The National Grand Strategy Of A State

Throughout its long history, Russia has been trapped in a continuous cycle of authoritarian regimes; only interrupted briefly with periods of tumultuous democratic transitions that were plagued by poor bureaucracy and weak institutions. Therefore, time and time again, Russia has turned towards authoritarianism. In the late 1900’s to early 2000’s, Russia again saw the fall of democracy coincide with the rise of a competitive authoritarian regime. This rise of competitive authoritarianism in Russia in the late 1900’s to early 2000’s was largely the result of the resource curse which granted Putin’s Administration false economic performance legitimacy. This in turn reinvigorated past strongman ideals, while at the same time solidified negative

One country is comparable to the United States of America in terms of world power and prominence. Russia makes their name known beginning in World War 2 (WW2), later in the Korean War, Cold War, and today’s proxy war in the Syria. Russia’s culture, environment, politics, military, and economy do not just make Russia a regional powerhouse, but slowly becoming a region of influential power to surrounding countries with the end state of a global superpower. All the factors that make Russia the powerhouse that it is slowly becoming, highlights the impressive trend that supersedes the previous Soviet Union and past leaders.

Since then President Putin of Russia has gradually attempted to re-unite the Soviet Union by re-staking claims to certain of the previous member states. This post-cold war resurgence by Russia to dominate other states is another illustration of the struggle between power and freedom or

The foreign policies of Russia also compliments in many ways its domestic policies, both in the apparent want for dominance and security in the focal point on sovereignty. These aims lead to an importance on bringing back Russia’s international status and removing positions of power that Western states have had in Russia

It seems Obama’s foreign policy in Russia has to do with institutional constraints and reminding the kremlin of American economic power and their dependence on its support. The contrast between Obama’s realism in one situation and liberalism in another communicates that his foreign policy strategy of “smart power” has more to do with approval ratings and money than a principled construction of foreign policy through bending and blending. Obama’s sanctions attempt to secure U.S. economic hegemony by weakening the ruble relative to the dollar, and Obama’s treasury department believes this strategy works better than hard power. Regardless of Obama’s hard or soft power, the motive behind his foreign policy remains the same: ensuring U.S. hegemony. Though realism cannot fully explain Obama’s instrumental mechanisms for ensuring such an effect, realism does explain the Obama Administration’s motives for global dominance—liberalism (and sometimes constructivism) merely justifies the

Russia re-emerging as a global power, due to its natural gas and is the second largest oil producer after Saudi Arabia. Due to Chinese and Indian economies have led huge demand for energy and increased global energy prices. Russia now sees itself as an energy superpower. So we can see that Russia is trying to emerge as a superpower with the increasing need for energy. This can have an affect in changing superpower, for example the USA depends largely on Russia for its energy and if Russia stops supplying it to the US they will have problems, which many lead them into not being a superpower anymore.

The state remains significant to Russia’s prospect as ever. This is so not only because, as in any nation, an effectively functioning state government is necessary considering the proper implementation of a complex economy and legal system, but also because, in Russian circumstances, the factors of globalization are increasing. These mutually factors included the geography of Russian politics, and the dislocation between population concentrations and natural resource centers, and the unavoidable preponderance of somewhat costly land transportation over sea-borne transportation. As a result, it is questionable whether Russia can survive as a country; whereas, they find themselves essentially in a global liberal economic structure. For

Russia’s geopolitical strategic goals in the region involve exerting control over the Caucasus region, particularly energy resources, pipelines, and infrastructure. Moreover, Russia may press for the eventual annexation of several separatist territories, such as South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Additionally, Russia’s long-term strategic goals include preservation of their maritime dominance in the Black Sea region, home to the Russian Black Sea fleet. However, what may be the most dangerous course of action as highlighted by Cohen and Hamilton is, Russia’s intent to

Russia has built a strong, but stagnating economy on several natural resources to include the refinery and export of natural gas and oil. According to the Jim Picht (2014) exportation of natural gas and oil to Eastern Europe account for 70 percent of Russia’s exports and 53 percent of the government’s revenue. Along with exporting oil to Eastern Europe, Russia also exports too many countries to include China and Belarus. Europe fueled majority by Russian supplied natural gas and oil, the dependency of Europe’s need for this natural resource is the reason Russia’s economy is so strong. In 2014, when Russia decided to invade the neighboring country of Ukraine has led Europe to begin searching for other suppliers of their natural resources. If Europe finds other countries to supply the natural resources

