russian foreign policy stand on international …web.isanet.org/web/conferences/baltimore...

DRAFT: NOT FOR CITATION

1

Irina Antonova

PhD in Political Science, Associate Professor

Saint-Petersburg State University

Russian Federation

RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY STAND ON INTERNATIONAL

CONFLICTS MATTER: CONCEPTIONAL ASPECTS

Introduction

Conflict is usually considered both a basis of interaction and an evil that must be

eradicated. One way or another its existence educes a need of rules to cooperate and

solutions to overcome. Nowadays there is a pronounced tendency of

internationalization of civil and domestic conflicts and reduce of classic interstate

conflicts number. Global interdependence makes local problems and crisis influence

regional and international security, as well as other states, international institutes and

non-governmental actors interfere in them.

The problem of international conflict directly includes its settlement and peace-

keeping aspects as well as general issues of local, regional and international security,

international legal regulation and its effectiveness, international world order,

mechanisms of decision-making, because they affect both conflict and international

community. This is why conceptual framework of Russian stance towards

international conflicts must be investigated within a context of its approaches to the

full range of issues connected to the phenomenon.

International security is a condition that the global community strives to, and

conflicts resolution is one of the elements on this way. World order is considered

because it defines who resolves conflicts, and the position Russia has in it determines

its role in resolution. Decision-making process is a direct mechanism of the way

conflict settlement and resolution are implemented and conflict parties and


2

concerned parties involvement. International law provides rules and order of certain

processes. Most of international law fundamental principles (such as non-

interference, territorial integrity, inviolability of borders, non-use of force,

international disputes settlement by peaceful means) explicitly affect conflicts and

their management. The ways Russia interprets and launches its approaches to these

key elements, documents them in its Concepts of its foreign policy make its stance

towards international conflicts.

Moreover, guidelines of Russian foreign policy are maintained from a point of its

national interests, means it has and a role it plays in the world. First, Russia forges

its stance towards international conflicts as a response to challenges from outside

and to promote its national security as there are numerous conflicts close or

relatively close to its borders. Second, being the UN Security Council permanent

member Russia cannot abstain from conflict settlement and management due to the

process of this institution functioning. Third, peacekeeping promotes Russia’s

integration to the global community and increase of its prestige, that is why it is one

of Russia’s most significant directions of the foreign policy.

The paper notes key features of Russian Foreign Policy Concepts evolution from a

point of its stance towards international conflicts. First, the evolution is revealed

through a historic review of Russian the Federation’s foreign policy and significant

conceptional decisions and principles marked by Russian authorities. Second, a

content analysis of Concepts dated on 1993, 2000, 2008, 2013 and 2016 is carried

out. Third, issues of peacekeeping, aspects of international security, international

legal regulation processes, world order formation peculiarities, collective decision-

making that influences world mechanisms are considered.

Evolution of Russian Foreign Policy Conceptual Framework

Each state foreign policy conceptual foundation defines its general line in

international relations, its actions and principles concerning certain issues. Ever

since Russia has become a legal successor to the USSR its foreign policy was being


3

shaped according to conditions of Russian statehood development, political

reformation, new political elite generation, range of internal problems, shifting

system of international relations and geopolitical status changing. Russia had a list

of certain gained advantages due to the fact that it stepped into the world arena

already having centuries-long foreign policy making experience, a network of

sustainable multilateral and bilateral contacts, traditions of Russian and Soviet

diplomacy1.

Nevertheless, after the Cold War ending and the USSR collapse Russia also faced

huge losses such as sphere of geopolitical influence decrease whilst the very country

became potentially vulnerable because of ethnic conflicts at its territory and close to

its borders. Among the most significant losses are more than 5 million km2 of the

territory, outlets to the warm seas, direct ground outlets to Central and Eastern

Europe, incomplete borders, millions of Russian speakers beyond them2. Many

political and territorial entities within the federation imperiled Russian geopolitical

integrity. After the USSR collapse the ideological vacuum was filled with ethnic

nationalism3. Besides, in spite of the fact that Russia had preserved the nuclear

power status, the UN Security Council permanent membership and certain influence

on some political processes Russia’s international perspective was still unclear.

At the very first stages of its statehood and nation building Russian authorities had

to define national interests and foreign policy goals that could promote its inner

needs implementation and development. Hereinafter the term “national

1 Иванов И.С. Новая российская дипломатия. Десять лет внешней политики страны. – М.

2001. C.10 [Ivanov I. A Decade of Russian Foreign Policy] (In Russian)

2 Маруев А.Ю. Геополитический статус и геостратегия России в современных условиях //

Вестник Академии военных наук. 2009. №1. C.27 [Maruyev A. Geopolitical Status and

Geostrategy of Russia in Contemporary World] (In Russian)

3 Menon R. After Empire: Russia and the Southern «Near Abroad» / The New Russian Foreign

Policy. – New York. 1998. P.108.


4

interests” means a complex of inner and external needs of state in promoting its

security and sustainable development of individual, society and state.

National security provision and making of supportive external environment are the

most significant parts of national interests system4. According to the National

Security Strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2020 the term

“national security” means a condition of protection from any internal or external

threats of individual, society and the state that can promote constitutional rights and

freedoms, dignified conditions for life, sovereignty, territorial integrity and

sustainable development of the Russian Federation, its defense and safety5. Globally

speaking, national security includes national survival, prosperity, welfare and

development6.

On the threshold of the new post-Cold War era Russia also had to choose the

direction to follow, to choose the main vectors of its foreign policy. In spite of the

variety of these directions most of them rely on the search of Russian identity and

its position in contemporary world order. Their common denominator is Russian

attitude to the West.

Practically, Russia took several paths in its foreign policy. For instance, its first

minister of foreign affairs Andrey Kozyrev started its external political history from

choosing atlanticism as the main direction. According to his plan Russia was to

4 Арбатова Н.К. Национальные интересы и внешняя политика России: европейское

направление (1991-1999). Диссертация на соискание ученой степени доктора

политических наук. – М. 2003. C.17 [Arbatova N. National Interests and Foreign Policy of

Russia: the European Vector 1991-1999] (In Russian)

5 Стратегия национальной безопасности Российской Федерации до 2020 года. Утверждена

Указом Президента Российской Федерации от 12 мая 2009 года №537 [The National

Security Strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2020] (In Russian). Available at:

http://archive.kremlin.ru/text/docs/2009/05/216229.shtml. (accessed 10.04.2016)

6 Радиков И.В. Национальная безопасность как главный национальный проект России:

типичные проблемы реализации // ПОЛИТЭКС. 2007. №1 URL:

http://www.politex.info/content/view/327/30/. [Radikov I. National Security as the Main Russian

Project: typical problems of implementation] (In Russian)


5

abandon anything sovietic and communistic, leaving political competition and

rivalry in the past and integration to the western community. Moscow started to

focus on NATO and other transatlantic structures accession. In this manner Russian

president Boris Eltsin called the USA and other western states not just partners but

allies at the session of the UN Security Council in 19927. From this moment Russian

authorities started to work out a legal platform of its foreign policy. As a result a

new document named “Conceptual Issues of the Foreign Policy of the Russian

Federation” was represented and approved in April 1993. This first Russian foreign

policy concept was focused on implementation of exclusively internal needs,

national interests were targeted on territorial integrity, stability of the state and did

not address to the world8. On the other hand, it was well balanced and thought-out

from a point of the state that was just starting its new political chapter of history and

facing lots of inner problems9.

