Suchergebnisse

Geopolitics is a topic that again has taken the frontline in discussions of how to interpret Russia's foreign policy or Russia's relations with the West. Geopolitical thinking in Russia has often been identified with different schools of neo-Eurasianism, extreme versions of which contain expansionist, nationalist ideas. However, these schools do not characterize university teaching of geopolitics in Russia as a whole. Instead, teachers of geopolitics focus mainly on introducing various theoretical models and criticizing representatives of neo-Eurasianism. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate with survey data that there are differences in what we might call the published discipline and the taught discipline of geopolitics in Russia.

The article is devoted to the study of the problems of Eurasianism as one of the key trends in Russian history, in which the ideas that are still relevant are considered. The article analyzes new directions of the Eurasian concept, which are covered by the term "neo-Eurasianism" in modern historical science.

I attempt to answer the question about the place of Eurasianism in the Russian intellectual tradition. I reconstruct its historiosophical assumptions as well the political ideology following from them. I share the opinion of certain historians that Eurasianism is interesting for a variety of reasons, but I disagree with those who see in it nothing more than a synthesis of standard ideas often found in the history of Russian thought. Eurasianism's originality includes its acknowledgment of the positive contribution of the Mongols to the history of the Russian state, the radicalism of its critique of the West, the innovativeness of its theory of revolution, as well as the absence, unusual for Russian thinkers of the period, of an eschatological sensitivity. Adapted from the source document.

Eurasianism as a concept emerged among Russian émigrés in the 1920s, with the premise that Russia is a unique ethnic blend, primarily of Slavic and Turkic peoples. Its geopolitical implications for Russia include gravitation toward mostly Turkic Central Asia. Alexander Dugin, one of its best-known proponents, believes that the demise of the Soviet Union was simply a tragic incident. The people of the former USSR should again be united in a grand Eurasian empire, with Russia a benign and generous patron, providing its "younger brothers" clients economic largesse and defense, mostly against the predatory USA. The "orange revolutions" and the rise of Russian nationalism, for whose proponents a restored imperial presence is rather marginal, indicate that Eurasianism—along with the dream of the resurrection of the USSR—is becoming less viable.

Siberian regionalism movement is discussed in the paper in relation to classical Eurasianism of the 1920s. the political differences between Siberian regionalism and Eurasianism were by no means accidental. They were a consequence of deep theoretical differences. The Siberian regional concept was based on the idea of Siberia as a separate economic and geographical region, completely different in its natural and climatic conditions from the European part of Russia. The regionalists focussed on the geographical originality of Russian Siberia, as well as its remoteness and isolation from the "metropolitan state" in geographic and economic terms. All this fundamentally contradicted the "Eurasian geography," which as persistently smoothed out the geographical space of Russia, trying to present it more homogeneous than it really was. The mental maps of the regionalists and Eurasians did not coincide on the basic level: they both saw the geographic space of Russia in different ways, just as they perceived the structure of its economy. The analysis performed in the article may help to evaluate ideological foundations of modern Eurasian political blocks and alliances as well as Eurasian international legal initiatives.

Rosja zawsze była aktywna militarnie; jednak obecny reżim próbuje połączyć instrumenty siły twardej i miękkiej. Stosunki rosyjsko-gruzińskie charakteryzują napięcia i starcia. Prozachodnia polityka zagraniczna Gruzji powoduje zaniepokojenie Kremla. Pomimo że Federacja Rosyjska ma silną pozycję na Kaukazie, z uwagi na jej obecność wojskową w regionie, polityka stosowania siły inteligentnej uzyskała długotrwałą legitymizację. Takie środowiska jak pro-rosyjskie organizacje pozarządowe, inteligencja kulturowa i duchowieństwo promują pojęcia wspólnej kultury i wspólnych wartości. Podobne promowanie zazwyczaj towarzyszy negatywnej narracji skierowanej ku liberalnemu Zachodowi. ; Russia has always been active militarily; however, the current regime attempts to combine hard power with soft power tools. Russian-Georgian relations are wrought with tensions and clashes. The Western-oriented foreign policy of the latter causes worries in the Kremlin. Although the Russian federation has a strong standing in the Caucasus region, prominently due to its military presence there, the smart power policy is enacted to gain long lasting legitimacy. The mediums, such as pro-Russian non-governmental organizations, cultural intelligentsia and the Church clergy, promote the notion of a common culture and shared values. This promotion is usually accompanied by negative narratives directed towards the liberal West.

Russia has always been active militarily; however, the current regime attempts to combine hard power with soft power tools. Russian-Georgian relations are wrought with tensions and clashes. The Western-oriented foreign policy of the latter causes worries in the Kremlin. Although the Russian federation has a strong standing in the Caucasus region, prominently due to its military presence there, the smart power policy is enacted to gain long lasting legitimacy. The mediums, such as pro-Russian non-governmental organizations, cultural intelligentsia and the Church clergy, promote the notion of a common culture and shared values. This promotion is usually accompanied by negative narratives directed towards the liberal West. ; Rosja zawsze była aktywna militarnie; jednak obecny reżim próbuje połączyć instrumenty siły twardej i miękkiej. Stosunki rosyjsko-gruzińskie charakteryzują napięcia i starcia. Prozachodnia polityka zagraniczna Gruzji powoduje zaniepokojenie Kremla. Pomimo że Federacja Rosyjska ma silną pozycję na Kaukazie, z uwagi na jej obecność wojskową w regionie, polityka stosowania siły inteligentnej uzyskała długotrwałą legitymizację. Takie środowiska jak pro-rosyjskie organizacje pozarządowe, inteligencja kulturowa i duchowieństwo promują pojęcia wspólnej kultury i wspólnych wartości. Podobne promowanie zazwyczaj towarzyszy negatywnej narracji skierowanej ku liberalnemu Zachodowi.