week 2 lectures with graphics

8/11/2019 Week 2 Lectures With Graphics

1/27

Week 2:

The Changing World Order: Rising Powers and International Institutions

2.1 Overview of Week 2

Hello there and welcome back again to our course, The Changing Global Order. This week is we

will look at some of these changing global power constellations. Obviously, there are a lot of

changes on the global level at the moment. Think about the rise of the so-called BRICs. We'll

hear more about these countries in this week's sessions. We will first have lectures by Professor

Rob De Wijk, who will look at changing global power structures and, for example, the role of

China. Then we'll have lectures by Professor Andre Gerrits, who will have a special emphasis on

the role of Russia. We see a lot of different changes on this global order and, obviously, these

are fascinating subjects to look at.

Now, maybe, meanwhile, you have done the test on week one, and you probably realized that

it was not all that easy. Obviously, thinking about theories of international relations is a bit

tough at times. So if you managed to really do well on this test, you're in [good] shape. Okay, let

us now enjoy the lectures that we will have in this week.

2.2 Power Politics (Prof. Dr. Rob de Wijk)

Hello my name is Rob de Wijk. I'm a professor of international relations and security. This

lecture is about power politics in a multi-polar world. There is little scholarly disagreement that

since the end of the Cold War, a multi-polar world has slowly been re-emerging. Such a system

is less stable than a uni-polar or bipolar one, a distinction that is often made is that between

the West and the rest.


2/27

The Indian-American journalist and author Fareed Zakaria

argued that, due to the rise of the rest, we're now seeing the

emergence of a post-American world. In this world, the United

States and Europe compete with China and other emerging

powers over economic interests, which will spark new politicaland security issues. This has led to a new debate on geo-

economics.

With a secure access to resources and

energy as dominant drivers of more

than geo-politics, countries around the

globe no longer focus solely on

territorial defense. Instead they also now consider the defense of vital

economic interests. Indeed both industrialized and industrializing

nations demand unrestrictive access to these resources, particularly

energy supplies, critical materials and food. This is a prerequisite for

continued economic growth and social political stability. This geo-

economics explains why major in-state conflicts can and do erupt over

economic issues and will continue to do so.

MANIFESTATIONS OF THE RESOURCE STRUGGLE: Certain manifestations of this resource

struggle are already visible. On September the 7th, 2010 for instance, a Chinese trawler collided

with a Japanese Coast Guard patrol vessel near the

uninhabited, but resource rich Senkaku and Diaoyu islands. Theincident and the detention of the Chinese captain, led to major

diplomatic fallout between the two nations. Japan eventually

relented, but only after China reportedly had already halted

critical exports of rare Earth minerals to its rival.

A similar incident took place in April 2012 between China and the

Philippines over the disputed Scarborough Shoal, which China claims as

an integral part of its territory. When a Philippine warship sought to

apprehend eight Chinese fishing vessels for illegal fishing, it found its

[route] blocked by two Chinese surveillance vessels. As the standoff

continued, China warned its population against travel to the

Philippines and raised trade barriers on imported pineapples and

bananas. Since then China has maintained a military presence in

Scarborough Shoal and implemented new legislation barring non

Chinese vessels from entering without authorization.


3/27

RESPONSE OF THE U.S. The rise and increase regional assertiveness

of China has triggered a debate in the United States in the pivotal

issue of re-balancing and re-entrenchment. U.S. Policy makers are

reducing the country's strategic commitments in response to a

decline in its relative power and defense budget. As a result,Washington's foreign policy doctrines have been marked by

increased retrenchment, deep cuts in military spending and the

shifting of more of the United States global defense burdens onto

its allies.(See chart below.) Indirectly America's rebalancing to Asia

also points at increased danger of major power conflict.

US fears that the rise of China, and its mounting anti

access and area denial capabilitiescould pose a threat toits naval forces. In particular it believes new Chinese anti

ship ballistic missiles, such as the F21D which could sink an

air craft carrier with a single hit,

and our game changes. In

response, U.S. military presented

the Air-Sea Battle concept, which

calls for strengthening of bases in

the Pacific and dispersal of forces and the ability to conduct long-range

operations. In addition, in response to Chinese assertions that theSouth China Sea was a core interest of Chinese sovereignty, the Obama

administration stated in 2010 that freedom of maritime navigation in

the region is a US national interest.

