Russia’s Approach and Behavior in International Relations Pre
Communism is based on the writings of two German economists, Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels, who worked on answering queries on what communism actually is in their group effort, “The Communist Manifesto” which was published in 1848. In that book they’ve written that a lot of problems in the society arise because of unjust and unequal allotment of wealth and other assets. In order to have a prosperous society, the division among the rich and poor must be gotten rid of. (All About Philosophy, 2008)
To attain Communism, the idea is to even use violence in order to achieve a classless society, if the rich won’t give up their goods and other assets in order for a just and equal distribution of wealth and other assets among all then the poor, the working class must rebel to get what is rightfully theirs. Capitalism is a system where the focus is on individual rights and individual wealth, and communism is the exact opposite of it. Force is one of the forefront tools of communism that tends the people to treat each other equally.
Capitalism is a system where individual rights are suppressed in order to give the government complete power and control over people. Communism approves of atheism and thinks of religion as a tool of the rich to suppress the poor and to keep them away from what is rightfully theirs, basically to keep the poor from progressing from their poor state of being. (All About Philosophy, 2008) In the year 1917, an evolution was witnessed, when Bolshevik proposed his Revolution resulting in a major mark of communism in the Russian history.
Russia was bestowed with its first Communist ruler, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. Historians have observed that ‘the Communist Manifesto’ that was proposed by Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx played the role of inspiration for Vladimir who founded the Bolshevik Party in Russia. (Malena, 2008) In one perspective, Communism provides all the facilities to its believers, and therefore, can be a very good alternative for a government to keep people happy.
In Communism, people share all the goods equally, and therefore, Communist society does not have any upper or lower classes, which is one of the major characteristics of Communism. In this regard, the Communist Party welcomed a number of interested Americans in the 1930s during the Depression Era. Miserably, practice of Communism is quite different from its concepts and ideologies. For instance, Lenin, Mao, and Stalin are some of the major examples that practiced completely different Communism, and therefore, people of the 20th century are the major witnesses of a different practice of Communism.
During the governments of abovementioned rulers, goods and services were shared among the people like the Communism ideology; however, only the people of government were bestowed with the facilities, and a dictatorial government enjoyed the benefits of all the resources that Communism provided to them. In the 20th century, a government job was something that was wanted by every Soviet Russian. One of the major reasons was the larger accommodation space, which was provided to the people with government jobs.
It has been observed that a state with a Communist set up is very vulnerable to the corruption due to its setting up on the grounds of capitalism. In that era, people with government jobs justified themselves by saying that they required the best to govern and serve the people in an effective manner. (Malena, 2008) Greediness has been the major problem of humans that has resulted in malfunctioning of the Communism system. It has been argued by some experts that nobody would want more, if the same facilities had been provided to everybody.
However, such argument has been proven as an erroneous belief since decades, as needs of human lives never end, and therefore, greed is one of the major characteristics of humans that cannot allow the effective impact of Communism. Humans in other forms of set up, work for the improvement of their lives, as well as, their positions. However, Communism does not provide any means of excelling, and requires accomplishment of a production quota that is not appreciated by humans at all.
Capitalism is quite similar to the Communism, and therefore, human greed is the major one that is benefited by such systems, rather than every member of the system. Conclusion: The quote, ‘From each, according to his ability, to each according to his need’, best describes the meaning of communism. Communism is best described as a form of socialism that is against private ownership and is in favor of creating a classless society. (Malena, 2008) Russia’s approach and behavior in international relations Pre and post communism
Every person has different perspective, and therefore, every person will have a different viewpoint related to the objectives of the Russian foreign policy. Authoritarian status of Russia being ruled by a Communist Party has been argued many times; however, its non-existence needs to be recognized for the proper assessment of behavior of Russia around the globe. A number of experts have also argued that Russian foreign policy has expanded world socialism and destroyed democracy, which should also be opposed for the assessment.
In the year 1991, Russia disappeared from map of the globe. To a certain extent, the role of a democratizing state has been played by Russia, which has confronted several problems due to its weak democracy. In addition, domestic politics has been consisted in the foreign policy of Russia. (Michael McFaul, 1999) Foreign policy objectives cannot be acquired by states in a democracy. Rather, foreign policy objectives are attained by the individual political leaders and interest groups in the democracies.
Under certain conditions, foreign affairs are supported by a united purpose by the amalgamation of the various forces in the democracy. At other times, conflicts may arise among these disparate groups, and sometimes, a single foreign policy might be supported by them for different reasons. It has been observed that few foreign policy objectives are supported by the Russian leaders; however, a number of other objectives related to the foreign policy are disagreed by them, which results in the status of Russia as one of the usual democracies around the globe.
In addition, strategies and techniques for the implementation of policies have confronted a lot of argument from the Russian leaders, and therefore, such strategies have been a matter of debate for several political leaders and parties in Russia. Internally, a revolutionary modification can be observed in Russia, and therefore, quick modification might be observed in the domestic politics of the country. (Michael McFaul, 1999) The Collapse of the Soviet Union: The collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent end of the cold war was a shocking contrast to the stable patterns of running the state previously.