According to the Concept the essence of Russian foreign policy was defined by goals

of Russia's rebirth as a democratic state and enabling its economy for good living

standarts of its citizens. Also Russia claimed for integration to the international

society as a great power having centuries-long history, unique geopolitical position,

military capacity and significant technologic, scientific and ethnic resources.

7 Security Council. Provisional Verbatim Record of 3046 Meeting 31 January 1992. S/PV.3046

Available at: https://documents-dds-

ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/PRO/N92/601/98/PDF/N9260198.pdf?OpenElement (accessed

14.04.2016)

8 Aron L. The Foreign Policy Doctrine of Post-Сommunist Russia and its Domestic Context /

The New Russian Foreign Policy. – New York. 1998. P.26.

9 Пляйс Я. Теория и практика внешней политики современной России // Обозреватель.

1997. №10 [Plyays Y. Theory and Practice of Russian Foreign Policy] (In Russian)


6

Elimination and settlement of armed conflicts around Russian borders and its

territorial integrity protection were the main political issues.10

However the Concept did not impede the foreign minister to concentrate Russian

foreign policy in his hands and to implement the ideas of atlanticism due to the fact

that the machine of the government was still immature and the level of coordination

in foreign affairs was low.

Soon, the chosen path turned out to be not proving its value (at least at that moment).

Kozyrev had counted that the USA and the West would accept Russia as an equal

partner, but they didn’t as considered it weak and perceived it just as a minor partner.

Moscow felt no one wants to consider its opinion on key international problems, and

it was inadmissible for the state with more than millennial history. However the West

itself welcomed this Russian choice and its initial Euro-Atlantic orientation11.

President Boris Eltsin declared a new approach in his address to the Federal

Assembly in February 1994. According to this approach the CIS states were

proclaimed the focal area of Russian foreign policy. Besides, the president

considered the importance of the UN fortification and formally announced that

10 Основные положения концепции внешней политики Российской Федерации

Утверждены Распоряжением Президента Российской Федерации Б.Н. Ельцина от 23

апреля 1993 г. Внешняя политика и безопасность современной России (1991–2002).

Хрестоматия в четырех томах. Под общ. ред. Шаклеиной Т.А. Москва, Московский

государственный институт международных отношений (У) МИД России, Российская

ассоциация международных исследований, АНО «ИНО-Центр (Информация. Наука.

Образование.)», 2002. Том IV. 538 с. [Osnovnye polozhenija koncepcii vneshnej politiki

Rossijskoj Federacii utverzhdeny Rasporjazheniem Prezidenta Rossijskoj Federacii B.N. El'cina

ot 23 aprelja 1993 g.[Foreign Policy Concept of The Russian Federation. Approved by the

President of the Russian Federation B. Yeltsin April 23. 1993] Vneshnjaja politika i bezopasnost'

sovremennoj Rossii (1991–2002). Hrestomatija v chetyreh tomah [Foreign Policy and National

Security of Contemporary Russia (1991-2002). Anthology in Four volumes]. Moscow,

Moskovskij gosudarstvennyj institut mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij (U) MID Rossii, Rossijskaja

associacija mezhdunarodnyh issledovanij, ANO «INO-Centr (Informacija. Nauka.

Obrazovanie.)», 2002, 538 p.]

11 Blacker C.D. Russia and the West / The New Russian Foreign Policy. – New York. 1998.

P.191.


7

Russia disputed NATO enlargement without it. He also noted that Russia was set to

continue playing one of the key roles in a process of crisis resolution in Former

Yugoslavia using exclusively diplomatic means such as pushing the parties to peace

through a special role of the UN Security Council12. Thus, Moscow started to make

political stances differing from acceptable for the West ones.

Yevgeny Primakov became the next foreign minister in 1996. He was famous for

his tough and pragmatic approach to Russian foreign policy. It was obvious, that

Primakov’s methods were made within a framework of the “multipolar

alternativeness” concept. It was him who made the first steps to coordinate different

political directions of the state in the sphere of its national security13. During the

period Primakov was a head of the ministry of foreign affairs Russian policy was

becoming multidimensional, its involvement to the processes of international

conflict settlement as a mediator was extending, they counted on balance of power

regional systems, and finally, Russia started the search of its position in the world

order as a power. Primakov chose some middle path that differed both from radical

atlanticism and nationalist isolationism against the West. Frankly speaking, such a

policy of alternatives was quite difficult to implement as the body-politic was guided

by radical anti-Americanism that period14. By the way the chosen strategy was

bearing its fruits as Russia was gradually turning to a center of attraction for

countries that hadn’t got along with the USA, from Bosnian Serbs to Iranians15.

12 Послание Президента Российской Федерации Федеральному Собранию. Об укреплении

российского государства (Основные направления внутренней и внешней политики) 24

февраля 1994 года [President’s Eltsin Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian

Federation 24 February 1994] (In Russian) Available at: URL:

http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=EXP;n=417720;fld=134;dst=429496

7295;rnd=0.8088934997732244 (accessed 14.04.2016)

13 Арбатов А. Безопасность: российский выбор. – М. 1999. C. 96. [Arbatov A. Security:

Russian Choice] (In Russian)

14 Fawn R. Realignments in Russian Foreign Policy. – London. 2003. P.15-16.

15 Пушков А. От «доктрины Козырева» - к «доктрине Примакова» // Независимая газета.

24 октября. 1997 [Poushkov A. From Kozyrev’s Doctrine to Primakov’s Doctrine] (In Russian).


8

Thus, impact on situation in conflict areas could promote Russia’s activation in the

global order.

The next significant statement was made by president Eltsin in his address to the

Federal Assembly in 1997. He stated about unacceptability of unipolar world order.

Thus, the stance of Russia regarding it was officially declared for the first time and

it also detected the key difference in the approaches of Washington and Moscow.

However, it was asserted that Russia must advocate its national interests without

confrontation fortifying stability and cooperation in international relations, and the

universal community should lean on military force less instead of this preferring

power of law16.

After a new foreign minister Igor Ivanov entered the cabinet in 1998 and a new

president Vladimir Putin replaced Boris Yeltsin in 2000 a Concept of foreign policy

was to be brought up to date due to serious changes in Russia and in the world in

general.

A new document was created within a principle of continuity to the previous one

accepted in 1993 as it summarized the political experience of the past years, but it

had a list of key innovations as well. First of all, the Concept was focused on external

policy for internal needs17. Henceforth the interests of individual, society and the

state were the top priority of Russian foreign policy. Besides, Russia’s adherence to

multipolar world order was documented. It was stated that multipolar international

system correlated to Russian national interests, reflected the diversity of

16 К активной внешней политике и эффективной военной реформе / Послание Президента

Российской Федерации Федеральному Собранию. Порядок во власти - порядок в стране (о

положении в стране и основных направлениях политики Российской Федерации) 6 марта

1997 года [Moving to Active Foreign Policy and Effectve Military Reform. President’s Address

to the Federal Assembly 6 March 1997] (In Russian) Available at:

http://zakonprost.ru/content/base/27025/pdf (accessed 15.04.2016).

