Russia in Global Affairs

The events, which climaxed in early 1991 with the U.S.-led Desert Storm, were the first manifestation of the “new world order.” Amid today’s dramatic events, it is useful to recall how the Soviet Union and the United States tried to become partners in shaping the then new—and now collapsing—U.S.-centric world order.

Attempts to encourage changes in the positions of African states by carrot and stick have limits. The distancing of African countries from both Russia and the United States was not the result of policy reformulation by African countries, but primarily because Russia and the United States themselves had changed and radicalized their approaches.

Relations between Russia and the U.S. have been degrading steadily, but even the Ukraine crisis has not yet become the equivalent of the Cuban missile crisis.

Although the Central Asian states seek a more visible role in the international arena and are characterized as independent actors of world politics, they have to sacrifice their independence in order to become middle powers because they lack the power and resources to do so on their own.

What we are witnessing today is rather a reaction to the excesses of the previous decades. In the future, international communication will be determined not only by this, but also by some unique traits of the modern structural realities in which the states will have to act.

So, as the dust settles in Afghanistan, what’s driving policymakers in Russia and Central Asia? In this new episode of War & Peace, Olga Oilker and Hugh Pope are joined by Ivan Safranchuk, Senior Fellow at Moscow’s Institute of International Studies, to discuss the role they will play in shaping Afghanistan’s future.

In reality, Russia has supported (although softer diplomatic language is used) the force in Afghanistan which is the most independent one in the local context. This is a rather consistent step towards building a polycentric and diverse world.

The new set of global and regional actors can be taken for the new, multipolar hardware of the global system; its software is shaped by new structural realities, within which actors operate. These are conceptualized as the mismatch between material globalization and the decline of ideational universalism: the latter determines conflict while the former limits escalation. The article outlines the mode of competition within these structural realities, i.e., indirect coercion.

What does the U.S.-China confrontation mean for Russia? Will Moscow take sides? Or will it be able to skillfully maneuver between the two powers? We discuss these issues with Ivan Safranchuk, Associate Professor of MGIMO University, and Vassily Kashin, a leading researcher at the Higher School of Economics.