Russian Foreign Policy1996-2000

EU Foreign and Security PolicyLecturer: Senator B. KlichStudent: Michela Morazzini

Jagellonian University a.a.2014/15

Outline1.The Primakov doctrine: - national contest and definition - case studies : China, Iran, Iraq - outcomes

2. Russian foreign policy after 1996

3. Conclusion

The historical background

• Away from the Atlanticist foreign policy that had existed under Foreign 

Minister Andrey Kozyrev

• The three principal planks of this new orientation: 1) integrating Russia into the world economy 2) establishing a multipolar world 3) counteracting United States

When he took office in 1996, Primakov had to face the fact that Russia, which was losing its war in Chechnya, was a very weak state. However Russia was still a great power and its foreign policy should correspond to its status

The national contest• Difficulties in the attempt to establish democratic forms of government • Low level of economic development• Dissatisfaction with government at record levels• Mounting national and ethnic tensions

• February 1996, state of the Federation speech: persisting problems of Russian foreign policy

o NATO enlargemento Complex questions of identity/territorialityo Involvement in the conflict in former Yugoslaviao Controversies in CFE Treaty and anti- Ballistic Missile Treaty

Yeltsin and the West1991-2000

• Little attention to foreign policy in his earlier career

• 1991: Russia might join NATO but not allow the early

admission of the East European states

• The 1991-1992 period objective : to join quickly the

“family of civilized Western nations”

• In 1993-1995 Moscow shifted the focus of its attention

to security concerns and maintenance of its superpower status

Change and continuity in the foreign policy

• An aggressive and hard-line foreign policy vis-à-vis the West

• Since 1993: new approach in the foreign policy. Russia was still a great power which needed to defend its vital interests and should take into account the local conflicts outside its borders

• Emphasis on the UN: a position of formal equality in the Security Council and in the OSCE

• Greater emphasis upon relations with China

• Strong campaign against the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe

“The main goal of our foreign policy remains unchanged. We must create a favorable external environment for the successful implementation of Russian democratization and economic transformations”

H. Primakov, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, January

10, 1996

Yevgeny PrimakovA New political thinking

• Russia’ s Foreign Minister : January 1996 - September 1998 Former Head of KGB and head of Foreign Intelligence service • Russia’s Prime Minister : September 1998 - May 1999 he led Russia’s Cabinet of Ministers • Primakov has promoted Russia, China and India as a "strategic triangle" to counterbalance the United States • An advocate of multilateralism as an alternative to US global hegemony

The concept of polarity• Strong emphasis on polarity in Russian foreign policy

while US foreign policy focuses on durability and stability of the American hegemony

• Its practical usefulness:› to build domestic political consensus › to offer a justification for opposing the American hegemony› a tool for advancing bilateral relations with other “poles ”

The multipolar doctrine (1997)A neo-Soviet foreign policy?

“ Russia must conduct a diversified, active policy in all directions where Russian interests are involved ”

• An alternative to Kozyrev’s pro-Western approach

• American perspective : the source of this policy is the belief in Russian Derzhavnost (the ideology of Russian exceptionalism)

• The idea : a coalition Russia - China - Iran

The goal: an exclusive Russian sphere of influence in the Caucasus and Central Asia

March 1996: conclusion of a “Treaty of the four” (Russia, Belarus,

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan):

o deepening of integration in the economic and humanitarian

sphereso creation of a single economic spaceo an agreed foreign policy

A particular attention to the progress made in relations with China .

However the Chinese were reluctant to realize Russian plans for a joint

system of Asian security.