17 Клепацкий Л. Ориентиры внешней политики России // Обозреватель. 2001. №9 URL:

http://www.rau.su/observer/N9_01/9_08.htm [Klepatsky L. Russian Foreign Policy Guidelines]

(In Russian).


9

contemporary world, promoted mutual consideration of interests and elaboration of

fair mechanism of collective decision-making, assisted international security

consolidation, coincided with global community concerns. It was underlined, that

Russian policy must be balanced, predictable, consistent and targeted on

consolidation of its position on the world arena. Meanwhile, it was also stated that

Moscow’s count on making equitable relations with the surrounding community had

not been justified18. It is obvious that this assertion meant unsuccessful attempts of

Russia’s integration into the western world as an equal partner and further NATO’s

refusal to take Kremlin’s stance on international affairs and Russian national

interests into account.

The following negative trends that Russia would confront were specially

documented in the text of the Concept-2000:

- efforts to diminish the role of the UN Security Council;

- strategy of unilateral actions of the western institutes to resolve key issues of

international security;

- usage of power methods passing by existing international law mechanisms

and without the UN Security Council resolutions;

- attempts to distort essence of state sovereignty in order to interfere in domestic

affairs and practical usage of force on the ground of “humanitarian

intervention” and “limited sovereignty” concepts;

- unsolved and frozen regional and local conflicts;

18 Foreign Policy Concept of The Russian Federation. Approved by the President of the Russian

Federation V. Putin June 28, 2000 Available at:

http://archive.mid.ru/Bl.nsf/arh/1EC8DC08180306614325699C003B5FF0?OpenDocument

(accessed 12.04.2016).


10

- divergence of political and military NATO’s goals with Russian national

security interests including its expansion to the East and military operations

out of Washington Treaty effect framework19.

According to the existence of these trends and threats the fundamental principles

and goals of Russian foreign policy were documented as the following:

- consolidation of Russian position in the world;

- making equitable partnership relations with the world;

- steadfast implementation of the international law fundamental principles;

- rational reforming of the UN in order to develop its mechanisms of immediate

reaction to crisis;

- increase of the UN Security Council effectiveness and universal recognition

of its exclusive right to authorize use of force;

- preserving the UN role of international relations central regulator;

- force factor impact reduction;

- international peace-keeping legal platform consolidation;

- active involvement of Russia into peace-keeping operations;

- getting over the difficulties in Russian-American relations within mutual

respect of national interests and in order to consolidate international

security20.

It is important to note, that these principles were documented in the Concept-

2000 for the first time and it was not accidental. Most of them became responses

to the armed NATO intervention in Kosovo conflict in 1999. It is obvious, that it




(accessed 12.04.2016).




(accessed 12.04.2016).


11

had become a milestone for Russian authorities for starting reconsideration of the

fundamental principles of Russian foreign policy. Moscow’s diplomacy had

shown tendency to protect international law pillars before, but it had gained its

full extent by the beginning of the 21st century and had become a notable

counterbalance to the attempts of making unilateral decisions of global

importance21.

At the beginning of Putin’s presidency his foreign policy was usually

characterized as more pragmatic and less emotional than the policy of his

predecessor. It was determined and conditioned by not always substantiate

aspiration to restore the status of a global scale power without considering the

realities inside the state22. Nevertheless, the quality of Russian diplomatic activity

was improving, and the economic upturn explained by price increase for energy

supplies had built up the home front of Russian diplomacy23.

Sometimes Putin’s foreign policy general line was called “a doctrine of Russian

international influence adjustment in accordance with its economic power”24. It

is also interesting, that former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt called Russia

a great power equal to China and the USA and he expected that Moscow would

21 Громыко Анат.А. Мировой порядок или правопорядок // Международная жизнь. 2012.

№3 URL: http://interaffairs.ru/author.php?n=arpg&pg=627 [Gromyko Anat. World Order or

Law] (In Russian).

22 Пархалина Т.Г. Внешняя политика России при Путине. Отношения Россия — Западная

Европа // Актуальные проблемы Европы. 2002. №1. C.90 [Parkhalina T. Putin’s Russian

Foreign Policy. Russia and the Western Europe Relations] (In Russian)

23 Конопатов С. Россия в современной системе международных отношений //

Обозреватель-Observer. 2007. №2. C.17 [Konopatov S. Russian in Contemporary System of

International Relations] (In Russian).

24 Богатуров А. Три поколения внешнеполитических доктрин России // Международные

процессы. 2007. №1(13) [Bogatourov A. The Generations of Russian Foreign Policy Doctrines]

(In Russian) Available at: http://www.intertrends.ru/thirteen/005.htm (accessed: 12.04.2016).


12

keep this status for decades25. It is obvious, that such an approach can be

explained by setting certain expectations and its legendary historic past, but not

the realities of contemporary world.

The main issue that Vladimir Putin faced and was trying to solve was how to

develop partnership and cooperation with the West and simultaneously to escape

obeying its hegemony26. The very difficulty of combining both of these

imperatives contributed fluctuations and lurches in Russian foreign policy during

that period. For a moment it seemed that Russia had left its geopolitical

ambitions27 when it supported American military operation in Afghanistan,

agreed with American military bases deployment in Central Asia, accepted US

withdrawal from AMB treaty, joined global anti-terrorism coalition28. But

actually it was not like that and Moscow returned to protection of its own stances

in international affairs soon. For instance, president Putin held a speech at

Munich Security Conference in 2007, where he stated that the USA were

spreading the system of their domestic law over the rest of the world and

promoting inacceptable unipolar world order without consideration interests of

the international community29.

25 Шмидт Х. Россия должна сама найти свой путь // Актуальные проблемы Европы. 2002.

№1. C.94 [Schmidt H. Russia Must Find Its Way] (In Russian).

26 Дилигенский Г. Хочет ли Россия дружить с Западом? // Мировая экономика и

международные отношения. 2002. №4. C.30 [Diligensky G. Does Russia Want to Be Friends

with the West?] (In Russian).

27 Lo B. The Securitization of Russian Foreign Policy under Putin / Russia between East and

West: Russia Foreign Policy on the Treshold of Twenty-First Century. Ed. by G.Gorodetsky. –

London. 2003. P.30

28 Крылов А. Новые перспективы России на международной арене // Мировая экономика и

международные отношения. 2006. №7. C.91 [Krylov A. the New Perspectives of Russian at

the World Arena] (In Russian).

29 Putin’s Prepared Remarks at 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy Available at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200555.html

(accessed 12.05.2016)


13

Meanwhile, the world itself was becoming more and more uncontrollable,

unstable and divided. A list of new dichotomies finally came to substitute the

global bipolar confrontation, and Russia vs. the West was among them. Their

contradictions are heavy. First, they have polar opposite understanding of the

essence of the contemporary world key elements such as democracy, human

rights, international law. Second, Russia usually faces ignorance from the West

that tries to sideline it when key decisions on international security are made.

Third, the competition for the influence in the post-Soviet area is still going on.

Forth, almost every issue of international security divides Russia and the West

by their approaches opposite to each other. This complicated atmosphere educed

inability of the existing international security mechanisms and made the necessity

of making new ones explicit. In what connection Moscow’s initiatives in this

direction could seriously promote Russia’s growth as one of the power poles in

the world order.

