Russia and the United States on the world stage. Part III. The role of messianism, exceptionalism, ambition, and survival in forging rivalry

Graham T.,

Council on Foreign Relations, New York, USA, tgraham@cfr.org

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.03.05

Rubric: Orbis terrarum: international relations

For citation:

Graham T. Russia and the United States on the world stage. Part III. The role of messianism, exceptionalism, ambition, and survival in forging rivalry. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 3. P. 50-66. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.03.05

Abstract

Russian messianism and American exceptionalism played radically different roles in shaping the foreign policy of the two great powers. Messianism had little influence on Russian statesmen, who operated largely according to the principles of realpolitik. This is true even of the Soviet period, when ideological fervor quickly yielded to considerations of national interest. For the most part, Russian rulers rarely sought to dominate the world in the name of a Russian brand of universalism and exceptionalism; rather they were focused on preserving the fundamental character of the Russian state and their seat at the high table of global geopolitics among the other great powers. American exceptionalism, by contrast, infused elites and public alike, creating a unique approach to world affairs among great powers. The drive to propagate American values by example gave way to a vigorous crusade to extend their reach across the globe in the decades after the Second World War. American global leadership became a core tenet of American foreign policy, which was driven by a universalist ideology. American dynamism sharpened the rivalry with Russia. As the country pushed outwards into Eurasia in search of commercial opportunity and eventually to propagate its democratic values, it ran up against Russia’s long security perimeter. Since the United States could no more abandon its search for new markets or effort to propagate American values than Russia could renounce the unique character of its statehood, enduring ideological and geopolitical rivalry was inevitable.

Keywords

Russian messianism, American exceptionalism, Realpolitik, Manifest Destiny, Muscovite State, balance of power.

Full Text

References

Bailyn, B. (2017). The ideological origins of the American revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Billington, J. (1966). The icon and the axe: an interpretative history of Russian culture. New York: Vintage Books.

Black, C. (1962). The pattern of Russian objectives. In I. Lederer (Ed.), Russian Foreign Policy: Essays in Historical Perspective (pp. 3-38). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Carter, D. (1997). American exceptionalism: an idea that will not die. American Studies in Scandinavia. 29(2), 76-84.

Cherniavsky, M. (1958). ‘Holy Russia’: a study in the history of an idea. The American Historical Review. 63(3), 617-637.

Dallin, A. (1962). The use of international movements. In I. Lederer (Ed.), Russian Foreign Policy: Essays in Historical Perspective (pp. 311-349). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Edwards, J. (2012). An exceptional debate: the championing of and challenge to American exceptionalism. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 13(2), 351-367.

Fuller, Jr. W. (1992). Strategy and power in Russia 1600-1914. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Greenfeld, L. (1992). Nationalism: five roads to modernity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Hietala, T. (1985). Manifest design: American exceptionalism and empire. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Hosking, G. (1997). Russia: people and empire 1552-1917. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Hosking, G. (2001). Russia and the Russians: a history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kagan, R. (2007). Dangerous nation. New York: Vintage Books.

Kaplan, R. (2012). The revenge of geography. New York: Random House.

Keenan, E. (1986). Muscovite political folkways. Russian Review, 45(2), 115-181.

Kissinger, H. (1994). Diplomacy. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Kupchan, C. (2020). Isolationism: a history of America’s efforts to shield itself from the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

LeDonne, J. (1997). The Russian Empire and the world, 1700-1917: the geopolitics of expansion and containment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Lieven, D. (2000). Empire: the Russian Empire and its rivals. New York, NY: Yale University Press.

Malia, M. (1961). Alexander Herzen and the birth of Russian socialism. New York, NY: Gorsset & Dunlap.

Onuf, P. (2000). Jefferson’s empire: the language of American nationhood. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.

Ostrowski, D. (2006). ‘Moscow the Third Rome’ as historical ghost. In S. Brooks (Ed.), Byzantium: Faith and Power (1261-1557): Perspectives on Late Byzantine Art and Culture (pp. 170-179). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Restad, H. (2012). Old paradigms in history die hard in political science: US foreign policy and American exceptionalism. American Political Thought, 1(1), 53-66. https://doi.org/10.1086/664586

Rey, M.-P. (2012). Alexander I: the tsar who defeated Napoleon. DeKalb, IL: NIU Press.

Riasanovsky, N. (1959). Nicholas I and official nationality in Russia 1825-1855. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Ulam, A. (1962). Nationalism, panslavism, communism. In I. Lederer (Ed.), Russian Foreign Policy: Essays in Historical Perspective (pp. 39-67). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Wertheim, S. (2009). Reluctant liberator: Theodore Roosevelt’s philosophy of self-government and preparation for Philippine independence. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 39(3), 494-518.

Yanov, A. (1981). The origin of autocracy: Ivan the Terrible in Russian history. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Klyuchevskiy, V. (1987). Kurs russkoy istorii [The course of Russian history]. Lectures 3, 4. In V.O. Klyuchevskiy, Works in 9 vols (pp. 63-89). Moscow: Mysl’. (In Russ.)

Content No. 3, 2022