The Primakov doctrineA strong Anti- Americanism

The objectives:1. Obtaining political consensus

2. Weakening U.S. influence in the Middle East and in Eurasia How? 1998 : Russia, China and Iran as a "strategic triangle" to counterbalance the United States (later “Global Quadrilateral”)

Building an anti-American coalition, cultivating

Middle Eastern dictators, modernizing China's

military power 3. Strong opposition to the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe

The equal partnership• Conditions to be observed :

o new division lines in international relations must be avoided (attempts to divide the world into civilizations)

o rejection of the notion of states as winners and losers of the Cold War (but Russia is the winner)

• Russia still sees security mainly in military and zero-sum game terms

The strategic triangleCase study

I.Russia-China a deeper collaboration started in 1996 (Good Neighbourliness and Friendly Cooperation Treaty) : a huge market for military hardware and industrial equipment and a supporter of Russia in Chchnya conflict and NATO expansion

II.Russia-Iran energetic common interests, military dependance from Moscow in exchange of a responsible Iranian behavior in Central Asia

Russia had a number of interests also in India, Turkey, Iraq, Lybiaand Yugoslavia

A hot issue: the expansion of NATO

• A source of threat: the danger of a cold peace

• The risk: to establish new dividing lines in Europe and

isolate Russia from the most vital security system

• The alternative: a structure based on the CSCE

• A geopolitical response to NATO expansion: union

with Belarus of Lukashenko

20 May 1997: NATO and Russia signed the NATO-Russia Founding Act

Round One, 1999 : Poland and Czech republicRound Two, 2004: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania

The outcomes of Primakov doctrine

1. Political consensus: strong support at home but isolation of Russia

2. Fight against US hegemony: has not lead to the expected outcome at all

3. Bilateral relations : the only relevant success was the relation with China; its eastern direction has been more successful

• Russia found a firmer place in the post cold war world• Russian policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict acquired a

special flavor under Primakov • In the West: Russia figured mainly as a source of

instability, organized crime and dangerous nuclear power installations.

The legacy of Primakov doctrine

• Influence on the relatively new foreign policy conception, adopted in June,28, 2000:

Russian Federation is "a great power ... one of the most influential centers of the modern world ... [with a] responsibility for maintaining security in the world both on a global and on a regional level”

• the new Putin doctrine remains that of multipolarity in which Russia constitutes one of the main poles

The period after 1996

Russia is a state in transition as regards human rights protection 1997: last Russian troops leave Chechnya (1994-1996) 1998: Russian economic collapse , November 1998 : Russia joined the  Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum (APEC) 1999: Russian troops enter Kosovo. Russia became

involved because of the NATO threat and could play a constructive

role in ending the conflict

Igor Ivanov’s Foreign Ministry(1998-2004)

The Presidency of V. Putin

The ‘’Great Russia’’ strategy (2000-2001)• An overarching goal: the recovery of economic,

political, and geostrategic assets lost by the Soviet state in 1991

• A confrontational foreign policy: pragmatism and pursuit of national interests

• Ratification of START II Treaty by Russia (significant reduction in strategic nuclear warheads for both the United States and Russia by 2007)

Thank you for your attention

References• Russia’s new politics, the management of a postcommunist society, Stephen White,

Cambridge Soviet paperbacks,November 28, 1999• Post-Soviet Russian Foreign Policy: Between Doctrine and Pragmatism., Selezneva, L. In: Fawn, R. (ed). Realignments in Russian Foreign Policy. London,

Frank Cass, 2003• NATO- Russia Founding Act, http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive

/official_texts_25468.htm• Robert A. Saunders and Vlad Strukov, ”Primakov doctrine”,  2010 http

://russian_federation.enacademic.com/• Peter W. Rodman and Robert O. Freedman , “Primakov’s foreign policy”,

January 30 1996, http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/primakovs-foreign-policy-russia-and-the-middle-east

• J. Michael Waller, “Primakov’s imperial line”, January-February 1997, http://www.bu.edu/iscip/vol7/Waller.html

• Stephen Sestanovich, “The State of Russian Foreign Policy and U.S. Policy Toward Russia”, April 6 1998,

http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/the-state-of-russian-foreign-policy

• Michael McFaul , “What are Russian foreign policy objectives?”,May 1 1999,

http://carnegieendowment.org/1999/05/01/what-are-russian-foreign-policy-objectives

• www.mid.ru • The New York Times, “Russia’s role in Kosovo”, April 6 1999,

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/04/06/opinion/russia-s-role-in-kosovo• Aleksandr Bondarenko, prominent Russians: Igor Ivanov,

http://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/politics-and-society/igor-ivanov

• Leon Aron, “The Putin Doctrine”, March 8 2013 http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139049/leon-aron/the-putin-doctrine