Such a perspective could be seen in a plan of the new president Dmitry Medvedev

proposed in 2008. The main idea was about commonality and impartibility of the

international security space. It was about inadmissibility of someone’s national

security promotion at the expense of someone else’s one and necessity to

elaborate common rules in this sphere30. The president proposed a draft of a

Treaty of European Security as an option. European states were initially much

interested in it and even made an effort to implement it within the OSCE, but

gradually lost their concern soon changing it for suspiciousness. But the very idea

of impartible and equal security for every state stays in Russian policy since then.

Broadly, the main distinction between the approaches to Russian foreign policy

of the two presidents was in their understanding of the reasons of tensions with

30 Мизин В.И. «План Медведева» и приоритеты российской политики в Европе //

Обозреватель-Observer. 2009. №12. C.16-24 [Mizin V. “Medvedev’s Plan” and Russians

Political Priorities in Europe] (In Russian).


14

the West. Putin saw them in the unwillingness of the USA and their allies to

accept Russian geopolitical ambitions to be a global power. Medvedev, in his

turn, asserted, that the West just didn’t understand which direction Russia was

going31. That is why open and clear explanation of Russian stances became the

main feature of his foreign policy as a president in 2008-2012.

No wonder, Medvedev held a new initiative to elaborate the third Concept of

Russian foreign policy that came into life in 2008. As a previous related

document it was written in the principle of continuity framework and was adapted

to the new realities. Generally, Russian approaches to key global political

problems stayed the same but considering Moscow’s increased political heft and

consolidated stances they became more motivated and essential.

Among the innovations concerning the issues of international conflicts and

covered by the text of the Concept-2008 were the following:

- the UN bears a unique legitimacy in international relations and it must play a

fundamental role in setting an effective inter-civilizational dialogue;

- the global competition has gained civilizational dimension demonstrated in a

confrontation of different value orientations and patterns of development;

- Russia will persist to consolidate multilateralism in international affairs based

on impartibility of international security principle;

- fundamental principles of international law must be purely universal from a

point of their understanding and use, their revision and case interpretation are

inadmissible, their violation must be antagonized;

- rule of international law in international relations must be maintained;

31 Арбатова Н.К. Россия после президентских выборов: внешнеполитические ориентиры //

Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2008. №12. C.28 [Arbatova N. Russia

after the Presidential Elections: Foreign Policy Guidelines] (In Russian).


15

- Russia will aspire to promote exclusively political and diplomatic settlement

on regional conflicts on the ground of collective actions of the global

community;

- Russia maintains an approach which means that contemporary conflicts have

no solutions by force that is why their settlement must be implemented

through universal involvement of parties without isolation of any of them32.

In order to consolidate the efforts targeted on the Concept-2008 implementation

president Medvedev also specially emphasized five key principles defining his

foreign policy line. They are:

- superiority and respect of international law fundamental principles in

international relations;

- affiliation to multipolar world order;

- absence of any intention to confront or to isolate and commitment to amicable

relations;

- protection of life and dignity of Russian citizens wherever they are;

- implementation of Russian interests in its amicable regions33.

A document named “The National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation

for the period up to 2020” was accepted in 2009. According to it existence and

potential aggravation of conflicts around Russian borders are among the main

32The Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation. Approved by Dmitry A. Medvedev,

President of the Russian Federation, on 12 July 2008. Available at:

http://www.russianmission.eu/userfiles/file/foreign_policy_concept_english.pdf (accessed

10.05.2016)

33 Пять принципов президента Медведева. // Российская газета. 01.09.2008 [Five Principles

of the President Medvedev] (In Russian) Available at:

http://www.rg.ru/2008/09/01/princypi.html (accessed 13.04.2016).


16

threats to Russian national security34. Besides, it was documented that making

Russia one of the global powers within multipolar world order is among its

national interests.

American researcher Jeffrey Mankoff called Medvedev’s foreign policy line a

search of autonomy at the global level, which meant an ability to make

independent decisions according to the principles of Russian foreign policy and

international law without looking at the West. He gave an example of Russian

military assistance it made for South Ossetia in 2008, after which no one could

permit itself to ignore Russian interests and stance35.

Signs of crisis, turbulence at both local and global levels, tensions in the Middle

East and in North Africa, closeness to global conflict etc. met Vladimir Putin

when he returned to the presidential cabinet in 2012. The world was fatally

driving from balance of power to disbalance. As a result, accumulation of crisis

phenomena motivates Russia to seek and to elaborate some effective mechanism

of collective decision-making in order to promote security.

As the world had seriously changed since 2008 the president gave an order to the

Ministry of foreign affairs to elaborate yet another Concept that would correlate

the realities of the contemporary world.

Innovations concerning conflict issues implemented through the Concept-2013

were the following:

- current events are not mere evolution of international relations, but rapid

acceleration of global processes and profound changes in the geopolitical

34 Стратегия национальной безопасности Российской Федерации до 2020 года.

Утверждена Указом Президента Российской Федерации от 12 мая 2009 года №537 [The

National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2020] (In Russian).

Available at: http://archive.kremlin.ru/text/docs/2009/05/216229.shtml. (accessed 10.04.2016)

35 Mankoff J. Russian Foreign Policy” the Return of Great Power Politics. – Lanham. Maryland.

– P.6.


17

landscape that reveal a transition from the world order to polycentric

international system;

- Russia is already a competitive center of contemporary world order having

significant experience of various nations and confessions harmonious

coexistence and playing a multidirectional role of balancing factor in

international affairs;

- the new goals of foreign policy efforts are inter-civilizational dialogue, wide

and equal-opportunity international cooperation based on non-aligned

network alliances;

- there is a strong necessity to maintain a set of common values as a foundation

for joint action including pursuit of peace and justice, responsibility, honesty,

compassion, etc.;

- it is impossible to build individual systems of peace and security in the

contemporary world, that is why the idea of the security impartibility principle

implementation needs further maintenance;

- collective decision-making is becoming more and more valuable;

- inadmissibility of any sort of external interference in sovereign states

domestic affairs is underlined36.

There is one notable point about these four Concepts. Each of them had lost its

applicability quite soon after adoption. The Concept-1993 went out of date as

soon as NATO had unveiled its plans about future eastward expansion. Concept-

2000 deteriorated right after the terrorist acts 9/11. Concept-2008 was adopted in

July, but August was marked by the war in Georgia, that led to South Ossetia and

Abkhazia de-facto independence. Finally, Concept-2013 lost its applicability

with the Crimea integration and dramatiс deterioration of relations with the

36 Concept of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation. Approved by President of the

Russian Federation V. Putin on 12 February 2013. Available at:

http://www.mid.ru/foreign_policy/official_documents/-

/asset_publisher/CptICkB6BZ29/content/id/122186?p_p_id=101_INSTANCE_CptICkB6BZ29

&_101_INSTANCE_CptICkB6BZ29_languageId=en_GB (accessed 12.04.2016)


18

Ukraine and the West. So, a new Concept was presented in the end of 2016.

However, it is little different from the previous document.

There are four new pivotal points in the Concept-2016, that make this document

serving realities of contemporary world and national interests of Russian

Federation. First, previously used statement about Russia's advocating the role of

the use of force in international relations reducing is not in the text anymore.

