S.-led liberal international order and the cohesion of the West; enhancing Putin’s domestic legitimacy by demonstrating Russia’s status as a global superpower; promoting specific Russian commercial, military, and energy interests; and tweaking the United States’ nose in areas of traditional U. In 2014, following Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and the start of its undeclared war in Ukraine, this counteroffensive intensified and took on new qualities.
In the Middle East, Russia seeks to protect its longstanding equities in Syria and to convey its purported great power status to domestic and international audiences, as well as its capacity to act beyond its immediate neighborhood and gain a foothold in what is seen as a traditionally U. Some of these efforts involve forming coalitions of rising powers willing to challenge the Western-dominated international system; elsewhere, Moscow tries to cultivate authoritarian leaders and take advantage of frictions between the United States and some of its traditional allies or partners.
In Latin America, in particular, Moscow hopes to embarrass Washington and show that it too can make a foray into its main global adversary’s backyard.
Russia is keen to exploit increased opportunities in the resulting vacuum, using both hard and soft power, to expand its influence and presence and to take advantage of Donald Trump’s presidency, marked by his embrace of an “America First” foreign policy and: Finding examples of Russian global activism is easy. Which Russian activities may risk overreach and pushback?
Assessing its motivations, consequences, and effectiveness is not. response to Russia’s increased global activism will be challenging. What are the best ways to measure the impact—both in Russia and the West—of Moscow’s recent global activism?
Formulating an effective response to Russia’s global activism will be challenging. For much of the post–Cold War era, the United States and Europe paid little attention to Russia’s efforts to expand its political, economic, and military influence abroad.
The West saw these efforts as relics of the Cold War, primarily confined to Russia’s immediate neighborhood but largely absent or at least ineffective elsewhere.
In general, Moscow’s ordering of priorities aligns closely with the proximity of the region to Russia, as well as with Russian threat perceptions.
First are Moscow’s efforts to retain its influence or counter Western influence in the states of the former Soviet Union.
Specifically, it can be hard to tell whether a given Russian behavior is meant to actively undermine the liberal political and economic order that has flourished under U. leadership or whether it is designed primarily to shore up Putin’s domestic standing and to create timely economic opportunities for domestic Russian constituencies that support his regime. The risk of doing too much or too little is real, and getting the answer right entails asking a series of challenging questions. interests of Russia’s efforts to gain geopolitical and economic toeholds beyond its immediate neighborhood? Identifying the key drivers of Russia’s global activism and providing an overview of Moscow’s many efforts to expand its global influence is a useful and important way to begin formulating appropriate and effective responses to these behaviors.
Is Moscow’s behavior largely symbolic or does it threaten the interests of the United States or its closest allies? In some areas, Russian activities have damaged Western interests, but in others their impact has proven to be more symbolic than substantive. policy tools would constitute the most effective response.
The breakup of the Soviet Union left Russia with little appetite and few resources to pursue old Soviet ambitions in various far-flung corners of the world.