The relationship between Russia and the rest of Europe has been extremely precarious throughout its existence. From looking to Europe for guidance to outright opposing the interests of Europe, the stance towards Europe has varied greatly. In the post-Cold War era, Russia’s policies have been formed in an attempt to reclaim control over their former sphere of influence, often clashing with European interests in regards to economic, energy, and security matters facing the world. In the post-Cold War world, Russia has been struggling to reestablish itself as a world power. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia found itself surrounded by hostile nations that feared nationalism and expansionism from Moscow, leading many to seek solace in the form of closer relations to America. Isolated geo-politically, Russia has sought to reclaim what it considers its rightful place in the world through both its foreign policy and economic/energy policies. According to Oudenaren and Tiersky, “Russian’s relationship with Europe is a geopolitical story of major consequence that goes back centuries to the beginnings of the modern European order” (European Foreign Policies 69). While Tsar Peter the Great did much to modernize Russia’s economy and technology, he did so while repressing many aspects of the European enlightenment and even European culture. In going about the modernization in such a way, Russia failed to develop its own sense of foreign policy for the 18th and 19th centuries, frequently “alternating between periods of introspection and retreat and aggressive moves towards Europe along its western frontier” (69). It was this inability to adapt to a changing world that contributed to a series of collapses of Russia’s governme... ... middle of paper ... ... both Western Europe and Russia are attempting to impose their view of politics and international relations upon Eastern Europe has caused both sides to exhibit ambivalent stances towards one another, agreeing with one another only when it is their best interests, and disagreeing on many aspects frequently. While both sides wish to become closer to the other, for the obvious economic and strategic benefits, it is unlikely to happen in the near future without a drastic change in one side’s ideology. Works Cited Tiersky, Ronald, and Oudenaren John. Van. European Foreign Policies: Does Europe Still Matter? Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010. Print. Tiersky, Ronald, Erik Jones, and Saskia Van. Genugten. "Russia." Europe Today: A Twenty-first Century Introduction. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2011. 209-41. Print.
Though the book has no footnotes, it was researched methodically through documents and the work of other scholars. It is very detailed and specific for such a short book. The information about the foreign policy of Russia under Catherine’s rule, and her various wars and military maneuvers, helped explain some of the issues Russian is currently undergoing today in Crimea, the Ukraine and with Turkey. The central theme of reform was also examined in depth, and given the time in which she ruled, and the size of the country, it astonishes me the undertaking Catherine had in front of her. It could take 18 months for an imperial order to reach the far eastern side of Russia, then 18 more months for a reply to get back to her at the
Historically, Russia’s relationship with the West has been shaky at best. From the Crimean War in the 1850’s to alienation following the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution all the way up to the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has been “under attack.” This has forced them to adopt a mentality that is based in self sufficiency and autarky. As Western nations attempt to strengthen democracy in Russia in the 21st century, Russia has responded negatively to these perceived “intrusions.” Therefore it is important to ask what role the West should play in Russia’s development and what is hindering this from happening? In her book Russia: Lost in Transition, Lilia Shevtsova outlines two different ways the West can approach development with Russia: let them figure it out themselves or patiently create an international environment that the Russians feel comfortable in. Shevtsova clearly favors the latter. The West’s involvement is hindered however by double standards, ideological differences, and negative perceptions of the West’s motives by the Russian people. These must first be analyzed before showing how a cautious, assertive approach is the best way for the West to assist in Russian development.
In a speech broadcast to London via radio on October 1st, 1939, Winston Churchill famously said: “I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma (Murdico, 1).” While it is true that Churchill was referring to his inability to predict the country’s actions in regards to the impending world war, the words can be used to illustrate a general confusion and lack of understanding, by both western and eastern powers alike, concerning the massive nation. Russia, as it stands today, currently encompasses about 6.6 million square miles of land (Murdico, 1), and is the largest country in the world by land mass. Along with a large area, Russia also has quite the large reputation; having been through two world wars, governments both communist and imperial, and a slew of civil wars and internal struggles. Russian politics and history is still today a hot topic of conversation, yet very little of this conversation mentions anything pre-WWI. It may be difficult to say exactly why this is so, as a great number of factors, including first an foremost our own cultural biases and perspectives come in to play, but it is true that Russia may confuse us because it is nearly impossible to categorize as being entirely “western” or “eastern” in nature. It is not really European nor is it truly Asian. Instead it has been shaped by a blend of different cultures and political ideologies that certainly include both European and Asian influence. Playing a huge role in this is the geography of the area; its location lends itself to contact with and, more importantly, being attacked by surrounding societies while still being pushed up against the corner of a continent in an almost isola...
