А Test of Russian Geopolitics:
Russia's Foreign Policy in the Perspective of Geopolitical Theories


Silaev N.Yu.,

MGIMO University, Moscow, Russia, nikolai.silaev@gmail.com

elibrary_id: 435265 |


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2021.01.09
Rubric: Russia Today

For citation:

Silaev N.Yu. А Test of Russian Geopolitics: Russia's Foreign Policy in the Perspective of Geopolitical Theories. – Polis. Political Studies. 2021. No. 1. P. 125-141. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.01.09


The article was supported by the Russian Science Foundation grant “Typology of Modern Military-Political Alliances and Models of Russia’s Relations with Its Allies”, project No. 17-78-20170.


   Buy a digital version in Polismag

Abstract

The crisis in relations between Russia and the West has challenged not only Russia’s foreign policy but also the theories which explain Russia’s role in world politics. Historically, these theories have also pointed to the optimum political course for Moscow. Alexander Dugin’s geopolitics occupy a special place among those theories. Dugin is not recognized in academic circles in Russia, but in the West, Dugin is seen if not as a surrogate propounding the Kremlin’s views then as a rather influential political philosopher. His works are considered an important source of contemporary Russian foreign policy thought, and are used to explain Russian foreign policy. As a consequence, it is well worth assessing the degree to which Dugin’s approaches – and also the views of researchers who evaluate Russia’s foreign policy using his approach – have borne themselves out during this current crisis. In this paper, Dugin’s theory is tested by juxtaposing it against that of Vadim Tsymbursky, another geopolitical thinker well known in Russia but not in the West. Tsymbyrsky’s works were chosen because he has developed an original and holistic theory which explains the place Russia occupies in the world. The theory was built within the same geopolitical paradigm as Dugin’s, but contradicts the latter both with its point of departure and conclusions. Both Dugin’s and Tsymbursky’s theories are compared to the influential American realist Stephen Walt’s theory of the balance of threats. Western scholars pay particular attention to Dugin’s work, which holds Western academics back from developing a nuanced understanding of Russian domestic issues, the complexities thereof, and Russia’s place in the world. Furthermore, this hinders proper understanding of Russia’s foreign policy strategy. Russia’s behavior in the current crisis was more accurately predicted by Tsymbursky’s theory than by Dugin’s. The conclusions made regarding structural geographical factors in Russian’s foreign policy course – which are drawn according to Tsymbursky’s theory – indicate parallels with those which can be made on the basis of the balance of threats theory. As a paradigm, Russian geopolitics maintains its analytical potential, though it could be strengthened by a more thorough analysis of the current shifts in the international order. 

Keywords
geopolitical theories, Tsymbursky, Dugin, Russia’s foreign policy, balance of threats theory, international alliances, relations between Russia and the West.


   Buy a digital version in Polismag
References

EU–Russia Relations in Crisis: Understanding Diverging Perceptions. 2017. Ed. by T. Casier, J. DeBardeleben. London, New York: Routledge. 264 p.

Charap S., Drennan J., Noel P. 2017. Russia and China: A New Model of Great-Power Relations. – Survival. Vol. 59. No. 1. P. 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2017.1282670.

Charap S., Colton T.J. 2017. Everyone Loses: The Ukraine Crisis and the Ruinous Contest for Post-Soviet Eurasia. London: Routledge, 212 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429031571

Graham T. Let Russia Be Russia. The Case for a More Pragmatic Approach to Moscow. – Foreign Affairs. 2019. Vol. 98. No. 6. P. 134 – 152. URL: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2019-10-15/let-russia-be-russia (accessed 22.11.2020).

