Suchergebnisse

Danish images of Russia in the 2010sThis article surveys how the editorial columns of five leading Danish newspapers treat Russia in the 2010s, building on an earlier study which focused on the first decade of the 2000s (Hansen 2010). The present study finds that the overall negative trajectory associated with Russia has continued, even grown more pronounced. In response, a minority position has developed on the fringes of political life in Denmark, holding that Russia is being demonized and that media coverage is too negative and essentially one-sided. The Danish newspapers surveyed focus on what is seen as an increasingly aggressive Russia violating borders and other established norms, and threatening its neighbours. The editorials reflect the gradual paradigm shift in views of Russia. They now speak openly of the need for Denmark to protect itself and its allies militarily against possible Russian aggression and to prevent Russia from wielding more power through its energy supplies to Europe, including supplies that traverse Danish territorial waters. Other topics in focus include Russia's invasion and subsequent annexation of Crimea, its involvement in the war in Eastern Ukraine as well as its military campaign in Syria.

March 2018 – and then what? The issue of political succession in Putin's Russia
As president of Russia and a prominent political leader, Vladimir Putin has consistently endeavoredto legitimize his rule by appealing to central political myths and taken-for-granted truths inRussian society. In rhetoric and official communication, he emerges as the guarantor of domesticorder and stability, the protector of traditional values, and a staunch advocate of Russia'sstatus and position as a great power in a world often depicted as hostile. What is being communicatedhere, and apparently finds resonance among broad segments of public opinion, is thaton all these parameters Putin is uniquely qualified to lead Russia. Four times in the course of18 years, Putin has been elected president in the first round of elections, and throughout thisperiod he has received high rankings in regular monthly opinion polls. However, his legitimationstrategies have been so firmly linked to the persona of Putin that we may speak of an emergingdilemma with his fourth presidency. Who could fill his shoes as his successor? The articleanalyzes this dilemma, taking its point of departure in Weber's seminal theorizing on types oflegitimate authority and the routinization of charisma. It discusses the evident dearth of crediblesuccessor candidates, and concludes by discussing possible actions for dealing with or postponingthe issue of succession.

This article begins by examining strategic culture studies, in particular Alan Bloomfield's concept of different sub-cultures in strategic culture. It then focuses on the border between Russia and Finland and how Finnish EU membership was made possible by Finland's decision not to challenge the WWII border treaty with the Soviet Union after the Soviet collapse. Next, it investigates the debates and public opinion relating to Finland's 1994 EU referendum, to see how the dynamics changed three strategic cultural sub-groups: "self-defence", "Westernisers" (including Western international organizations) and "Reassurance and Dialogue with Russia". In conclusion, it is argued that EU membership altered the hierarchy of these strategic culture sub-groups in Finland, as well as their substance. These changes were, however, more evolutionary than revolutionary.