Search

In a time when 'the Western idea' is increasingly challenged, when the creation of meaning is contested globally, this dissertation seeks to illuminate how Russian and EU foreign policy discourses interact. It is building upon the insight that Russian and European debates do not exist in isolation from but are entangled with each other. Going beyond one-dimensional studies of Russian and European identity formation, this project seeks to capture the EU-Russia relationship as an intersubjective one. Such a context, it is argued, requires an approach that does not reduce the Other to an object of discursive othering but appreciates it as an acting subject in its own right, articulating an alternative political project. It seeks to understand how this social context of discursive struggle positions Russia and the EU towards each other, how this positioning may pose constraints on the foreign policy discourses they articulated, and thus, how it conditions both subjects' (discursive) agency. To this end, this dissertation proposes a non-deterministic intersubjective analytical approach. Its theoretical framework marries poststructuralist thought with insights from critical approaches to Hegelian recognition dialectics. Adding the latter's social ontology to the former's constitutive logic, it fleshes out how the intersubjective dimension conditions Russia's and the EU's articulation of contingent discourses. The empirical discourse analysis takes a comparative perspective, focusing on articulations by key figures and institutions of foreign policy-making both in Russia and the EU. Based on more than 550 primary sources, it traces the structure of Russian and EU antagonistic foreign policy discourses on seven contested events (floating signifiers) between 2004 and 2021 and illuminates how they engage with each other in a competition for hegemony. This study draws a detailed empirical picture of discursive dynamics between Russia and the EU. Tracing the evolution of how both subjects relate to each other discursively, it illustrates how the discursive struggle between Russia and the EU intensifies. At the same time, it is argued that neither the EU's nor Russia's foreign policy discourses have changed substantially. Their structure, as well as their patterns of interaction have exhibited striking continuity. This interaction is an asymmetrical one with Russia's articulation remaining much more conditioned by the EU's discourse than vice versa. Harnessing insights from recognition dynamics, this dissertation argues that the EU is more independent in sovereignly articulating an interpretation of the world, whereas Russia continues to face constraints in the formulation of an autonomous political project, ultimately limiting its agency in the articulation of discourse. Conceptually and methodologically, this dissertation contributes to the existing literature by providing a comprehensive analytical framework to capture discursive interaction in an intersubjective setting free of preconceived structural assumptions. Empirically, it offers a detailed account of the mechanics of how Russian and EU discourses compete for hegemony, substantially contributing to an understanding of the discursive dynamics in the two decades preceding Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Grand theory is either understood as a particularly useful form of theory or a deeply problematic form of theory in the discipline of international relations (IR). Grand theory, for some, is useful as a "map", a "big picture" or a "framework" to orient and guide research. For others, grand theory either distracts attention from studying what matters in IR, or it is understood to have so many problematic effects that it should be abandoned. Despite the prominence of grand theory, there is no agreement on what constitutes a grand theory in IR. It is difficult to adjudicate whether grand theory is useful or problematic in general because theorists think that different types of grand theory are either useful or problematic. To gain a better understanding of whether grand theory is useful or problematic, I investigate three particular grand theories: Buzan's social structural approach (2004), Lebow's cultural theory (2008) and Ripsman et al.'s type III neoclassical realism (2016). I argue that Buzan (2004) and Lebow (2008) abandon their projects of grand theory while Ripsman et al. (2016) retain their commitment to grand theory. By answering why Buzan (2004) and Lebow (2008) abandoned grand theory, and why Ripsman et al. (2016) have retained their committed to grand theory, I aim to make a contribution as to whether grand theory can be viewed as useful or problematic in IR.

