scholarly journals Foreign Policy Contradictions between the United States and the Russian Federation in Transcaucasia and the Black Sea Region in the XXI Century

Manuscript ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1117-1121
Author(s):  
Elchin Nuraddin oglu Shakirov ◽  
◽  
Roman Vladimirovich Penkovtsev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Black Sea Region ◽  
The Russian Federation

scholarly journals TURKEY AND RUSSIA AS MAJOR PLAYERS IN THE BLACK SEA: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-30
Author(s):  
Nuri Demirel
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Black Sea Region ◽  
The World ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Republic Of Turkey

Currently, the Republic of Turkey plays a vital role in international processes taking place on the world stage. Since ancient times, at the crossroads of the paths between the world of East and West, the Republic of Turkey claims to have an excellent position in the relations of these regions with each other, as well as in their internal processes and events. The universal location between Europe and Asia makes Turkish foreign policy one of its main political issues, especially in the field of regional cooperation. Moreover, the changes in the world of recent decades, such as the collapse of the USSR, revolutions and military operations in eastern countries, the transition of Crimea to Russia, lead to the fact that Turkey pursued its foreign policy thoughtfully and actively, taking the most advantageous positions for itself. An essential region for pursuing Turkish policy is the Black Sea region. The events of recent years have significantly affected him and the role that large states play in him, such as the Republic of Turkey and the Russian Federation. It also began to arouse great interest among states and regions of the Western world, such as the European Union. The changed geopolitical structure of the Black Sea region has led to the need for its members to determine their positions and areas of interaction in which they are ready to cooperate or, on the contrary, to oppose each other. In this article, the author will examine the relations of the Turkish Republic and the Russian Federation in the Black Sea region and its importance. In this study, political relations, security, economy, energy, and security will be discussed. In the conclusion of the study, the current state of Turkey-Russia relations and assessments will be made about its future.

RUSSIAN ANTI-ACCESS POTENTIAL (A2 / AD) ON THE CRIMEAN PENINSULA

2020 ◽  
Vol XIV ◽  
pp. 0-1
Author(s):  
Patryk Reśkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Black Sea ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Security Architecture ◽  
Crimean Peninsula ◽  
Black Sea Region ◽  
South Eastern ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Crimean Peninsula

The purpose of the following article is to present the military capabilities of the Russian Federation located on the Crimean peninsula, and to define in this context Russian A2/AD anti-access capabilities and their impact on the security architecture of the Black Sea region, in particular NATO's south-eastern flank

scholarly journals The Conflict in Syria from the Perspective of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominik Karczmarzyk
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Initial Phase ◽  
Peace Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
The West ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Syrian Conflict

Following the outbreak of the conflict in Syria, the United States and Russian Federation became involved in the peace process aimed at stabilizing the internal situation. In the initial phase of this process, Russia introduced political plans to resolve the dispute, while successively blocking UNSC projects calling for the resignation of Bashar al-Assad. As a consequence of the changes that took place in Russia’s foreign policy after the annexation of Crimea, it began conducting military activities aimed at ousting opposition forces from Syria and preventing the West from making any possible intervention. Due to the lack of a decisive response from the United States, within a few years the Syrian regime’s offensive, militarily supported by Russia, reduced the opposition forces supported by the US to the defense. As a result of Russi’s intense involvement in the process of resolving the Syrian conflict, this country has once again started to play a key role in the international arena. The conflict in Syria has highlighted the Russian government’s aspirations to rebuild its state as a superpower.

