A Very Ambiguous Empire: Russia’s Hybrid Exceptionalism

Oskanian, Kevork

doi:10.1080/09668136.2017.1412398

Cited by 32 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, this article contends that both Russia and the EU have developed distinct and hybrid geopolitical approaches. These approaches are shaped by their unsettled and hybrid identities, as well as by shifting perceptions of the self and other, and by the role played by geographical space (Oskanian 2018;Zielonka 2008). This contention resembles the concept of fluid symbolic boundaries developed in the introduction to this special issue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Hybrid geopolitics in EU-Russia relations: understanding the persistence of conflict and cooperation

Nitoiu

Pasatoiu

2020

East European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mainstream analyses of relations between the European Union (EU) and Russia have seen impressive proliferation since 2014 with an emphasis on the perceived rise of geopolitics as a key driving factor on the European continent. In this background, the article analyses the way the rise of geopolitics has affected the conflict and cooperation dichotomy in EU-Russia relations. It contends, that the role of geopolitics in the security architecture of the European continent is characterised by continuity, as its pervasive effects have constrained the agency and autonomy of both Russia and the EU. The growing number of studies on EU-Russia relations tend to employ a classical or traditional understanding of geopolitics, which emphasises the importance of power projection and geographical space in states' behavior in world politics. In contrast, the article argues that both Russia and the EU have developed distinct and hybrid approaches of geopolitics.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Hybrid geopolitics in EU-Russia relations: understanding the persistence of conflict and cooperation

Nitoiu

Pasatoiu

2020

East European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Малые страны, Грузия в их числе, вынуждают крупные державы обосновывать легитимность мирового порядка, его полезность и справедливость [Кавешников, 2008]. Иностранные исследователи, изучающие роль демократических норм в проекте Политики соседства ЕС, склонны рассматривать Россию как актора, проецирующего определённые цивилизационные ценности, в том числе несогласие с либеральным нормативным дискурсом [Oskanian, 2018]. Напротив, нормы, транслируемые Россией -государствоцентричность, невмешательство во внутренние дела [Kornilov, Makarychev, 2014], суверенная демократия, принадлежность к "русскому миру" [Nuryiev, 2015], -по мнению авторов, противоречат ценностям, фиксируемым ЕС в соглашениях со странами-партнёрами.…”

Section: поиск ценностной основы взаимодействияunclassified

Georgia: A Smaller State’s Foreign Policy

Ayvazyan¹

2020

soveurope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Анна АЙВАЗЯН 1 ГРУЗИЯ: ВНЕШНЯЯ ПОЛИТИКА МАЛОГО ГОСУДАРСТВА Аннотация. В статье рассмотрен вопрос политической субъектности малых стран (на примере Грузии), а также особенности их взаимодействия с глобальными державами. Автор подчёркивает, что за последнее десятилетие в малых государствах Южного Кавказа укрепились собственные представления о национальной идентичности и политических приоритетах. Государственные интересы каждой из этих стран по-прежнему во многом связаны с Россией, однако контекст взаимоотношений изменился, что требует разработки новых механизмов взаимодействия. Предметом исследования послужила современная внешняя политика страны, в разные периоды балансирующая между приоритетом взаимоотношений с Россией и западными странами. Автор указывает, что запрос современных политических элит Грузии выходит за пределы исключительно экономического и политического сотрудничества. В статье сделан вывод о сохранении тенденции к многостороннему сотрудничеству во внешней политике Грузии, несмотря на доминирование европейского вектора развития. Автор считает, что приоритетным направлением российско-грузинских отношений должно стать выстраивание долгосрочных каналов взаимодействия вне зависимости от структурных изменений во внутренней политике Грузии.

show abstract

“…Several authors emphasise the ‘humiliation’ that followed the end of the Cold War and political elites’ desire to take their revenge and reshape an international order that was rigged against Russia, which could explain the current confrontational policies (Larson and Shevchenko, 2014; Lukyanov, 2016; Tsygankov, 2014) in a country which strongly associates status with military power (Renz, 2018). This frustration was correlated with the gradual influence of nationalist and neo-imperialist ideas and personalities among power circles (Kolstø and Blakkisrud, 2015; Kuzio, 2016; Shlapentokh, 2014), which fed a neo-imperialist foreign policy (Dunn and Bobick, 2014; Kivelson and Suny, 2016; Laruelle, 2012; Oskanian, 2018; Toal, 2017). Other discourses and representations, such as an insistence on protecting the ‘Russian world’ (Engström, 2014; Feklyunina, 2016) and a revival of a traditional ‘geopolitical’ mind-set emphasising zero-sum games and competition (Auer, 2015; Guzzinni, 2012), also contributed to justifying and legitimising a gradually assertive Russia.…”

Section: Assessing Russia’s Motives: the Riddle Wrapped In Mysterymentioning

confidence: 99%

How to challenge an international order: Russian diplomatic practices in multilateral security organisations

Schmitt¹

2019

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many policy and academic debates focus on the extent to which Russia is a revisionist power challenging the ‘liberal world order’. However, there is little agreement on the primary motives explaining the behaviour of Russia, some pointing to her unsatisfied great power ambitions and neo-imperial ideologies, and others to genuine security concerns. Adjudicating those claims is important because of their policy implications for engagement and/or deterrence towards Russia. This article contributes to this debate through a theoretical contribution to practice-based approaches to International Relations. Using De Certeau’s understanding of practices, it analyses Russian diplomatic practices in multilateral security organisations and illustrates how this helps infer foreign policy motives, contrary to the field-specific relationalism of Bourdieu-inspired practice approaches. Empirically, it builds on 126 interviews and participant observation in three multilateral security organisations (the United Nations, the NATO–Russia Council and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe). The article shows that at least since 2014, Russian diplomats in the three organisations consistently defend policies and use narratives that reveal more interest in status recognition, sometimes at the expense of security concerns.

show abstract

A Very Ambiguous Empire: Russia’s Hybrid Exceptionalism

Cited by 32 publications

References 88 publications

Hybrid geopolitics in EU-Russia relations: understanding the persistence of conflict and cooperation

Hybrid geopolitics in EU-Russia relations: understanding the persistence of conflict and cooperation

Georgia: A Smaller State’s Foreign Policy

How to challenge an international order: Russian diplomatic practices in multilateral security organisations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About