Suchergebnisse

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.

The amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation adoped after a 2020 referendum included a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. This is a recent manifestation of the turn to 'traditional values' in Russian politics and society, the best-known expression of which is the 2013 ban on 'propaganda for non-traditional sexual orientation'. This development cannot be understood as solely reflecting 'traditional' attitudes of the Russian population, nor as a backlash against LGBTQ activism. The turn to 'traditional values' must be considered in the context of a global pattern of increased pro-family mobilization, which opposes LGBTQ rights, feminism and the alleged undermining of gender as biologically determined and strictly binary – described by researchers as 'anti-gender mobilization'. Traditionalist politics in Russia should be analysed in a transnational and international perspective, but conservative mobilization is not a monolithic phenomenon. Using the concept of 'discourse coalition' developed by Maarten Hajer, I show how the identification of shared storylines enables a range of actors to act in similar ways, sometimes coordinating their actions, despite ideological, religious or strategic disagreements, on the domestic as well as the global arena.