Second, combat with terrorism became the key priority of Russian foreign policy

in the sphere of international security. Third, it is stated that Russia will counter

attempts to interfere in the domestic affairs of States with the aim of

unconstitutional change of regime, including by supporting non-State actors,

such as terrorist and extremist groups. Fourth, concerning relations with the USA

it is stated that Russia does not recognize the US policy of extraterritorial

jurisdiction beyond the boundaries of international law and finds unacceptable

attempts to exercise military, political, economic or any other pressure, while

reserving the right to firmly respond to hostile actions, including the bolstering

of national defense and taking retaliatory or asymmetrical measures.37

Results of a content analysis of the Concepts-1993, -2000, -2008, -2013 and -

2016 demonstrate their evolution and highlighted key points. Firstly, a significant

increase of frequency of appellations to such words as “stability” and “security”

highlights an appropriate response а Russia, growth of its concern and

anxiousness, realistic and regularly elaborated approach to global shift in the

contemporary world. A strong influence of the terrorist attacks 9/11, the Arab

Spring, world financial crisis, instability around Russian borders, war in Syria,

ISIS emergence and activity indicates the growth of appellations to security and

37 Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation (approved by President of the Russian

Federation Vladimir Putin on November 30, 2016) Available at:

http://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/official_documents/-

/asset_publisher/CptICkB6BZ29/content/id/2542248?p_p_id=101_INSTANCE_CptICkB6BZ29

&_101_INSTANCE_CptICkB6BZ29_languageId=en_GB (accessed 12.01.2017)


19

stability. An interesting point is a decline of appellations to security and stability

from 1993 to 2000. The fact is that the very first foreign policy document of the

Russian Federation was much concentrated on domestic problems than on

international issues, this is why there was much to say about inner stability and

national security of Russia on its way of implementing a new democratic state.

The proposed principle of impartibility of international security documented in

2008 continues to be developed in the Concept-2013 and Concept-2016 where it

is easily used equally with the fundamental principles of international law.

Besides, the documents of 2000 and 2008 show that Russia is intended to

promote to establishing multipolar world order, whilst it is stated in the texts

under the dates of 2013 and 2016 that polycentric system is already in the making.

Secondly, almost double increase of frequency of appellations to the name of the

UN and emergence of “the unique legitimacy” notion demonstrates the growth

of Russian principled stance concerning powers of the organization and its

Security Council in the sphere of regional and international security issues.

Thirdly, a similar situation is developing in regard to international law

fundamental principles. Russia puts more and more stress on inadmissibility of

their violation and arbitrary interpretation. Example of referring to principle of

territorial integrity and does not reflect any noticeable dynamic. Meanwhile,

Russian territorial integrity preservation was amongst pivotal issues of its foreign

policy in 1993 whereas in contrast documents of 2013 and 2016 address to the

principle in the international scale, it is referred to territorial integrity of any

sovereign state. Non-interference in domestic affairs was mentioned in the

Concept-2000 and Concept-2008 as an international legal principle facing

arbitrary interpretation whilst in further Concepts inadmissibility of attempts to

interfere in the domestic with the aim of unconstitutional change of regime was

committed. Undoubtedly, this was a result of numerous interventions such as in

Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Libya etc. Besides, people’s self-determination principle


20

was documented in 2008 for the first time, and this fact can be explained with the

issue of Kosovo declaration of independence in February, 2008, as Russia

considered it unilateral and illegal and this is why called it the principle arbitrary

interpretation. These facts demonstrate a certain transformation of Russian

stance, its growing concern and anxiousness caused by going worse situation of

invasive state sovereignty erosion.

Frequency of notions “conflict”, “settlement” and “peace-keeping” usage in each

of four documents (2000, 2008, 2013, 2016) does not indicate any shift and

steadily demonstrates equable concern retained. Meanwhile, the document of

1993 indicates major quantity of appellations to these terms, as well as to “the

UN” and “international law”. Firstly, the Concept-1993 was the first document

of foreign policy in the Russian Federation and, as it was mentioned before, it

was much focused on domestic affairs and national security, this is why it was so

vital to stabilize situation around Russian borders and at its own territory

eliminating and preventing conflicts. Moreover, it was much stress put of peace-

keeping institutions within the CIS. Secondly, essential terms such as “the UN”

and “international law” were used very broadly in the text. In contrast, in further

documents these terms were applied targetedly, specifically and accurately.

One more peculiarity is almost twice and a half increase of appellations to the

word “terrorism” in the document of 2016.

The table below gives us amounts of the key notions from a point of international

conflict stance used in the Concepts:


21

Notion Concept

1993

Concept

2000

Concept

2008

Concept

2013

Concept

2016

security 36 23 44 63 64

impartibility and equality

of security

- - 2 5 7

stability 25 16 18 23 25

multipolarity/polycentricity 2 1 2 2 1

the UN 27 20 30 37 36

international law 13 6 25 19 26

interference/non-

interference

- 1 1 7 8

territorial integrity 3 3 3 5 5

self-determination - 1 1 1

conflict 30 12 13 13 15

conflict settlement 21 7 10 12 13

peace-keeping 10 2 4 5 4

terrorism 5 6 18 15 35


22

The next table below shows how the key elements of Russian stance toward the issue of international conflicts shift through the

Concepts in dynamic. It demonstrates them upheld or specified:

Element of

the stance Concept-1993 Concept-2000 Concept-2008 Concept-2013 Concept-2016

world order struggle between

polycentric order and

unipolar order

Russia must facilitate stable, just and democratic world order, increasing its controllability

world order must be a

multipolar system of

international relations

world order must be

polycentric and its system

must be self-regulating

polycentric international system is already in the making

global

decision-

making

Russia must become an

equal partner in

multilateral processes on

both regional and global

levels

must be collective, multilateral and implemented under international law priority

must be based on equal, partnership relations with the central and coordinating role of

the UN

the bloc-based approach is being gradually replaced by network diplomacy based on

flexible participation in multilateral mechanisms aimed at finding effective solutions to

common challenges.

international

law

- Russian foreign policy

is based on international

law rules;

- double standarts

rejection

- precedence of international

law;

- it must be strictly followed

- rule of international law;

- its norms must be universal from a point of their understanding and use;

- all the efforts to revise them must be resisted and prevented

maintaining and strengthening international rule of law is one of Russia’s priorities


23

Element of


interference

in domestic

affairs

Russia is committed to a

principle, according to

which humanitarian

obligations of each

sovereign state are not its

absolute domestic affair.

