• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
The ForeignPolicy Concept of the RussianFederation
by Cristina Carpinelli
1
 Main lines of Russia’s new foreign politics
1) Russia is integrating the development of relations with traditional partners with the expansion of contactswith new ones. In determining its guidelines and the nature of its activity, Russia proceeds from theprinciples of its new vision of foreign policy. This involves, in particular, the primacy of collective action anda priority focus on so-called “network diplomacy”, meaning the formation of ad hoc groups created for thesolution of specific political tasks. These groups are not closed blocs or alliances (like NATO) and often cutacross and supplement each other. They include the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, US,and UK), the Quartet (EU, Russia, US, and UN), the “Six” (South Korea, North Korea, China, Japan, US, andRussia) who had scored a spectacular success with the North Korean problem, and so forth. This thesis issupported by the analysis of the foreign policy review prepared by the Foreign Ministry Sergej Lavrov, onVladimir Putin’s instructions, when the latter was still President of Russia. The review confirms that Russiamade the right thing in 2000, when it chose pragmatism and multi-vector diplomacy. Of course, thisadherence to collective action, be it in the form of the United Nations or network diplomacy, nonethelessdoes not rule out action by Moscow in keeping with its national interests, though without violating itsinternational commitments or obligations to its main global partners.Russia’s foreign policy independence (autonomy/equidistance) is the current imperative. Vitalij Naumkin,President of the International Center for Strategic and Political Studies, have asserted: “Russia is open toconstructive dialogue and equitable cooperation with all states without exception. With many countries,including our CIS neighbors, China, India, Egypt, Brazil, and the G8 group of industrialized countries, wehave already established or are developing a strategic partnership. The forces interested in a powerful,independent Russia are gaining strength. Needless to say, the notion of a state’s might and greatness has anew definition of ‘soft power’, which implies an ability to be part of a team, readiness to promote a positiveagenda on the entire range of international problems, and a capacity to preserve one’s own cultural andcivilizational identity with due respect for the world’s versatile cultures and traditions” (from: MoskovskieNovosti - January 19, 2007).Personally I don’t think that the current russian paradigm of international relations (choice of pragmatism, amulti-vectored policy) is based on the wish to please everyone or on common good, now that “under newglobal circumstances the awareness of the community of all states in the face of the challenges and threats ofthe 21st century is being transformed into a trend towards asserting collective and legal principles in worldpolitics” (Vitalij Naumkin. Moskovskie Novosti - January 19, 2007). This is an idea that has little to do withthe factual world. Russia simply proceeds from its own clear pragmatic interests; it works using “realpolitique”. After the 11 September, the russian President Putin has changed his political line towards theappeasement with America: his country entered the “western living-room” of the international geopolitics.Was this choice aimed at constructively cooperating with the America in combating global terrorism anddrug trafficking? Or was this choice aimed at combating a “dirty” war in Chechnya, without expecting athreat from all international community, that therefore missed an opportunity to make the demand for theprotection of rights inside Russia a priority? The way in which the russian forces conducted their anti-terrorcampaign in Chechnya was profoundly counterproductive; this was not a clean campaign but one freighted
1
CESPI - International Problems Study Center of Sesto San Giovanni (Milan - Italy).
1
 
with serious abuses that have alienated the local population and made them more susceptible to the appealof extremism. Recently Russia has delivered defensive arms to such states as Iran and Syria and establishedseveral contacts with Hamas. Maybe Russia doesn’t claim special rights in international relations now. Butthere are not reasons to believe that it’s a neutral player in world politics. Russia is protecting its nationalinterests in full, using all of its competitive advantages and tools (in primis: gas and oil) in foreign affairs.2) In today’s conditions of globalization (contrary to common idea), the system of international relations isunstable and becoming increasingly imbalanced. The world has not become a safer place to live in. The mainreason is in the cost people pay for globalization - the growing gap in development engenders social,economic, ethnic, and religious conflicts. Recurrent unilateral use of force is also creating a feeling ofinsecurity. Disarmament stagnation is increasing the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.Under these circumstances, many countries are beginning to revise their interests. Development of newglobal centers of influence and growth, a more even distribution of development resources and control overnatural wealth are laying the foundation for a multi-polar world arrangement. The existing global politics isdesigned to preserve a certain status quo - that is, the privileged position of some individual countries in thedeveloping international system. It seems that Brazil, Russia, India, China (BRIC), in the future South Korea,Malaysia and others will set themselves objectives of a more political colouring symbolising national pride intheir programmes. The absolute pre-eminence of the USA and Europe is starting to fade. For some emergingcountries the natural resources or other potential such as human, technological, space resources are becoming an integral component of their strategic position or an asymmetrical capability aimed atweakening the credibility of advantages held by old potential rivals. This could not encourage the globalcooperation or the “right competition”. On the contrary, the current international order, that doesn’t promotea balanced and fair economic, social and political growth, leads towards the “confrontation”, that is to saytowards, for istance, the unilateral use military force or the collision of civilizations, and so forth.Nevertheless, the competitive spirit (in its negative meaning) is not the only possible way. Permanentinfrastructures (ex: space infrastuctures, infrastuctures to promote the rational and efficient use of water,clean-energy and clean-technologies and so non) could also be organised globally, as ‘global public goods’,to contribute to answering questions related to major issues facing all humanity: pollution, economic andfinancial crisis, social polarization and inequalities.3) The current russian government is trying to reestablish influence in former Soviet republics - particularlythe more Western-leaning ones like Georgia and Ukraine, but also with other CIS (Commonwealth ofIndipendent States) countries - the near abroad. This approaching is, above all, based on its “energy muscle”(suffice it to remember the recent “gas wars” with Ukraine, although these wars are over and the agreementsare signed). Of course, the matter is more complex: it doesn’t merely consists of using its energy power “todiscipline and put down a former satellite”. Russia is unique, because of its size and its energy and natural-resource potential. It is trying to establish a new identity by redefining relations with its former holdings(also in terms of cooperation and of good neighbourhood). In the meantime, it is creating new alliancesoutside the former soviet bloc (with other world countries) “to consolidate its power observing the‘democratic course’, the ‘concert ed effort’ and accepting the global ‘liberal’ model of development”. Shortly,Russia feels it must secure its place within the cross-currents of globalization. The building of a new russianpole (not necessarily marked like “phisical space”) will allow it to better face the rising giants like China,India and Brasil, and to be considered as an equal partner on the world arena. In the anti-globalizationlanguage, this pole (like the others one) is better defined as imperialistic, as soon as it has as main goal thecontrol and the participation on the splitting up of the world resources (natural resources, capitals, markets,labour, and so on) using own charismatic super power and if necessary also, but like extreme ratio, the ownmilitary force. From this point of view, it’s possible understand the reason for which Putin had strengthenedthe internal power system with the “vertical of power” and the patriotic, nationalist spirit, even if Putinhimself had always maintained that these measures were not “a desire to revive old dogmas and to re-militarize international relations”.4) Russia has regained its role as a major power on the international stage, after the serious crisis in theprestige of Yeltsin’era. This was achieved with a policy of re-nationalization of the gas and oil companies(although not completely), first of all of Gazprom. The national wealth of Russia and its power in relation toother major world powers are dependent from oil and gas exports. There are, however, some problems that
2
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...