Guardian of Pax Transatlantica

2021 ◽  
pp. 42-67
Author(s):  
Jussi M. Hanhimäki

This chapter focuses on NATO, the institutional core of Pax Transatlantica. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has enlarged its membership and ventured beyond its immediate neighborhood. Its significance as a security actor has been enhanced, not least because of the actions of the Russian Federation in Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria. By 2020, NATO was bigger and more engaged than ever before, with military capacities that dwarfed those of any of its real or potential adversaries. Yet, the success story was hampered by widespread pessimism about NATO’s future on both sides of the Atlantic. In fact, the post–Cold War era had seen numerous inter-alliance crises: the Iraq War of 2003 being the most obvious example. Nevertheless, three decades after the collapse of the Berlin Wall, NATO retained its function as the basic building block of Pax Transatlantica.

2020 ◽  
pp. 115-166
Author(s):  
David Kilcullen

This chapter discusses Russian evolution and adaptation since the Cold War, surveys the post-Soviet military evolution of Russian forces, offers case studies of the Norwegian-Russian border and the Russo-Georgian War of 2008, introduces and analyzes the concept of liminal warfare as practiced by Russia, and discusses the “Gerasimov doctrine,”, reflexive control, and Russian political warfare methods, including those allegedly used during the 2016 US presidential election. It argues that, in recovering from its post-Cold War eclipse of the 1990s, the Russian Federation engaged in a process of adaptation under pressure, developing significantly more capable conventional and nuclear forces (especially after the Five-Day War of 2008 in Georgia) but also evolving a form of warfare, liminal maneuver, designed to offset US conventional dominance.


2021 ◽  
pp. 187936652199975
Author(s):  
Richard Sakwa

The end of the Cold War was accompanied by the idea that the fall of the Berlin Wall represented the beginning of the unification of Europe. Mikhail Gorbachev talked in terms of a “Common European Home,” an idea that continues in the guise of the project for a “Greater Europe.” However, right from the start, the transformative idea of Greater Europe was countered by the notion of “Europe whole and free,” whose fundamental dynamic was the enlargement of the existing West European order to encompass the rest of the continent. This was a program for the enlargement of the Atlantic system. After some prevarication, the enlargement agenda proved unacceptable to Moscow, and while it continues to argue in favor of transformation its main efforts are now devoted to creating some sort of “greater Eurasia.” There remains a fundamental tension between Atlanticist and pan-continental version of the post-–Cold War international order in the region. This tension gave rise to conflict and war: in 2008 (the Russo-Georgian War) and again from 2014 (Ukraine), and to what some call the Second Cold War. The continent is once again divided. However, pan-continentalism is far from dead, and although Greater Eurasian ideas have thrived, some sort of Greater European continentalism remains on the agenda. Is this, though, no more than a “sad delusion” or a genuine possibility?


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 61-85
Author(s):  
Konrad Świder

The purpose of this article is to outline the geopolitical concepts of Aleksandr Dugin, the guru of Russian Eurasian geopolitics as a total ideology. After the collapse of the USSR, there was a rapid renaissance of geopolitics in Russia, which was an ideological attempt to rationalise the role and place of the post-Soviet Russian state in the post-Cold War international system. The dynamic development of geopolitics in Russia was also a way for the Russians to overcome the post-imperial trauma and the post-Soviet identity crisis. Geopolitics was to define the global aspirations and goals of the Russian Federation, being the quintessence of postmodern Russian messianism and setting a new historical mission for this state. One of several geopolitical trends in Russia was neo-Eurasianism, whose main ideologist was Aleksandr Dugin. The Russian geopolitician has proceeded to formulate a total ideology based on geopolitics for Russia, which is to constitute an intellectually and conceptually attractive synthesis of all the universalist ideologies practised in this country throughout history. Dugin tries to integrate geopolitics with the metaphysics and philosophy of being, transforming it into a kind of ideocratic sacrum and ideological signpost for the contemporary Russian state.


2021 ◽  
pp. 45-59
Author(s):  
Michał Romańczuk

The collapse of the Cold War order led to a change in the geopolitical environment of the Russian Federation. The declarations of independence of the former Soviet republics and the emergence of the post-Soviet area had weakened the country’s position. As a result, the Russian Federation has been perceiving this new area as a zone of its ‘vital interests’, and attaining and maintaining dominant position in those territories has been considered crucial for the state’s security, its strength and position on the international arena. Russia has been pursuing its goals in the area through numerous reintegration attempts on political, military and economic levels. To achieve the main political goal, which is the control over the post-Soviet area, the Russian Federation has been also using military instruments. The focal point and purpose of this article is to show the internal and external causes of military intervention of the Russian Federation in eastern Ukraine.