Turkey and the Black Sea Economic Cooperation: Opportunities and Challenges

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-70
Author(s):  
Yusuf Ibrahim Gamawa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Cooperation ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Black Sea Region

This paper aims to analyse Turkey’s relationship with other states in the Black Sea region, and takes a look at reasons behind the formation of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation that was spearheaded by Turkey. The paper also highlights the importance of the region and the struggle by outside powers for influence in the region. These powers include Russia and the United states, alongside Turkey.

scholarly journals Black Sea Region in the Security Policy of Romania: Evaluation of Approaches

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-218
Author(s):  
D. S. Ayvazyan
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
National Defense ◽  
Black Sea Region

The paper is dedicated to the role of the Black Sea region in the security policy of Romania. Approaches, patterns and results of this area of the foreign policy of Romania are studied since the period after the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The concepts and strategies of the national security and the strategies of national defense of Romania, adopted since 1994 are analysed. The key patterns and results of the security policy pursued by Romania in the Black Sea region are defined. The author concludes that this direction of Romania's policy is consistently based on the strategic partnership with the United States and solidarity with the approaches of the NATO and EU in the Black Sea region. The policy leads to the imbalance in the relations with the littoral states for which euro-atlanticism has not become an ideological basis for their foreign policy (Russia and Turkey). Amidst the absence of the search for a new model of relations with the littoral states, Romania's policy leads to the growth of the potential for confliction in the Black Sea region.

Russia’s foreign policy in the age of Boris Yeltsin through the eyes of Slovak diplomats (1993–1999)

2020 ◽  
pp. 151-171
Author(s):  
Viktor V. Nikitin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Archival Documents ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Basic Approaches ◽  
The One ◽  
Foreign Ministry

ased on archival documents from the Embassy of the Slovak Republic in Moscow, which are being introduced into scholarly use for the first time, this essay discusses the two basic approaches of Slovak diplomats to Russian foreign policy. The first approach, utilised during the era of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Andrei V. Kozyrev, was described by Slovak representatives in Russia criticising its pro-Western policy that they said did not meet Russian national interests, but was then being pursued by the then top of the Russian Foreign Ministry. They saw the main problems of Russian diplomacy as being the deterioration of the socio-economic situation of the population of the Russian Federation on the one hand, and Kozyrev's emphasis on “strategic partnership” with the United States on the other, which gave rise to growing anti-American sentiments both among the political elite and the Russian electorate. This led, in particular, to a situation where even the most important bilateral agreements between Russia and the United States were perceived by the deputies of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation as a betrayal of Russian national interests. The second approach, which appeared in Slovak diplomatic reports under the next head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Evgeny M. Primakov, was characterised by, after modifying both their rhetoric and approach to foreign policy, criticism of the minister, which resulted in an attempt by Western countries, especially the United States, to have him removed from his post. This is because Slovakia did not need even a hint of a conflict between Russia and the West, since both the Western and the post-Soviet spaces became the most important and, in a sense, even irreplaceable areas of Slovak foreign policy.

scholarly journals Anti-Russian sanctions due to the Ukrainian crisis of 2014: assessment of consequences and prospects

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-48
Author(s):  
Sergei Valer'evich Krivov ◽  
Tat'yana Vladimirovna Baranova ◽  
Sergey Valer'evich Starkin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Effects ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
The Russian Federation

The subject of this research is the sanctions imposed by Western countries against Russia in response to the Ukrainian events of 2014. Leaning on the available empirical data and expert assessments conducted by various financial and analytical structures, an attempt is made to identify the nature and severity of impact of sanction pressure upon different economic sectors of the Russian Federation, implemented for achieving the foreign policy goals. Emphasis is placed on the absence of uniform sanctions policy due to the specificity of foreign policy goals and peculiarities of sanction mechanisms used by the United States and the European Union. It is underlined that anti-Russian sanctions and Russia’s response in many instances are substantiated by the preceding trends in strategic vision of foreign and domestic policy by the Russian Federation, as well as the nature of its relations with the West. The conclusion is made that the focus in studying the problem of sanctions has shifted towards the political analysis and further analytical and scientific examination. The author believes that in the conditions of uncertainty of the economic effects and absence of common approaches towards understanding the prospects of sanctions policy by the Western countries the two main scenarios of its further development. It would either gradually fade out without “renewed efforts”, slowly negating its practical effect, and prompt the United States and the European Union intensify the dialogue with Russia, avoiding the problematic issues on the status of Crimea, implication in the events in South-Eastern Ukraine, etc.; or it can lead to full “politicization” of sanctions polity and its integration into the negotiation process on settlement of the Ukrainian situation and turning into a powerful tool for conducting negotiations.

