Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus

Russia’s influence in its Near Abroad (called “Bližkoe zarubeže” in Russian) has created a permissive zone, in which the countries within that area can ignore their democratic commitments being aware that their loyalty to Russia can protect them against any possible interference of the US and the...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Gabrielli, Francesco
Formato: Artículo revista
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Universidad Nacional de Rosario 2022
Materias:
Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Bielorussia
Eurasia
Belarus
Acceso en línea:https://relasp.unr.edu.ar/index.php/revista/article/view/77
Aporte de:
RELASP de Universidad Nacional de Rosario
id I15-R205-article-77
record_format ojs
institution Universidad Nacional de Rosario
institution_str I-15
repository_str R-205
container_title_str RELASP
language Inglés
format Artículo revista
topic Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Bielorussia
Eurasia
Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Belarus
Eurasia
spellingShingle Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Bielorussia
Eurasia
Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Belarus
Eurasia
Gabrielli, Francesco
Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus
topic_facet Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Bielorussia
Eurasia
Autocracy promotion
Russia
Armenia
Belarus
Eurasia
author Gabrielli, Francesco
author_facet Gabrielli, Francesco
author_sort Gabrielli, Francesco
title Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus
title_short Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus
title_full Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus
title_fullStr Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus
title_full_unstemmed Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus
title_sort autocracy promotion in russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between armenia and belarus
description Russia’s influence in its Near Abroad (called “Bližkoe zarubeže” in Russian) has created a permissive zone, in which the countries within that area can ignore their democratic commitments being aware that their loyalty to Russia can protect them against any possible interference of the US and the EU. The analysis of bilateral relations between Armenia and Russia on one side, and between Russia and Belarus on the other, has led to the identification of the four models of autocracy promotion: spontaneous emulation, hard power efforts (mainly concerning military intervention), rewards (primarily regarding economic assistance) and negative sanctions (or blackmailing). A combination of rewards and punishments has proved to be the most frequent tactic used by the Kremlin, which has also been facilitated by Armenia and Belarus’s weak linkage and leverage with Western democracy promoters. Russia’s “conservative” diplomacy, which has followed a realist approach, has not resulted in a rigorous autocratic promotion policy, but the Belarusian and Armenian cases demonstrate that in these two (non-democratic) regimes (and also in those of Central Asia) the presence of Russia is stronger than in the democratic ones, such as the Baltic States. Russia’s “sanctions” against Belarus have been less than those directed against Armenia, owing mainly to the former country’s proximity to Russia in the cultural arena and the strategic geopolitical location of Belarus in Eastern Europe. Armenia, on the other hand, has also been subject to direct military intervention by Russia, which was however limited to the first Artsakh war
publisher Universidad Nacional de Rosario
publishDate 2022
url https://relasp.unr.edu.ar/index.php/revista/article/view/77
work_keys_str_mv AT gabriellifrancesco autocracypromotioninrussiasforeignpolicyacomparisonbetweenarmeniaandbelarus
AT gabriellifrancesco lapromozionedellautocrazianellapoliticaesterarussaunconfrontotraarmeniaebielorussia
first_indexed 2023-05-11T18:46:20Z
last_indexed 2023-05-11T18:46:20Z
_version_ 1765624544215695360
spelling I15-R205-article-772023-04-20T23:31:44Z Autocracy promotion in Russia’s foreign policy: : a comparison between Armenia and Belarus La promozione dell'autocrazia nella politica estera russa: : un confronto tra Armenia e Bielorussia Gabrielli, Francesco Autocracy promotion Russia Armenia Bielorussia Eurasia Autocracy promotion Russia Armenia Belarus Eurasia Russia’s influence in its Near Abroad (called “Bližkoe zarubeže” in Russian) has created a permissive zone, in which the countries within that area can ignore their democratic commitments being aware that their loyalty to Russia can protect them against any possible interference of the US and the EU. The analysis of bilateral relations between Armenia and Russia on one side, and between Russia and Belarus on the other, has led to the identification of the four models of autocracy promotion: spontaneous emulation, hard power efforts (mainly concerning military intervention), rewards (primarily regarding economic assistance) and negative sanctions (or blackmailing). A combination of rewards and punishments has proved to be the most frequent tactic used by the Kremlin, which has also been facilitated by Armenia and Belarus’s weak linkage and leverage with Western democracy promoters. Russia’s “conservative” diplomacy, which has followed a realist approach, has not resulted in a rigorous autocratic promotion policy, but the Belarusian and Armenian cases demonstrate that in these two (non-democratic) regimes (and also in those of Central Asia) the presence of Russia is stronger than in the democratic ones, such as the Baltic States. Russia’s “sanctions” against Belarus have been less than those directed against Armenia, owing mainly to the former country’s proximity to Russia in the cultural arena and the strategic geopolitical location of Belarus in Eastern Europe. Armenia, on the other hand, has also been subject to direct military intervention by Russia, which was however limited to the first Artsakh war L’influenza della Russia nel suo Estero Vicino (chiamato “Bližkoe zarubeže” in russo) ha creato una zona di permissività, in cui i paesi che vi si trovano all’interno possono ignorare i propri impegni democratici, essendo consapevoli che la loro lealtà alla Russia può schermarli da qualsiasi interferenza da parte degli USA o dell’UE. L’analisi delle relazioni bilaterali tra Armenia e Russia, da un lato, e tra Russia e Bielorussia dall’altro, ha portato all’identificazione dei quattro modelli di autocracy promotion: l’emulazione spontanea, le azioni di hard power (principalmente riguardanti interventi militari), i premi (facenti soprattutto riferimento all’assistenza di tipo economico) e le sanzioni negative (o i ricatti). Una combinazione di premi e sanzioni si è rivelata essere la tattica più frequente utilizzata dal Cremlino, la quale è stata ulteriormente facilitata dai deboli linkage e leverage che Armenia e Bielorussia hanno con i promotori occidentali della democrazia. La diplomazia “conservatrice” della Russia, la quale ha adottato un approccio realista, non è sfociata in una rigida politica di promozione dell’autoritarismo, ma i casi armeno e bielorusso dimostrano che in questi due regimi non democratici (ed anche in quelli dell’Asia Centrale) la presenza della Russia è più forte che nei regimi democratici, come le Repubbliche Baltiche. Le “sanzioni” della Russia contro la Bielorussia sono state meno di quelle dirette contro l’Armenia, dovendo ciò principalmente alla prossimità tra Russia e Bielorussia nell’arena culturale e alla posizione geopolitica strategica della Bielorussia in Europa Orientale. L’Armenia, dall’altro lato, è stata anche oggetto di un intervento militare diretto della Russia, che però si è limitato alla prima guerra dell’Artsakh. Universidad Nacional de Rosario 2022-08-18 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion application/pdf https://relasp.unr.edu.ar/index.php/revista/article/view/77 10.35305/rr.vi5.77 Revista Euro latinoamericana de Análisis Social y Político (RELASP); Núm. 5 (2022); 61-92 2683-7420 eng https://relasp.unr.edu.ar/index.php/revista/article/view/77/136 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Ejemplares similares