1993 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 287-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Deighton

For the first two years after the Berlin Wall came down and, as Jacques Delors put it, while the speed of history accelerated, most scholars confined themselves to journalism. Some books that did appear were rapidly overtaken by the heady pace of history, and the books under review here do not entirely escape being dated by the relentless progress of events on the European continent. Indeed, it can hardly be said that the dust has settled on German unification and the seismic events that we call the end of the Cold War. Both in the East (predictably) and in the West, unscrambling the elaborate territorial, strategic and ideological Cold War structures is bringing a re-examination of the nation state and its democratic practices; international governmental organisations; ‘Western’ values; and security issues. At one level, debate has been raging among some historians between two unsatisfactory notions: the ‘end of history’, and ‘real’ history being on the move again. At another level the German question has been returning unsteadily into focus, as historians start to pick at issues of national identity, nationalism and the nation-state. Other analysts have been trying to fit the European structures and assumptions we inherit from the Cold War years into a post-Cold War security and economic architecture. The close relationship between these strands of European history is obvious.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-82
Author(s):  
Andi Mihail BĂNCILĂ

The disintegration of the USSR in December 1991 marked the end of the Cold War. Many foreign policy analysts were quick to point out that Russian Federation had ceased to be a threat to the Western world. Despite facing a multitude of economic, social and military problems, under the leadership of Vladimir Putin the Russian state managed to be reborn. Russian Federation's miraculous return was made possible by the successful implementation of a policy of economic centralization that overlapped with a period of rising global oil prices. Economic prosperity encouraged the Russian Federation government to return to the old practices of the Soviet period, succeeding in unbalancing the fragile states of Eastern Europe and once again endangering the peace of the entire continent.   Keywords: Russian Federation; Cold War; Crimea; hydrocarbons; conflict.  


Poliarchia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. 5-27
Author(s):  
Mateusz Danielewski

Foreign Policy of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Russian Federation toward the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (1948–2016) Foreign relations between the Soviet Union and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) during the Cold War were based on support of the North Korean regime and a distrustful attitude toward Kim Il‑sung, who remained neutral in the Soviet‑Chinese split. After the political transformation, the Russian Federation is pursuing pragmatic policy toward the DPRK. Moscow seeks to deepen economic cooperation in order to maintain security in Northeast Asia. The aim of this article is to analyse the USSR’s and Russia’s relations with the DPRK. The author describes events before, during and after the Cold War. The article draws attention to the extent to which national interests and the foreign policy of the Russian Federation coincide and differ from those pursued by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.


Author(s):  
Vira Y. Maksymets

The article analyzes the changes in the security environment of Slovakia, which took place after the annexation of the Crimea and the situation in eastern Ukraine. This changed the strategic situation not only in Central and Eastern Europe, but de facto in the European and transatlantic defense complex. These strategic changes not only changed the existing situation that existed since the end of the Cold War, but led to a paradigm shift in security policy. Today, besides defense, citizens of Slovakia also define other vectors, in particular energy, ecological, and cybernetic. They are clearly international in nature, and therefore the Slovak foreign policy and diplomacy must take them into account more intensively than before, possibly to the detriment of other activities. In order to realize its security interests, the Slovak Republic uses its membership in international (NATO, UN) and regional (Visegrad Four, EU, OSCE) organizations and associations, developing its capabilities, flexibility, and mutually reinforcing cooperation. NATO membership is the determining factor in Slovak foreign security.The benefits of this study are consideration of the issues of European security and its interconnectedness with the policy of the Slovak Republic is relevant and at the same time complicated. This is due to the transformation of the European security system and the security and foreign policy of Slovakia as a result of a number of factors.First, the main factors determining the security of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the security policy paradigm that existed in Europe since the end of the Cold War, have changed. The second important factor is Slovakia’s response to these changes, because the foreign policy priorities of the country have not yet been determined. In this regard, in the formulation and implementation of the security policy of Slovakia in 2014, there was a period of systemic changes through the annexation by the Russian Federation of Crimea. The Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs of the Slovak Republic, on the one hand, sought to maintain the neutral nature of foreign policy, while the Ministry of Defense did not react to changes. The third factor, which is also closely related to others, is a difficult task, accordingly, to find consensus on the destruction of some of the key priorities of the foreign and security policy of Slovakia, which would lead to the adoption by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Affairs of a comprehensive plan to counter foreign policy challenges, addressed to the Visegrad Four, the Eastern Partnership, the EU and NATO.


2002 ◽  
Vol 58 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Gory O. Hall

More than a decade now since the fall of the Berlin Wall, one has to wonder what ever happened to the new world order. To be sure, market democracy marches on in many areas of the world, exposing a larger share of humanity to greater opportunity and wealth. Nonetheless, civil and regional conflicts are proliferate after the Cold War, threatening the very existence of some states (for example, Congo, Macedonia, Nigeria) and aggravating major power relations in the political and military dimensions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document