Politologist Simons Analyzes Russian Public Dyplomacy, Publishes an Article in a RUDN Journal

09:23, September 24, 2020

The article is devoted to the influence of Russian public diplomacy on the relations with the Western countries, e.g. the U.S.

Three national pragmatic approaches are characteristic of Russian public diplomacy. Each of them was formed on the basis of the country's internal needs, on the one hand, and the problems caused by global processes, - on the other, Gregory Simons, a leading researcher at the Laboratory for Comparative Studies of Tolerance of Recognition of UrFU, is sure. In the journal Vestnik RUDN, the political scientist published an article in which he explained how Russian public diplomacy has evolved in response to the challenges of the 21st century. When analyzing, he took into account the official Foreign Policy Concepts of the Russian Federation (2000, 2008, 2013 and 2016), Russia's geopolitical relations with the countries of the West, Asia, the United States, and trends in the world order.

“The fallout from the collapse of the bipolar order of the Cold War and the unipolar world order of the United States after the end of the Cold War left Russia with very few real alternatives in the short term due to economic, social and political chaos. However, as Russia gained strength and stability, although it retained its weaknesses, it became more confident and assertive in its foreign policy as a great power,” says Gregory Simons.

So, in the first period (2000s), the goals of Russia's foreign policy were focused on a multi-vector approach: balance in relations between the West and the East, the formation of a positive image in the international arena, and integration into international organizations. In the second period (since 2008), Russia's foreign policy marked a turn towards Asia, protecting its own interests from Western interference throughout the post-Soviet space ('dignity revolutions').

“This did not mean the end to attempts to interact with the West, led by the United States. This meant the recognition that Russia's interests and priorities were not taken into account and not respected. In addition, the transition to closer relations with Asia was pragmatic in terms of economic considerations and some security issues (SCO and BRICS), the political scientist says. “It was also a period when the country was striving for more inclusive global engagement as a great power.”

The foreign policy activity of the third and current periods took shape in conditions of high conflict in the transforming global order. In 2016, the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation notes that changes create a more chaotic, tense and cruel world. For the first time, the documents do not exclude the possibility of a large-scale military conflict. The ability of the West to dominate the world economy and politics continues to diminish, the potential for development is shifting towards the Asia-Pacific region, and global competition between political actors is increasing, which leads to growing instability in international relations.

“In the third era of national pragmatism in foreign policy, one of the key areas of public diplomacy is the struggle for the hearts and minds of the world community in the context of a fierce and merciless information war that rages between the West and Russia. The trend is clearly visible in the global media: in the information space, sets of norms and values ​​collide, ”explains Gregory Simons.

Simons stresses, that at the same time, the soft power and influence of Russia in the world are extremely unevenly distributed, the political scientist is sure. As one of the instruments of direct appeal to the global public, Russia uses social networks, since traditional interstate diplomacy is reaching a dead end. This engagement model is complex, but potentially pays dividends in the medium to long term. However, one of the obstacles to success, says Simons, is the lack of a clear and coherent set of clear and convincing messages on issues such as Russia's place in the world, understanding of the identity and values ​​of Russia and Russians. The author does not take into account rising revisionism in Russian foreign policy and its application to public diplomacy. 

The article was prepared within the research project “Digitalization of communicative and cultural memory and the problems of its intergenerational translation”, which was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 19-18-00264).