Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Russia

1961. Russian Foreign Policy Think Tanks in 2002

Author:
Katri Pynnöniemi
Publication Date:
01-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
This report provides a general picture of research institutes working in the areas of foreign and security policy in Moscow and St. Petersburg. In the following, I will briefly discuss changes in research financing and the consequent reorganisation of the research community. After this, major changes in the study of international relations in Russia are also discussed. A list of the most important research institutes in Moscow and St. Petersburg is appended to the report. In addition, information is provided on the forums and publications of most importance in the foreign-policy debate.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Non-Governmental Organization, and Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Asia, and Moscow

1962. From Yugoslavia to Iraq: Russia's Foreign Policy and the Effects of Multipolarity

Author:
Vadim Kononenko
Publication Date:
06-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The aim of this study is to analyze the evolution and political implications of Russia's doctrine of multipolarity. Multipolarity emerged as one of the earliest doctrinal solutions to the post-Soviet Russian foreign policy dilemma, and has remained essential for Russia's strategic behavior since the early 1990s. The multipolarity doctrine describes the post-Cold War world and Russia's place in it. As I argue in this study, Russian “multipolarity” – (the idea of the multipolar world; the vision of Russia as one of its 'poles'; and the understanding of the principles of international politics in the strict terms of realpolitik) is not an ideological resource for Russia's foreign policy but rather, a result of learning how to secure the country' s international status given the scarcity of foreign policy resources available, and the drastic change in the international institutional position of Russia. To sum up the central argument of this study: the multipolarity of Russian foreign policy – both a doctrinal strategy and foreign policy practice – has evolved as a template-like foreign policy approach to solve Russia's strategic dilemma since the demise of the Soviet Union: how to secure its place in the new international structure and compensate for the loss of the international arrangements that disappeared with Soviet might and the bipolar international system as a whole.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, Russia, Iraq, Europe, Middle East, Asia, Soviet Union, and Balkans

1963. Armament and Disarmament in the Caucasus and Central Asia

Author:
Zdzislaw Lachowski, Björn Hagelin, Sam Perlo-Freeman, Petter Stålenheim, Dmitri Trofimov, and Alyson J. K. Bailes
Publication Date:
07-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The international attention paid to the nations of the South Caucasus region and Central Asia—a group of post-Soviet states beyond Europe's conventional frontiers but included in the Conference on/Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE/OSCE)—has been fitful at best over the past decade. During the last years of the 20th and at the start of the 21st century, after the conflicts in Georgia and Nagorno-Karabakh became (at least partly) 'frozen', security concerns about the regions tended to decline and to become overshadowed both by 'oil diplomacy' and by concern about developments within Russia itself, in Chechnya and Dagestan. In 2002–2003 a constellation of changes in the outside world has started to reverse this pattern. Chechnya is no longer a regular topic of high-level political debate between Russia and the West, and President Vladimir Putin has played the anti-terrorist card with some success to secure his freedom to deal with it as an internal security matter. The factors prompting greater international attention to Russia's south-western and southern neighbours, by contrast, have the potential to undermine—perhaps for good—any Russian pretension to decisive influence or an exclusive droit de regard in these regions. At the time of writing, however, this latest shift could again be called in question by a new diversion of focus to the 'greater Middle East' following hostilities in Iraq.
Topic:
Defense Policy and Arms Control and Proliferation
Political Geography:
Russia, Iraq, Europe, Central Asia, Caucasus, Middle East, Chechnya, and Georgia

1964. Comparing Frameworks of Parliamentary Oversight: Poland, Hungary, Russia, Ukraine

Author:
David Betz
Publication Date:
07-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
Abstract:
It is a truism that the nature and limits of parliamentary oversight in any state are determined by the constitutional and political structure unique to that state. That is to say, a state's constitutional and political “framework of legislative oversight” ultimately constrains the extent to which its parliamentarians may regulate their defence establishment. In some countries, parliament has the legal wherewithal to exert a high degree of scrutiny and control over developments in the defence sector. In others, parliaments possess only limited legal prerogatives in this respect because the executive dominates the defence sector.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Civil Society, and Government
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Poland, and Hungary

1965. When Capital Cities Move: The Political Geography of Nation and State Building

Author:
Edward Schatz
Publication Date:
02-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kellogg Institute for International Studies
Abstract:
Capital relocation (i.e., the physical move of the central state apparatus from one location to another) is an unusual tool for nation and state building. Yet, it is used more frequently than we might expect. Thus, when Kazakhstan shifted its capital city in 1997 from Almaty to Astana the move was unique in that post-Soviet region, but not as uncommon in other post-colonial cases. This paper examines the move of the capital in Kazakhstan suggests that this move was designed to address particularly acute nation-and state-building challenges. If the Kazakhstan experience seems strange in de-Sovietization, this tells us much about the different nature of post-Soviet space versus other post-colonial contexts. The relative in frequency of capital moves implies that the challenges of nation and state building in the ex-USSR—as daunting as they have proved to be—are generally not as acute as in those of other post-colonial contexts.
Topic:
Government and Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, Central Asia, and Kazakhstan

