 |
| Russian President Vladimir Putin Image credit: Wikipedia |
While not the existential rival that they were during the Cold War, many of President Vladimir Putin's policies have squarely opposed US intervention in areas such as Iran, Syria and North Korea.
Anne Gearan at the Washington Post argues that Russia's foreign policy could pose serious problems for President Obama's second-term agenda.
Read the article, and decide whether Russia's actions exemplify realism or liberalism. Explain why for participation credit.
Russia's recent actions exemplify realism. President Putin is not interested in cooperating or coming up with a compromise with the US on current issues like the adoption laws and utilizing their land to get US troops from Afghanistan. Similar to the ideals of realism "cooperation is fleeting" because power is Russia's first priority. President Putin understands that as veto powers in the UN they too have a say on international affairs in the UN and can be used against the United States to gain more international influence. Once again Russia is attempting to redefine its power across Europe, like during the reign of the Soviet Union.
ReplyDeleteJessica Johnson
Based on the facts presented in this article, Putin's actions on behalf of Russia exemplify realism. The Russian president has indicated through his decisions that he is not particularly interested in making any concessions to the United States government. Putin currently holds power that is important to the U.S. in the sense that some of his decisions are capable of impacting America's international goals, including the desire to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Putin is acting in what he believes to be Russia's best interests, and is more interested in gaining power and improving security than helping a country he believes will "take advantage" of Russia.
ReplyDeleteBecause of Russia's failing cooperation with the U.S. in the area of national security, the self-interest of both countries shows to be an aspect of great concern to most realists. By describing the acts of Putin and Obama, the article emphasizes that this has become a competition and an obstacle to cooperation. With the competition for security at hand, the U.S. has a need for concern due to our lack of leverage in the situation. Russia, with this upper hand, is acting in a realist manner by looking to expand its powers.
ReplyDeleteBen Primes
It seems Russia's recent actions regarding foreign policy (especially relations with the United States) indicate a realist approach. The Russian government sees international politics as a zero-sum game, and recent laws seem to have been passed solely to antagonize Americans. In realism, the most important factor is power and the objective of the state is to obtain as much power as possible. The failure to renew the arms control agreement is clearly a sign that Russia is distrustful that the United States will fulfill its end of the bargain and that a power struggle is beginning between the two nations once again. One recent move by Russia that does not fit into the realist paradigm is the ban on Americans who wish to adopt Russian children. In realism, states are perceived as the only actors that matter. However, the adoption ban directly affects American citizens wishing to adopt, not the government itself. That confusing bit of legislation aside, Russian policy under Putin has been strongly realist.
ReplyDelete-Paul Brandt
I think that Russia's recent actions exemplify realism. While the US would like to believe in the more liberal view that peace is possibly attainable with the mitigation of the negative US-Russia relations, Putin seems to be much more focused on the balance of power being held primarily by Russia. With obvious disintrest in arms-control concessions by the US, Putin seems to be trying to prove to the American government that he will not and does not need to help them because his position as three-time leader of Russia is quite secure. Security is the number one goal of realists and with Russia's veto in the U.N. Security Council and its membership in other diplomatic clubs, Russia can feel very secure knowing that it has the power to impede the American government's goals.
ReplyDeleteCari Harris
I would say Putin's actions display a realist approach. He does not seem to see cooperating with the US as a high priority. He is not interested in helping President Obama get our troops out of Afghanistan, knowing that this conflict will certainly lead to diminished relations between the US and Russia. The adoption law is the same story. Preventing Americans from adopting Russian children will only weaken any relations between the two countries.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your contributions, everyone. Is there anyone who wants to try to make a case for liberal IR principles guiding Putin's actions? Maybe constructivism?
ReplyDeleteRussia's actions are leaning toward constructivism. While Putin's actions are not promoting relations with the United States, they do not seem to be provocations for war nor do they indicate Russia's preparation for any war with the United States. The interests of these two states are not going to stay constant. Two superpowers can not realistically be expected to maintain positive relations forever. Since the interests of Russia and the United States are changing we cannot always expect cooperation between them. The two issues that were brought up in December were primarily socially driven. This also demonstrates the constructivist ideas of citizenship and social norm. The elites in this case, Obama and Putin are very central to the cooperation and or conflict in the upcoming years.
ReplyDelete-Rachel Pewitt
The actions toward Russia are more so acts of constructivism in that reading the article, leads me to believe that Putin's personal ideas in regard to Russia as well as Obama's personal ideas in regards to the US are shaping state identity and interests. As mentioned in the article, this is exemplified in the law that was just passed in US which bans the American adoption of Russian children, and targets Russia's human rights records.
ReplyDelete