Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography Russia Publication Year within 10 Years

121. The Russian-Iran Partnership in a Multipolar World

Author:
Clément Therme
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
The strengthening of the partnership between Russia and Iran depends on overlapping security interests; bilaterally, regionally and on the world stage. Tehran has pursued a regional policy program that is largely in line with Russia’s interests, whether these relate to Syria (from 2011), the Caucasus, Central Asia, or Afghanistan (since 1991). This security dimension was already one of the foundations of the bilateral relationship in the post-Cold War-period. It has now appeared in regional dealings between Tehran and Moscow. In addition, the decline of US international predominance, which has been apparent since the 2000s, has allowed Russia and Iran to develop a shared ideological discourse in opposition to “Western values”. Beyond this shared ideological basis, Tehran has developed a true “Realpolitik” whereby it relies on Russian foreign policy to relieve US pressure on Iran that is aimed at regime change or, at the very least, a change in the behavior of the Islamic Republic. In other words, in seeking to preserve intact the main ideological tenets of its regime, Tehran has added a new dimension to its relationship with Moscow. Since 1991, this relationship has become a matter of survival for a regime that faces both popular opposition at home and external pressure from Washington: pressure that increased during the Trump administration of 2017-2021.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, and Multipolarity
Political Geography:
Russia, Iran, and Middle East

122. China's Foreign Policies Today: Who Is in Charge of What

Author:
Axel Berkofsky and Giulia Sciorati
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
While the war in Ukraine is a game changer for international and in particular European security, China appears to be marching on. And, in some ways, it is true. Since Xi Jinping took power in 2012, China’s foreign policy has significantly shifted from a defensive to an assertive approach. For decades, Beijing worked to integrate into the liberal international order, presenting itself as a peacefully rising power. By contrast, under Xi’s leadership, the country is attempting to create a global system that is more favourable to its own interests. The Report examines China’s current approach to foreign policy, and the drivers of the country’s shift away from tradition. What are the main characteristics of China’s foreign policy in the wake of the Ukraine war? How are decisions being taken, and to what extent do interest groups continue to have a say in decision-making after the recent power centralisation?
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Ukraine, and Asia

123. Turning point? Putin, Xi, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine

Author:
Bobo Lo
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Lowy Institute for International Policy
Abstract:
Putin’s war in Ukraine has highlighted the resilience but also the limitations of Sino–Russian partnership. Far from being an “arc of autocracy”, this is an interests-based relationship between strategically autonomous powers. Foreign policy coordination between China and Russia is limited by their different views of global order. Beijing is invested in a stable international system, albeit one skewed in its favour, whereas Moscow thrives on disorder and uncertainty. Xi Jinping aims to preserve the Sino–Russian partnership while maintaining ties with the West. But Beijing’s balancing act will become harder to sustain as the war continues. The balance of power within the bilateral relationship has tilted sharply towards Beijing. Russia is more reliant on China than ever. The long-term outlook for the relationship is unpromising.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, Conflict, and Vladimir Putin
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and Ukraine

124. China's messaging on the Ukraine conflict

Author:
Samantha Hoffman and Matthew Knight
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
In the early days of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, social media posts by Chinese diplomats on US platforms almost exclusively blamed the US, NATO and the West for the conflict. Chinese diplomats amplified Russian disinformation about US biological weapon labs in Ukraine, linking this narrative with conspiracy theories about the origins of COVID-19. Chinese state media mirrored these narratives, as well as replicating the Kremlin’s language describing the invasion as a ‘special military operation’. ASPI found that China’s diplomatic messaging was distributed in multiple languages, with its framing tailored to different regions. In the early stage of the conflict, tweets about Ukraine by Chinese diplomats performed better than unrelated content, particularly when the content attacked or blamed the West. ASPI’s research suggests that, in terms of its international facing propaganda, the Russia–Ukraine conflict initially offered the party-state’s international-facing propaganda system an opportunity to reassert enduring preoccupations that the Chinese Communist Party perceives as fundamental to its political security.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Cybersecurity, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Ukraine, and Asia

125. Meeting Antarctica’s diplomatic challenges: Joint approaches for Australia and the United States

Author:
Evan T. Bloom
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
This report describes current security and environmental policy challenges related to Antarctica and proposes options for Australia and the United States to address them. It assesses the current and potential future actions of strategic competitors like China and Russia, and proposes policy responses. It suggests ways in which the US and Australian governments can work more closely to protect and promote the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), advancing support for an approach to governance that the two nations have felt for decades is in their respective national interests. This requires both countries (as well as others) to make a clear-eyed assessment of current and future fault lines and move more quickly to address political and environmental challenges that have implications well beyond Antarctica. In particular, this involves determining when it’s necessary to counter the ambitions of strategic competitors, such as China and Russia, in the Antarctic context, and when cooperation may be the more appropriate objective. The current Antarctic governance regime, while far from perfect... achieves a great deal that’s in the long-term national interests of Australia and the US. The ATS shouldn’t be dismissed as out of date; it can still be effective in addressing core regional concerns of both countries. Both countries can use their influence to insist on the implementation by all countries of ATS rules and can invoke those rules to fight for environmental protection and policies that support scientists. It’s unlikely that a more effective set of treaties could be negotiated today. Australia and the US should spend more time at both senior and working levels to coordinate positions and on outreach to other governments on Antarctic issues.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Diplomacy, and National Security
Political Geography:
Russia, Asia-Pacific, United States of America, and Antarctica

