This book explores how far messianism, the conviction that Russia has a special historical destiny, is present in, and affects, Russian foreign policy. Based on extensive original research, including analysis of public statements, policy documents and opinion polls, the book argues that a sense of mission is present in Russian foreign policy, that it is very similar in its nature to thinking about Russia’s mission in Tsarist times, that the sense of mission matters more for Russia’s elites than for Russia’s masses, and that Russia’s special mission is emphasised more when there are questions about the regime’s legitimacy as well as great power status. Overall, the book demonstrates that a sense of mission is an important factor in Russian foreign policy.

The contributors to this book discuss the new conjunctions that have emerged between foreign policy events and politicized expressions of Russian nationalism since 2005. The 2008 war with Georgia, as well as conflicts with Ukraine and other East European countries over the memory of the Soviet Union, and the Russian interpretation of the 2005 French riots have all contributed to reinforcing narratives of Russia as a fortress surrounded by aggressive forces, in the West and CIS. This narrative has found support not only in state structures, but also within the larger public. It has been especially salient for some nationalist youth movements, including both pro-Kremlin organizations, such as "Nashi," and extra-systemic groups, such as those of the skinheads. These various actors each have their own specific agendas; they employ different modes of public action, and receive unequal recognition from other segments of society. Yet many of them expose a reading of certain foreign policy events which is roughly similar to that of various state structures. These and related phenomena are analyzed, interpreted and contextualized in papers by Luke March, Igor Torbakov, Jussi Lassila, Marlène Laruelle, and Lukasz Jurczyszyn.

Who decides what in Moscow? The answer is not always "Vladimir Putin". However, when explaining Russia's foreign policy, the consolidation of Putin's autocratic tendencies and his apparent stability despite many economic and political challenges have contributed – at least in the West – to an excessive "Putin-centrism" and the relative neglect of other agents of domestic politics. As a result, many facets of the country's foreign policy decisions are misunderstood or shrouded under a thin veil of vagueness and secrecy. This Report attempts to fill this gap, exploring the evolving distribution of political and economic power under the surface of Putin's leadership to assess the influence of different "lobbies" on Russia's foreign policy. All of the contributions in the volume underline the complexity of Russia's decision-making process beneath the surface of a monolithic and increasingly personalistic government.

As Russia's economy has grown, so have the country's global involvement and influence, which often take forms that the United States neither expects nor likes. The authors assess Russia's strategic interests and goals, examining the country's domestic policies, economic development, security goals, and worldview. They assess implications for U.S. interests and present ways that Washington could work to improve its relations with Moscow.

Nationalism was declared to be dead too early. A postnational age was announced, and liberalism claimed to have been victorious by the end of the Cold War. At the same time postnational order was proclaimed in which transnational alliances like the European Union were supposed to become more important in international relations. But we witnessed the rise a strong nationalism during the early 21st century instead, and right wing parties are able to gain more and more votes in elections that are often characterized by nationalist agendas. This volume shows how nationalist dreams and fears alike determine politics in an age that was supposed to witness a rather peaceful coexistence by those who consider transnational ideas more valuable than national demands. It will deal with different case studies to show why and how nationalism made its way back to the common consciousness and which elements stimulated the re-establishment of the aggressive nation state. The volume will therefore look at the continuities of empire, actual and imagined, the role of "foreign-" and "otherness" for nationalist narratives, and try to explain how globalization stimulated the rise of 21st century nationalisms as well.

This book explores Russia’s sense of its own uniqueness and the impact this has had on Russia’s conduct of international relations. Examining concepts such as Russia’s special civilising mission, its difference from the West, its proneness to conduct violent warfare, and more, and discussing these concepts in relation to Russia’s history and its present behaviour, and also in relation to other countries’ views of themselves as exceptional, the book highlights Russia’s sense of its own identity as a key factor shaping current international events.

This book explores how far messianism, the conviction that Russia has a special historical destiny, is present in, and affects, Russian foreign policy. Based on extensive original research, including analysis of public statements, policy documents and opinion polls, the book argues that a sense of mission is present in Russian foreign policy, that it is very similar in its nature to thinking about Russia’s mission in Tsarist times, that the sense of mission matters more for Russia’s elites than for Russia’s masses, and that Russia’s special mission is emphasised more when there are questions about the regime’s legitimacy as well as great power status. Overall, the book demonstrates that a sense of mission is an important factor in Russian foreign policy.