Although this may seem far-fetched to some, incidents in the

Indian Ocean and the South China Sea could severely affect not

just global security, but also our security. Major power conflict put

trade routes, sea lines of communication, and access to trademarkets and resources at risk. Both developed and emerging

countries are extremely vulnerable to disruptions in the supplyof

resources.


4/27

A 2010 report by the European Commissionidentified 14 critical minerals.

The report observes that many emerging economies are pursuing industrial

development strategies by means of trade, taxation and investment,

instruments aimed at preserving their resource base for their exclusive use.

In some cases, the situation is furthercompounded by a high level of concentration

on the production in a few countries as you can

see on the map below. There's many reserves of critical materials

can only be found in a limited number of countries. Diversification

of supply is not an option. If a country for whatever reason stops

the export of raw materials or energy, Europe may have no other

option but to attempt to force its access to these commodities. In

extreme cases this clearly could lead to armed conflict. Moreover

as we know now, power politics takes place in Europe, as well.

POWER POLITICS IN EUROPE. In early 2014, Russia took advantage of perceived economic,

military and, consequently, political weakness of Europe, to carry out the annexation of the

Crimea. We should understand here that, for Russia, power politics is not about geo-economics,


5/27

but about ideas of restoring past greatness, and undoing an

aberration of history. This is the aim of the Soviet Union. This

form of power politics is fueled by a feeling of humiliation by

the west.

This is about politics as well.

Russia accuses the west about

taking advantage of Russia's

weakness after the collapse of the

Soviet Union when Russia was

unable to stop German

reunification, the enlargement

of NATO, the 1999 Kosovo war,

or the EU's Eastern Partnership. The way Europe and America

responded demonstrated that President Putin's assessment of a

possible reaction of the west was right. Apart from imposing

largely symbolic sanctions, Europe could do little to stop Russia's

annexation of the Crimea.

Interestingly, in Asia, America's response was very different

when China established an air defense zone in the East China

Sea, extending over the disputed islands. This zone requires for

an aircraft to report to the Chinese authorities before entering

air space. One day after its establishment, U.S. responded bysending a pair of B-52 bombers on patrol into the zone. A

similar military show of force did not take place during the

Russian annexation of the Crimea.

CONSEQUENCES OF POWER POLITICS. So what are the

consequences of power politics? In the first place, it could

weaken the legitimacy or value of international treaties and

agreements. NATO's intervention in Kosovo in 1999 was notsupported by U.N. resolution. Consequently, humanitarian

operation was considered illegal by Russia and China. On the

other hand, by occupying the Crimea, Russia herself violated

U.N. charter, OSE [??] charter for European security, the

Budapest agreements, and all NATO Russia agreements. In

March 2014, a large majority of countries in the United Nations


6/27

general assembly dismissed the annexation as illegal, even as Russia sought to rally real

support for their idea of regional self determination. Remarkably even China, Russia's long time

ally, abstained from supporting its position in the U.N.

By violating the international rule of law major powers will

weaken global institutionssuch as the United Nations as well.

Another consequence is that Europe, which abandoned

traditional power politics after the end of the Second World War,

is now confronted with a world which it believed belonged to the

past. America's re-balancing to the east, a policy of retrenchment

and a concept of leading from behind all indicate that Europe

must be able to reassert and defend its vital interest, if

necessary without America's support. In the past few years,

before the Crimea, mostEuropean governments focused

on the sovereign debt crisis, which had plunked it into

institutional and political crisis. And they neglected the

reemergence of power politics. However, Russia's seizure of

the Crimea has made clear that Europeans have no answer

when confronted with the power politics of major powers in

its own neighborhood. Europe has come to suspect that if it

had been militarily strong and politically united, President

Putin might not have risked this confrontation of the Crimea.This is what power politics are all about.

So in summary, a multiple world is emerging. This has led to a

new debate on fuel economics and power politics. By

definition, a multi-polar world is less stable than the world we

know. In the next video we will look at the role of China in

global affairs.


