Home » russia

Category Archives: russia

Call for participation in the debate: “Can Prospect Theory Explain Russia’s 2014 Annexation of Crimea?” Deadline: 30.9.2021

[Feel free to forward, share, or post. Excuse any cross-posting.]


Call for participation in debate “Can Prospect Theory Explain Russia’s 2014 Annexation of Crimea?” 30.9.2021
https://www.facebook.com/events/edit/354414236054009

Since 2019, Dr. Julie Fedor (U of Melbourne), Dr. Gergana Dimova (U of Oxford), and Dr. Andreas Umland (Kyiv-Mohyla Academy) have been editing a series of special sections on the annexation of Crimea, within the ibidem Press “Journal of Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society” (JSPPS): www.jspps.eu. See https://www.facebook.com/events/460801681761446. JSPPS is also distributed via Columbia University Press here: https://cup.columbia.edu/series/journal-of-soviet-and-post-soviet-politics-and-society


We invite junior and senior scholars to read, and comment on, the peer-reviewed forthcoming JSPPS paper (of which the text will be provided):


“Loss Aversion, Neoimperial Frames and Territorial Expansion: Using Prospect Theory to Examine the Annexation of Crimea”

By Dr. Ion Marandici, Department of Political Science, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick

Abstract: Why did Russia’s authoritarian leader decide to annex Crimea? Why could Ukraine’s politicians not resist the Russian aggression effectively? This study relies on prospect theory and new documentary evidence to illuminate the decision-making in Moscow and Kyiv that led to the takeover of Crimea. The paper assesses the scope conditions of prospect theory compared to alternative theories of foreign policy decision-making. First, it identifies the turning points of the Euromaidan crisis preceding the annexation and traces how Putin’s assessment of the status quo shifted repeatedly between the domains of losses and gains. In the domain of losses, the authoritarian leader, influenced by an imperial faction within the presidential administration, became more risk acceptant, annexed the peninsula, and escalated the hybrid warfare. In doing so, Russia’s president framed the intervention, using nationalist themes and drawing on salient historical analogies from the imperial era. Second, the analysis of new documents released by Ukraine’s National Defense and Security Council (RNBO) and participant testimonies reveals that the decision-makers in Kyiv could not mount an effective resistance due to squabbles among coalition partners, the breakdown of the military chain of command in Crimea, the looming threat of a full-scale Russian invasion from the East, and the inflated expectations regarding the West’s capacity to deter Russia’s aggression. Third, the article relies on prospect theory to explain why after Crimea’s annexation, Putin refrained from continuing the territorial expansion at Ukraine’s expense, opting instead to engage in hybrid warfare and back secessionism in Eastern Ukraine. This account highlights the explanatory power of prospect theory compared to alternative frameworks, pointing out, at the same time, the need to incorporate strategic interactions, personality factors, and group dynamics in future studies of foreign policy decision-making.  


We are looking for pronounced statements on Marandici’s paper of between approx. 800 and 5,000 words. If interested to add your comment to this debate, please, request the PDF of the paper from: andreas.umland@ukma.edu.ua which we will send out in August 2021. Final texts need to be submitted until 30 September 2021 – preferably earlier. 


As models for the formal style of your comment (footnotes, transliteration, quotes, etc.), please, refer to these open-access papers: Andrew Wilson, “The Crimean Tatar Question: A Prism for Changing Nationalisms and Rival Versions of Eurasianism,” JSPPS 3:2 (2017), https://doi.org/10.24216/97723645330050302_01 Maria Shagina, “Business as Usual: Sanctions Circumvention by Western Firms in Crimea,” JSPPS 5:1 (2019), https://doi.org/10.24216/97723645330050501_04


Either footnotes or the Harvard style can be used. We will only accept fully edited, properly referenced as well as well-formatted texts in perfect English, and cannot assist in preparing or editing comments. Please, fully list all texts to which you are referring to in the footnotes or bibliography. Please, do not send us half-ready articles. We cannot absolutely guarantee publication before receiving your text, but will be happy to publish all competent comments that tackle the issue, have some empirical, conceptual and theoretical grounding, are linguistically and stylistically publishable, as well as arrive in time. Contributions to this debate will not be peer-reviewed but treated like book reviews. Multi-authored texts are welcome too. Female contributors are especially welcome.