Russia will actively

support international

actions targeted on

human rights violation

prevention and

elimination

inadmissibility of respect for sovereignty international legal principle arbitrary

interpretation or revision

inadmissibility of the

“limited sovereignty”

concept practical

implementation

unacceptability of military interventions contrary to

international law under the pretext of implementing the

"responsibility to protect" concept

there is a dangerous

tendency of the principle of

state sovereignty respect

revision

inadmissibility of attempts

to interfere in the domestic

affairs with the aim of

unconstitutional change of

regime, including by

supporting non-State actors,

such as terrorist and

extremist groups

territorial

integrity and

inviolability

of borders

principles

- Russia is commited to

principles of territorial

integrity and inviolability

of borders;

- territorial changes can be

applied only in accordance

with the international law,

by peaceful means and

bilaterally.

inadmissibility of territorial integrity and inviolability of borders principles arbitrary


people’s right

to self-

determination

principle

- - inadmissibility of people’s right to self-determination principle arbitrary



24

Element of


use of force

force still plays an essential role

force is becoming an increasingly important amid

escalating contradictions and growing uncertainty,

however this is a threat to global security

force influence on international relations must be reduced

Russia stands for

elimination of force,

except for self-defense,

acts of war

suppression, peace-

keeping operations etc.

in accordance with the

UN Charter

use of force bypassing the UN Charter and the UN

Security Council is unable to eliminate antagonisms

that cause conflicts and lead to aggravation

international

cooperation in

countering terrorism,

including through the

use of military force,

with agreement by the

States where the fight is

taking place

force can be used only by the UN Security Council permission

- article 51 of the UN Charter is an adequate legal basis for the use of force in

self-defense;

- inadmissibility of non-use of force or threat of force international law

principle arbitrary interpretation or revision


25

Element of


the UN and

its Security

Council

the UN is among the

other international

institutions that could

be used for problems

settlement;

the mechanisms of the

UN must be used to the

utmost for peace and

security purposes

- the UN is the main center of international relations regulation;

- the UN Security Council is the only institute that bears legal capacity to approve use of force

Russia must resist any

attempts to downgrade the

role that the UN and its

Security Council play

the UN has no alternatives

the UN has unique

legitimacy

the UN has international legitimacy

international

security

as a permanent UN

Council member

Russia bears

responsibility for

international security;

- making a security belt

around Russian borders

through zones of

regional cooperation;

- Helsinki process is a

pivotal factor in peace

and international

security

Russia is fully aware of its responsibility to support peace and security in the world both at the global and

regional levels and is committed to working with all interested States to address common challenges

Russia consistently advocates strengthening international security and enhancing strategic and regional

stability

international security must be indivisible and equal for every member of the

global community

- attempts to ensure stability and security within a

single territory are doomed to fail;

- need of transforming declarations regarding

indivisibility of security into legally binding

obligations


26

Element of


conflict

settlement one of Russia’s pivotal

interests is to settle and

eliminate conflicts

around its borders

- helping to overcome existing and prevent potential tensions and conflicts in regions adjacent to Russian

Federation;

- seek of political and diplomatic solutions to regional conflicts

commitment to

political solution of

conflicts

- Russia will seek political and diplomatic solutions to regional conflicts through

collective actions of the international community

- isolation of some parties from settlement process is inadmissible

contemporary conflicts cannot be resolved through use of force

- interactions with

NATO, EU, WEU;

- use of the UN, CSCE,

CIS peace-keeping

mechanisms

- auspices of the UN, mechanisms of OSCE, CIS, SCO, CSTO;

- Russia intends to participate in international peacemaking activities under the UN auspices and within the

framework of collaboration with regional and international organizations;

Russia regards international peacemaking as an effective instrument for settling armed conflicts

… and fulfilling post-crisis nation-building tasks

Russia endorses improving

the UN preventive anti-

crisis capacities

Russia will actively contribute to improving the UN preventive anti-crisis

capacities

the UN Security Council is the only institute that

bears legal capacity to approve peace-enforcement

and use of force

Russia supports elaboration of peacekeeping

mandates allowing for no arbitrary interpretation,

particularly those implying the use of force, and strict

control over their implementation


27

Element of


cooperation

with the

USA

towards

conflicts

- American attempts of

peace-keeping to

substitute Russia in the

zones of its traditional

interests are possible;

- preventive measures

in Asia Pacific are

among estimated

spheres of cooperation

Russian-American

cooperation in such

spheres as regional

conflicts settlement is

required for international

climate improvement

Russia supports

achievement of new

arrangements with the

USA in the sphere of

regional conflicts

settlement

Russia expects that US

will be strictly guided by

international legal norms,

including the principle of

non-interference.

Russia does not

recognize the US policy

of extraterritorial

jurisdiction beyond the

boundaries of

international law and

finds unacceptable

attempts to exercise

military, political,

economic or any other

pressure

Russia considered the world order in 1993 a new era full of hopes for equal and fruitful partnership with the former competitors.

However, it took an unbiased look at the possibility of further struggle between polycentric order and unipolar order as intentions

of the USA to keep its leadership were seen whilst simultaneous multivariance of the world politics. But the key distinction

between Concept-1993 and the other four Concepts is in the way how Russia evaluated its role in these processes. Definitely, it

was going to settle down its inner issues in 1993 and it was going to maintain and to be a part of the world order starting from

2000.

The similar situation upheld concerning global decision-making Russia was reckoning on equal partnership in 1993, but soon

its authorities realized that Russia was considered just a minor partner in world politics. This is why Russia put stress on


28

facilitating collective and multilateral decision-making as a part of polycentric

world with equal opportunities for each sovereign state.

Concerning international law in 2008 Russia started to use the term “rule of law”

instead of “precedence of law” as a stronger one to underline its importance and

bonding role as well as menace of its revision or arbitrary interpretation in

contemporary turbulent world.

Russia’s attitude to the role of force in international relations and its use has

undergone changes from “playing an essential role” to strong need of reduction

and back to “becoming an increasingly important”. In 2000, 2008 and 2013

Russia stated that force influence on international relations must be reduced, but

then being engaged into military operation in Syria since October, 2015 it had to

withdraw this statement in the document of 2016, however it still advocates

article 51 of the UN Charter as an adequate legal basis for the use of force in self-

defense and strongly believes that force can be used only by the UN Security

Council permission.

There is a noticeable transition in Russia’s position concerning the UN and its

Security Council since 1993 as in this document the UN is among the other

international institutions that could be used for problems settlement. Further

Russia called it the main center of international relations regulation with unique

legitimacy.

All the five document are unified by Russia’s understanding of its responsibility

for international security, although the very first Concept was focused on its inner

problems and mostly on security belt around Russian borders. Emerging and

further consolidation of the equality and indivisibility of security principle is

noticeable starting from 2008.

In fact, conflict settlement approaches have not changed much through the

Concepts. Adherence to political solutions of contemporary conflicts pervades


29

all of them. However, Russia altered its stance towards the role of NATO and the

EU in conflict settlement, and starting from the document of 2000 it has been

advocating the UN as the main institution. One more point is also connected to

the force factor as from 2000 to 2013 Russia stated that contemporary conflicts

cannot be resolved through use of force, whilst after the start of the military

operation in Syria this phrasing was withdrawn.

The single aspect that has undergone essential shift concerns Russia’s relations

with the USA in the sphere of conflict settlement. It has declined from “required

cooperation” to reserved condemnation and intimidation by asymmetrical

measures.

In general, the content-analysis of the Concepts primarily reveals an explicit

continuity as well as gradual detailization and specification of the stances,

hardening of the approaches to general issues, introduction of the new elements

such as “unique legitimacy of the UN”, “indivisible security” etc. e. On the

whole, the approaches to international conflicts are based on the UN uniqueness,

international law rule and force impact reduction – these elements are specified

and hardened through the Concepts, but they do not transform much.

The third table below shows the conflicts and conflict abundant regions

documented in the Concepts. These conflicts mentioned in the texts were

included into the system of Russian political concerns, while some of them went

out of it (such as the Balkans) or appeared later as new challenges, or approaches

to them were detailized.


