The London School of Economics and Political Science Stigmatisation in International Relations: Russia, the West and International Society from the Cold War to Crimea Adrian Rogstad A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, September 2019. 1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 96,546 words. Statement of use of third party for editorial help I can confirm that my thesis was copy edited for conventions of language, spelling and grammar by Paul Mothersdill. 2 Abstract This study analyses the effect of stigmatisation – the process of marking certain actors, behaviours or attributes as deviant in order to reinforce the norms of a social order – on Russian-Western relations from 1991 to 2016 and the broader normative fabric of post- Cold War international society. Building on the stigma literature in Sociology and recent applications of stigma theory in International Relations, stigmatisation is conceptualised as a relational process central to how international politics works, most notably in terms of what it means to be a ‘normal’ state. The study makes two overall contributions. First, to the literature on Russian-Western relations, it provides a critical-theoretical, relational account of the co-constitutive relationship between the two that goes beyond the blame game of much recent work. Second, to the literature on international society and international norms, it provides an account of the contestation that takes place over norms to shape expectations of ‘normality’ in international society. In the process, it also offers to the IR stigma literature a sociological conceptualisation of stigmatisation that challenges structural, psychological conceptualisations. The study adopts a fourfold definition of the components of stigmatisation (stereotyping, labelling, separation and status loss), and a fourfold definition of stigma management strategies (stigma recognition, stigma evasion, stigma rejection, counter-stigmatisation). It uses these foundations to analyse Russian-Western relations in respect of four norms of state behaviour deemed central to contemporary international society: (liberal) democracy, human rights, non-aggression, (liberal) capitalism. It gauges how stigmatisation and stigma management work in relation to each norm, and what that says about the norm’s importance in contemporary international relations. In conclusion, the study considers the extent to which stigmatisation in Russian-Western relations has made international society ‘hang together’, that is whether Western stigmatisation of Russian behaviour and Russian stigma management has served to strengthen or weaken international society’s norms. 3 Acknowledgments The first people who should be thanked are my two supervisors, George Lawson and Iver Neumann. Each in their own distinctive, generous, warm and often refreshingly direct ways, George and Iver have provided first-rate guidance through both the intellectual and human challenges that come with pursuing a PhD, as well as expert knowledge on the natural habitats of salmon. The thesis would never be where it is without them, and I owe them both a huge debt of gratitude. I have been privileged to be part of an amazing group of PhD students in the LSE IR Department. Thank you for comments, conversations and friendship to Sarah Bertrand, Kelly-Jo Bluen, Ilaria Carrozza, Ida Danewid, Nicola Degli Esposti, Kentaro Fujikawa, Kerry Goettlich, Scott Hamilton, Alvina Hoffmann, Marnie Howlett, Marissa Kemp, Jackie Majnemer, Aaron McKeil, Gustav Meibauer, Chris Murray, Andreas Aagaard Nøhr, Evelyn Pauls, Hanna Rodehau-Noack, Will Rooke, Emma Saint, Alireza Shams Lahijani, Till Spanke, Bjørnar Sverdrup-Thygeson, Marc Sinan Winrow, Joanne Yao and Asad Zaidi, and a special thanks to Mia Certo and Joe Leigh as Millennium editors-in-crime. Several scholars, colleagues and friends have given of their time to discuss thoughts and ideas expressed in this thesis, whether as discussants, research panel members or conversation partners. Thank you to Rebecca Adler-Nissen, Tarak Barkawi, Federica Bicchi, Helge Blakkisrud, Kristian Gjerde, Stefano Guzzini, Minda Holm, Mathias Koenig- Archibugi, Debbie Lisle, Ben Martill, Viatcheslav Morozov, Maria Mälksoo, Vasil Navumau, Alex Pravda, Anatoly Reshetnikov, Paul Richardson, Bahar Rumelili, Richard Sakwa, Jelena Subotic, Einar Wigen, Julie Wilhelmsen and Ayşe Zarakol. Thanks also to participants at IQMR 2017, the UPTAKE PhD training school in 2018, EWIS 2018, the Doing IPS PhD Workshop 2018 and the LSE International Theory Workshop in 2017 and 2018. My family has made me who I am, encouraged me to pursue the academic route and supported me throughout. Specific thanks to my dad for reading the whole manuscript in the final stages and providing a healthy antidote to the academic ‘gobbledegook’, to my mum for giving me a kick up the backside when I was considering delaying my application, to my brother for the ‘encouragement’ with ‘work’ on my ‘essay’, and to little JPLR for perspective and playtime. Finally, and most importantly, my partner, Alexia Ash, has not only had to live with stigmatisation and Russia for the past four years but has at various stages been an excellent word-cutter, expert graph consultant, soundboard for numerous ideas and arguments, last-minute fixer of footnote formatting, and both/and grammar pedant. Her love, support and patience for my stubborn pursuit of this strange ambition has been truly amazing. 4 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 I – Russia and the West: situating the study ................................................................................. 10 II – Structure of the study ..................................................................................................................... 17 Chapter 1: The power politics of norms in international society .............................................. 19 I – International society: Norms as consensual building blocks or an exclusionary ‘standard of civilisation’? ...................................................................................................................... 20 II – ‘Thin’ Constructivism: Norms as substantialist variables and ‘good things’ ............ 27 III – Dominance, deviance and power: society as a struggle for norms ............................. 37 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 46 Chapter 2: Stigmatisation, relationalism and discourse ............................................................... 48 I – Stigmatisation as a relational process ....................................................................................... 52 II – Stigmatisation and power: The co-constitution of deviance and normality ............. 62 III – Methodology and methods: stigmatisation as discursive practices ........................... 73 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 88 Chapter 3: The ‘normal’ state in post-Cold War international society .................................... 90 I – Democracy ............................................................................................................................................ 92 II – Human Rights .................................................................................................................................... 97 III – Non-aggression............................................................................................................................. 104 IV – Capitalism ....................................................................................................................................... 109 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 116 Chapter 4: Democracy ............................................................................................................................. 120 I – Domestic democracy: from ‘transitionology’ to ‘back to the USSR’ ............................ 120 II – International democracy: from the Colour Revolutions to the Ukraine crisis ...... 134 III – Russian stigma management: stigma rejection and counter-stigmatisation ....... 144 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 156 Chapter 5: Human Rights ......................................................................................................................