The High Seas for All

BKD SIR - Major Powers

I) Discuss the power projection in Central Asia by Major Powers (USA, Russia & China) (15 marks)

Central Asia, strategically located at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, has historically been a nexus of great power competition. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the region's newfound independence attracted the attention of various major powers. The United States, Russia, and China have each sought to project their influence, driven by distinct interests related to security, energy, economic opportunities, and geopolitical positioning.

1. Russia's Power Projection: The "Near Abroad" Doctrine

Russia views Central Asia as its traditional sphere of influence, often referred to as its "near abroad." Its power projection is rooted in historical ties, security concerns, and economic integration.

Security: Russia maintains military bases (e.g., Kant Air Base in Kyrgyzstan, 201st Military Base in Tajikistan) and plays a leading role in regional security organizations like the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). The CSTO serves as a mechanism to counter external threats, including terrorism and drug trafficking, and to a certain extent, to deter Western influence. From a Realist perspective, Russia's actions are a clear manifestation of its desire to maintain its security perimeter and prevent the encroachment of rival powers, akin to a Mearsheimerian "offensive realism" where great powers constantly seek to maximize their relative power.

Economic Influence: Russia remains a significant economic partner, particularly through remittances from Central Asian migrant laborers and its dominant position in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). While China's economic footprint has grown, Russia still leverages its energy networks and historical trade routes.

Political-Cultural Linkages: Russia promotes the Russian language and culture, and many Central Asian elites have strong ties to Moscow. This soft power, though diminishing in some areas, contributes to its overall influence.

Case Study: Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan: Russia's security presence in Tajikistan is crucial for border security with Afghanistan, while its base in Kyrgyzstan provides a rapid reaction capability. These instances highlight Russia's enduring commitment to maintaining stability on its southern flank and preventing the rise of hostile forces.

2. China's Power Projection: Economic Ascendancy and the BRI

China's influence in Central Asia has rapidly expanded, primarily through economic means, shifting the regional balance of power. This can be understood through a Neoliberal Institutionalist lens, where economic interdependence fosters cooperation, but also a Realist perspective, where economic power translates into geopolitical leverage.

Economic Dominance: China has become the largest trading partner and investor for most Central Asian states. Its focus on infrastructure development, particularly under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), has created new trade routes and connectivity, such as the China-Central Asia-West Asia Economic Corridor. This investment, while offering much-needed development, also raises concerns about debt sustainability and dependence on Beijing.

Energy Security: Central Asia is a vital source of energy for China, with pipelines transporting oil and gas (e.g., the Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline). Securing these resources is a core strategic interest for China's continued economic growth.

Security Cooperation (Limited but Growing): While primarily economic, China also engages in security cooperation through mechanisms like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which it co-founded with Russia and Central Asian states. The SCO focuses on counter-terrorism, separatism, and extremism, aligning with China's domestic security concerns, particularly in Xinjiang.

Case Study: Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan: Kazakhstan is a major recipient of Chinese investment, especially in energy and infrastructure. Uzbekistan, a large and populous country, is increasingly integrating into China's economic orbit through BRI projects, showcasing China's long-term vision for regional connectivity.

3. USA's Power Projection: Shifting Priorities and Values-Based Diplomacy

The U.S. engagement in Central Asia post-9/11 was largely driven by security interests related to Afghanistan, but its long-term strategy has often struggled to find a consistent footing.

Security (Post-9/11): The "War on Terror" led to temporary U.S. military bases (e.g., Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan, now closed) and security assistance programs. The U.S. sought to establish a presence to conduct operations in Afghanistan and counter extremist groups. However, with the withdrawal from Afghanistan, this security rationale has diminished.

Democracy Promotion: The U.S. has historically promoted democracy, human rights, and good governance in Central Asia, often clashing with the authoritarian tendencies of regional governments. This values-based approach, while rooted in Liberal internationalism, has often been perceived as interference by local regimes, pushing them closer to Russia and China (as discussed in detail in question III below).

Economic Diversification: The U.S. seeks to promote economic diversification in Central Asia and reduce reliance on Russia and China, though its economic footprint remains smaller compared to the other two. Initiatives like the C5+1 diplomatic platform aim to foster regional connectivity and economic growth independent of Moscow and Beijing.

Case Study: Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan: The U.S. has engaged with Turkmenistan, despite its isolation, due to its vast natural gas reserves. In Uzbekistan, there have been periods of closer cooperation, particularly during reforms, reflecting a shifting balance between security concerns and democracy promotion.

Conclusion:

The power projection of the USA, Russia, and China in Central Asia is a dynamic interplay of competing and sometimes overlapping interests. Russia leverages its historical ties and security architecture, China dominates economically through the BRI, and the U.S. seeks to promote its values and diversify regional partnerships, though with a less consistent presence. The Central Asian states themselves increasingly engage in multi-vector foreign policies, seeking to balance these external influences to maximize their own sovereignty and development. The region, therefore, serves as a compelling case study of contemporary great power competition and the evolving international order.