126. The Evolution of Russia’s Foreign Policy Doctrine

Author:
A. Bogaturov, O. Lebedeva, and A. Bobrov
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
East View Information Services
Abstract:
ACCORDING to many of our international relations experts, a presidential decree to approve a new edition of the Foreign Policy Concept of Russia will be one of the most significant developments of 2022. It will be the sixth doctrinal document in our country’s recent history: Previous versions of the key diplomatic “manifesto” were issued in 1993, 2000, 2008, 2013, and 2016. The media treat them as routine events when in fact they offer us a unique opportunity to trace all transformations in the foreign policy thinking of the country’s leaders and to analyze the events and trends of the last 30 years. The response to the latter has determined the nature and substance of the conceptual foundations of Russia’s foreign policy. More than 30 years have passed since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991. The new generation that grew up, studied at, and graduated from institutions of higher education knows next to nothing about the Soviet superpower, bipolar confrontation, socialist internationalism, and games with “inter-imperialist” contradictions. The system of Russia’s foreign policy priorities has been broken, reestablished, and altered several times. This and the country’s revival inspired us to reassess an article published in 2007 [1] and to correct assessments made then of global processes.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Hegemony, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

127. International Practice of Sanction Evasion and Circumvention Possibilities for Russia

Author:
Davit Shatakishvili
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
Sanctions play a special role in the economic and political life of the world. Historically, despite their various forms of use, sanctions have acquired an essentially functional substance in the 20th century. The goal of the sanctions is primarily to ensure global peace. In case of violation of market principles, military aggression, or disregard for the rules established between nations, the violator is sanctioned by specific countries and/or groups of states, who, in doing so, aim to bring it back to the norms of international law. Sanctions increase political and economic pressure on the target country, which are reflected in various dimensions and quantitative figures. Consequently, the country loses some of its political leverage and experiences tangible economic regress. For the sake of universal peace and global security, the policy of sanctions has not lost its relevance in the 21st century. As a result of Russia’s aggressive military intervention in Ukraine, the world community has applied an unprecedented package of sanctions against the aggressor, which has spread to almost every industry of the country and is still being added to. In this regard, Russia broke the anti-record and surpassed countries such as North Korea, Iran, Syria, and Venezuela. Over the decades, sanctioned countries have accumulated extensive experience on how to circumvent the imposed sanctions, so as to at least partially help the country overcome the economic difficulties. It is interesting which ways and schemes such countries use to circumvent the restrictions, and based on that experience, what opportunities there are for the Russian Federation to do the same and evade the sanctions imposed on it, a move which will not only limit but also further pave the way for its aggressive foreign policy and threaten world peace.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, International Trade and Finance, Oil, Sanctions, Global Markets, Cryptocurrencies, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia and Eurasia

128. Turkey’s Place and Role in the Russia-Ukraine War

Author:
Zurab Batiashvili
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
In recent decades, Ankara has maintained a kind of balance in foreign policy and this approach naturally applied to Russia and Ukraine as well. NATO member Turkey sought to develop lucrative military-political and trade-economic relations with both Russia and Ukraine. However, after the Kremlin's war with Ukraine, Ankara clearly saw the facing imminent Russian threat, precipitating the change in its position (supply additional weaponry to Ukraine, close the Bosporus and Dardanelles Straits, etc.). At the same time, the longer the Russia-Ukraine war lasts, the more drastic consequences it will have for Turkey. Consequently, Ankara will have to take even more decisive retaliatory steps.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, NATO, Conflict, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

129. Positions, Role and Activity of the International Community in the War Waged by Russia against Ukraine

Author:
Nika Petriashvili
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
This volume of the Security Review focuses on the Russia-Ukraine war. Regardless of the outcome of the war, it will fundamentally alter the post-Cold War world order and have a major impact on Georgia's security environment. Alex Petriashvili tells us about the reaction of the international community to the start of the war by Russia, what the West has done so far and what we should expect from it in the future. To what extent is the Georgian security system ready to withstand such challenges?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Community, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

130. How Russia’s War Against Ukraine Will Affect Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali Region

Author:
Badri Belkania
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
Abstract:
On February 21, 2022, Russian President, Vladimir Putin, signed the document recognizing independence of the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (Lenta, 2022) which was officially supported by the de facto leaders of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region. The de facto leadership of the Tskhinvali region, which recognized the DNR and LNR back in 2014, hailed President Putin’s decision of February 21 as an «expected, reasonable and justified» step (RIA Novosti, 2022). Russia’s move was also lauded by the de facto President of Abkhazia, Aslan Bzhania, who said the decision was «fair, geopolitically adequate» and in line with modern challenges and threats (TASS, 2022). In a few days, the de facto leader of Abkhazia signed the document recognizing independence of the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (Ekho Kavkaza, 2022). The recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk is in itself a remarkable geopolitical step on the part of Russia which also brings significant changes in terms of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region. However, within days of its recognition, it became clear that Moscow needed the move as a launch pad for war in Ukraine. Consequently, the recognition of the de facto republics was accompanied by a Russian military aggression in Ukraine which, from the prospective of Sukhumi and Tskhinvali, changes even more than just the recognition of the Donbas region. As the domestic and foreign policy characteristics of Sukhumi and Tskhinvali differ, both will be discussed separately in this article.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Territorial Disputes, Geopolitics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and Abkhazia