7/27

A clearer map from lecture note. Source: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-

materials/files/docs/crm-report-on-critical-raw-materials_en.pdf

Resource for detailed (tabulated) materials analysis: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-annexes_en.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-report-on-critical-raw-materials_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-report-on-critical-raw-materials_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-report-on-critical-raw-materials_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-annexes_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-annexes_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-annexes_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-annexes_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-annexes_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-report-on-critical-raw-materials_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/raw-materials/files/docs/crm-report-on-critical-raw-materials_en.pdf


8/27

2.3 Rise of China ( Prof. Dr. Rob de Wijk)

In this video, we will look at one of the most important rising powers of today, China. This

graph shows that today, political change is only about one country, China. As you can see on

this graph, for some years now the Western world is in steady relative decline. So it should

come as no surprise that China has increasingly become the focus of the Western worlds

geopolitical calculations.

U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton made this very clear in 2011. She wrote a famous article

in Foreign Policy magazine. In this article she argued that the Asia-Pacific has become the key

driver of geopolitics. The key issue is that in the Asia-Pacific, only

China truly translates its increased economic power into military,

and consequently political power.

Now, it is good to remember that until the Middle Ages, China was

the most powerful country on the globe. Have another look at the

graph. Until 1820, China was still easily the biggest economy. In

those days, China's GDP accounted for more than 30% of the world's

total. But during the Industrial Revolution, the Western world's rapid development left China in

the dust. But historically, this is only a very recent development.


9/27

So for historical, psychological, and political reasons, the Chinese leadership consider China's

recent rise as merely the restoration of a great power to its rightful place under the sun. In fact,

the Chinese word for China, Zhong Guo, literally translates to

middle country, the country at the center of the world.

CHINAS 2013 DEFENSE WHITE PAPER. So China's rise is about

reclaiming what it sees as its rightful place in history. This is

psychologically and politically very important when we try to

understand China. China's recent white paper recognized the

shifting geopolitical center of gravity towards the east. I quote

from the white paper,

the Asia-Pacific region has become an increasingly significant stage for world

economic development and strategic interaction between major powers. The U.S. is

adjusting its Asia-Pacific security strategy, and the regional landscape is undergoingprofound changes

from this defense strategy. Moreover the white paper, or the defense strategy, identified signs

of increasing hegomonism, power politics, neo individualism, and the knowledge that this could

lead to competition in international military field.

At the same time there is also close cooperation between China and

the west. For example, in February 2012, European Union officials

went to Beijing in search of a Chinese contribution to the Eurozone

rescue fund. In addition, China invests strategically in Europe's

infrastructure and high tech industry. Due to its interventions tosave the Euro, growing trade relations, increasing for indirect

investments and huge dollar research, China plays an increasingly

dominant role in the Western world.

What then could be the source of conflict? Well in the first place

industrialized and industrializing nations alike need reliable and


10/27

unrestricted access to resources, particularly energy supplies, critical materials, and food. This is

requisite for continued economic growth and social political stability.

ACCESS TO RESOURCES. Between 2000 and 2008, China's

consumption of metals such as aluminum, copper, lead, nickel,

tin and zinc grew by an average of 16% per year, whereas the

demand for these minerals in the rest of the world grew by only

1% per year. Therefore access to resources is an important driver

for China's foreign policy. This could of course lead to

competition with other nations around the globe.

Food security is of particular importance. Very small increases in

food prices could have profound repercussions. For example, it

could create social unrest. When food becomes scarcer in

countries with a high food dependency rate, shown below indark blue, the cost of living to people can increase hugely almost

overnight. This carries a high risk of popular unrest and civil instability. In recent years climate

change and pollutions are already affecting food production in China. Consequently China

bought arable land in Africa and other parts of the world.


11/27

The key issue is that with China's rise, its global interests grow

with it. China needs an annual economic growth over 8% per year

to accommodate the domestic growth, to satisfy domestic needs.

A downturn in such growth could result in social unrest, which

would spark instability and ultimately, political fires. Uprisings orrevolutions have been an essential part and recurring part of

China's history. The Chinese leadership is, of course, aware of this

and therefore takes extreme care to maintain its social contract

with the people.

Access to raw materials and resource nationalismare two sides

of the same coin. A notable example is China export quota for

rare earth minerals. China produces 97% of the world's rare earth

metals, seventy elements critical to high-tech and green-tech manufacturing. Resource

nationalism and high power politics are two sides of the same

coin as well.

Beijing is already pursuing increasingly assertive policies in an

attempt to gain access to raw materials in Africa. Countries could

try to acquire bases in resource rich countries and could transfer

arms to resource rich or transit countries. China is one of the

biggest arms suppliers to resource-rich African states such as

Sudan and Zimbabwe. This development could turn the Indian

Ocean into the flashpoint of future geopolitical strife.