30

Region/conflict Concept-1993 Concept-2000 Concept-2008 Concept-2013 Concept-2016

regions

adjacent to the

Russian

Federation, the

CIS space

helping to overcome existing and prevent potential tensions and conflicts

Moldova,

Transdniestria

- - - settlement of the problem on the basis of respect for

the sovereignty, territorial integrity and neutral status

of the Republic of Moldova while providing a special

status for Transdniestria

South Ossetia

and Abkhazia

- - - assistance to the formation of the republics as modern

democratic states, strengthening of their international

positions, ensuring sustainable security and their social

and economic recovery

Nagorny

Karabakh

- - - settlement of the conflict in collaboration with other

OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs, building on the

principles contained in the joint statements made by

the Presidents of Russia, the USA, and France

the Balkans

- peace-keeping efforts

in Yugoslavia in

collaboration with the

UN, the CSCE, the EU

etc.;

- maintenance of

contacts with

Yugoslavian authorities

on the issue

consistent efforts to find a

just and lasting political

solution; preserving of

Yugoslavian integrity

- - -


31


Afghanistan - menace of Afgan and

Tajik conflicts merging;

- active diplomatic

activity targeted on

stabilization in the

country but with no

interference from

outside

needs just and lasting political solution

Afghanistan needs post-conflict recovery to become a peace-loving sovereign neutral

state while respecting rights and legitimate interests of all ethnic groups

need of comprehensive measures to reduce terrorist

and drugs threat

participation of

concerned countries, the

UN, the CIS, the CSTO,

the SCO and other

multilateral institutions

including Russia-NATO

projects

participation of concerned

countries, the UN, the CIS,

the CSTO, the SCO and

other multilateral

institutions

Indo-Pakistani

conflict

Russia’s goal is to

achieve balance in

relations with India and

Pakistan in order not to

be perceived as “pro-

Indian supporter”

denuclearized zone

maintenance

- - -

Korean

peninsula

both Koreas unification

support, but with no

mobilization from

outside

keeping balanced relations with both Koreas

Russia’s equal right to

participate in the settlement

Encouragement of inter-Korean political dialogue

non-nuclear status of the peninsula

reconciliation achievement


32


Iranian nuclear

problem

- - comprehensive political and diplomatic settlement of

the situation through dialogue based on a step-by-step

and mutual interest approach and in strict compliance

with nuclear non-proliferation requirements

implementation of the joint

comprehensive agreement

based on UN Security

Council resolution 2231

and relevant IAEA Board

of Governors decisions;

assistance in every possible

way.

African

continent

settling and preventing regional conflicts and crises

Middle East - active participation in

the settlement;

- being a sponsor or

negotiation processes;

- dialogue with both

parties

meaningful contribution to the stabilization of the situation

consolidation of Russian

positions in the region

including economic ones

сontribution to stabilizing the situation, political and diplomatic settlement of

conflicts while respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right to self-

determination without outside interference

promotion of an independent Palestinian State living in

peace and security side by side with Israel

comprehensive, fair and

lasting resolution of the

Israeli-Palestinian conflict

in all its aspects consistent

with international law

establishment of a zone free from weapons of mass

destruction

Iraq - - political settlement,

violence use reduction and

statehood restoration

- -


33


Ukraine - - - - developing political,

economic, cultural and

spiritual ties promotion of

political and diplomatic

settlement in cooperation

with all the interested

States and international

agencies.

Syria - - - - political settlement and the

possibility for the people of

Syria to determine their

future based on the Geneva

communiqué, statements by

the International Syria

Support Group and relevant

UN Security Council

resolutions; support of the

unity, independence and

territorial integrity of Syria

as a secular, democratic and

pluralistic State with all

ethnic and religious groups

living in peace and security.

Conclusions

Therefore, evolution of Russian stance towards international conflicts is initially determined by changing environment and

system of international relations and Russia’s growing abilities whilst its national interests do not go through any transformation.


34

Such moments as the new NATO Strategy, NATO expansion to the East, efforts

to consolidate unipolar world order, humanitarian interventions without the UN

Security Council resolutions find response in general Russian approaches to key

issues of international security.

Besides, the evolution also reflects the searching process of Russia’s position in

the world order. It is obvious that Moscow proceeds from the premise that

becoming one of poles in the multipolar world order is one of its national

interests. Thus, conflict as a challenge to national, regional and international

security is seen, firstly, from a point of certain stance and general principles of

settlement elaboration, secondly, from a point of the phenomenon use for solving

problems of key international institutes authority enhancement, maintaining

efficiency of the international law basis, preserving order in international

relations.

As a general result, Russia’s position is elaborated within a special formula that

means the higher is its international status the more effective it can affect

processes of international conflicts regulation and settlement. Besides, the

approaches are based upon unique UN and its Security Council legitimacy,

international law supremacy, violence usage reduction. In the addition, Russian

stance leans on the idea of multipolar world order that can provide fair collective

decision-making and equal involvement for conflict parties. On the whole, the

study tested that Russian position towards international conflicts is eventually

polished up and becomes tougher but it doesn’t go through any transformation.

References

1. Aron L. The Foreign Policy Doctrine of Post-Сommunist Russia and its

Domestic Context / The New Russian Foreign Policy. – New York. 1998.

P.26.


35

2. Blacker C.D. Russia and the West / The New Russian Foreign Policy. – New

York. 1998. P.191.

3. Concept of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation. Approved by

President of the Russian Federation V. Putin on 12 February 2013.

Available at: http://www.mid.ru/foreign_policy/official_documents/-

/asset_publisher/CptICkB6BZ29/content/id/122186?p_p_id=101_INSTANC

E_CptICkB6BZ29&_101_INSTANCE_CptICkB6BZ29_languageId=en_G

B (accessed 12.04.2016)

4. Fawn R. Realignments in Russian Foreign Policy. – London. 2003. P.15-16.

5. Foreign Policy Concept of The Russian Federation. Approved by the

President of the Russian Federation V. Putin June 28, 2000 Available at:

http://archive.mid.ru/Bl.nsf/arh/1EC8DC08180306614325699C003B5FF0?

OpenDocument (accessed 12.04.2016).

6. Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation (approved by President of

the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin on November 30, 2016) Available at:

http://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/official_documents/-

/asset_publisher/CptICkB6BZ29/content/id/2542248?p_p_id=101_INSTAN

CE_CptICkB6BZ29&_101_INSTANCE_CptICkB6BZ29_languageId=en_

GB (accessed 12.01.2017)

7. Lo B. The Securitization of Russian Foreign Policy under Putin / Russia

between East and West: Russia Foreign Policy on the Treshold of Twenty-

First Century. Ed. by G.Gorodetsky. – London. 2003. P.30

8. Mankoff J. Russian Foreign Policy” the Return of Great Power Politics. –

Lanham. Maryland. – P.6.

9. Menon R. After Empire: Russia and the Southern «Near Abroad» / The New

Russian Foreign Policy. – New York. 1998. P.108.