This week’s reading focused on the changes that took place in the Russian Federation after the presidency of George W. Bush. In class and previous readings, we got a teaser about how the start of the Obama administration in 2008 allowed for a “reset” in relations between the United States and Russia. This second portion of Elkin’s Russia Turns the Page: Historic Sketches of the End of the Post-Soviet Period: A History of the New Russia in 2007-2014. Sheds light on the events that are currently some of the most pressing issues for both nations. In addition, Elkin’s ability to offer an “insider” perspective on some of the varying power dynamics within the Russian Federation made for a very unique read.

Commitment to international security has been a point of conflict between Russia and the U.S. Historically the U.S. has abided by an ideology of universalism, “by which all nations share a common interest in all the affairs of the world” whereas Russia, formerly the USSR, has abided by the sphere-of-influence view, “by which each great power would be assured by other great powers of predominance in its own area of special interest” (Origins, p.26). Therefore, it is imperative that U.S. leadership protects the sovereignty of

From the Beginning of the Soviet Union, the West opposed the communist nation ideologically, the capitalist West feared communism. Communism was the reason that the Soviet Union was not compatible with the Western capitalist nations. With the end of the Soviet Union and the birth of capitalism in Russia, the West believed that their eastern problem was over, although as time would tell this assumption would be incorrect. Over the next decade, Russia would exert their power over boarding nations trying to join NATO, even invading Georgia, and Ukraine. Furthermore, they would back anti-West dictators such as Assad, proving Western tensions with Russia are far from over. Political and military tensions between the West and Russia persisted after the end of the Cold War because of the rise of anti-west military elites in Russian politics. This occurred because of Russia’s inability to properly implement a free market economy. Instead, Yeltsin, the Russian president at the time, enacted “shock therapy” capitalism. This process led to corruption in Russian politics and consolidation of power among anti-western Russian elites. The anti-west security elites, such as Putin, were able to rise to power by vowing to eliminate this corruption. These elites pose a threat to the West due to their dislike and aggressiveness towards the West.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and President Vladimir Putin’s ascendency in the early 2000s, he and his government have been hell-bent on reclaiming Russia’s old title of a world superpower. In conjunction with his administration, Putin has commandeered Russia’s identity to the narrative of being an energy superpower by using the nation’s most effective weapon: the country’s energy resources. Peter Behr’s article for the Congressional Quarter Global Researcher titled “Energy Nationalism,” seeks to demonstrate and explain why and how Russia—in addition to other countries such as China and Venezuela—became so nationalistic and protective of its energy resources. Furthermore, “Since the oil age began more than a century ago, governments in the developing world—on both the right and left—have promised their people a fair share of the wealth…Instead, ‘black gold’ has spawned corruption, economic hardship, vast class differences and civil war” (Behr 2007). When politically creating a nation’s identity on the world’s stage, leaders incorporate the benefits and effects of human, material, and natural resources. Since these are constantly evolving variables, a country’s identity, particularly relating to natural resources, is constantly evolving as well. Nevertheless, Putin is reminiscing and effectively reenacting Russia’s energy production days in order to shape the narrative of being a geopolitical and energy superpower. However, prior to understanding and examining

Russia's new strength is also based on its vast reserves of oil and natural gas, which as the price of crude exceeds $ 120 per barrel, give the country tremendous bargaining power, not only in its relations with countries directly dependent on its supplies as Ukraine, Germany and Hungary, but, in general, by the capacity of influence that give

The oil industry is one of great power that countries are invest in. Russia is one of the leading contenders in producing oil and exports the goods to various countries. With great resources comes great strength. Oil is of the utmost important to every country therefore, Russia has an upper hand in some respects. Moreover, the history behind the oil pipelines and how Russia connects to different countries allows for insight into the power they withhold politically and economically, and on the improvements that need to be made to continue growth in this industry.