CHINAS DEFENSE INVESTMENTS. China's hunger for resources

explained numerous incidents with regional powers around the

South China Sea and with Japan.

This underscores the importance of the security of strategic

routes, as there are numerous potential flash points. Some

observers argue that war cannot be ruled out.

Chinese rhetoric is supported by investments in the build of its

armed forces. Chinese defense expenditure grew more thanmost other countries according to SIPRI. Between 1998 and

2010, global military expenditure increased every year in real

terms. With double digit growth rates for last two decades China

has had the fastest growing defense budget by far. In March

2014, President Xi Jinping of China announced China's biggest

rise in military spending in three years. The official figure would


12/27

budget at a 12.2% increase. China seeks to develop more high-

tech weapons and to beef up coastal and air defenses. In fact

the real figure might be even higher.

In 2010, indiscretion started over extra regional ambitions. This

marked a shift from a brown water navy into a blue water

navy, capable of operating in distant places.The deployment of

a Chinese warship off the coast of Somalia to join the battle

against piracy is a clear expression of the new policy. In terms

of size, the Chinese navy already possesses around 190 major

combatant vessels. It is on-course to overtake the U.S. Navy by

2020. Moreover to support its future expeditionary

capabilities, China is producing force projection capabilities.

This includes the first aircraft carrier the Liaoning.

CHINA ON A COLLISON COURSE. It doesn't mean that China is

aiming at a new kind of aggressive or imperial world dominance.

China considers itself as a responsible world leader. It prefers soft

power and it puts the improving welfare of its own people firstbefore interfering with world affairs. The Chinese leaderships

stress peaceful rights. In the early 21st century, president Hu

Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao acknowledged that the rise

of the new power often results in challenges to global political

order and even war. Yet both leaders emphasized that China's rise

will not pose a threat to peace and stability, and that other


13/27

nations will benefit from it. Finally, the Chinese model of

autocracy and state capitalism remains extremely attractive

for other governments. In the eyes of some global leaders, the

financial crisis, which started in 2008, proved that China's

model is superior over the western neo-liberal capitalist

system. Indeed, this suggests that in China, wealth growth,

based on soft power could eventually come to replaceAmerica's and Europe's soft power.

So, concluding, geo-political change is about one country,

China. The key issue is that China translates its economic

power into military and political power. This has profound

geopolitical consequences. In the next video, my colleague

Professor Gerrits will look at the role of Russia in current

global order.


14/27

Note: The drivers of vulnerability reference is an interactive map. Suggest visiting the

referenced website for better clarity.

http://www.hcss.nl/dossiers/drivers-of-vulnerability-monitor/21/

2.4 The Role of Russia (Prof. Dr. Gerrits)

Hi. My Name is Andre Gerrits. I'm a professor of Russian and International Studies at Leiden

University. In this video we'll discuss the shifts of global power, changing power relations at a

global level, including the emergence of new powers. I will pay special attention to the Russian

Federation, which might be seen as the world's most important re-emerging power.

POWER SHIFTS. Political power is shifting and it is diffusing into

various directions. It moves from one state or group of states to

another, which is called of course by the well known phrase, the

decline of the west and the rise of the rest . But power also

diffuses. It leaks away from the states to other actors, to other

institutions or to wired individuals, or groups of individuals. But in

global politics the central assumption of the shifting power

paradigm is actually the rise of new major states.

China, of course is the primary example. Within a relatively shorttime span, the People's Republic of China has reached the second

position in almost all global rankings, obviously behind the United

States. China is the C in the BRIC abbreviation, which stands for Brazil, Russia, India and China,

which is sometimes headed by the S for South Africa.
http://www.hcss.nl/dossiers/drivers-of-vulnerability-monitor/21/http://www.hcss.nl/dossiers/drivers-of-vulnerability-monitor/21/http://www.hcss.nl/dossiers/drivers-of-vulnerability-monitor/21/


15/27

The BRIC is an exclusive clubof prominent countries of which no

single affiliate has ever officially applied for membership. The

notion was actually coined by an investment banker Jim O'Neilof

Goldman Sachs in a 2001 publication, Building Better Economic

Bricks.Well, O'Neil is a banker and as a banker he was primarily

interested of course in investment opportunities. He believed at

that time that these four economies would offer excellent, the

best, prospects for the growth and expansion, including of course

Western investment.