1966. Russia's Response To The 2002-2003 North Korean Nuclear Crisis

Author:
Peggy Falkenheim Meyer
Publication Date:
03-2003
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Since he became president of Russia, Vladimir Putin has played an active role on the Korean peninsula, pursuing ties with both North and South Korea. Putin's engagement with both Korean states has contributed to a perception by some that Russia could play an influential role in helping to resolve the second North Korean nuclear crisis that began in October 2002 when a North Korean official admitted that his country has been pursuing a secret uranium enrichment program.
Political Geography:
Russia, South Korea, North Korea, and Korea

1967. North Korea's Unofficial Market Economy and its Implications

Author:
Sungwoo Kim
Publication Date:
03-2003
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
International Journal of Korean Studies
Institution:
International Council on Korean Studies
Abstract:
Amidst the rigid command economy of North Korea, there exists an unofficial yet flourishing market economy, currently operated through Jung Ma Dung, or literally a market place. Of course, a market place is a common feature of even the poorest country in the world and does not require special scrutiny. Yet to North Koreans who have been hitherto completely accustomed to government rationing for all their economic necessities, an economic activity for personal profit is a completely new and almost revolutionary concept. More importantly, the market place in the north has been gradually developed, with strenuous public oppression at the beginning, by a dire need for physical survival of its ordinary people. Without precedence and knowledge, they established, purely through trial and error, every aspect of the market place best suited for the existing peculiarities and constraints of its economy. Now the market place is so widely and firmly established, with the participation of practically everybody in North Korea, ranging from high government officials to common soldiers, that no power, including the leadership itself, can completely shut it down without causing a major revolt, especially by starving and desperate soldiers with weapons to wield, reminiscent of the October Revolution in czarist Russia.
Political Geography:
Russia, North Korea, and Korea

1968. When Will Russia Really Enter Northeast Asia?

Author:
Gilbert Rozman
Publication Date:
08-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
Russia needs to open the Russian Far East for regional integration and make use of its dynamism and vast natural resources. Initiatives of the past decade have demonstrated great sensitivity to the dangers of foreign presence, but little forward thinking on their positive contributions. Putin has advanced beyond Yeltsin, but there is still no vision of regionalism. A reorientation of Sino-Russian relations from strategic goals associated with multipolarity to economic cooperation in a multilateral context offers hope that a new approach is coming. Under the umbrella of globalization including closer relations with the U.S., Putin can more easily pursue regional integration as well. In 2002-03, the nuclear standoff between North Korea and the U.S. put regionalism on hold, while energy security achieved a new profile that gave Putin the opportunity to weigh offers from China, Japan, and the U.S., while asserting control over oligarch Mikhail Khodorovsky and his oil behemoth Yukos. Clearly, Putin planned to take firm charge of managing all dimensions of regionalism, but it was less clear if he would encourage market forces.
Topic:
Civil Society and Politics
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Japan, China, Asia, and North Korea

1969. Societal Foundations for Self-Governance

Author:
Paul T. Christensen
Publication Date:
08-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
Since the middle of the Gorbachev period, much has been written about the (re)emergence of civil society and the rapid appearance of social organizations in Russia and throughout the post-communist world. Of late, however, society and social organizations appear mainly as footnotes to the discussions of politics in the Russian Federation. This is not particularly surprising, given continuing struggles over “reform,” the ongoing war in Chechnya, the international community's preoccupation with terrorism, and not least given the absence of any dramatic social unrest or “mobilization from below.” This absence of discussion about society, however, is troubling for those interested in self-governance in Russia. Not only does this absence reflect the weak and threatened societal foundations for such governance, it also highlights the general lack of attention given to social conditions in Russia—by the Russian state, other states in the international system, and international institutions alike. Scholars who are concerned with social empowerment and democratization in the post-communist world have repeatedly noted the difficulty that civil society faces in carving out a space for itself across the region. Boris Kagarlitksy barely exaggerates when he writes that civil society in Russia “perished even before it had managed to appear,” and there is little doubt that Russian society remains largely excluded from politics.
Topic:
Civil Society and Politics
Political Geography:
Russia and Chechnya

1970. Russian Politics under President Vladimir Putin: Current State and Prospects

Author:
Andrei Ryabov
Publication Date:
08-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
Not too long ago, the analysts studying the development of the Russian political process under Vladimir Putin attached foremost attention to efforts aimed to formulate the political priorities of Russia's second president and to ascertain his vision of the way the nation should develop. The actions and decisions made by Putin were analyzed primarily from that angle. For a long time, that way of analyzing today's Russian politics was regarded as perfectly operational: it is common knowledge that the political system in Russia is monocentric and the president is the principal political agent whose position largely determines the character and the thrust of political change. However, the two years that have elapsed since Putin's rise to power have compelled many experts to revise their attitudes. The reason is that despite the occasional changes in the system of government institutions made by the second president of the Russian Federation and his announcement of a continued market-oriented reform, what lies ahead remains uncertain. There are still doubts about the firmness of the stabilization attained under Putin, while the influence wielded by most of the key Russian political actors who arose back in Yeltsin's times has not diminished whatsoever. In this connection it has even been said that, in the final analysis, Putin will have to return to the policy pursued by his predecessor.
Topic:
Government and Politics
Political Geography:
Russia