The combination of the end of the cold war and radical transformation and decay within Russia has left its mark on the formation and implementation of Russian foreign policy. Groups with radically different conceptions of Russia’s place in the world sit side by side in the Duma, in the Ministry of Defense, and even in President Yeltsin’s own administration. As in all revolutions, advocates for and against change in Russia have staked out antithetical positions regarding the definition of state borders, the organization of the economy, or the construction of a new polity.
In August 1991 and October 1993, these disagreements were so pronounced that they produced armed conflict between different political factions within Russia. Although narrowing over time, the same range of views has emerged regarding foreign policy issues. In this fluid domestic context, Russia behaves like a rational, unitary actor only when individuals with realist beliefs dominate the making of Russian foreign policy. For much of the past decade, realists have not dominated the definition or execution of Russian foreign policy.
(Michael McFaul 1999) A number of actors are usually involved in the creation of foreign policy. Such actors have recognized some necessary foreign policy objectives that have resulted in their implementation in the country. Economy of Russia is in the process of a decline, which has been accepted by most of the political leader of the country. Since the year 1991, fast contraction has been observed in the Russian economy, which has surpassed the history of any other super power in the modern world history.
Presently, it has become very difficult for the state to provide basic facilities, such as education, security, public goods, currency, etc. due to such an economic decline in its history. International influence of Russia has ended due to a number of weaknesses that were aroused by its domestic feebleness. In the result, Russia has become a simple observer, as compared to its previous role of a super power and political actor on the map of the globe. One of the major reasons of painful focus on Russia is the campaign against Yugoslavia by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
It has been agreed by every Russian political leader and party that economic decline of the country should be focused during the creation of foreign policies of the country. Russia’s economy is quite similar to the economy of Denmark, which is very much smaller as compared with the size of Russia, and therefore, a major political role cannot be played by the country with such a declining economy. However, in midst of such agreement, the foreign policy objectives are still in contrast due to different interests and objectives of political leaders and parties of the country. (Michael McFaul, 1999) Russia and Kosovo:
Russia has been threatened in terms of its isolation from the West due to the bombing campaign of NATO against Yugoslavia, which is quite similar to any other international crises occurred during the last decade. However, long-term interests of the country will be ignored by agreement with Slobodan Milosevic, President of Yugoslavia, as domestic liberal reforms will be thwarted by such a step. In this regard, a number of steps are in the process of creation by the Russian leaders for assisting Serbia due to such threatening. However, implementation of such measures will result in the opposing response from the West.
Although Russian people have expressed their anti-American sentiments in the country, a solution is being searched by the Russian leaders for the creation of an effective foreign policy that may serve the domestic interests, as well as, of the West. In such process, a number of political groups have arise and fell due to a significant evolution in the domestic politics of the country. Passionately, negative response was given by Russia in response to the bombing campaign of NATO against Yugoslavia initially. The rhetoric of anti-Western ideologies was adopted by a number of foreign policy experts, such as Yeltsin, Primakov, Yabloko, etc.
In addition, the NATO bombing was referred as a step of aggression by the Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov forgetting the incidences of 1956 when Hungary was invaded by Soviet Union. Domestically, anti-American response can be seen by a number of rallies of Nationalists and Communists in the country. NATO bombing has been referred with Hitlerism by one of the political leaders, Gennady A. Zyuganov, who is the leader of the Communist Party. Prime Minister Primakov did not allow any influence of anti-Western expression on the process of foreign policy creation, in order to avoid any crisis internationally.
In this regard, articulation of such a gap between the expression and influence was performed domestically. On the other hand, internal divisions of NATO over Kosovo would have been a reason of rejoice for the Prime Minister Primakov, as a bad image would have to be confronted by the United States due to weakening of the NATO alliance internationally. So far, military conflict with NATO may not support the interests of the Russia, which has been recognized by the Prime Minister. A war cannot be afforded by the country due to its declining economy and lack of financial resources.
In this regard, it has been understood and recognized by the Prime Minister that it is necessary that Western parties and IMF should be taken into consideration, in order to address its economic miseries. Any step towards the military conflict would result in the decline of Russia in the international world. Alternatively, role of a peacemaker was played by the champion Primakov. Overnight, peace policies of the United States were defended vocally by the Russian political leaders and foreign policy officials, which improved their image in front of the international world.
High-profile role of Russia in the international arena was welcomed by the Russian Prime Minister, and objectives of the Russian foreign policies were aimed in such situation, as Russia would be credited for the peace talks. On the other hand, NATO would confront its belligerent profile, if a war would continue, as the role of peaceful nation has been played by Russia. During advocating a peaceful resolution to the conflict, Milosevic can be favored by Primakov, in order to weaken the NATO policies. Domestically, a presidential status was gained by the Prime Minister due to such a championed step during the Kosovo conflict.
(Michael McFaul, 1999) In detail describe and explain the sovereignty claims and disputes between Russia and Chechnya. Introduction: Russia’s stance on war on Chechnya has always been that, the military action is only against the terrorists and the regular peace loving Chechen civilians should have no fears now worries. (Yogesh Ambekar, 2004) The Chechen fighters on the other hand, call their resistance a liberation war. They claim that Chechnya never voluntarily wanted to be a part of Russia and whenever Chechnya was a part of Russia in the past, it had been so due to military’s involvement and therefore by force and not choice.Sample Essay of PapersMart.net