16/27

Well, from a collective of emerging economies, BRIC gradually

developed into a geopolitical notion, indicating the four major

rising powers at the global level, Brazil, Russia, India and China,

apparently were the prime challengers of the International

Liberal or Western order, which was and still is dominated by theUnited States, and to a lesser extent, Europe. Is BRIC, the BRIC

notion more than a catchy phrase and how do you actually

recognize an emerging power? And do these four countries have

enough in common to put them in the very same category of

emerging powers? I will focus on Russia because Russia is

perhaps the most exotic member of the BRIC Club.

How do we recognize an emerging power when we see one? My

argument is that an emerging power, a rising power, is defined by

three criteria.

1. Rapidly growing economy of substantial scale.

2.

An increasing political weight

3. The ambition to change the existing power relations.

That's absolutely crucial. In other words, a rising power combines

growing economic and political mass and a revisionist ambition.

Well, in economic terms, Russia is a relatively great power. Its GDP is

in the global top ten, although far behind the numbers one and two,

the United States and China. Its GDP per capita ranks about 40th which is substantially lower of

course than that of the United States but higher than China's. But Russia reaches particularly

high in some geographically relevant rankings. Not only is it the worlds' largest country (it

covers about one sixth of the earth) but it also borders most of the world's unstable and

explosive regions. Additionally it's one of the world's largest energy suppliers and a major arms

producer. So it's an important country indeed, but is it an emerging power? What do you think?

Is Russia truly an emerging power? (From the first 268 student responses, 68% said yes.)

I would say that the answer is negative. Different from Brazil, India and especially China, Russiais not a rising or emerging power. The Russian Federation is the successor state, as you know,

to the Soviet Union, which during the Cold War was one of the two major global superpowers.

The Soviet Union was feared and sometimes even admired far beyond its own borders. Well the

Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and Russia, one of the union's 15 constituent republics, became

independent.


17/27

During the 1990's, the country went through an unprecedented deep

political and economic crisis. Russia became only a shadow of the

former Soviet Union. It was only during the 2000s, under the

presidency of Vladimir Putin that Russia slowly re-emerged again.

The critical factor was not so much the administrative capabilities ofits leadership, which were generally low, but enormous price rises

for oil and gas on the world market. Russia finally recovered from its

economic malaise and Putin obviously became a popular and

powerful leader. The Russian Federation succeeded to reclaim its

position as a great power, maybe not a global great power but

certainly a regional one.

RUSSIA: THE VERDICT. In my opinion Russia is not an emerging

power, like China, India and Brazil. At best I would argue it is a re-

emerging power. It has huge resources, but mostly in the energy

fields. In geopolitical terms, Russia is an ambiguous power. There is

no doubt that it has a clear revisionist agenda. It wants to change the

global power relations, particularly the dominant, and as all Russians,

or practically Russians would have, the arrogant position of the

United States. Little love is lost I would argue between the two

protagonists of the Cold War. But different from most emerging

countries, Russia is also a status quo power. Russia has a clear stake


18/27

in the global order. It's one of the world's most important nuclear powers. It has a permanent

seat obviously in the U.N. Security Council, and it is a member, although it was suspended after

the Crimea crisis in 2014, of the G8. But Russia's position today is, to a very large extent, a

legacy of the Cold War. It's a legacy which the Russian Federation cherishes carefully.

So the BRIC actually represents a mixed group of countries. We have democracies and

authoritarian regimes, we have divergent geopolitical situations and we have a large variety of

interests and ambitions. The whole of the BRIC I would argue is actually smaller than the sum of

its parts. Interestingly, it is Russia that proved to be one of the most active members of the

BRIC. The transformation of BRIC from a group of growing economies into a club of rising

powers was mainly due to Russia's efforts. The Russian Federation obviously considers the

break an important political asset, an instrument to compensate for its own failures and

shortcomings.

Russia is not an exemplary power. Russia generates little admiration beyond its own borders. In

other words, Russia has a poor brand name. What the Russian leadership is actually doing is

using BRIC not only to mobilize more revisionist power at the global level, mostly against theUnited States, but also to bolster its own reputation and influence at home.

