The US ballistic missile defence policy in the Baltic and Nordic regions

This article examines the implications of the deployment of the US ballistic missile defense (BMD) system in the Baltic and Nordic regions. These implications are to be considered to ensure Russia's military security. Using the structural-functional method, the authors analyse the internal structure of the US BMD in Europe, stages of its implementation, and its influence on the military equilibrium in the region. Being similar to other regional missile defence systems of the Pentagon, BMD in Europe increases the offensive capabilities of the US armed forces and its allies and in doing so, it stops performing a purely defensive mission declared by Washington. It is stressed that the deployment of mobile sea- and land-based BMD elements in the Baltic Sea region and Nordic countries will inevitably destabilize the strategic situation and may lead to a new round of arms race in the region. The efficacy of BMD in Europe is evaluated from the perspective of military technology. The system’s potential threats to Russia's military security and its armed forces are assessed. The article considers measures to enhance national security that could be taken by Russia provided the US plans to deploy BMD in Europe are fully implemented

On the Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility Indicators in the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation

The main purpose of this paper is to create a system of corporate social and environmental responsibility indicators for assessing the company activities in the Russian Arctic. There are three groups of indicators that correspond to the corporate activities in the social and environmental spheres as well as reflect the degree of companies’ transparency. Based on them, the index of social and environmental responsibility of companies operating in the Russian North is compiled. It is concluded that it is important to correctly identify indicators that reflect the social and environmental aspects of companies’ activities in the Arctic regions of Russia, in order to make competent management decisions to ensure the sustainable development of the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation.Основной целью данной работы является создание системы индикаторов корпоративной социальной и экологической ответственности для оценки деятельности компаний в Российской Арктике. Выделяются три группы индикаторов, соответствующих деятельности компаний в социальной и природоохраной сферах, а также прозрачности их отчетности. На их основе составлен индекс социальной и экологической ответственности компаний, работающих на российском Севере. Делается вывод о важности правильного определения индикаторов, отражающих социальные и экологические аспекты деятельности компаний в арктических регионах России, для принятия грамотных управленческих решений по обеспечению устойчивого развития Арктической зоны Российской Федерации.Исследование выполнено в рамках проектов по линии Российского фонда фундаментальных исследований и Фонда «Дом наук о человеке» (Франция) № 20-514-22001 и стипендиальной программы фонда Коне в Коллегиуме передовых исследований Университета Хельсинки

Evolution of the U.S. Arctic Strategy’s Conceptual Basis

Introduction. The article examines the features of the main stages in the evolution of the U.S. Arctic strategy in the period after the end of the Cold War that helps to understand the future of American regional policy. The United States is one of the main participants in the Arctic policy, on which the state of security and cooperation in the region largely depends. Methods and materials. The empirical basis for the study was the documents of various institutions and departments involved in the planning, implementation and control of the U.S. Arctic policy. These documents include the directives and public papers of the president, documents of the Department of Defense, the Arctic strategies of ministries and departments, reports of the Congressional Research Service, documents of “think tanks”. Analysis. The article concludes that the Arctic became a priority of U.S. policy only in the early 2000s after the revival of Russia’s activity in the Far North. The U.S. strategy was finalized only under President Barack Obama. It directed to achieving American dominance in all spheres by combining political, diplomatic, economic, military instruments. If B. Obama considered international cooperation in the Arctic productive, then the next President D. Trump shifted the American strategy towards nationalism and isolationism, curtailing many cooperation projects. Results. The development of the American strategy was inconsistent, and so far it does not represent a coherent, consistent vision of American policy in the Arctic. Relations between the United States and Russia in the Arctic decreased in the aftermath of the Ukrainian crisis, but objective conditions for cooperation remain. The scenario for the further evolution of bilateral relations remains uncertain under J. Biden. Authors’ contribution. Valery Konyshev: introduction, contours of the Arctic policy after the end of the Cold War: strategic interests, development of the U.S. Arctic Doctrine: limited cooperation. Alexander Sergunin: methods and materials, revision of the Arctic doctrine: from cooperation to rivalry, results