36

10. Putin’s Prepared Remarks at 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy

Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021200555.html (accessed

12.05.2016)

11. Security Council. Provisional Verbatim Record of 3046 Meeting 31 January

1992. S/PV.3046 Available at: https://documents-dds-

ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/PRO/N92/601/98/PDF/N9260198.pdf?OpenElement

(accessed 14.04.2016)

12. The Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation. Approved by Dmitry

A. Medvedev, President of the Russian Federation, on 12 July 2008.

Available at:

http://www.russianmission.eu/userfiles/file/foreign_policy_concept_english.

pdf (accessed 10.05.2016)

13. Арбатов А. Безопасность: российский выбор. – М. 1999. C. 96. [Arbatov

A. Security: Russian Choice] (In Russian)

14. Арбатова Н.К. Национальные интересы и внешняя политика России:

европейское направление (1991-1999). Диссертация на соискание

ученой степени доктора политических наук. – М. 2003. C.17 [Arbatova

N. National Interests and Foreign Policy of Russia: the European Vector

1991-1999] (In Russian)

15. Арбатова Н.К. Россия после президентских выборов:

внешнеполитические ориентиры // Мировая экономика и

международные отношения. 2008. №12. C.28 [Arbatova N. Russia after

the Presidential Elections: Foreign Policy Guidelines] (In Russian).


37

16. Богатуров А. Три поколения внешнеполитических доктрин России //

Международные процессы. 2007. №1(13) [Bogatourov A. The

Generations of Russian Foreign Policy Doctrines] (In Russian) Available at:

http://www.intertrends.ru/thirteen/005.htm (accessed: 12.04.2016).

17. Громыко Анат.А. Мировой порядок или правопорядок //

Международная жизнь. 2012. №3 URL:

http://interaffairs.ru/author.php?n=arpg&pg=627 [Gromyko Anat. World

Order or Law] (In Russian).

18. Дилигенский Г. Хочет ли Россия дружить с Западом? // Мировая

экономика и международные отношения. 2002. №4. C.30 [Diligensky G.

Does Russia Want to Be Friends with the West?] (In Russian).

19. Иванов И.С. Новая российская дипломатия. Десять лет внешней

политики страны. – М. 2001. C.10 [Ivanov I. A Decade of Russian Foreign

Policy] (In Russian)

20. К активной внешней политике и эффективной военной реформе /

Послание Президента Российской Федерации Федеральному

Собранию. Порядок во власти - порядок в стране (о положении в

стране и основных направлениях политики Российской Федерации) 6

марта 1997 года [Moving to Active Foreign Policy and Effective Military

Reform. President’s Address to the Federal Assembly 6 March 1997] (In

Russian) Available at: http://zakonprost.ru/content/base/27025/pdf (accessed

15.04.2016).

21. Клепацкий Л. Ориентиры внешней политики России // Обозреватель.

2001. №9 URL: http://www.rau.su/observer/N9_01/9_08.htm [Klepatsky L.

Russian Foreign Policy Guidelines] (In Russian).


38

22. Конопатов С. Россия в современной системе международных

отношений // Обозреватель-Observer. 2007. №2. C.17 [Konopatov S.

Russian in Contemporary System of International Relations] (In Russian).

23. Крылов А. Новые перспективы России на международной арене //

Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2006. №7. C.91

[Krylov A. the New Perspectives of Russian at the World Arena] (In

Russian).

24. Маруев А.Ю. Геополитический статус и геостратегия России в

современных условиях // Вестник Академии военных наук. 2009. №1.

C.27 [Maruyev A. Geopolitical Status and Geostrategy of Russia in

Contemporary World] (In Russian)

25. Мизин В.И. «План Медведева» и приоритеты российской политики в

Европе // Обозреватель-Observer. 2009. №12. C.16-24 [Mizin V.

“Medvedev’s Plan” and Russians Political Priorities in Europe] (In Russian).

26. Основные положения концепции внешней политики Российской

Федерации. Утверждены Распоряжением Президента Российской

Федерации Б.Н. Ельцина от 23 апреля 1993 г. Внешняя политика и

безопасность современной России (1991–2002). Хрестоматия в четырех

томах. Под общ. ред. Шаклеиной Т.А. Москва, Московский

государственный институт международных отношений (У) МИД

России, Российская ассоциация международных исследований, АНО

«ИНО-Центр (Информация. Наука. Образование.)», 2002. Том IV. 538

с. [Osnovnye polozhenija koncepcii vneshnej politiki Rossijskoj Federacii

utverzhdeny Rasporjazheniem Prezidenta Rossijskoj Federacii B.N. El'cina

ot 23 aprelja 1993 g.[Foreign Policy Concept of The Russian Federation.

Approved by the President of the Russian Federation B. Yeltsin April 23.

1993] Vneshnjaja politika i bezopasnost' sovremennoj Rossii (1991–2002).

Hrestomatija v chetyreh tomah [Foreign Policy and National Security of


39

Contemporary Russia (1991-2002). Anthology in Four volumes]. Moscow,

Moskovskij gosudarstvennyj institut mezhdunarodnyh otnoshenij (U) MID

Rossii, Rossijskaja associacija mezhdunarodnyh issledovanij, ANO «INO-

Centr (Informacija. Nauka. Obrazovanie.)», 2002, 538 p.]

27. Пархалина Т.Г. Внешняя политика России при Путине. Отношения

Россия — Западная Европа // Актуальные проблемы Европы. 2002. №1.

C.90 [Parkhalina T. Putin’s Russian Foreign Policy. Russia and the Western

Europe Relations] (In Russian)

28. Пляйс Я. Теория и практика внешней политики современной России //

Обозреватель. 1997. №10 [Plyays Y. Theory and Practice of Russian

Foreign Policy] (In Russian)

29. Послание Президента Российской Федерации Федеральному

Собранию. Об укреплении российского государства (Основные

направления внутренней и внешней политики) 24 февраля 1994 года

[President’s Eltsin Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian

Federation 24 February 1994] (In Russian) Available at: URL:

http://base.consultant.ru/cons/cgi/online.cgi?req=doc;base=EXP;n=417720;f

ld=134;dst=4294967295;rnd=0.8088934997732244 (accessed 14.04.2016)

30. Пушков А. От «доктрины Козырева» - к «доктрине Примакова» //

Независимая газета. 24 октября. 1997 [Poushkov A. From Kozyrev’s

Doctrine to Primakov’s Doctrine] (In Russian).

31. Пять принципов президента Медведева. // Российская газета.

01.09.2008 [Five Principles of the President Medvedev] (In Russian)

Available at: http://www.rg.ru/2008/09/01/princypi.html (accessed

13.04.2016).

32. Радиков И.В. Национальная безопасность как главный национальный

проект России: типичные проблемы реализации // ПОЛИТЭКС. 2007.


40

№1 URL: http://www.politex.info/content/view/327/30/. [Radikov I.

National Security as the Main Russian Project: typical problems of

implementation] (In Russian)

33. Стратегия национальной безопасности Российской Федерации до 2020

года. Утверждена Указом Президента Российской Федерации от 12 мая

2009 года №537 [The National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation

for the period up to 2020] (In Russian). Available at:

http://archive.kremlin.ru/text/docs/2009/05/216229.shtml. (accessed

10.04.2016)

34. Шмидт Х. Россия должна сама найти свой путь // Актуальные

проблемы Европы. 2002. №1. C.94 [Schmidt H. Russia Must Find Its

Way] (In Russian).

russian foreign policy stand on international …web.isanet.org/web/conferences/baltimore...

Documents