RUSSIA TODAY. The collapse of the Soviet Union was an enormous blow to the Russians back

in 1991. They lost their empire. They lost their country. They actually lost their global position.

Russia appears to have finally recovered now from this devastating moment in its recent

history.


19/27

Today the country's foreign policy is driven by a new forceful

combination of ambitions. One, power, two, influence, but also

and very importantly status and honor. Russia wants to be

taken seriously. The Russians are

absolutely convinced that theywere belittled and degraded by the

Western powers after the Cold War.

And the 2014 annexation by Russia

by the Crimea needs to be seen

against this background. Putin drew

a line in the sand. The occupation of

Crimea saved Russia's influence and

honor in the general opinion in the

Kremlin. Putin realized that the

dismemberment of Ukraine could

seriously jeopardize his relations with the West, but he also

knew that it would strengthen his position at home. His act of

aggression was supported by a large majority of the Russian

population. The annexation of the Crimea, I would argue, is not

the beginning of a new era in global politics, although Putin

wants us to believe that. It's an expression of Russia's anger and

frustration rather than of its growing influence and strength.

Russia may be a re-emerging power, but it remains still far too

weak to actually define the global order of things.

In this video, we discussed the role and relevance of Russia among today's emerging powers.

Power is shifting away from the Trans Atlantic world to other regions to Asia in particular. As a

major power during the cold war and a re-emerging power in today's world, Russia in a way

symbolizes the link between the old and the new . In the next video we will dive deeper into

the subject. We will look more specifically at Russia's role in international organizations.


20/27

2.5 RussiaRole in International Organizations (Prof. Dr. Gerrits)

Hello. Welcome back. In our last video, we discussed power shifts at the global level, including

the role of newly emerging powers especially the BRICs. In this video, we will again zoom in on

Russia, the Russian Federation, that is an old, new member, among these emerging powers,

and we will look specifically, at Russia's role in the international organizations.

Russia's changingrole in international organizations

is, of course, closely linked tofluctuations

in the country's foreign policy. From 1991, that is, since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the

country's foreign and international relations went through

different stages, clearly different stages. These successive phases

were all narrowly linked with the country's internal situation,

obviously, but also with its global environment. Given that

Russia is the successor state to the Soviet Union, one of the two

major superpowers during the cold war, and that Russia still is

the largest, and one of the more powerful countries in the world,

it has a wide range of global and regional institutional affiliations.

In diplomatic terms, I would argue, Russia is a truly globalized

power. And this is of great importance to Russia and the

Russians, but also to the rest of the world.

There are very few global issues that can be effectively dealt with

without the active participation of Russia. Conflict resolution in


21/27

the Middle East and Afghanistan are examples. Terrorism in the

Caucasus and the Central Asian, but also the future of European

integration, given our competition between the EU and Russia,

and other issues which need the participation of Russia to be

effectively solved, the climate issue, water, and, obviously,finally, energy.

MEMBERSHIP IN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. Russia of

course, is one of the five permanent members of The United

Nations Security Council, and this is one of the country's most

crucial international privileges some would argue, which Russia

uses extensively, and strategically, especially to block initiatives

which it considers detrimental to its own national interest. A

possible intervention to the Syrian civil war is a good example.

Russia's also a member of the Council of Europe, which once was exclusively a club of

democracies, and currently is an organization that spans the whole of the Eurasian continent.

Russia's even formally affiliated with NATO. It's linked with the Trans Atlantic Military Alliance

through the so-called NATO-Russia council, and this affiliation gives Russia a very limited say in

NATO affairs. In short, Russia has a voice, but not a veto, in NATO.

Russia's participation in international institutions is part, obviously,

of its foreign policies in general. And a countrys foreign policy is

formed, I would argue, by three variables: 1) its domesticresources or capabilities, 2) its environment regional and global,

and 3) the ambitions of a countrysleadership.

RUSSIAS FOREIGN POLICY IN THE LAST TWO DECADES. The

foreign policy of Russia during the last two decades can be divided

into two, separate stages which are loosely connected with its


22/27

major leaders, Boris Nicolai Yeltsin and Vladimir Vladmirvic Putin. During the largest part of the

1990s under Yeltsin, Russia's domestic resources were extremely limited, and its international

environment was highly unfavorable. The country was only very slowly recovering from the

collapse of the Soviet Union, and the international context was dominated by defeat, and

marginalization. The West was in a triumphant mood, so Yeltsin had actually few other optionsbut to follow this very same West. Russian foreign policy was unprecedentedly pro Western

during the 1990s.