Russian Universities as Actors of Arctic Science Diplomacy

Abstract. This article examines the role of Russian universities in emerging and further developing Arctic science diplomacy (ASD). According to authors, in the current geopolitical conditions Russian universities are significant ASD actors which perform a number of important functions for the organization of international scientific cooperation with foreign countries and making a positive image of Russia in the world. The paper uses a systemic approach to identify Russian universities’ contribution to the ASD development through various mechanisms: joint research projects and publications with foreign partners, the organization of international events on the Arctic issues and participation in prestigious international conferences on the Arctic research area, joint polar expeditions (land and maritime), and participation of Russian scientists in international Arctic scientific organizations, etc. The university ASD is exemplified by the Russian leading universities – St. Petersburg State University, Moscow State University, Northern (Arctic) Federal University, etc. The study demonstrated that maintaining a dialogue on an ongoing basis within the framework of research and educational activities of universities can contribute to the systematic establishment of cooperation in other areas of international relations, the search for innovative solutions for the benefit of the development of the entire Arctic region

Elite opinion and foreign policy in post-communist Russia

Russian elite opinion on matters of foreign policy may be classified as ‘Liberal Westerniser’, ‘Pragmatic Nationalist’ and ‘Fundamentalist Nationalist’, terms that reflect longstanding debates about the country’s relationship with the outside world. An analysis of press statements and election manifestoes together with a programme of elite interviews between 2004 and 2006 suggests a clustering of opinion on a series of strategic issues. Liberal Westernisers seek the closest possible relationship with Europe, and favour eventual membership of the EU and NATO. Pragmatic Nationalists are more inclined to favour practical co-operation, and do not assume an identity of values or interests with the Western countries. Fundamentalist Nationalists place more emphasis on the other former Soviet republics, and on Asia as much as Europe, and see the West as a threat to Russian values as well as to its state interests. Each of these positions, in turn, draws on an identifiable set of domestic constituencies: Liberal Westernisers on the promarket political parties, Pragmatic Nationalists on the presidential administration and defence and security ministries, and Fundamentalist Nationalists on the Orthodox Church and Communists

RUSSIAN SOFT POWER: ORIGINS, INSTITUTIONS, EFFECTIVENESS

Purpose: The paper examines conceptual and institutional aspects ofRussia’s soft power strategy over the last decade.Methodology: research is made on the basis of the institutional approach which requires the analysis of both configuration and internal structure of the object. The study of an institution’s behavior and its interaction with the external environment is an integral part of this approach as well.Results: The sources of Moscow's interest in the soft power strategy are explained. Various methods, techniques and institutional mechanisms that are used by Moscow to exercise its soft power in its geopolitical neighborhood are explored. The effectiveness of Russia’s soft power politics is evaluated.Practical implications: the results of this research can be taken into consideration by the Russian governmental agencies responsible for the soft power strategies (e.g. the Rossotrudnichestvo and ‘Russian world’)

EU‐Russia cross‐border co‐operation in the twenty‐first century: Turning marginality into competitive advantage

International audienceThis paper aims to examine how Russian north‐western regions and municipalities use their marginal/border position as a resource to build a sustainable development strategy. Theoretically, this study is based on the marginality theory which states that border or remotely located subnational units are able to turn their marginality from disadvantage to a resource and transform themselves from depressed and provincial territories to attractive places hosting intense international flows of goods, services, capital, technologies and people. A number of venues for the EU‐Russia cross‐border cooperation are explored: the European Neighborhood Instrument, Northern Dimension partnerships, Euroregions and city‐twinning. The authors conclude that despite some problems with establishing a proper division of labor between above programs and project implementation cross‐border cooperation proved to be a valuable instrument not only for successful development of the marginal/border actors but also for establishing mutual trust and collaborative relations between Russia and neighboring EU countries