. The article also evaluates questions raised about the legitimacy of the result, and its long-term significance for the Russian political system.
{"title":"Consolidating the Putin Regime: The 2020 Referendum on Russia’s Constitutional Amendments","authors":"Derek S. Hutcheson, I. McAllister","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00603004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00603004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In July 2020, Russian voters gave strong support to a package of constitutional reforms that reconfigured the Russian political system and enshrined social guarantees and conservative identity values, consolidating the regime that has been built over a 20-year period. This was achieved through an alteration that ‘zeroed’ presidential terms that commenced before the constitutional change, potentially allowing President Vladimir Putin to overcome term limits and continue in office beyond 2024. The article explains how such a far-reaching and important change was successfully endorsed by the Russian electorate. The analysis shows that the main explanation rests with variations in voting patterns across the regions, a pattern that has been evident in previous Russian elections and resulted in strong pro-Putin support. The article also evaluates questions raised about the legitimacy of the result, and its long-term significance for the Russian political system.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46119234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-02DOI: 10.30965/24518921-00602002
Ekaterina Paustyan
This paper studies the signing of bilateral treaties between the federal and regional governments of Russia in the period of 1994–1998. Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of 64 cases suggests that by signing bilateral treaties in exchange for political support President Yeltsin built a broad coalition with subnational leaders. This strategy allowed Yeltsin to win the 1996 presidential election but, in the long run, contributed to the preservation of authoritarian enclaves in Russia. The results are in line with the argument that authoritarian consolidation in Russia during the 2000s was deeply embedded in the center-region relations of the 1990s.
{"title":"A Treaty for the Rich and Politically Loyal? Explaining the Bilateral Center-Region Treaties in Post-Soviet Russia","authors":"Ekaterina Paustyan","doi":"10.30965/24518921-00602002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.30965/24518921-00602002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This paper studies the signing of bilateral treaties between the federal and regional governments of Russia in the period of 1994–1998. Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis of 64 cases suggests that by signing bilateral treaties in exchange for political support President Yeltsin built a broad coalition with subnational leaders. This strategy allowed Yeltsin to win the 1996 presidential election but, in the long run, contributed to the preservation of authoritarian enclaves in Russia. The results are in line with the argument that authoritarian consolidation in Russia during the 2000s was deeply embedded in the center-region relations of the 1990s.","PeriodicalId":37176,"journal":{"name":"Russian Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2021-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43717586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：