This situation changed from the end of that decade, under president Putin. Russia's domestic

conditions improved considerably, state power was consolidated and strengthened, the

economy recovered, the Putin leadership was popular and almost undisputed, and at the very

same time, the international situation changed as well, and again for the better. Prices for oil

and gas went up. Russia's finances improved significantly. International terrorism, in the wake

of 9-11, gave Russia an increasingly important geopolitical position. Russia even became a

partner in the war on terror. And finally, the days of western optimism and hubris were over,

from the 2000's. The United States struggled with unpopular wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. And

the European Union struggled as well, mostly with itself. Russian foreign policy changed,

accordingly.

The Russian Federation sees itself, considers itself as an

autonomous, revisionist power, in, I would add, a truly

[INAUDIBLE] world. What are its major foreign policy

features? One, Russia is an assertive, and a revisionist power.

It has the clear ambition to change the current rules of thegame. Aspect number two, Russian foreign policy is a policy

by issue rather than by principle, which is very different from

the old Soviet Union's foreign policy. That was ideologically

inspired. Russia's foreign policy isn't. Actually the only

ideology that the current Russian leadership knows is the

perceived national interest. Thirdly, Russian foreign policy is

pragmatic and strategic. It has a very clear aim. That is the

consolidation of the current domestic order in Russia, and the

strengthening of Russia's position beyond its own borders,

internationally. And these two ambitions are very, closely related.

NEAR ABROAD Yeltsin's foreign policy priority was very clear, to have good, effective

relations with the West. Now, Putin obviously also has a clear stake in workable relations with

the west. But his real priority seems to lie elsewhere, in the country's own neighborhood. Putin

seems particularly interested in strengthening Russia's power and influence among its


23/27

neighboring countries, in other words, in the area that used to be the Soviet Union, including

Ukraine. In Russian political jargon, this part of the world is sometimes referred to as the so

called near abroad, which distinguishes it, apparently, from the real abroad. In other words,

Russia claims to have special privileges in this area. The former Soviet Union, with the exception

perhaps of the Baltic states, is seen as Russia's own sphere of influence.

Now, what are the overall goals in Russia's neighborhood? First of

all, I would argue Russia wants to establish greater security on itsown periphery. Secondly, it wants to maximize its economic

opportunities. And it wants to protect the well-being of ethnic

Russians. Finally, most importantly perhaps, Russian sees it as a

condition of its great power status.

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN THE FORMER SOVIET UNION .

There's a wide range of international, institutions and organizations

active in the former Soviet Union. And actually, Russia dominates

most of them. Not all of them, but most of them. To mention the

most important institutions, we have the Custom's Union, sort of a

European Union, to which Russia wants to add Ukraine. There's the

Commonwealth of Independent States, which is the oldest

organization in the area. We have the Collective Security Treaty Organization, CSTO, which

resembles NATO, and we have the Shanghai Corporation Organization, which also includes the

People's Republic of China. Now most of these organizations fall short in terms of investment of


24/27

resources and policy coordination. Membership and degree of

participation have fluctuated dramatically, and no two states in the

region have an identical history of memberships.

Well, due to its hegemonic position in the area, and the volatility of

these organizations, the Russian Federation prefers bilateral over

multilateral ties in its own neighborhood. These bilateral ties take

various forms. Political linkages include diplomatic and financial

support by Russia to friendly governmental or non-governmental

individuals and organizations.

Military links, are particularly important in relations between

Russia and its neighbors. Russian troops have intervened on several

occasions, especially in conflict zones, and most recently, in 2014, in the Crimea.

Economic interests are another major driver of Russian foreign policy, also in its neighborhood.

Russia's economic relations its neighboring countries are very nontransparent and difficult to

untangle, but the bottom line is always the same. They are supposed to support the expansion

of Russia's state interest, and those of its leaders. And these two issues are closely linked. I

would argue that for the first time in its history, Russia is actually being ruled by the very same

people who also own the country.


