Russia and the Iraq War: was Putin's policy a failure?

Although Russian President Vladimir Putin has been faced with numerous crises since coming to office in 2000, most importantly the war in Chechnya, the Iraq War was the first major international crisis with which his administration was confronted. As in the case of Kosovo for Yeltsin, and the Gulf War for Gorbachev, the Russian President had to deal with conflicting domestic pressures and apparently still more conflicting Russian national and international interests. Indeed, one result of such a situation was a post-war accusation that Putin actually had no policy or at least no consistent policy with regard to the Iraq crisis [Golan, G., 1992. Gorbachev's difficult time in the Gulf. Political Science Quarterly 107 (2), 213–230]. One may remember similar accusations of Gorbachev's “zigzaging” in the Gulf War and claims that the Yeltsin government failed to forge a Kosovo policy altogether [Levitin, O., 2000. Inside Moscow's Kosovo muddle. Survival 42 (1), 130]. Yet, a certain pattern did appear to repeat itself in the Iraqi crisis, namely, pre-war efforts to prevent a military conflict from breaking out, then gradual escalation of rhetoric if not actual involvement, and finally gradual but relatively rapid retreat to conciliatory posture toward the United States (in all three crises). Moreover, Putin was indeed consistent throughout the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods in his opposition to the Americans' use of force against Iraq and in the need to remain within a United Nations framework. Actually, one might ask (and we shall below) why Putin did not abandon the first part of this policy, in order to maintain the second component, when it became certain that the U.S. was going to attack with or without UN Security Council approval.     

Russia and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation: Multilateral Policy or Unilateral Ambitions?

Ambivalence and misconceptions surround the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO). Relying upon the literature on multilateralism, state–IGO relations, regionalism and security governance, this study examines: which goals Russia is pursuing in its CSTO policy; how Russia engages with its individual members within the organisation; how Russia uses it in five foreign policy situations and with which results. It shows that Russia’s CSTO policy is more mixed and complex than is usually assumed. Russia uses the CSTO in pursuit of unilateral ambitions but it is also searching for partners. Russia’s policy has resulted in the formation of instrumental multilateralism within the CSTO.     

More continuity than change? US strategy toward Cuba under Obama and Trump

This article examines the policies implemented by both the Obama and Trump Administrations toward Cuba to evaluate the claim that the ‘Thaw’ of relations between Washington and Havana represents a significant change in US foreign policy toward the island nation. Despite the appearance that the change in policy is a fundamental shift, I argue that the changes in US policy toward Cuba under both Obama and Trump represent changes in the means for pursuing the same historical objectives pursued by the Washington for the past few decades. In other words, the overall strategy and objective of US hegemony in Cuba is the same, with the only change being the means for achieving these ends. The central implication of this is that the ‘Thaw’ in relations between Cuba and the US represents a new, more ‘consensual’ means to instigating the same objective of provoking American-orchestrated political, economic, social and ideological changes in the island nation.     

Making a Difference? NGOs and Civil Society Development in Russia

The role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the development of Russia's civil society has been the focus of academic study since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In light of this literature, this article aims to assess the impact of the movement that has most often been seen as very promising for Russia's future civil society development—the environmental movement—by utilising research undertaken in Samara Oblast’ of the Russian Federation. While the results do reveal some positive contributions to civil society development in Russia, they also exhibit many similarities with other studies in the extant literature, illustrating the relative weakness of Russia's social movements in the area of civil society development.     

Рublic Procurement in Russia: What Hinders Innovation?

ABSTRACT

Using public procurement to foster innovation is a widespread practice worldwide. However, in Russia public procurement has had no significant impact on developing innovation. Empirical research with expert interviews and qualitative and quantitative data analysis has revealed the reasons for poor performance to promote innovation, including tough anti-trust and anti-corruption rules, limited use of tenders as well as “life-cycle cost” criteria, and poor management by the procuring agencies. The analysis revealed the contradiction between the rules designed for fighting corruption and monopolies and the need to stimulate innovation through procurement.     

Cuba: heading for a new development and political model – an introduction

Cuba, this iconic revolutionary island which has brought so much hope to the Third World and, at one point, worry for a nuclear World War III, is going through a process of change never seen since Fidel Castro led his revolutionary forces to triumph around New Year’s of 1959. Yet, 10 years into the change process, led by the younger Castro Raúl (now 85), nobody can really forecast where the country will end up in socio-economic and political terms. In this TWQ subsection, two economists and three political scientists – two Cubans and three European Cuba watchers – analyse the reforms and their possible outcome.     

Biopower and geopolitics as Russia’s neighborhood strategies: reconnecting people or reaggregating lands?

In this article, we address geopolitics and biopower as two different yet mutually correlative discursive strategies of sovereign power in Russia. We challenge the dominant realist approaches to Russia’s neighborhood policy by introducing the concept of biopolitics as its key element, which makes analysis of political relations in the post-Soviet area more nuanced and variegated. More specifically, we address an important distinction between geopolitical control over territories and management of population as two of Russia’s strategies in its “near abroad.”     

Russia’s Climate Policy: International Bargaining and Domestic Modernisation

This article accounts for the gap between Russia’s weak initial implementation of the Kyoto Protocol and its more active engagement in climate policy during the Medvedev presidency. We examine the intersection of climate policy and broader efforts to modernise Russia’s economy, drawing attention to synergies between domestic and international politics. We argue that international factors alone do not explain the change in climate policy as they have remained relatively constant. Instead, greater attention toward climate policy results from efforts to introduce new technologies and increase energy efficiency, spurred by the recent financial crisis and a shift in domestic policy priorities associated with the Medvedev presidency.     

One Europe or None? Monism,Involution and Relations with Russia

Abstract

The crisis in relations between Russia and the European Union (EU) is part of the broader breakdown of the post-Cold War security order. This commentary focuses on structural interpretation and identifies four interlinked processes shaping the crisis: tension between the logic of the enlargement and transformation; a dynamic of involution and resistance; the problem of monism, whereby the expanding self is unable adequately to engage with the un-integrated other; and the recent emergence of ‘other Europes’ that may potentially overcome involution. The erosion of the Atlantic system provides an opportunity for delayed institutional and ideational innovation.     

Gas Supply and EU–Russia Relations

Drawing on New Institutional Economics (NIE) theory, the article argues that EU energy policy towards Russia damages security of supply because it neglects the specific aims and propensities of Russia and Gazprom. EU Commission initiatives are based on the promotion of interdependence through market opening, favouring a policy of competition over security of supply. The reason for this focus is found in the EU's embedded inclination towards liberal markets. Russia, by contrast, has chosen suboptimal state control of natural resources over the frontier capitalism of the 1990s. Sustainability of the current rent based system and geopolitical considerations are essential to Russia and Gazprom. In this situation a pragmatic approach that aims at security of supply and security of demand seems to be more successful. In this approach, liberalisation of the market can only be a long-term goal.     

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.