Hale H.E. A Surprising Connection between Civilizational Identity and Succession Expectations among Russian Elites. Post-Soviet Affairs. 2019. Vol. 35. No. 5-6. P. 406-421. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586x.2019.1662198

Ingram A. 2001. Alexander Dugin: Geopolitics and Neo-Fascism in Post-soviet Russia. – Political Geography. Vol. 20. No. 8. P. 1029-1051. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0962-6298(01)00043-9

Kalinin K. 2019. Neo-Eurasianism and the Russian Elite: The Irrelevance of Aleksandr Dugin’s Geopolitics. Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 35. No. 5-6. P. 461-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2019.1663050

Korolev A. 2019. On the Verge of an Alliance: Contemporary China-Russia Military Cooperation. – Asian Security. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 233-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2018.1463991

Kropatcheva E. 2016. Russia and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation: Multilateral Policy or Unilateral Ambitions? – Europe-Asia Studies. Vol. 68. No. 9. P. 1526-1552. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2016.1238878

Larson D., Shevchenko A. 2014. Russia Says No: Power, Status, and Emotions in Foreign Policy. – Communist and Post-Communist Studies. Vol. 47. No. 3-4. P. 269-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2014.09.003

Laruelle M. 2009. In the Name of the Nation: Nationalism and Politics in Contemporary Russia. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. viii, 254 p.

Levy J.S., Thompson W.R. 2010. Balancing on Land and at Sea: Do States Ally against the Leading Global Power? – International Security. Vol. 35. No. 1. P. 7–43. https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00001

Lynch A.C. 2016. The Inf luence of Regime Type on Russian Foreign Policy toward “the West,” 1992-2015. – Communist and Post-Communist Studies. Vol. 49. No. 1. P. 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2015.12.004

Maliniak D., Peterson S., Powers R., Tierney M.J. 2018. Is international relations a global discipline? Hegemony, insularity, and diversity in the field. Security Studies. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 448–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/09636412.2017.1416824

Malinova O. 2014. Obsession with Status and Ressentiment: Historical Backgrounds of the Russian Discursive Identity Construction. – Communist and Post-Communist Studies. Vol. 47. No. 3-4. P. 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2014.07.001

McFaul M., Sestanovich S., Mearsheimer J.J. 2014. Moscow’s Choice. – Foreign Affairs. Vol. 93. No. 6. P. 167-171.

Mearsheimer J.J. 2014. Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault. – Foreign Affairs. Vol. 93. No. 5. P. 1-12.

Mearsheimer J.J. 2016. Defining a New Security Architecture for Europe that Brings Russia in from the Cold. – Military Review. May-June. P. 27-31.

Melville A. 2018. “Fortress Russia”: Geopolitical Tendencies, Unintended Consequences, or Policy Choices. – The Return of Geopolitics. World Society Foundation. Ed. by A.J. Bergesen, Ch. Suter. Wien, Zurich: LIT. P. 97-112.

Millerman M. 2018. Alexander Dugin’s Heideggerianism. – International Journal of Political Theory. Vol 3. No. 1. P. 1-23.

O Tuathail G., Dalby S. 1998. Rethinking Geopolitics. – Rethinking Geopolitics. Ed. by G. O Tuathail; S. Dalby. N.Y.: Routledge. xii, 333 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203058053

Ofitserov-Belskiy D., Sushenstov A. 2018. Central and Eastern Europe. – Routledge Handbook of Russian Foreign Policy. Ed. by A. Tsygankov. New York: Routledge. P. 282-294.

Pipes R. 1974. Russia under the Old Regime. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. xxii, 361 p.

Riddervold M., Rosen G. 2018. Unified in Response to Rising Powers? China, Russia and EU-US relations. – Journal of European Integration. Vol. 40. No. 5. P. 555-570. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2018.1488838

Rutland P. 1994. Has Democracy Failed Russia? – The National Interest. No. 38. P. 3-12.

Ripsman N.M., Taliaferro J.W., Lobell S.E. 2016. Neoclassical Realist Theory of International Politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199899234.003.0002

Sakwa R. 2008. ‘New Cold War’ or Twenty Years’ Crisis? Russia and International Politics. – International Affairs. Vol. 84. No. 2. P. 241-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2008.00702.x

Sakwa R. 2014. Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands. London: I.B. Tauris. 320 p.