We may have a second round of debate in 2022, if interest in continuing this discussion is sufficiently high. We later intend to republish the entire debate, within a larger collected volume.
https://www.ibidem.eu/de/zeitschriften/journal-of-soviet-and-post-soviet-politics-and-society.html
https://www.facebook.com/events/edit/354414236054009

New #SPPS book: The Russian Orthodox Church & Demise of Religious Pluralism @ibidem11 @ColumbiaUP

New volume in the ibidem-Verlag Book series “Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society”​ by Lincoln Flake. With a foreword by Peter Martland. Distributed by Columbia University Press. To be listed with Scopus and Clarivate Web of Science book citation index.

https://cup.columbia.edu/book/defending-the-faith/9783838213781

https://www.ibidem.eu/en/reihen/gesellschaft-politik/soviet-and-post-soviet-politics-and-society/defending-the-faith-14205.html

russia #orthodox #churches #history #research #publication #publishing #society

On Western strategy towards #Russia: From ‘#Putinfirst’ to ‘democracy first’ – #AndriusKubilius in “European View” 2021

The article analyses two distinct approaches that Western leaders have taken to relations with Putin’s Russia. It argues that the dominant approach of fostering good relations with Vladimir Putin, prioritising these over support for longer-term democratic change in Russia, has not brought any results and is damaging the interests of Russian society, neighbouring countries and the West. The article analyses the prerequisites for deep change in Russia and argues that there is a need for the EU to comprehensively review and change its strategy towards Russia, putting democracy at its core. It discusses in detail the deterrence, containment and transformation elements of a new EU strategy. The article emphasises that the strategic approach of ‘democracy first’ in relations with Russia also relates to the future of democracy in general and should be a priority of EU–US cooperation.

Source: On Western strategy towards Russia: From ‘Putin first’ to ‘democracy first’ – Andrius Kubilius, 2021

Book series “Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society” in the #Scopus and #WebofScience citation indeces @ibidem11 @ColumbiaUP

Having been registered with Scopus Elsevier in 2019, the ibidem-Verlag Book Series “Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society” (#SPPS) has, until the end of 2020, accumulated 147 entries in this Citation index. The monographs and chapters in collected volumes listed here were published within SPPS between 2018 and 2020: https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/21100865030#tabs=1. So far, SPPS’s ranking in the three relevant #Scopus categories “#History,” “#PoliticalScience and #InternationalRelations,” and “Political Science and #Sociology” is modest. Yet, the volumes and papers published in SPPS during the last three years will get additional quotations during the next years.

More monographs and collections are in print and preparation: https://www.ibidem.eu/en/reihen/gesellschaft-politik/soviet-and-post-soviet-politics-and-society.html. English-language SPPS volumes are also distributed by Columbia University Press here: https://cup.columbia.edu/series/soviet-and-post-soviet-politics-and-society?amount=96.

Starting this year, original SPPS volumes are also being registered with the new Clarivate Web of Science Book Citation Index: http://wokinfo.com/cgi-bin/bkci/search.cgi?search=”Soviet+and+Post-Soviet+Politics+and+Society”&searchtype=and.

