{"title":"联盟的转变:描绘俄罗斯在多元矢量主义时代的密切关系","authors":"Ecaterina Locoman, M. Papa","doi":"10.1080/13523260.2021.1994692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Russia led a key Cold War alliance and is now at the forefront of debates about major power realignments. Yet Russia’s own conceptualization of alliances in the post-Soviet era has received scant attention. How do Russian policymakers and academics view Russia’s post-Cold War alliances: Are they obsolete, or are they still used for cultivating strategic relationships? We examine the Russian conceptualization of alliances through a systematic study of Russian policy documents and academic debates between 1991 and 2019. We find that traditional alliances are considered ineffective and defense commitments have declined. However, we challenge claims that alliances are obsolete and that alignments/multivectorism have replaced them. Russian regional alliances are cultivated for new purposes and coexist with various other institutional forms. We conceptually map Russia’s close relationships and argue that alliance scholarship needs to move away from a single entity focus toward conceptualizations based on institutional choices.","PeriodicalId":46729,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Security Policy","volume":"43 1","pages":"274 - 307"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transformation of alliances: Mapping Russia’s close relationships in the era of multivectorism\",\"authors\":\"Ecaterina Locoman, M. Papa\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13523260.2021.1994692\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Russia led a key Cold War alliance and is now at the forefront of debates about major power realignments. Yet Russia’s own conceptualization of alliances in the post-Soviet era has received scant attention. How do Russian policymakers and academics view Russia’s post-Cold War alliances: Are they obsolete, or are they still used for cultivating strategic relationships? We examine the Russian conceptualization of alliances through a systematic study of Russian policy documents and academic debates between 1991 and 2019. We find that traditional alliances are considered ineffective and defense commitments have declined. However, we challenge claims that alliances are obsolete and that alignments/multivectorism have replaced them. Russian regional alliances are cultivated for new purposes and coexist with various other institutional forms. We conceptually map Russia’s close relationships and argue that alliance scholarship needs to move away from a single entity focus toward conceptualizations based on institutional choices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46729,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Security Policy\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"274 - 307\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Security Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2021.1994692\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Security Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2021.1994692","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Transformation of alliances: Mapping Russia’s close relationships in the era of multivectorism
ABSTRACT Russia led a key Cold War alliance and is now at the forefront of debates about major power realignments. Yet Russia’s own conceptualization of alliances in the post-Soviet era has received scant attention. How do Russian policymakers and academics view Russia’s post-Cold War alliances: Are they obsolete, or are they still used for cultivating strategic relationships? We examine the Russian conceptualization of alliances through a systematic study of Russian policy documents and academic debates between 1991 and 2019. We find that traditional alliances are considered ineffective and defense commitments have declined. However, we challenge claims that alliances are obsolete and that alignments/multivectorism have replaced them. Russian regional alliances are cultivated for new purposes and coexist with various other institutional forms. We conceptually map Russia’s close relationships and argue that alliance scholarship needs to move away from a single entity focus toward conceptualizations based on institutional choices.
期刊介绍:
One of the oldest peer-reviewed journals in international conflict and security, Contemporary Security Policy promotes theoretically-based research on policy problems of armed conflict, intervention and conflict resolution. Since it first appeared in 1980, CSP has established its unique place as a meeting ground for research at the nexus of theory and policy.
Spanning the gap between academic and policy approaches, CSP offers policy analysts a place to pursue fundamental issues, and academic writers a venue for addressing policy. Major fields of concern include:
War and armed conflict
Peacekeeping
Conflict resolution
Arms control and disarmament
Defense policy
Strategic culture
International institutions.
CSP is committed to a broad range of intellectual perspectives. Articles promote new analytical approaches, iconoclastic interpretations and previously overlooked perspectives. Its pages encourage novel contributions and outlooks, not particular methodologies or policy goals. Its geographical scope is worldwide and includes security challenges in Europe, Africa, the Middle-East and Asia. Authors are encouraged to examine established priorities in innovative ways and to apply traditional methods to new problems.