scholarly journals KHARKIV AGREEMENTS OF 2010: VISIONS OF POLITICAL, MEDIA AND EXPERT CIRCLES IN UKRAINE

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 194-213
Author(s):  
Pavlo ARTYMYSHYN
Keyword(s):  
Black Sea ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Crimean Peninsula ◽  
Black Sea Region ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Political Media ◽  
The Crimean Peninsula

The main visions of the political, media, and expert circles in Ukraine concerning the conclusion of the Kharkiv Agreements in 2010 – the pact between Ukraine and the Russian Federation on the stay of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation Navy on the territory of Ukraine are determined. It is alleged that circles close to the President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, saw them as a sign of the beginning of an era of intense Ukrainian-Russian relations, including the issue of cheaper gas, which would help to overcome the crisis in the economy and provide a lower price for gas for both industrial and household consumers. Instead, the agreements in the opposition were seen as a betrayal of Ukrainian national interests, the creation in the Black Sea region of a destabilizing center in the form of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy, and the beginning of Ukraine’s integration into the Russian geopolitical space. At the same time, the Ukrainian side was unable to persuade the Russian to sign new gas agreements to revise the price of «blue fuel» in essence, rather than through a discount system. Opposition criticism was also not effective under these circumstances: although the topic of prolongation of the Russian Navy’s Black Sea Fleet base in Sevastopol became one of the tenets of their anti-government rhetoric, however, the unification of the opposition had not yet grown into an institutionalized movement, acquiring such features only on the eve of the parliamentary elections in 2012. Instead, the Russian side took full advantage of the Ukrainian concessions of 2010. It is the preservation of the Black Sea Fleet on the Crimean Peninsula that allowed the Russians to prepare the ground for its annexation and for the nourishment of the Russian chauvinist ideology about Sevastopol as a «Russian city». Keywords: Kharkiv Agreements of 2010, politicum, mass media, expert environment, visions, the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation Navy, gas, Ukraine, Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Russian Politics Toward Ukraine: was there Ever a Strategic Partnership?

2019 ◽  
pp. 131-144
Author(s):  
Olga Brusylovska ◽  
Igor Koval
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Strategic Partner ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Politics ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
High Level

The hypothesis of this research was that these states never had a rich level of strategic partner-ship (despite the officially proclaimed status), but always remained a sort of “negative strate- gic dependence” because of the high level of asymmetry in their relations. I. Zhovkva proved that the attribute of strategic partnership is community of strategic interests without its further reflections existing relations are superfluous. G. Perepelytsia marked that scientists must distinguish two definitions of strategic partnership – as a level of the attained cooperation and as an instrument of state foreign policy. In the given article strategic partnership is examined in two measures. The first part is sanctified to the use of the concept of strategic partnership in the foreign policy of the Russian Federation (on the example of Ukraine), and second to accordance of level of their cooperation proclaimed strategic partnership. After 1991, the goal of Moscow was ‘a friendly and neutral Ukraine.’ The relations were built primarily on an economic basis, but even then Russia widely used a ban on the import of some goods as a political instrument. After 2004, problems in Russian-Ukrainian relations related to the Russian military base in Crimea and the basing of the Russian Black Sea Fleet aggravated. Kremlin tried to destruct Ukraine rather than let it go its own way these witnessed against the contemporary concept of strategic partnership, which was the foundation of Russian politics towards Ukraine. Rather, the RF used very old policy of ‘stick and carrot’ (low gas prices and other economic preferences as the carrot, responsibility for ‘compatriots’ as the stick). The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation was denounced as well as all Russian-Ukrainian agreements on the Black Sea Fleet, so, the RF itself refuses from using ‘strategic partnership’ as instrument of its policy towards Ukraine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document