Russian Geopolitical Visions and Argumentation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SIRKE MÄKINEN Russian Geopolitical Visions and Argumentation Parties of Power, Democratic and Communist Opposition on Chechnia and NATO, 1994–2003 ACADEMIC DISSERTATION To be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Tampere, for public discussion in the Lecture Room A1 of the Main Building, Kalevantie 4, Tampere, on February 23rd, 2008, at 12 o’clock. UNIVERSITY OF TAMPERE ACADEMIC DISSERTATION University of Tampere Department of Political Science and International Relations Finland Distribution Tel. +358 3 3551 6055 Bookshop TAJU Fax +358 3 3551 7685 P.O. Box 617 [email protected] 33014 University of Tampere www.uta.fi/taju Finland http://granum.uta.fi Cover design by Juha Siro Layout Marita Alanko Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1293 Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis 696 ISBN 978-951-44-7219-0 (print) ISBN 978-951-44-7220-6 (pdf) ISSN 1455-1616 ISSN 1456-954X http://acta.uta.fi Tampereen Yliopistopaino Oy – Juvenes Print Tampere 2008 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 15 2 RESEARCH AGENDA 22 2.1 Geopolitical tradition 22 2.2 Critical geopolitics concepts 24 2.3 Comparison of previous research 26 2.4 General research questions 31 3 BOOM IN (EURASIAN) GEOPOLITICAL THINKING 34 3.1 Modern geopolitical imagination 34 3.2 Geopolitical thinking in Russia/Soviet Russia 36 3.3 Geopolitical thinking in the Russian Federation: Westernism vs. Eurasianism? 40 3.3.1 Aleksandr Dugin as an example of extreme New Eurasianism 44 3.4 Impact of (Eurasian) geopolitical thinking 47 4 POLITICAL CONTEXT AND PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES 49 4.1 Creating the party system: the Russian and Soviet legacy and the political elite’s decisions 53 4.2 Role of political parties and the party system 59 4.3 Russian political opposition 64 4.4 Russian parliamentary parties 68 4.4.1 ‘Parties of Power’ 69 4.4.1.1 Nash Dom – Rossiia 72 4.4.1.2 Otechestvo 75 4.4.1.3 Edinstvo 76 4.4.1.4 Edinstvo-Otechestvo -> Edinaia Rossiia 77 4.4.2 Iabloko 78 4.4.3 Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii (KPRF) 82 5 DATA AND METHODS 86 5.1 Newspaper articles and party programmes as primary data 86 5.1.1 What naturally occurring data is available? 87 5.1.2 Data collection 89 5.1.2.1 Websites of the parties 90 5.1.2.2 Databases 91 5.1.3 Party programmes as data 97 5.2 Approach to studying geopolitical argumentation 99 5.2.1 Studying texts as part of reality and as constructing reality 100 5.2.2 Critical geopolitics and Gearóid Ó Tuathail’s grammar of geopolitics 105 5.2.3 New rhetoric and Stephen Toulmin’s model of argument 110 5.2.4 Case-specifi c research questions 120 6 ARGUMENTS ON RUSSO-CHECHEN RELATIONS I 123 6.1 Introduction 123 6.2 Th e war in Chechnia 1994–1996 and its aft ermath: re-building the constitutional order or fi ghting for national self-determination? 127 6.2.1 Party of Power Nash Dom – Rossiia: Democratic Russia is protecting its citizens 129 6.2.2 Iabloko: Undemocratic leaders are threatening democracy and unity 144 6.2.3 Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii (KPRF): Russia is breaking apart and in need of salvation by real patriots 158 6.3 Comparison and geopolitical vision 169 7 ARGUMENTS ON RUSSO-CHECHEN RELATIONS II 171 7.1 Th e war in Chechnia in 1999–: a counter-terrorist operation? 171 7.2 Parties of Power 173 7.2.1 Nash Dom – Rossiia: Russia is fi ghting against terrorism 174 7.2.2 Otechestvo: Russia is defending unity but without popular support 184 7.2.3 Edinstvo: Chechnia is a hotbed of international terrorism 200 7.3 Iabloko: Chechnia is a sad example of the incompetence and power greed of Russian and Chechen leaders 211 7.4 Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii (KPRF): Chechnia is the most violent symptom of Russia’s illness 223 7.5 Comparison and geopolitical vision 234 8 ARGUMENTS ON RUSSIA-NATO RELATIONS 236 8.1 NATO enlargement to the East – A potential threat? 238 8.1.1 Parties of Power 241 8.1.1.1 Nash Dom – Rossiia: Enlargement equates to the betrayal and isolation of Russia 241 8.1.1.2 Otechestvo: Speculations about Russia’s membership are a trap 247 8.1.1.3 Edinstvo 251 8.1.2 Iabloko: NATO is isolating Russia and threatening all-European security interests 252 8.1.3 Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii (KPRF) NATO enlargement is a manifestation of the American dictatorship 266 8.2 Severe tension in NATO-Russia relations: Humanitarian intervention and confl ict around Kosovo 275 8.2.1 Parties of Power 277 8.2.1.1 Nash Dom – Rossiia: Intervention into a sovereign country violates international law and is part of America’s hegemony aspirations 277 8.2.1.2 Otechestvo: Th e goal of the NATO operation is to break Yugoslavia apart 284 8.2.1.3 Edinstvo: NATO operation equates to one-sided aggression 291 8.2.2 Iabloko: Th e Kosovo operation is a threat to democratic development in Russia 292 8.2.3 Kommunisticheskaia Partiia Rossiiskoi Federatsii (KPRF): Russia should stop NATO aggression by creating a counter-bloc 303 8.3 Comparison and geopolitical vision 309 9 GEOPOLITICAL VISIONS AND ARGUMENTATION 312 9.1 Purpose of the study 312 9.2 Case-specifi c arguments and geopolitical storylines 314 9.2.1 Russo-Chechen relations 314 9.2.2 Russia-NATO relations 315 9.3 Remarks on political argumentation 321 9.4 Parties of power versus opposition parties 322 9. 