One year into the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, debates still rage over the Russian motivations for this war. Purely international explanations, found in offensive and defensive realism, emphasise that...Show moreOne year into the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, debates still rage over the Russian motivations for this war. Purely international explanations, found in offensive and defensive realism, emphasise that wars are best understood as a means of states to ensure security among states. I argue that domestic considerations matter by stressing the analytical utility of the selectorate theory of war, which argues that state behaviour is best explained by a leader's desire to stay in power through ensuring loyalty by providing public and private goods. Using a qualitative explanatory case study research design, focusing on a single case: the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It is found that before the war, Vladimir Putin was facing a crisis of political survival because his ability to ensure support from the elites he depended on and the wider public was increasingly constrained during his presidency due to a persistently stagnating economy. The war strengthened Putin’s political survival because newly acquired territories provide new sources of revenue for Russia’s elites. For the wider public, this study strongly suggests that Putin was aiming for a rally round the flag effect to distract the public at home from deteriorating circumstances and temporarily reduce the demand for public goods. In addition, the war legitimised greater repression, which signals a high cost of expressing discontent with Putin which deters future opposition and serves as a means to purge the elites and the broader public from disloyalty. Understanding these domestic factors that are negated by the purely international explanations of war is crucial for understanding the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war. This thesis provides a novel contribution to the literature explaining Russia’s foreign policies by using the selectorate theory of war, a theory that has not been used systematically for explaining Russia’s foreign policy.Show less
International organizations (IOs), like all other organisms, have a life cycle, and like any governance form, IOs need to adapt to the changes or become obsolete. NATO, a survivor of all threats...Show moreInternational organizations (IOs), like all other organisms, have a life cycle, and like any governance form, IOs need to adapt to the changes or become obsolete. NATO, a survivor of all threats that the global arena has thrown at it, faced a unique threat with Trump. This thesis explores IO survival with the case study of NATO during Trump’s presidency , focusing on what explains NATO’s survival of Trump’s threats. With the support of the broad academic literature on the IO survival and NATO’s persistence, three factors, namely member state benefits, the structure of NATO and domestic politics were studied through the process-tracing method. Evidence showed that a combination of factors placated Trump from withdrawing the US from NATO. The member states’ benefits and domestic politics factors had a significant impact, and NATO’s structure factor supported them.Show less
This thesis employs Robert Putnam’s concept of foreign pressure (“suasive reverberation”) to analyze the battle in the US Congress over the 2015 Iran nuclear accords. Drawing on the public...Show moreThis thesis employs Robert Putnam’s concept of foreign pressure (“suasive reverberation”) to analyze the battle in the US Congress over the 2015 Iran nuclear accords. Drawing on the public statements of key players, journalistic sources, and the congressional record, I contend that the most important factor in determining whether undecided lawmakers voted for or against the agreement was lobbying by other states. Specifically, the survival of the deal can be credited to appeals from France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, as well as to a lesser degree from Russia and China. Working in close conjunction with the Obama Administration, representatives of these states successfully pressured wavering members of Congress to support the agreement. I also argue that, counter-intuitively, the government of Israel’s suasive reverberation in opposition to the Iran accords probably contributed to the deal’s survival. The methods and rhetoric used in Israel’s lobbying were perceived as partisan and sparked a backlash among Democratic members of Congress, leading them to close ranks and vote to approve the deal. Through examination of these divergent outcomes, this paper provides empirical support for the importance of suasive reverberation and sheds light on the conditions underlying its use, success, and failure.Show less