Potential SPPS book authors and editors should send their book proposals to: andreas.umland@stanfordalumni.org

Интервью: Зачем арестовали Навального, и что известно о преемнике Меркель? @UKRLIFETV @UkrinFuture

Source: Зачем арестовали Навального, и что известно о преемнике Меркель? – Андреас Умланд | Політика | UKRLIFE.TV

 

Tables of @Publons-registered researchers in Russian & Ukrainian studies with most @WebOfScience Core Collection entries

Top 10 Publons-registered researchers in the fields “#Russia,” “#Ukraine,” “#RussianPolitics” as well as “#UkrainianStudies,” with the most entries in the Clarivate Web of Science Core Collection, as of 10 January 2021 (most of my entries listed here are book reviews). See: https://publons.com/researcher/?research_field=9279&is_core_collection=1&order_by=num_publications

Не та война, не в то время: почему теории конфликтов не применимы к войне России и Украины, – Умланд | Політика | UKRLIFE.TV

Source: Не та война, не в то время: почему теории конфликтов не применимы к войне России и Украины, – Умланд | Політика | UKRLIFE.TV

История с вагнеровцами: может ли СБУ позволить себе действовать как израильский Моссад? @UkrLifeTV

История с вагнеровцами: может ли СБУ позволить себе действовать как израильский Моссад? – Умланд | Політика | UKRLIFE.TV

 

Die friedenspolitische Ambivalenz deutscher Pipelinedeals mit Moskau – eine interdependenztheoretische Erklärung des russisch-ukrainischen Konfliktes @Je_Sirius

Dieser Aufsatz führt einen wenig beachteten Aspekt der deutschen Ostpolitik der letzten 25 Jahren in die aufgeheizte europäische Diskussion darüber ein, wie man am besten mit Putins Russland umgehen solle. Ausgehend von der bekannten Interdependenztheorie wird argumentiert, dass durch die von Berlin geförderten zwei Nord-Stream-Projekte die russisch-ukrainischen Wirtschaftsbeziehungen gelockert und dadurch eine Konfrontation zwischen den beiden postsowjetischen Republiken erleichtert wurde. Besonderheiten der überraschend friedlichen Entwicklung der Ukraine in den ersten zwanzig Jahren ihres Bestehens als unabhängiger Staat werden der Eskalation der Spannungen zwischen Moskau und Kyjiw in den Jahren 2013–2014 gegenübergestellt. Die Fertigstellung des zweiten Strangs der ersten Nord-Stream-Pipeline im Oktober 2012 wird als eine entscheidende Entwicklung angesehen, die dem Kreml gegenüber der Ukraine freie Hand gab. Die Verringerung der wirtschaftlichen Interdependenz infolge der Umleitung sibirischer Gasexporte in die neue Ostsee-Pipeline führte zu einem Territorialkonflikt zwischen der Ukraine und Russland, der an Entwicklungen erinnert, die zuvor in Moldau und Georgien stattgefunden hatten.

Source: Die friedenspolitische Ambivalenz deutscher Pipelinedeals mit Moskau – eine interdependenztheoretische Erklärung des russisch-ukrainischen Konfliktes

https://www.academia.edu/44024222/Die_friedenspolitische_Ambivalenz_deutscher_Pipelinedeals_mit_Moskau_eine_interdependenztheoretische_Erklärung_des_russisch_ukrainischen_Konfliktes

TOC: Russ. Forum. Vol. 17: Germany & Russia, Donbas War, Ukrain. Decentralization, Literature, Populism, Poroshenko

Insert picture description

Форум новейшей восточноевропейской истории и культуры. 2020. T. 17. №№ 1-2
Open access: https://lnkd.in/dg-5iXQ
Contributions by: Marlene LaruelleValentyna RomanovaLeonid LuksVlad Mykhnenko and others.
Distributed by ibidem-Verlag.

I. Русские #европейцы (9)
II. Страницы новейшей истории
III. #Политология
IV. #Этнология
V. #Историякультуры
VI. Эссе
VII. Рецензии
VIII. Трибуна
Коротко об авторах

https://lnkd.in/dg-5iXQ

Earlier “Forum” issues: https://lnkd.in/e5uAR22

#internationalrelations#geopolitics#internationalaffairs#russia#russian#ukraine#democracy#ukrainian#easterneurope#politicalscience#russland#history