The PhD is concerned with two periods of French history, the first covers the lead up to the French Revolution and the second approximately the last half century of French politics. Through the analysis of these periods, it develops the concepts of 'Total Crisis' and 'Nation as Arbiter' as a conceptual framework for understanding the potential for revolutionary change during these periods. Total Crisis refers to a situation in which an accumulation of abnormal occurrences, affecting multiple facets of the political system, compromise its stability to the point where collapse is possible. The construct of Nation as Arbiter relies on a conception of nation which evolves depending on the historical period under analysis. Rather than using a fixed academic definition, this thesis argues that in order to understand its role in politics it is important to view which of its characteristics have been politicised and what political purpose this has served. A clear distinction between the politicised nation at the time of the French Revolution and today emerged from the analysis of both periods. The key argument is twofold. First, that the political significance of the nation was born within a political conflict over sovereignty and legitimacy within the ancien régime system and therefore the words' association with identity was not yet politicised. Second, that the politicised characteristics of nation today relate to the notions of both sovereignty and identity. By drawing parallels between the lead up to the French Revolution and today, the potential for a similarly revolutionary outcome will also be considered, if not with any finality since the cycle of crisis is not complete.

The past several years have witnessed the apparent return of great power rivalry as Russia-West and China-West relations have grown strained or deteriorated outright, owing in significant part to disputes over instances in which the nature of state sovereignty was contested. This has led to questions concerning the future of the liberal international order, including debates over what the liberal international order precisely is - the extent to which it is rooted in American leadership and whether it includes a commitment to certain values that go beyond mere rules-based cooperation. But the strengthening character of hegemony, the emergence of a truly global international society and the increasing rigidity of certain international norms all raise further questions regarding how recent developments should be conceptualized. Drawing on a range of English School and other sources, this dissertation will explore the relationship between international society, conceptions of sovereignty and international order. It will situate the liberal international order with respect to these concepts in the post-Cold War context, examine the sources of today's Russia-West conflict, and explore the multiple vectors that inform Russia's current position in international society, including with respect to its deepening partnership with China. It will then derive conclusions regarding the future of hegemony and great power rivalry in international society.

This research aims to explore why Russia and China have been more successful in establishing economic cooperation with post-Soviet Uzbekistan than the Western major powers. It will be based on the following key interrelated questions: Why do Russia and China win this so called 'New Great Game'? What is the role of Russia's attempt to reclaim its 'Great Power' status since 2000 and President Putin's attempt to build and expand the Eurasian Economic Union? What were the Chinese competitive strategies that shifted its attention towards Uzbekistan? What is the role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in China's expanding trade relations with Uzbekistan? How do domestic politics, economics, and culture, formed historically, contribute to shaping Uzbekistan's international engagement? How can we conceptualise Uzbekistan's own post-Soviet foreign economic policy and its decision-making? To address these questions, the research will examine the role of the state and globalisation in Critical International Political Economy (CIPE), utilising mainly a neo-Gramscian approach, and analyse the interaction of various domestic and international factors. Based on these analyses I will show why Uzbekistan has sought to forge a lasting cooperation with the major powers like China and Russia rather than with the West.

This interdisciplinary dissertation seeks a more holistic and broader understanding of political identity formation processes in post-USSR Eastern Europe. It seeks to develop a theoretical approach for assessing the non-rationalistic factors, which influence domestic and foreign policy, political attitudes and identities in the region – including associative symbolism, human experience, political images and historical narratives. The research is based on the main case of Lithuania, which is analysed in the first three chapters of the dissertation from three perspectives: the historical/political, the intellectual/narrative and the experiential/symbolic. Along the way, a theory is being inductively elaborated, offering new insights into the process of Lithuanian political identity formation. In the next two chapters, other cases are also explored in order to examine the theory’s applicability and broaden its spectrum of inquiry. These include Russia, Poland, Estonia and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Qualitative methods are used in this dissertation, including textual and visual analysis (of primary and secondary literary sources, photographs, film, etc.), unstructured interviews, historical analysis, as well as political, philosophical and anthropological theoretical approaches by Roland Barthes, Raoul Girardet, Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Victor Turner, Arpad Szakolczai, and others. The dissertation seeks to improve our understanding of political identity formation, periods of political transition and the importance of human experience to politics. It also aims at developing a theory capable of accounting for the often unrecognised factors of historical narrative, political symbolism and emotional associative charge. As a result it makes a contribution towards a better understanding of post-USSR Eastern European politics and thus to more effective policy towards the region, which is gaining increasing importance in global political arena.