Defining the National Interest: Russian Foreign Policy and Domestic Politics

1997 ◽  
pp. 1-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Shearman
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy

Political Asylum in Germany: International Norms and Domestic Politics

1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-49
Author(s):  
John Bendix ◽  
Niklaus Steiner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Comparative Politics ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
National Interest ◽  
Political Asylum ◽  
German Politics

Although political asylum has been at the forefront of contemporaryGerman politics for over two decades, it has not been much discussedin political science. Studying asylum is important, however,because it challenges assertions in both comparative politics andinternational relations that national interest drives decision-making.Political parties use national interest arguments to justify claims thatonly their agenda is best for the country, and governments arguesimilarly when questions about corporatist bargaining practices arise.More theoretically, realists in international relations have positedthat because some values “are preferable to others … it is possible todiscover, cumulate, and objectify a single national interest.” Whileinitially associated with Hans Morgenthau’s equating of nationalinterest to power, particularly in foreign policy, this position hassince been extended to argue that states can be seen as unitary rationalactors who carefully calculate the costs of alternative courses ofaction in their efforts to maximize expected utility.

Russian Theory of International Relations

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei P. Tsygankov ◽  
Pavel A. Tsygankov
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Identity Politics ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Political Factions ◽  
Fundamental Shift

Unique features of Russia’s perspectives on international politics as practice can be obtained quite clearly through the investigation of the debates on Russian foreign policy orientations. Russian foreign policy has been framed out of identity politics among different political factions under highly politicized conditions. Structural changes in international politics in the 1990s complicated internal reforms in Russia and the aggravation of socio-economic conditions due to the rapid reforms which intensified conflicts between conservatives and progressives in Russian domestic politics. Unfortunately, the aspirations of Russian reformist elites to make Russia strong could not reconcile with the conservative tendency the nation showed during the worsened economy in that period. This led to conflicting evaluations of Russian identity, which caused a fundamental shift in domestic sources for foreign policies. This transformed Russia’s perspectives on international politics, which brought about changes in its foreign policy orientation. Pro-Western Liberalism played a major role in defining Russian foreign policy under the A. Kozyrev doctrine, which defines Russia’s identity as one of the agents in the West-/US-centered system of liberal democracy and the market economy. Significant challenges to this pro-Western foreign policy came not only from outside, but also from internal changes that brought more fundamental changes to Russian foreign policy. This change should be understood within the cultural and institutional context of Russian society, since this framework determines the conceptualization of “national interest” and/or the formulation of diplomatic and security policies.

scholarly journals THE IMPORTANCE OF MIDDLE EAST IN RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanaz Rostamjabri ◽  
Seyed Javad EmamJomehzadeh ◽  
Mahnaz Goodarzi
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Islamic Fundamentalism ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Economy ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Vladimir Putin

The Soviet Union emerged as a superpower in the Cold War, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, a new Russia was formed. To achieve the hegemony of power, Russia's security document was given priority. In the first term, Vladimir Putin focused on pragmatism and emphasized the power of domestic politics and the revival of the Russian economy. In his second term, Putin focused on the politics of realism to gain power on the international stage and return to what Moscow is interested in. In his second term, Putin pursued a political (power expansion), security (avoiding differences), and economic (strengthening Russia) view Middle East. Therefore, in this study, Russian foreign policy in the Middle East and its importance The question for this study is: what factors in Russian foreign policy made the Middle East region important for Russia? And the hypothesis for this question: Russia's concern about Islamic fundamentalism (security), economic and political reasons are among the most important factors in directing its foreign policy to the Middle East.

Russian Foreign Policy

2022 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Initial Period ◽  
Large Degree ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
General Interest ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
The West

Russian foreign policy has undergone substantial shifts in the post–Cold War period. Scholarly attention toward the topic has also experienced ebbs and flows as the breakup of the Soviet Union drastically decreased general interest toward a newly emerged Russia. The initial period of Russian foreign policy in the early 1990s was to a large degree a continuation of Soviet foreign policy, with its focus on cooperative relations with the West. This, in turn, combined with the general weakness of the Russian state, resulted in the relative disregard of other foreign policy directions. The deepening domestic power struggle led to a growing opposition toward the pro-Western course and paved the way for a number of domestic players to influence Russia’s foreign policy course. Vladimir Putin’s arrival to power in 2000 and the domestic changes he introduced freed foreign policy from most of its domestic constraints, at least temporarily. During his first presidential term (2000–2004), Russian foreign policy oscillated between competition with the West (the United States in particular) and attempts to integrate Russia as the West’s equal partner. The consolidation of the regime, which accelerated in Putin’s second presidential term (2004–2008), left its mark on foreign policy. Russia’s engagement with the external world underwent substantial changes, which turned out to be durable for the next decade and a half. Material resurgence, the strengthening of the state, and the domestic political consolidation fueled Russia’s assertiveness in international politics. These processes culminated in Putin’s 2007 Munich speech and the 2008 war with Georgia. The following period of the so-called tandemocracy (2008–2012), with Putin becoming prime minister and Dmitri Medvedev serving as president, led to a partial warming in relations with the West, though Russia continued its assertive policy. Russia also deepened its cooperation with a rising China. Putin’s return to power in 2012 initiated the conservative-nationalist turn in domestic politics, which was reflected in foreign policy. Russia increasingly positioned itself not only as a geopolitical challenger to the West, but also a normative one. The annexation of Crimea (2014), followed by the military intervention in Syria (2015), opened a new phase in Russian foreign policy. Moscow became bolder in using military force abroad and enlarged its presence in such regions as sub-Saharan Africa. The explanations of change and continuity in Russian foreign policy can be grouped in several camps, with scholars emphasizing power politics and external constraints, domestic politics, and the role of ideas and identity. The emerging trend is the growing popularity of pluralist explanations of Russian foreign policy.

scholarly journals The Two Faces of Russia Foreign Policy toward China and Taiwan

Global Focus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-82
Author(s):  
Adhi Cahya Fahadayna ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Northeast Asia ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
Stable Relationship ◽  
Political Relations ◽  
Vladimir Putin

Russia, as one of the key actors in international politics, faces problematic issues in Chinese-Taiwan Relations. As a significant player, Russia reserves a close and stable relationship with China. However, Russia could not avoid Taiwan's significant role in Northeast Asia, especially its role in allying with the West. Taiwan undoubtedly offers a promising prospect for the Russian economy, but political relations with Taiwan could not significantly contribute to Russian FP. In this paper, Russian foreign policy will be examined on both sides, Russian foreign policy toward China and Russian foreign policy toward Taiwan. The purposes of this paper are trying to analyze the Russian foreign policy dilemma toward China-Taiwan relation. The analysis of this paper will focus on President Vladimir Putin as the decision-maker and explore all circumstances that will influence the decision-making process. The level of analysis implemented in this paper is domestic politics that significantly contribute to Russian foreign policy decision-making. This paper will gather secondary data from the news, journal, and book as the primary sources. The paper's outcome is analyzing Russian foreign policy's dilemma and exploring how Russian foreign policy toward current dynamics of China-Taiwan Relations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document