Shlapentokh D. 2007. Dugin Eurasianism: A Window on the Minds of the Russian Elite or an Intellectual Ploy? – Studies in East European Thought. Vol. 59. No. 3. P. 215-236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-007-9030-y

Shlapentokh D. 2008. Alexander Dugin’s Views on the Middle East. – Space and Polity. Vol. 12. No. 2. P. 251-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562570802173448

Shlapentokh D. 2014. The Great Friendship: Geopolitical Fantasies About the Russia/Europe Alliance in the Early Putin Era (2000-2008) – The Case of Alexander Dugin. – Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe. Vol. 22. No. 1. P 49-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2013.873218

Shlapentokh D. 2016. The Ideological Framework of Early Post-Soviet Russia’s Relationship with Turkey: The Case of Alexander Dugin’s Eurasianism. – Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 18. No. 3. P. 263-281. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2015.1096130.

Shlapentokh D. 2017. Alexander Dugin’s Views of Russian History: Collapse and Revival. – Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe. Vol. 25. No. 3. P. 331-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/25739638.2017.1405491

Tolstoy A., McCaffray E. 2015. Mind Games: Alexander Dugin and Russia’s War of Ideas. – World Affairs. Vol. 177. No. 6. P. 25-30.

Tsygankov A.P. 2014. The Frustrating Partnership: Honor, Status, and Emotions in Russia’s Discourses of the West. – Communist and Post-Communist Studies. Vol. 47. No. 3-4. P. 345-354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2014.09.004

Walt S.M. 1989. Alliances in Theory and Practice: What Lies Ahead? – Journal of International Affairs. ol. 43. No. 1. P. 1-17.

Walt S.M. 1990. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. xii, 321 p.

Wohlforth W.C., Zubok V.M. 2017. An Abiding Antagonism: Realism, Idealism and the Mirage of Western–Russian Partnership After the Cold War. – International Politics. Vol. 54. No. 4. P. 405-419. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0046-8

Waltz K. 1979 The Theory of International Relations. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. 251 p.

 

Baranovsky V.G. 2019. New International Order: Overcoming or Transforming the Existing Pattern? – World Economy and International Relations. Vol. 63. No. 5. P. 7-23. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-5-7-23

Baranovsky V.G. 2017. Transformation of Global World Order: Dynamics of Systemic Changes. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 3. P. 71-91. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2017.03.05

Bikbov A.T. 2014. Grammatika poryadka. Istoricheskaya sotsiologiya ponyatii, kotorye menyayut nashu real’nost’. [The Grammar of Order: A Historical Sociology of the Concepts That Change Our Reality]. Moscow: Publishing House of Higher School of Economics. 432 p. (In Russ.)

Bogaturov A.D. 2004. The Concept of World Politics in a Theoretical Discource. – International Trends. Vol. 2. No. 1. P. 16-33. (In Russ.)

Dugin A.G. 1997. Osnovy geopolitiki [The Basics of Geopolitics]. Moscow: Arktogeya. 928 p. (In Russ.)

Entin M.L., Entina E.G. 2017. From Liberal World Order to Normalization of International

Relations. – World Economy and International Relations. Vol. 61. No. 12. P. 5-17. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2017-61-12-5-17

Fomin I., Silaev N., Makarycheva A., Stolyarova S., Shavlay E. 2019. Russia’s Allies Formal Obligations vs. Effective Cooperation. – International Trends. Vol. 17. No. 2. P. 101-130. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2019.17.2.57.6

Ilyin M.V. 1995. The Problems of “Island Russia” Formation and the Contours of its Domestic Geopolitics. – Moscow University Bulletin. Series 12. Political Science. No. 1. P. 37-52. (In Russ.)

Ilyin M.V. 2015. The Dialog on Islands and Straits, on Spaces in-between Seas, and in-between Worlds. – Essays on Conservatism. No. 1. P. 128-135.

Ilyin M.V., Meleshkina E.Yu. 2010. Balto-Chernomor’e: vremena i prostranstva politiki [Baltic – Black Sea Region: Times and Spaces of politics]. Kaliningrad: Baltic State University Publisihg. 385 p. (In Russ.)