25/27

It remains to be seen if Russia's annexation of the Crimea really represents another era of

global politics. I have my doubts. Practically all Russians welcome the annexation of the Crimea,

that's for sure. And for the time being, the Russian leadership considers the seizure of this part

of Russia's historical lands as way more important than good and workable relations with the

West. But will it truly have a major impact on Russia's global position? What do you think?

Personally, I would say the answer is negative. Even in its own neighborhood, Russia is being

increasingly challenged by outside powers, by the European Union in the west, perhaps also by

United States, and by China and Central Asia.

SUMMARY. In conclusion, Russia is a particularly large, but not always

an exceptionally, powerful country. In this video we talked about the

various dramatic changes in Russian foreign policy, from the late Cold

War era. For a super power Russia, the deep crisIs of the 1990's was a

traumatic experience. For the re-emerging Russia, honor and statusseem as important as power and influence. Russia wants to be taken

seriously, and it needs to be taken seriously, in everybody's interests,

whether Russia is weak and compliant as it was in the 1990's, or

whether strong and more confrontational, as it is today.

2.6 Wrap Up Week 2

Hello there again. We are now concluding the second week of this course, The Changing Global

Order. You probably agree with me that you got a lot of information in this week's lectures.

Actually if you are still a bit uncertain about some of the topics we have learned about, make

sure you have a look again at the lectures and also obviously look at the assigned readings. At

the end of this week, as usual, you'll have a little multiple choice exam, to see that you

understood the material. Good luck taking this test.


26/27

What do we do now? In next week's lectures, we actually will start looking at a related but still

a bit different topic. What we will do is look at tools of conflict resolution: negotiations,

bargaining, and security. First you will learn a little bit about tools of conflict resolution as we

find in the literature, and you will be asked to apply this actually to a case that you are

interested in. Then we'll take you further to the topic of mediation. You will get lectures on therule of the security council and sanctions, another topic that's very important in today's world.

Finally, you'll get lectures on an institution that is located here in The Hague, the International

Criminal Court. So we very much look forward to having you back again in this course next

week. See you then.


27/27

Required Readings

Jones, Bruce (2010): Making Multilateralism Work: How the G-20 Can Help the UnitedNations, Policy Analysis Brief, The Stanley Foundation.Click here to read.

Jong, Sijbren de, Rem Korteweg, Joshua Polchar and Artur Usano (2012):New Players, New

Game? The Impact of Emerging Economies on Global Governance, HCSS, The Netherlands,October 25.Click here to read(Click "Download report as PDF" on the right-hand side).

Monaghan, Andrew (2013): The New Russian Foreign Policy Concept: Evolving Continuity,Russia and Eurasia, REP 2013/03, Chatham House, London.Click here to read.

Recommended Readings

Jong, Sijbren de and Willem Auping (2014): The Geopolitics of Shale Gas, HCSS, TheNetherlands, February 11.Click here to read(Click "Download report as PDF" on the right-

hand side).

ONeill, Jim (2001):Building Better Global Economic BRICs,Global Economics

Paper,66, Goldman Sachs, New York.Click here to read. Lo, Bobo and Lilia Shevtsova (2012):A 21st Century MythAuthoritarian Modernization in

Russia and China,Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Moscow.Click here to read

These notes are taken from a Coursera course provided by the University of Leiden. They are intended only for

students of the course and not to be shared or sold they are the intellectual property of the University of Leiden.

Any errors are the fault of the transcriber and not the University. No payment was received for providing this

service.
http://bit.ly/BJonesSFhttp://bit.ly/BJonesSFhttp://bit.ly/BJonesSFhttp://bit.ly/hcssreporthttp://bit.ly/hcssreporthttp://bit.ly/hcssreporthttp://bit.ly/hcssreporthttp://bit.ly/monaghanchttp://bit.ly/monaghanchttp://bit.ly/monaghanchttp://bit.ly/hcssshalehttp://bit.ly/hcssshalehttp://bit.ly/hcssshalehttp://bit.ly/hcssshalehttp://bit.ly/Bbricshttp://bit.ly/Bbricshttp://bit.ly/Bbricshttp://bit.ly/carnegieehttp://bit.ly/carnegieehttp://bit.ly/carnegieehttp://bit.ly/carnegieehttp://bit.ly/Bbricshttp://bit.ly/hcssshalehttp://bit.ly/monaghanchttp://bit.ly/hcssreporthttp://bit.ly/BJonesSF

week 2 lectures with graphics

Documents