In April 2014 an armed conflict broke out between pro-Russian separatists and the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Donetsk and Luhansk (Donbas) regions in Eastern Ukraine. The extent to which the...Show moreIn April 2014 an armed conflict broke out between pro-Russian separatists and the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Donetsk and Luhansk (Donbas) regions in Eastern Ukraine. The extent to which the Russian government supports the separatists of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics remains a topic of scholarly debate. Numerous academics have come up with interpretations on Russian foreign policy towards Ukraine but these fail to explain the behaviour of the Russian government in Donbas. This thesis will assess what the foreign policy objectives of the Russian government are in Donbas and how these have changed since April 2014. During the first phase of the conflict, the Russian government attempted to introduce the neo-imperial myth of Novorossiya in order to justify separatism throughout South-Eastern Ukraine. This project failed as the separatist drive did not spread to the regions of Kharkiv and Odesa. Thereafter the Russian government started to focus on keeping the conflict ongoing by militarily intervening to prevent the Ukrainian Army from defeating the separatists but not letting the separatists win the armed conflict either. The Russian government governs the separatists republics without participation of Ukrainian separatists, provides them with necessary financing but at the same time drains the region of its economic resources. The main goal of the Russian government in Donbas is to destabilise Ukraine and keep the armed conflict ongoing by sustaining two highly disruptive separatist republics.Show less
This thesis focused on Russia's regional policies towards the traditional societies of Chechnya and Ingushetia during the period of 1991 till 2017. The thesis distinguishes Russia's different...Show moreThis thesis focused on Russia's regional policies towards the traditional societies of Chechnya and Ingushetia during the period of 1991 till 2017. The thesis distinguishes Russia's different approaches towards Chechnya and Ingushetia. These different approaches are inherent to the first three presidents of the Russian Federation. As the thesis will further explain, the obstacle with the implementation of Russia's policies in these regions, is the traditional character of the regions.Show less
The internal politics of an unrecognised state like Transnistria may seem like a forgone conclusion, as per the common reputation of such states being static, authoritarian "puppets" of Russia....Show moreThe internal politics of an unrecognised state like Transnistria may seem like a forgone conclusion, as per the common reputation of such states being static, authoritarian "puppets" of Russia. However, closer inspection of recent election results reveals a dynamic and unpredictable succession of regime changes that challenges not only our understanding of de facto state politics, but that of the workings and elite struggles of post-Communist "hybrid regimes" in general. Building on existing theory on regime change and democracy in the post-Soviet sphere and in unrecognised states in particular, the author then uses primary resources gained from numerous field interviews in Transnistria and Moldova to evaluate exactly where power lies in the de facto state, how it has shifted over the past election cycles, and what role is played by the mysterious patron, the "dark knight", Russia.Show less
This thesis examines what role the Arctic plays in contemporary Russian politics. For this purpose, a thorough analysis of the Russian domestic discourse on the Arctic region is conducted. The...Show moreThis thesis examines what role the Arctic plays in contemporary Russian politics. For this purpose, a thorough analysis of the Russian domestic discourse on the Arctic region is conducted. The discourse analysis covers the period 2007-2018 and focuses on a few key figures who have arguably a significant impact on the Arctic discourse due to their centrality in Russian politics. The analysis shows that the individual narratives on the Arctic strengthen Russian national identity by promoting notions of foreign encirclement and the country’s exceptionalism and great power identity. Moreover, the discourse on the Arctic is provided with a temporal and overall coherence by selectively manipulating historical memory and drawing on a wide range of symbolic actions. In the second part of the paper the findings from the analysis are placed within the wider Russian political context. Thereby, it is shown that the Arctic discourse is not an isolated phenomenon, but that it is representative of a general shift towards an increasingly nationalist and patriotic rhetoric during Putin’s third term in office. It is argued that by creating a coherent and compelling national identity, the Putin regime seeks to buttress its fragile legitimacy. These findings imply that foreign observers and representatives need to be aware of Russian domestic political developments in order to properly assess Russia’s actions and interests in the Arctic region.Show less