II) Describe briefly different schools of thoughts which have influenced Russian Foreign Policy. (5 marks)

Russian foreign policy since the collapse of the Soviet Union has been shaped by a complex interplay of historical legacies, geopolitical realities, and evolving ideological currents. Several distinct schools of thought have profoundly influenced its trajectory:

1. Atlanticism (Westernizers/Liberals): This school advocates for Russia's integration into the broader Euro-Atlantic community, emphasizing cooperation with the United States and European powers. Influenced by Western liberal democratic ideals, Atlanticists believe that Russia's future prosperity and security lie in aligning with Western institutions and norms, such as the G8, WTO, and potentially even NATO (though less explicitly for military integration). Proponents of this view, particularly prominent in the early 1990s under figures like Andrey Kozyrev, believed in a market economy and democratic reforms as a path to Russia's resurgence. The initial hope for a "common European home" following the Cold War is a prime example of this thinking. However, this school lost significant influence due to perceived Western indifference to Russia's security concerns (e.g., NATO expansion) and the economic hardship of the 1990s.

2. Imperialism/Great Power Revisionism: This school, rooted in Russia's historical consciousness as a great power and former empire, advocates for the restoration of Russia's geopolitical influence and a multi-polar world order. It emphasizes state sovereignty, military strength, and the protection of Russian national interests, even if it means challenging Western hegemony. This perspective is often associated with a desire to rebuild a sphere of influence in the "near abroad" (former Soviet states) and project power globally. Figures like Yevgeny Primakov, who promoted a more assertive, multi-vector foreign policy, embody this school. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine are stark examples of this revisionist impulse, driven by a perceived need to secure Russia's strategic interests and challenge what it sees as a unipolar, US-dominated world. This aligns with a Realist understanding of international relations, particularly an offensive realist approach, where Russia seeks to maximize its relative power and security in a competitive international system.

3. Neo-Slavophilism/Eurasianism: Emerging from intellectual traditions dating back to the 19th century, this school emphasizes Russia's unique civilizational identity, distinct from both the West and the East. Neo-Slavophiles argue for a strong, centralized state, traditional values, and a foreign policy focused on building closer ties with non-Western powers, particularly in Eurasia. They often view Western liberalism as a threat to Russia's cultural and spiritual heritage. Alexander Dugin, a prominent ideologue, is a key figure associated with modern Eurasianism, advocating for a Eurasian Union stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok, led by Russia, as a counterbalance to Western influence. This worldview is increasingly influential in contemporary Russian foreign policy, as seen in the emphasis on a multi-polar world and the deepening strategic partnership with China, often framed as an "anti-Western" bloc. This perspective highlights the Constructivist aspect of identity shaping foreign policy, where Russia's self-perception as a distinct civilization dictates its interactions with the world.

4. Pragmatic/State-Centric Realism: This school, while overlapping with the imperialist view, focuses more on practical state interests, national security, and economic stability rather than overt ideological crusades. It emphasizes balancing power, avoiding unnecessary confrontation, and engaging in selective cooperation where it benefits Russia. This approach, often associated with Vladimir Putin's early years in power, sought to stabilize Russia domestically and reassert its position on the global stage through pragmatic deal-making and a focus on material capabilities. While not discarding the idea of a multi-polar world, it prioritizes concrete gains and risk assessment. For instance, Russia's involvement in the Syrian conflict can be seen through this lens – a pragmatic move to secure its naval base, maintain influence in the Middle East, and demonstrate its military capabilities without necessarily seeking to conquer territory. This aligns directly with Classical Realism (Morgenthau) and Defensive Realism (Waltz), where states prioritize survival and security in an anarchic international system.

These schools of thought are not mutually exclusive and have often competed, merged, or evolved over time, reflecting the dynamic nature of Russian foreign policy. The current dominant narrative often blends elements of imperialism/great power revisionism with neo-Slavophilism/Eurasianism, underpinned by a pragmatic realist approach to securing Russia's interests in a perceived hostile international environment.

SA SIR - Major Powers

I) What is Major Power and features and criteria of Major Powers (5 marks)

In international relations, the concept of a "Major Power" (often used interchangeably with "Great Power") refers to a state possessing sufficient military, economic, and diplomatic capabilities to exert significant influence on a global or at least a broad regional scale. These states are critical actors in shaping the international system, often defining its rules, norms, and security architecture.

Features of a Major Power:

Significant Military Capability: A major power possesses a large, modern, and technologically advanced military capable of projecting force beyond its borders. This includes substantial armed forces, advanced weaponry (including, for some, nuclear arsenals), and the capacity for rapid deployment.

Robust Economic Strength: A strong and diversified economy is fundamental, providing the resources to fund military spending, invest in research and development, and exert economic leverage through trade, investment, and financial power.

Diplomatic Influence and Network: Major powers are central to international diplomacy, holding significant sway in international organizations (like the UN Security Council), forming alliances, and leading multilateral initiatives. They have extensive diplomatic missions and a track record of shaping international agendas.

Technological Prowess: Leadership in key technological fields, from information technology to aerospace and advanced manufacturing, is crucial for both military superiority and economic competitiveness.

