THE U.S. AND U.K. STRATEGIES TOWARDS RUSSIA AND THE BALKANS SINCE 1991

• Authors: Ivanov Denys
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This paper presents the comparative analysis of the specifics of the U.S. and U.K. strategies in the Balkans and the post-Soviet area with the definition and explanation of the differences in the political agenda of these two states. The political decisions of the U.S. and U.K. governments were supposed to create a global Euro-Atlantic security system by the enlargement of NATO and the management of the local conflicts. The transition from unipolar moment to multipolar international system determined U.S. withdrawal from liberal internationalism of the 1990s and its return to the containment strategy of political realism after the annexation of Crimea. The Russian geopolitical position was also analysed as important for understanding the current situation in international relations. The paper consists of five parts which include introduction, an analysis of U.S. and U.K. approaches towards the Balkan wars and Russia, escalation of tensions between the West and Russia caused by these events followed by some conclusion.

Keywords

EN

international relations, Balkan wars, Russia, Bosnia, Kosovo

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu. Wydawnictwo UMK
• Journal: Torun International Studies
• Year: 2020
• Issue: 13
• Pages: 151-164

Contributors

author

Ivanov Denys

References

• Allan, D. (2018). Managed confrontation. UK policy towards Russia after Salisbury attack. London: Chatham House.
• Baumann, R., Rittberger, V., & Wagner, W. (2001). Neorealist foreign policy theory. In V. Rittberger (Ed.), German foreign policy since unification. Theories and case studies (pp. 37–68). Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.
• Boduszynski, M. P. (2010). Regime Change in the Yugoslav Successor States: Divergent Paths toward a New Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New-York: Basic Books.
• Brzezinski, Z. (2012). Strategic vision: America and the crisis of global power. New York: Basic
• Books.
• International Court of Justice. (2010). Accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo. Summary of the Advisory Opinion. Retrieved 24 August, 2019, from https://web.archive.org/web/20140328224253/http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/141/16010.pdf
• Johnstone, D. (2002). Fool’s Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO and Western Delusions. New York: Monthly Review Press.
• Fairhall, D. (1996). Deadly shadow hangs over Europe. Guardian. April 13.
• Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. New York.: The Free Press.
• House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. (2007). Global Security: Russia. London: The Stationery Office. Retrieved 5 March, 2019, from https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmfaff/51/51.pdf
• Dayton Agreement. (1995). General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Retrieved 25 April, 2019, from https://peacemaker.un.org/bosniadaytonagreement95
• Glaurdic, J. (2011). The Hour of Europe: Western Powers and the Breakup of Yugoslavia. New Haven, London: Yale University Press.
• Glaurdic, J. (2013). The Owl of Minerva Flies Only at Dusk? British Diplomacy on the Eve of Yugoslav Wars. East European Politics and Societies, 27(3), 545-563. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325413484758
• Gow, J. (1997). Triumph of the Lack of Will: International Diplomacy and the Yugoslav War. London: C. Hurst & Co.
• Hansard. (2016). HC Debate 21 January 2016. Retrieved 23 April, 2019, from https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm160121/debtext/160121-0002.htm#16012124000003
• Hartel, A. (2017). Passing the buck or dividing the work? The UK’s approach to the Ukraine crisis. Ideology and Politics, 1(7), 257-298.
• Hodge, C. (2006). Britain and the Balkans: 1991 until the present. New York: Routhledge.
• Huntington, S. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Jones, J. (1995). Evidence builds up of Muslim bias by CIA. Daily Telegraph, June 3.
• Kissinger, H. (2014). To settle the Ukraine crisis, start at the end. Retrieved 16 April, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html
• Koslowski, R., & Kratochwil, F. (1994). Understanding Change in International Politics: The Soviet Empire's Demise. International Organization, 48(2), 215-247.
• Lobell, S., Ripsman, N., & Taliaferro, J. (2009). Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• MacFarlane, N. (1999). Realism and Russian Strategy After the Collapse of the USSR. In E. Kapstein & M. Mastanduno (Eds.), Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies After the Cold War (pp. 218-260). New York: Columbia University Press.
• Mansfield, E., & Snyder, J. (1995). Democratization and War. Foreign Affairs, 74(3), 79-97.
• Mearsheimer, J. (2014). Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs, 93(5), 77-84, 85-89.
• Potiekhin, O., & Fesenko M. (2020). The basics and stages of Ukraine-NATO relations. In O. Mikhailyhenko (Ed.), Actual issues of modern social science and international relations: Monograph (pp. 59-82). Beau Bassin: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publisihig. (in Ukrainian)
• Ramsbotham, O., & Miall, H. (1991). Beyond Deterrence. Britain, Germany and the New European Security Debate. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21720-5
• Roberts, A. (1999). NATO’s “Humanitarian War” over Kosovo. Survival, 41(3), 102-123.
• Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy. World Politics, 51(1), 144-172.
• Russel, A. (1993). Prejudice and plum brandy: Tales of a Balkan stringer. London: Michael Joseph Ltd.
• Ruthland, P., & Dubinsky, G. (2008). U.S. – Russian relations: hopes and fears. U.S. Foreign policy. Retrieved 17 April, 2019, from https://www.tigurl.org/images/resources/org/docs/2123.pdf
• Simms, B. (2002). Unfinest Hour: Britain and the Destruction of Bosnia. London: Penguin Books.
• Snyder, T. (2018). Road to Unfreedom. Russia, Europe, America. New York: Tim Duggan Books.
• Strategic Defence Review. (1998, July). Modern forces for the modern world. Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Defence by Command of Her Majesty. Retrieved 5 May, 2019, from http://fissilematerials.org/library/mod98.pdf
• Smith N. (2020). A New Cold War? Assessing the Current US-Russia Relationship. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Taliaferro, J., Lobell, S., & Ripsman, N. (2009a). Conclusion: the state of neoclassical realism. In S. Lobell, N. Ripsman & J. Taliaferro (Eds.), Neoclassical realism, the State, and foreign policy (pp. 280–300). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Taliaferro, J., Lobell, S., & Ripsman, N. (2009b). Introduction: neoclassical realism, the State, and foreign policy. In S. Lobell, N. Ripsman & J. Taliaferro (Eds.), Neoclassical realism, the State, and foreign policy (pp. 1–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Trenin, D. (2018). Avoiding U.S. – Russia military escalation during the hybrid war. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
• Tuathail, G. (1999). A strategic sign: the geopolitical significance of “Bosnia” in US foreign policy. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 17, 515-533. https://doi.org/10.1068/d170515
• Ukraine Crisis Media Center. More than 90% of citizens consider themselves ethnic Ukrainians – survey results. Retrieved 18 April, 2020, from https://uacrisis.org/en/55302-ukraine-identity
• United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. (1999). Retrieved 14 April, 2019, from https://undocs.org/S/RES/1244(1999)
• Waltz, K. (2001). NATO Expansion: A Realist’s View. In R. Rauchhaus (Ed.), Explaining NATO Enlargement (pp. 23-37). London: Frank Cass.
• Western, J. (2002). Sources of Humanitarian Intervention Beliefs, Information, and Advocacy in the U.S. Decisions on Somalia and Bosnia. International Security, 26(4), 112-142. https://doi.org/10.1162/016228802753696799
• Williams, P. D. (2005). British Foreign Policy under New Labour, 1997-2005. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230514690
• Wheeler, N. (2004). The Humanitarian Responsibilities of Sovereignty: Explaining the Development of a New Norm of Military Intervention for Humanitarian Purposes in International Society. In J. Welsh (Ed.), Humanitarian Intervention and International Relations (pp. 29-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.