Wilson, A., & Popescu, N. (2009). Russian and European Neighborhood Policies Comapred. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 9, 317-331.
Consequently, Russia offers U.S. businesses both high risk, and potentially high rewards. Russian firms and customers admire U.S. technology and know-how, and generally are interested in doing business with U.S. companies. At the same time, there is a tendency in some quarters to suppose that the U.S. is responsible for the changes which have occurred in Russia, especially those which have caused most hardship to individuals and to industry. This sentiment has attracted the support of some political leaders, and in given credence by a significant proportion of the populace. At the same time, a strong U.S. commercial presence is viewed in the Russian Far East as a counterbalance to other regional economic powers.
In an era of discord, chaos, and bloodlust, Russia had temporarily lost its position as an orderly country on the world map. Many events, like the unpopularity of
"Russia: Country Overview." World Geography: Understanding a Changing World. ABC-CLIO, 2014. Web. 6 Feb. 2014.
Russia had been an autocratic government for 300 years under the Romanov Dynasty before the revolution of 1917. When problems started in the early 1900’s most people were serfs that had been freed about 20 years before. In 1914 during World War One, Czar Nicholas II decided to stay in war with Germany despite what the rest of his country thought. Nicholas posed a distraction from the countries problems. His plan was to keep his soldiers minds off of the horrible living conditions of Russia by staying in war with Germany and starting a war with Japan in hope that he would lead his country to a victory; both wars were lost, giving Russian citizens more to be upset about. Russia’s Army was extremely weak, made mainly of peasants, and the cost of war was weighing down on the citizens of Russia. In reality, Nicholas II had no aptitude to be a ruler, and proved himself to be politically incapable of governing a country. Starvation and poor living conditions lined the streets of homeless families. Many people were unemployed, and those who were faced terrible conditions when they were working. Nation-wide discontent for the czar had set in, people begged for him to be dethroned. The country attempted to industrialize, but this just brought more trouble and left the country more distraught than ever, at this point they were behind the rest of the world in every aspect. The war with Germany was over, but Russia was left with a period of economic downfall to deal with.
The induced isolation that Russia has brought upon itself has closed off any foreign ideologies and foreign influence. This is worrying, in terms of another cold war, because this will cause many citizens to believe in Putin’s propaganda and follow his customsm blindly. Another valid point that Cohen makes
The Cold War did not directly involve Europe, but Europe and its various states were key players and key sources of tension between the two great powers, the USSR and the United States of America. The dates of the beginning and end of the Cold War are debated but 1947-1991 is generally agreed upon. In this paper, I will attempt to outline the events of the Cold War which were relevant to Europe and how this affected European integration and relations. ‘Integration’ here refers to the process of transferring powers of decision-making and implantation from national to supranational level. Europe was weakened after World War Two, especially in contrast with the USSR and the USA. Traditional European hegemony was at an end and Europe had to find a new dynamic without becoming involved in conflict with the two new superpowers.
After their defeat in the Crimean war (1853-1856), Russia’s leaders realized they were falling behind much of Europe in terms of modernisation and industrialisation. Alexander II took control of the empire and made the first steps towards radically improving the country’s infrastructure. Transcontinental railways were built and the government strengthened Russia’s economy by promoting industrialisation with the construction of factory complexes throughout...
One of the main issues on the agenda in Russia is the clear understanding and definit...
Even though the Cold war has ended accordingly during the 1990’s, tensions are still alive between the United States and Russia. From Putin’s perspective in this article, his announcement of new strategic weapons has demonstrated how the U.S. demands control on negotiations. The article talks about how the Russians have seen Putin taking initiative to make treaties between the U.S. and Russia on weapon agreements, such as a new START treaty, and rules and conducts in relations to cyberspace. It also points out how Putin could be handling the situation more appropriately.
Historically, Russia has often found itself in a tough situation strategically. Due to its massive size, its borders are always at risk of being invaded by the countries surrounding it. In the early 1700’s it was the Ottomans and the Swedes who encroached on Russian borders. This was to be followed by an invasion by Napoleon, a defeat in the Crimean War, and resistance to Russian expansion in the Balkans in the late 1800’s (J.L. Black, Russia Faces NATO Expansio...
Russia is bullying Europe around because of its economic power in the gas industry. Russia knows that winters are brutal and that European countries have to get natural gas from them.... ... middle of paper ... ...