Putin, the state, and war: The causes of Russia’s near abroad assertion revisited. Götz, E. International Studies Review, 19(2):228–253, 2017. doi abstract bibtex Moscow’s annexation of Crimea and meddling in eastern Ukraine are the latest signs of Russia’s increasingly assertive behavior in the post-Soviet space. Not surprisingly, Moscow’s actions have become the source of much debate. This article maps the fast-growing literature on the subject and assesses four types of explanations: (1) decision-maker explanations focusing on Putin’s personality traits and worldviews; (2) domestic political accounts emphasizing the Kremlin’s efforts to deflect attention from internal failures; (3) ideational accounts explaining Russia’s near abroad assertion with reference to its national identity and desire for international status; and (4) geopolitical accounts highlighting power and security considerations. The article shows that each approach offers some valuable insights but fails to provide a convincing stand-alone explanation. It is argued that to overcome the identified shortcomings, scholars need to devote more attention to building synthetic accounts. A theoretical model is outlined that specifies how geopolitical pressures, ideas, domestic political conditions, and decision-maker influences interact in shaping Russia’s near abroad policy. © The Author (2016).
@article{gotz_putin_2017,
title = {Putin, the state, and war: {The} causes of {Russia}’s near abroad assertion revisited},
volume = {19},
copyright = {Sin acceso desde las BD},
shorttitle = {Putin, the state, and war},
doi = {10.1093/isr/viw009},
abstract = {Moscow’s annexation of Crimea and meddling in eastern Ukraine are the latest signs of Russia’s increasingly assertive behavior in the post-Soviet space. Not surprisingly, Moscow’s actions have become the source of much debate. This article maps the fast-growing literature on the subject and assesses four types of explanations: (1) decision-maker explanations focusing on Putin’s personality traits and worldviews; (2) domestic political accounts emphasizing the Kremlin’s efforts to deflect attention from internal failures; (3) ideational accounts explaining Russia’s near abroad assertion with reference to its national identity and desire for international status; and (4) geopolitical accounts highlighting power and security considerations. The article shows that each approach offers some valuable insights but fails to provide a convincing stand-alone explanation. It is argued that to overcome the identified shortcomings, scholars need to devote more attention to building synthetic accounts. A theoretical model is outlined that specifies how geopolitical pressures, ideas, domestic political conditions, and decision-maker influences interact in shaping Russia’s near abroad policy. © The Author (2016).},
number = {2},
journal = {International Studies Review},
author = {Götz, E.},
year = {2017},
keywords = {Analytical eclecticism, International Relations theory, Russian foreign policy},
pages = {228--253},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"hnZH4PgLFQZtwZoRS","bibbaseid":"gtz-putinthestateandwarthecausesofrussiasnearabroadassertionrevisited-2017","author_short":["Götz, E."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Putin, the state, and war: The causes of Russia’s near abroad assertion revisited","volume":"19","copyright":"Sin acceso desde las BD","shorttitle":"Putin, the state, and war","doi":"10.1093/isr/viw009","abstract":"Moscow’s annexation of Crimea and meddling in eastern Ukraine are the latest signs of Russia’s increasingly assertive behavior in the post-Soviet space. Not surprisingly, Moscow’s actions have become the source of much debate. This article maps the fast-growing literature on the subject and assesses four types of explanations: (1) decision-maker explanations focusing on Putin’s personality traits and worldviews; (2) domestic political accounts emphasizing the Kremlin’s efforts to deflect attention from internal failures; (3) ideational accounts explaining Russia’s near abroad assertion with reference to its national identity and desire for international status; and (4) geopolitical accounts highlighting power and security considerations. The article shows that each approach offers some valuable insights but fails to provide a convincing stand-alone explanation. It is argued that to overcome the identified shortcomings, scholars need to devote more attention to building synthetic accounts. A theoretical model is outlined that specifies how geopolitical pressures, ideas, domestic political conditions, and decision-maker influences interact in shaping Russia’s near abroad policy. © The Author (2016).","number":"2","journal":"International Studies Review","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Götz"],"firstnames":["E."],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2017","keywords":"Analytical eclecticism, International Relations theory, Russian foreign policy","pages":"228–253","bibtex":"@article{gotz_putin_2017,\n\ttitle = {Putin, the state, and war: {The} causes of {Russia}’s near abroad assertion revisited},\n\tvolume = {19},\n\tcopyright = {Sin acceso desde las BD},\n\tshorttitle = {Putin, the state, and war},\n\tdoi = {10.1093/isr/viw009},\n\tabstract = {Moscow’s annexation of Crimea and meddling in eastern Ukraine are the latest signs of Russia’s increasingly assertive behavior in the post-Soviet space. Not surprisingly, Moscow’s actions have become the source of much debate. This article maps the fast-growing literature on the subject and assesses four types of explanations: (1) decision-maker explanations focusing on Putin’s personality traits and worldviews; (2) domestic political accounts emphasizing the Kremlin’s efforts to deflect attention from internal failures; (3) ideational accounts explaining Russia’s near abroad assertion with reference to its national identity and desire for international status; and (4) geopolitical accounts highlighting power and security considerations. The article shows that each approach offers some valuable insights but fails to provide a convincing stand-alone explanation. It is argued that to overcome the identified shortcomings, scholars need to devote more attention to building synthetic accounts. A theoretical model is outlined that specifies how geopolitical pressures, ideas, domestic political conditions, and decision-maker influences interact in shaping Russia’s near abroad policy. © The Author (2016).},\n\tnumber = {2},\n\tjournal = {International Studies Review},\n\tauthor = {Götz, E.},\n\tyear = {2017},\n\tkeywords = {Analytical eclecticism, International Relations theory, Russian foreign policy},\n\tpages = {228--253},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Götz, E."],"key":"gotz_putin_2017","id":"gotz_putin_2017","bibbaseid":"gtz-putinthestateandwarthecausesofrussiasnearabroadassertionrevisited-2017","role":"author","urls":{},"keyword":["Analytical eclecticism","International Relations theory","Russian foreign policy"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/moniquepaez","dataSources":["bGsBCQzaqZdRxfy7J"],"keywords":["analytical eclecticism","international relations theory","russian foreign policy"],"search_terms":["putin","state","war","causes","russia","near","abroad","assertion","revisited","götz"],"title":"Putin, the state, and war: The causes of Russia’s near abroad assertion revisited","year":2017}