5 Geopolitical visions and imagination 324 EPILOGUE 333 REFERENCES 335 SECONDARY DATA 335 Literature, articles in refereed journals and other academic papers 335 Documents and party materials 342 Newspaper articles and news 342 Web sources 344 Author’s interviews 346 PRIMARY DATA 346 Newspaper and www articles and interviews on the radio and TV 346 Party announcements, programmes and platforms 355 APPENDIX 1. Politicians of the parties and the commands of the searches used in collecting the data in the Integrum database 358 APPENDIX 2. Newspapers used in collecting the articles 368 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. Study on geopolitical discourses: Geopolitical storylines on 9/11 and overall geopolitical orientations and parliamentary parties 28 TABLE 2. Study on geopolitical culture: Geopolitical schools/traditions and Russian parties according to previous studies 43 TABLE 3. Party programmes of the parliamentary parties 98 TABLE 4. Grammar of geopolitics according to Ó Tuathail 107 TABLE 5. Geopolitical script according to Ó Tuathail 108 TABLE 6. Explaining the model of argument 115 TABLE 7. Our Home is Russia politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia 1995–1998 130 TABLE 8. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1995–1998 142 TABLE 9. Iabloko politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia 1994–1998 144 TABLE 10. Iabloko politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1994–1998 156 TABLE 11. KPRF politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia 1994–1998 158 TABLE 12. KPRF politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1994–1998 166 TABLE 13. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia in 1999 174 TABLE 14. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ argument on Chechnia in 1999 182 TABLE 15. Otechestvo politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia 1999–2003 184 TABLE 16. Otechestvo politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1999–2003 198 TABLE 17. Edinstvo politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia 1999–2003 201 TABLE 18. Edinstvo politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1999–2003 209 TABLE 19. Iabloko politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia 1999–2003 211 TABLE 20. Iabloko politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1999–2003 221 TABLE 21. KPRF politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the confl ict in Chechnia in 1999–2003 224 TABLE 22. KPRF politicians’ argument on Chechnia 1999–2003 232 TABLE 23. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on NATO enlargement 1995–1999 241 TABLE 24. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ argument on NATO enlargement1995–1999 245 TABLE 25. Kosachev’s (Otechestvo) grammar of geopolitics on NATO enlargement 2001–2002 247 TABLE 26. Kosachev’s (Otechstvo) argument on NATO enlargement 2001–2002 249 TABLE 27. Edinstvo politicians’ argument on NATO enlargement 2001–2002 252 TABLE 28. Iabloko politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on NATO enlargement 1994–2003 253 TABLE 29. Iabloko politicians’ argument on NATO enlargement 1994–2003 264 TABLE 30. KPRF politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on NATO enlargement 1994–2003 266 TABLE 31. KPRF politicians’ argument on NATO enlargement 1994–2003 273 TABLE 32. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the Kosovo confl ict in 1999 278 TABLE 33. Nash Dom – Rossiia politicians’ argument on the Kosovo confl ict in 1999 283 TABLE 34. Otechestvo politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the Kosovo confl ict 1999–2001 285 TABLE 35. Otechestvo politicians’ argument on the confl ict in Kosovo 1999–2001 289 TABLE 36. Iabloko politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the Kosovo confl ict 1998–2001 293 TABLE 37. Iabloko politicians’ argument on the Kosovo confl ict 1998–2001 301 TABLE 38. KPRF politicians’ grammar of geopolitics on the Kosovo confl ict 1999–2000 303 TABLE 39. KPRF politicians’ argument on the Kosovo confl ict 1999–2000 307 TABLE 40. Geopolitical storylines on Chechnia and NATO 320 TABLE 41. Geopolitical visions of parliamentary parties in the context of an internal and an external threat 326 TABLE 42. Geopolitical schools/traditions and parliamentary parties. Old classifi cation – new places. 329 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CIS Commonwealth of Independent States (SNG Soobzhestvo nezavisimykh gosudarstv) CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Union CSCE Congress for Security and Cooperation in Europe DVR Demokraticheskii Vybor Russii (Democratic Choice Russia) EPItsentr Tsentr ekonomicheskikh i politicheskikh issledovanii (Centre of Economic and Political Studies) EU European Unioin FSB Federalnaia sluzhba bezobasnosti (Federal Security Service) gosudarstvenniki Advocates of Russian statehood GUAM Organisation for Democracy and Economic Development.