New directions in Russian international studies: pluralization,Westernization, and isolationism |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Unit of Reproductive Endocrinology, First Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece;2. Department of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy;1. Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Division Environmental Epidemiology and Veterinary Public Health, Utrecht University, Netherlands;2. Department of Pathology and Medical Biology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands;3. GRIAC- Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands;4. Department of Sciences, University College Roosevelt, Middelburg, the Netherlands;1. Pharmacology and Toxicology Laboratory, Dietetics and Nutrition Technology Division, CSIR-Institute of Himalayan Bioresource Technology (CSIR-IHBT), Palampur 176061, India;2. Formulation Laboratory, Dietetics and Nutrition Technology Division, CSIR-Institute of Himalayan Bioresource Technology (CSIR-IHBT), Palampur 176061, India;3. Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad 201002, India |
| |
| Abstract: | The essay argues that Western scholars can improve their understanding of the post-Soviet Russia by studying the discipline of new Russian international relations (IR). The other objective of the essay is to move away from the excessively West-centered IR scholarship by exploring indigenous Russian perceptions and inviting a dialogue across the globe. The essay identifies key trends in Russian IR reflective of the transitional nature of Russia’s post-Soviet change. It argues that Russian IR continues to be in a stage of ideological and theoretical uncertainty, which is a result of unresolved questions of national identity. For describing Russia’s identity crisis, the authors employ Erving Goffman’s concept of stigma defined as a crisis of a larger social acceptance by Russia’s “significant other” (West). The essay suggests that, until this crisis is resolved, much of Russian IR debates can be understood in terms of a search for a national idea. It also introduces the authors of the issue and summarizes their contribution to our understanding of Russian and Western IR. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
