scholarly journals Vladimir Putin, Twenty Years On: Russia’s Foreign Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-462
Author(s):  
Maria Raquel Freire

This article touches upon the main dynamics in Russian foreign policy since Vladimir Putin came to power in 2000. Following a Constructivist approach to the analysis of foreign policy, the article positions this study at the intersection of domestic processes and external relations, as well as understanding foreign policy as a combination of material and ideational aspects. The discursive practices that drive foreign policy shaping and making are the result of social interaction, and thus, of the combination of these elements, in different formats and weights. Three main dimensions in Russias foreign policy course are identified, namely a normative one, defining the guiding principles for foreign policy shaping, the status dimension as the power-alignment underlining foreign policy making, and an identity-driven dimension, ontologically characterizing foreign policy. These three dimensions of analysis are co-constitutive and reinforce each other at different moments and in distinct configurations. The article concludes that Russian foreign policy in the last twenty years has kept its main end-goal quite stable - great power status, - what has changed have been the means - and ways of doing - to achieve this, both regarding a more assertive foreign policy, and increased pressure for revising the international order, attributing Russia the label of a revisionist power in the international system.

Author(s):  
Robert H. Donaldson

Russian foreign policy has both been similar and unique to that of other great powers. As a general rule of statecraft, Russia has pursued balance-of-power policies, which essentially involves the mobilization of power to countervail the power of an enemy or a potential adversary. The enduring goals pursued by Russian foreign policy have placed primary emphasis on ensuring national security, promoting the economic wellbeing of the country, and enhancing national prestige. The dominant theme in the Russian foreign policy under the tsars is that of expansionism. No single motive force can be found to explain tsarist Russian expansionism; rather, the influences of geography, regime type, the international system, and ideology all weigh in, though in different proportions at different times. The ideology known as Marxism–Leninism has also had a significant effect on Soviet and post-Soviet policy. Meanwhile, Russian Federation president Boris Yeltsin’s primary aim in foreign policy, like Mikhail Gorbachev’s before him, was to create a nonthreatening external environment that would be most conducive to his country’s internal economic and political development. On the other hand, Vladimir Putin pursued a pragmatic, cautious, and nuanced policy. The most visible change that Putin brought to Russia’s foreign policy was a heightened level of presidential activism. In his second presidential term, Putin further changed the direction of Russian foreign policy, increasingly demanding that Russia be recognized as a great power and be given commensurate weight in the resolution of global issues.


2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-139
Author(s):  
Michael McFaul

Why did Russia's relations with the West shift from cooperation a few decades ago to a new era of confrontation today? Some explanations focus narrowly on changes in the balance of power in the international system, or trace historic parallels and cultural continuities in Russian international behavior. For a complete understanding of Russian foreign policy today, individuals, ideas, and institutions—President Vladimir Putin, Putinism, and autocracy—must be added to the analysis. An examination of three cases of recent Russian intervention (in Ukraine in 2014, Syria in 2015, and the United States in 2016) illuminates the causal influence of these domestic determinants in the making of Russian foreign policy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-56
Author(s):  
Irina Busygina ◽  
Mikhail Filippov

In this article, we explore the inherent trade-offs and inconsistencies of Russia’s policies toward the post-Soviet space. We argue that attempts to rebuild an image of Russia as a “great power” have actually led to a reduction of Russian influence in the post-Soviet region. The more Russia acted as a “Great Power,” the less credible was its promise to respect the national sovereignty of the former Soviet republics. In 2011, Vladimir Putin declared that during his next term as president, his goal would be to establish a powerful supra-national Eurasian Union capable of becoming one of the poles in a multipolar world. However, Russia’s attempt to force Ukraine to join the Eurasian Union provoked the 2014 crisis. The Ukrainian crisis has de-facto completed the separation of Ukraine and Russia and made successful post-Soviet re-integration around Russia improbable.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Rogério de Souza Farias

Summary Policy planning has a long history in the Ministries of Foreign Affairs around the world. This article provides an overview of almost 70 years of this technique in Brazil’s Ministry of External Relations (Itamaraty). I will argue that there has been a clear trade-off between predicting, preaching, disrupting and managing. Despite its failures, planning has been an important tool for coping with uncertainty and has provided coherence in foreign policy-making.


2019 ◽  
pp. 64-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marise Cremona

This chapter explores the ways in which the EU uses its external relations powers and its wide range of external instruments to extend the reach of EU law, and the ways in which law shapes the EU’s external action. It examines three dimensions of the relationship between law and external action: first, the role law plays in the construction of the EU’s international presence as a ‘Union of values’; second, the use of law by the EU as a way of conducting its foreign policy and constructing its relationships; third, the EU as a regulatory actor engaged in shaping, importing and promoting international legal norms. These dynamics illustrate different aspects of the notion of the global reach of EU law and in so doing they raise questions about the ambivalent role that law plays in these processes, challenging our understanding of law as the foundation of the EU’s external power and the instrument through which, and in accordance with which, it expresses that power.


Subject Russian foreign policy in 2016. Significance Russian foreign policy is driven by an amalgam of realpolitik, nationalism and anti-Western ideology, and consists of both defensive and offensive strategies. The robust, confrontational approach championed by President Vladimir Putin in recent years has produced successes in such areas as the military campaign in Syria, but an undecided outcome in Ukraine and mixed results in other parts of the former Soviet Union. Impacts A NATO summit this July may result in a tougher, more coordinated stance on Russia. Following its official partial withdrawal from Syria, the Russian military will conduct selective attacks. Russia will need careful diplomacy to keep Belarus and Kazakhstan from drifting away as allies.


2003 ◽  
Vol 82 (6) ◽  
pp. 168
Author(s):  
Robert Legvold ◽  
Bobo Lo

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Sitenko

Abstract The crisis in Ukraine, that broke out in 2013 and escalated in 2014, has led to sanction policy and the emergence of significant political divergences between Russian Federation and the West. This has resulted in an intensification of Russia’s foreign and economic policy alliances with its neighboring countries as well as with the rest of the BRICS members. In his interview with Cuba’s Prensa Latina, Vladimir Putin further classified cooperation with Latin American states as one of the key and very promising lines of Russia’s foreign policy. In light of the above mentioned developments, this paper addresses the Latin American vector of Russian foreign policy using the example of Russian-Venezuelan partnership, which has been intensified after 2004. It explores the underlying key elements of this partnership based on realist and constructivist assumptions and is aimed at outlining foreign policy identities, perceptions and interests constitutive for the cooperation between the two countries. The author concludes, that the cooperation is based both on realist and constructivist elements, whereas Russian interests are mainly realist and Venezuelan constructivist, and that fact could hinder long-lasting and both-way beneficial bilateral collaboration.


Politik ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Larsen Nonboe

Russian foreign policy in the increasingly important Arctic region reflects an ambiguous combination of assertiveness and cooperation in accordance with international law. Against this background, the existing literature on the Arctic tends to polarise around revisionist and status quo interpretations of Russian foreign policy in the region. The present paper contrasts the divergent interpretations through case studies of the Russian flag planting on the North Pole seabed in 2007 and Russia’s participation at the Ilulissat Summit in 2008 which can be seen as ‘crucial’ cases for the competing interpretations. Overall, the case studies provide support for a modidied version of the status quo interpretation which incorporates insights from the revisionist interpretation. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document