Karaganov S.A. 2019. Departure of Military Superiority of the West, and Geo-Economics. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 8-21. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.06.02

Kashin V.B. 2015. Chinese Picture of the Future and Russia’s Place in it. – Tetradi po konservatizmu. No. 5. P. 159-165. (In Russ.)

Khatuntsev S.V. 2011. Limitrophe Territories: Inter-Civilizational Areas of Old and New World. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 2. P. 86-98. (In Russ.)

Khatuntsev S.V. 2015. The West and the “Eurasian Quadriga” (Russia, China, India, Iran). – Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 45-52. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2015.06.07

Kireeva A.A. 2019. Theories of International Relations and Prospects of a Military Alliance Between Russia and China. – International Trends. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 84-114. (In Russ.)

Kolosov V.A. 2011. Critical Geopolitics: The Basics of the Conception and the Practice of Applying in Russia. – Political Science (RU). No. 4. P. 31-52. (In Russ.)

Mezhuev B.V. 2011. Vadim Tsymburskii: ot kon”yunktur zemli k kon”yunkturam vremeni [Vadim Tsymburskii: from Conjunctures of Land to Conjunctures of Time]. – METHOD: Moscow Yearbook of Works from Social Science Disciplines. No. 2. P. 321-345. (In Russ.)

Mezhuev B.V. 2012. Politicheskaya kritika Vadima Tsymburskogo. [Vadim Tsymbursky’s Political Critique]. Moscow: Evropa Publishing. 200 p. (In Russ.)

Mezhuev B.V. 2017. “Island Russia” and the Russian Politics of Identity. – Russia in Global Affairs. Vol. 17. No. 6. P. 162-175. (In Russ.)

Mezhuyev B.V. 2019. Turkey, Russia and Europe from the Perspective of “Civilizational Realism”. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 53-66. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.06.05

Okunev I., Kuchinov A. 2013. Coupling of Space and Power: Diversity of Modern Geopolitics’ Faces. – International Trends. No. 11. P. 74-84. (In Russ.)

Shnirelman V.A. 2016. Alexander Dugin: Building a Bridge between Eschatology and Conspiracy. – Gosudarstvo, religiia, tserkov’ v Rossii i za rubezhom. No. 4. P. 194–221. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2073-7203-2016-34-4-194-221

Tsygankov A.P. 2015. Vadim Tsymbursky’s “Island” Geopolitics. – Tetradi po konservatizmu. No. 1. P. 12-20. (In Russ.)

Tzymbursky V.L. 2016. Morfologiya rossiiskoi geopolitiki i dinamika mezhdunarodnykh system XVIIIXX vekov [The Morphology of the Russian Geopolitics and the Dynamics of International Systems of XVIII‑XX Centuries]. Moscow: Knizhnyi mir Publ. 496 p. (In Russ.)

Tzymbursky V.L. 1993. The Island of Russia: Russian Geopolitics Seen in Perspective. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 5. P. 6-53. (In Russ.)

Tzymbursky V.L. 1999. Geopolitics as a Mode of Vision of the World and an Occupation. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 4. P. 7-28. (In Russ.) URL: https://www.politstudies.ru/article/2602 (accessed 22.11.2020). 

Content No. 1, 2021

See also:


Zvereva T.V.,
On Russia in the World and the World in Russia (N.E. Bazhanova: Ad Memoriam). – Polis. Political Studies. 2015. No5

Busygina I.M., Filippov M.G.,
Political modernization of Russia as condition of growth of her international influence. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No5

Chugrov S.V.,
Moscow University Bulletin. Series 25. International relations and world politics: 5 years on track. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No5

Kazantzev A.A.,
Liberal approach to russian foreign policy. Notes on the margins of the book by V. Petrovsky. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No2

Lukin V.P., Oznobishchev S.K.,
Russia in the World of the 21st Century: Accomplishments and Hopes. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No6

 
 

Archive

   2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991