Soft Power and Cultural Influence: The ability to attract and persuade through cultural appeal, political values, and foreign policy legitimacy (Joseph Nye's concept of "soft power") enhances a major power's global standing and influence.

Geopolitical Importance: Their geographical location and control over strategically vital regions or resources contribute to their overall power.

Criteria for Identifying a Major Power:

While there is no universally agreed-upon checklist, common criteria include:

Ability to Affect the Global System: A major power must be capable of impacting global politics, economics, or security, not just regional affairs. This implies a systemic rather than purely localized influence.

Willingness to Act: Possessing capabilities is not enough; a major power must also demonstrate the willingness to use its power to pursue its interests and shape outcomes.

Recognition by Other Major Powers: Other significant states must acknowledge and treat a state as a major power, often through diplomatic engagement, inclusion in exclusive forums, and recognition of its strategic importance.

Capacity for Independent Action: While alliances are common, a major power should possess the capacity to act independently on major international issues if necessary, without being entirely reliant on other states for its security or core interests.

Long-Term Vision and Strategy: Major powers typically have a coherent and sustained foreign policy strategy aimed at maintaining or enhancing their global position.

Theoretical Context:

From a Realist perspective, major powers are central to understanding the distribution of power in the international system, often leading to unipolar, bipolar, or multipolar configurations. Scholars like Kenneth Waltz (Neorealism) focus on capabilities (especially military and economic) as the primary determinant of a state's status. Liberal Institutionalists, while acknowledging material power, also emphasize the role of major powers in creating and sustaining international institutions. Constructivists would highlight how the identity and recognition of a state as a major power are socially constructed and evolve over time.

Examples of current major powers generally include the United States, China, and Russia, with debates ongoing about the status of others like India, Japan, and the European Union.

II) Difference between Major Powers, middle Powers & emerging powers. (15 marks)

The international system is structured by a hierarchy of states based on their capabilities and influence. While "Major Powers" (or Great Powers) sit at the apex, "Middle Powers" and "Emerging Powers" occupy distinct positions with differing roles and characteristics. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for analyzing global politics.

1. Major Powers (Great Powers):

Definition: States possessing overwhelming military, economic, and diplomatic capabilities, allowing them to exert significant, often global, influence and shape the international system. They are typically key players in defining international norms, laws, and security architectures.

Characteristics:

Global Reach: Possess the capacity to project power (military, economic, diplomatic) across multiple regions and globally.

Agenda Setters: Play a primary role in setting the international agenda, initiating major international agreements, and leading global governance efforts.

System Shapers: Can unilaterally or with other major powers significantly alter the international balance of power or the structure of international institutions.

Nuclear Weapons: Often (though not exclusively) possess nuclear weapons and delivery systems, granting them a unique deterrent capability.

High Responsibility: Bear a disproportionate responsibility for international peace and security, often acting as "system stabilizers" or "challengers" to the existing order.

Examples: Historically, the UK, France, Germany (at various times). Currently, the United States, China, and Russia are widely considered major powers.

2. Middle Powers:

Definition: States that, while not possessing the global reach of major powers, nonetheless have sufficient capacity and diplomatic skill to exert influence in specific regions or on particular international issues. They often act as "bridge-builders" or "niche diplomats."

Characteristics:

Regional Influence: Their primary sphere of influence is typically regional, though they can have significant impact on global issues where they specialize.

Multilateralism: Tend to rely heavily on multilateral institutions and diplomacy to achieve their foreign policy goals, as their individual power is insufficient for unilateral action on global scales.

Niche Diplomacy: Often focus on specific issues where they have expertise or a strong interest, such as arms control, environmental protection, human rights, or specific regional conflicts. (Annette Baker Fox's concept of "middle power diplomacy").

Coalition Builders: Frequently work to build consensus and form coalitions among states to advance common interests, mediating between major powers and smaller states.

Norm Entrepreneurs: Can be active in promoting new international norms or strengthening existing ones.

Examples: Canada, Australia, Sweden, Norway, South Korea, Brazil, Mexico, and potentially countries like Turkey and Indonesia. Historically, often perceived as having a moral or principled foreign policy (e.g., Canada's role in peacekeeping).

3. Emerging Powers:

Definition: States that are experiencing rapid growth in their economic, and often military, capabilities, leading to increasing influence on the regional and potentially global stage. They are "rising" and challenging the existing power hierarchy.

Characteristics:

Rapid Growth: Characterized by fast-paced economic development, often leading to increased military spending and technological advancements.

Increasing Assertiveness: As their capabilities grow, they become more assertive in international affairs, demanding a greater voice and role in global governance.

Desire for Systemic Reform: Often critical of existing international institutions, viewing them as reflective of an outdated power distribution, and advocate for reforms that would grant them greater representation and influence.

Dual Identity: May simultaneously exhibit characteristics of both middle powers (e.g., engaging in multilateralism) and aspiring major powers (e.g., seeking permanent UNSC seats).

Regional Hegemons (potential): Many emerging powers are already regional hegemons or aspire to be so.

Examples: The BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) are the most prominent examples. India, in particular, is often seen as an emerging power with the potential to become a major power.

Key Dist