Cold War redux in US–Russia relations? The effects of US media framing and public opinion of the 2008 Russia–Georgia war

This paper examines the Cold War rhetoric in US–Russia relations by looking at the 2008 Russia–Georgia war as a major breaking point. We investigate the links between media, public opinion and foreign policy. In our content analysis of the coverage in two major US newspapers, we find that the framing of the conflict was anti-Russia, especially in the initial stages of the conflict. In addition, our survey results demonstrate that an increase in the media exposure of US respondents increased the likelihood of blaming Russia exclusively in the conflict. This case study helps us understand how media can be powerful in constructing a certain narrative of an international conflict, which can then affect public perceptions of other countries. We believe that the negative framing of Russia in the US media has had important implications for the already-tenuous relations between the US and Russia by reviving and perpetuating the Cold War mentality for the public as well as for foreign policymakers.     

The Globalization of Nationalism and the Future of the Nation?CState

The state is a specific form of government, distinguished from others by its impersonal character and the recognition on the part of the office holders that they represent the will of the people. This form of government is an implication of nationalism. Thus, every state is a nation?Cstate. Since nationalism is the cultural framework of modernity in all its expressions, every state is also a modern state. The future of the nation?Cstate depends on the future of nationalism. The recent globalization of nationalism into the formidable civilizations of South-East Asia has opened a new era for the latter. Therefore, the future of the nation?Cstate at present looks brighter than ever.     

Towards an Anti-Japanese Territorial Front? Russia and the Senkaku/Diaoyu Dispute

This article examines Russia's position on the Senkaku/Diaoyu dispute. It focuses particularly on the claim that Russia and China are forming an anti-Japanese territorial front. Looking closely at official statements and actions, as well as Russian-language media and scholarship, it finds that Russia, while retaining a position of formal neutrality, clearly considers China's claims more favourably. While this could be seen to have alarming implications by arraying China and Russia on one side against Japan and the USA on the other, the article also finds that Russia's support is not without qualifications and that its place in the conflict is not yet entrenched.     

What Generates,Constitutes and Causes Opportunity-driven Violence? The Case of West Kalimantan

Abstract

This article uses the example of West Kalimantan to show some new ways of studying opportunities for violence, contributing especially to the so-called ‘sons of the soil’ conflict debate. By showing that the opportunity structure in West Kalimantan was not primarily material, but social, related to ways to circumvent fear of and norms against violence, this article attempts to update the theoretical premises of the traditional security studies approach to obstacles to conflict and opportunities for violence. The intention is to show how socially constructed realities are relevant in offering and denying opportunities for violence, and how the study of the meanings of actions reveals ways in which opportunities for violent demonstrative argumentation are born in local conflict discourses. The case study shows how powerful narratives enable the justification of violent action and how identities and violent policies mutually constitute each other. This way the empirical evidence calls for understanding the generative and constitutive sources of violence, which are not simply mechanistic causes of conflict.     

Russia,the West and the 2007–2008 Electoral Cycle: Did the Kremlin Really Fear a ‘Coloured Revolution’?

In the period before the 2007–2008 elections, there was much talk from the regime about the danger of a ‘coloured revolution’ in Russia. The article considers whether the fear of revolution was genuine or artificially created to discredit opposition and strengthen support for the regime. It seems that tensions inside the regime and the unexpected occurrence of the previous coloured revolutions led to real fears of revolution in Russia, although this was in fact unlikely. Russian policy towards the West and the rival election programmes are examined to investigate whether the regime was creating an ‘enemy image’ of the West.     

The architecture of annexation? Russia’s bilateral agreements with South Ossetia and Abkhazia

Following the August War of 2008, Russia recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states. Both territories remain dependent upon Moscow for their security and economic survival, and they remain dominated militarily, economically, and even politically by their northern patron. These relationships are structured, in part, by a series of bilateral agreements signed since September 2008, which have created a comprehensive legal architecture which, in turn, deeply affects the state- and nation-building processes in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. This article examines 78 agreements signed between Russia and these territories between 2008 and 2015 in order to better understand these processes and how they interact with and are influenced by their respective relationships with the Russian Federation. It groups these agreements into three categories: the 2008 “friendship” agreements which created the initial baseline for the bilateral relationship; the numerous, more narrowly defined documents which fleshed-out this relationship; and the “alliance” and “integration” agreements signed with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, respectively, through which Moscow sought to take its relations with these territories to a qualitatively new level. Of particular focus is the degree to which these territories exhibited signs of independent agency and formal autonomy, as well as the differences between them.     

United Russia’s Primaries and the Strength of Political Machines in the Regions of Russia: Evidence from the 2016 Duma Elections

Abstract

The primary elections of the United Russia party serve as a tool for party organisation and voter mobilisation. In this study, we employ United Russia’s capacity to mobilise voter turnout in the 2016 primary elections as an indirect indicator of the strength of party-controlled regional political machines. Our analysis of the results of the 2016 Duma elections in 83 regions of Russia demonstrates that voter turnout in the spring 2016 party primaries of United Russia to a significant extent explains cross-regional variation in party success.