Russia's East Asia Policy: New Opportunities and Challenges*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Russia’s East Asia Policy: New Opportunities and Challenges* Anna KIREEVA** Abstract Since the demise of the Soviet Union, Russia’s corresponds with Russia’s course on intensifying foreign policy has evolved from a Western- cooperation with East Asian countries in order oriented one to a multi-dimensional one, with to facilitate the development of Siberia and the substantial focus on East Asia. Russia’s East Russian Far East. Asian policy is stimulated by its bid for great power status in the region. Russian-Chinese relations have been the axis of Russia’s East Asian Key Words foreign policy, though the relations have not been without their challenges. Overdependence on China threatens Russia’s independent policy Russia, East Asia, Foreign Policy, Security. in the region and encourages Russia to search for ways to diversify its ties. The rise of China and the US counter-offensive have resulted in a Introduction changing strategic environment in East Asia. A need for balancing between the US and China Asia has every reason to view Russia has brought about ASEAN countries’ desire to as a crucial element of military welcome Russia as a “balancer” in the region. It and political stability as well as of sustainable development.… We may effectively contribute to solving the * The article is prepared with the support of region’s energy, transport, scientific, Russian Foundation for Humanities (grant technological and environmental project № 12-03-00538а). I would like to problems, and our partners are well express my gratitude to Professor Alexei D. Voskiressenski and Associate Professor aware of that. Regional military and Ekaterina V. Koldunova for their comments on political stability, collective efforts a draft of this article, and to Associate Professor to counter international terrorism, Natalia V. Rodoman for giving me a tool of emergency response cooperation, or English political vocabulary to write it. dialogue between civilizations are unimaginable without Russia.… We ** Anna Kireeva is a PhD candidate at MGIMO- accord priority to the development of University, the MFA of Russia. She is a Coordinator of the MA degree programme economic cooperation focusing on the in World Regional Studies and International areas where we have distinct advantages. Relations, “Politics and Economics of World I am primarily referring to the energy Regions”, and a Lecturer in Asian and African sector, including atomic energy, 1 Studies at MGIMO-University, the MFA of transport and space exploration. Russia. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov 49 PERCEPTIONS, Winter 2012, Volume XVII, Number 4, pp. 49-78. Anna Kireeva influenced by both the West and the A need for balancing between East, in domestic discourse there has the US and China brings about never been clarity about what kind ASEAN’s desire to welcome of a country Russia actually is. One Russia as a “balancer” in the school of thought believes that Russia region. is a European power, and President Medvedev described Russia as one of As incumbent Russia’s Foreign the three main pillars of the European Minister Sergey Lavrov noted, Russia civilisation, alongside the European is not a newcomer in East Asia. Russia Union and the United States. As two has enjoyed contacts with the countries thirds of its territory lies in Asia and one there since the 17th century, and played third in Europe, Russia throughout its an important role in international history has been under the influence of relations in the region in the 19th and both Eastern and Western civilisations. 20th centuries. Although it might be a The Russian political system has differed disputed point, one cannot deny the role considerably from those in Europe, while of the Soviet Union in the victory of the Russian culture has been notably distinct national liberation movements in Asia.2 from Asian ones. Hence, according to Not to be overlooked is the fact that another long-standing tradition, Russia though a vast Russian empire was made is often regarded as both a Western and up of numerous peripheral territories Eastern country, a Eurasian one, whereas situated in Asia, including Siberia, the outside it is mostly perceived as neither Far East and Central Asia, they cannot a Western country nor an Eastern one. be regarded as classical colonies for There is a school of thought that holds a number of reasons. Firstly, Russia’s that Russia is an Asian power, although expansion was supported, or at least not this point of view is mostly rejected by opposed, by the local elites. Secondly, the majority of the Russians. The 2000s witnessed an attempt to overcome this Russia’s periphery, which was integrated dilemma of Russia’s ambivalence. A into the empire, was not plundered, newly emerging concept of Russian as in classical colonial model, but on geopolitical positioning being discussed the contrary subsidised. Thirdly, the at the moment argues that Russia is peripheral elites were not discriminated a Euro-Pacific power, which means it against, but incorporated into the has both European and Asia-Pacific national elite.3 dimensions in geographical terms, but in Since Russia has never been a classical terms of its political characteristics is a colonial power and has been significantly European power.4 50 Russia’s East Asia Policy The existence of so many contradictory a desirable model of development for perceptions makes Russian foreign policy Russia.5 very complicated. Moreover, the Soviet However, before exploring the nature legacy has imposed certain limitations of Russia’s East Asia policy, it is necessary upon it. The Soviet bloc, which also to establish some conceptual clarity in included many Asian and African the use of the key concept, namely that countries, served as a self-contained of a “great power”. The meaning of this military, political and economic system. concept in Russia’s foreign policymaking After the collapse of the Soviet Union the cannot be underestimated, because main foreign policy goal of the Russian aspiring to a great power status has elite was to gain recognition and support been a unifying theme for the Russian from the developed Western world. The ruling elite from Yeltsin to Putin and to logic of this strategic course was quite Medvedev.6 There have been a number justified: with the collapse of the bipolar of studies concerning great powers in system the basic aim of those which “had history, but for the aims of this article lost” was to join the “winners” in order only the term itself and its criteria are to become a part of the international of actual importance, and it is worth political and economic system. However, dwelling on the approaches to define practical implementation of this Western- a great power. Paul Kennedy defines oriented policy in the mid-1990s clearly a great power as a state which is able demonstrated its imbalances and to stand up to any other state in war.7 contributed to re-launching the Eastern Robert Gilpin characterises great powers dimension of Russia’s foreign policy. as countries that are able to establish and Although such regions as the Middle enforce the basic rules that influence East, North and South Africa and others their behaviour and that of inferior states are of great importance to Russian in the system hierarchy.8 Kenneth Waltz foreign policy, its primary focus has been lays down five criteria for being a great on East Asia. Dwelling on the reasons power: population and territory, resource for such a decision, it could be argued endowment, economic capability, that a number of East Asian countries, political stability and competence, and including Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, military strength.9 Singapore and others, which are now perceived as sources of economic growth, Barry Buzan and Ole Weaver offer have quite successfully managed to a more coherent definition for and integrate Eastern and Western political criteria of a great power, which can be and economic models and represent explained by the fact that their regional 51 Anna Kireeva security complex theory (RSCT)10 has Yeltsin to Putin and to Medvedev, with constructivist roots and is quite operable special reference to competing visions on both in the realist and liberal perspectives. Russia’s strategic goals within the political According to them, classifying any actor elite. The second part concentrates on as a great power requires a combination the achievements and blemishes of the of material capability (as understood by Russian-Chinese strategic partnership as Waltz), formal recognition of that status well as Russian relations with other East by others, and a response by the other Asian states and Russia’s accession to great powers on the basis of system- regional multilateral organisations. The level calculations about the present and third part is devoted to the analysis of the future distribution of power in world Russia’s new bid for great power status in politics. The last criterion is behavioural the East Asia region-the impediments to, in nature and means that great powers and prospects of-its implementation. are taken into consideration not only when dealing with the countries of the An Evolution of Russia’s East region they belong to, but also when Asian Policy from Yeltsin to operating in different regions and on the global political system level.11 This Putin and Medvedev understanding of a great power concept After the demise of the Soviet Union will serve as the methodological basis of and the emergence of a democratic but the article. considerably weaker Russian Federation a new foreign policy course was During the early 1990s the proclaimed by the political elite. In the primary direction of Russian early 1990s this course was put forward foreign policy was the Western by the Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s one, and the Eastern was (1991-1999) first team, which had little subordinate to the former.