THE SHIFT OF RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY FROM EUROPE

TO THE ASIA PACIFIC FROM 2008 TO 2013

LTC Rozelle Salvosa Gadin PAF was an aviation cadet commissioned into the
Philippine Air Force on 31 August 1995. She is an instructor pilot and has served in
various key positions from tactical to the organizational level. She holds a degree in
Bachelor of Science in Nursing (Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila), Masters of
Arts in Management Major in Public Administration (Phil Christian University) and
Masters in Public Management Major in Development and Security (Development
Academy of the Phils).

ABSTRACT
Russias Foreign Policy in 2008 saw the leadership of President Medvedev with the
security concept remains to be the same, which is focusing on internal economic
recovery. When President Vladimir Putin came to power in 2012, he signed the
Concept of the Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation on February 12, 2013,
replacing the endorsement of Dmitry Medvedev in July 2008, shifting Russias focus
towards the Asia Pacific. This research paper analysed the reasons as to why Russia
had shifted its focus from Europe, to the Asia Pacific through its foreign policy in
2013 despite its established economic and strategic relations with the European
community. The three research objectives are to analyze the effects of the shift of
Russias focus from Europe to the Asia Pacific with its economic interests; with its
strategic interest to become a dominant power, and to the United States as a global
power. There were three findings from this research. Firstly, Russia was shifting its
focus to the Asia-Pacific to prosper its economic interests. Secondly, Russia was
pouring its effort towards the Asia Pacific to achieve its strategic interest in order to
become a dominant power. Thirdly, Russia shifted its focus in order to balance the
United States. In conclusion, the shift of Russias focus from Europe to the Asia-
Pacific through it foreign policy from 2008 to 2013 was due to the international
system. As presented, the empirical evidence has shown that the international system
plays an important role in influencing a states behaviour in determining their foreign

1
policy. This is in tandem and in coordination with the theory of neorealism. This
research hopes to contribute to the field of strategic studies by explaining the
geopolitics in the region, and the formulation of foreign policy that was primarily due
to the international system.

INTRODUCTION
In international relations, interdependence in world politics implies that actors are
interrelated or connected such that something that happens to at least one actor, will
have the potential to affect the other actors.1 Modern day Russia and the former Soviet
states have experienced such plight and are refocusing towards economic recovery. By
increasing and fostering its interaction with other states, Russia's alternative is to
engage the Russian Far East, China and Southeast Asia, which are the determining
factors necessary for Putin to achieve his long-term goals.

According to an article written by Dr. Bhavna Dave, Russias pivot which can
be generally considered as a shift towards the Asia-Pacific Region was Moscows
move to assert Russias geopolitical status as a Euro-Pacific as well as an Asia-Pacific
power.2 Another issue yet waiting to be seen is whether the change would proceed
towards Russias strategic interest of emerging as the dominant power, challenging the
United States as a global power. Neil Macfarlane in his article assessed the role of
Russia as an emerging power by raising questions such as, How do Russians
interpret the international system in which they operate? What kind of system would
they prefer? What are they trying to do in the current system and why? How do these
considerations affect their relations with the hegemon, with other centers of power
such as the European Union and with other emerging powers?3 There are questions
whether Russia is concentrating its effort towards becoming a dominant power in the
Asia-Pacific region, or on a global scale. This leads to the question, will Russia
independently rebrand itself from being one of the former fifteen Soviet States, to rise
up again as another great civilization. Russia loses and unpopularity in the West are
observed in its focus shift towards the Asia-Pacific. In light of these observations, the
relevant question that need to be answered is why Russia has shifted its focus from
Europe to the Asia-Pacific through its foreign policy in 2013, despite its established
economic and strategic interests with the European community.

1
Evans, G. & Newnham, J. 1998. The Penguin Dictionary of Foreign Relations.
The Penguin Dictionary of Foreign Relations, 256.
2
Dave, B. Russias Asia Pivot: Engaging the Russian Far East, China and Southeast Asia.
Singapore.
3
MacFarlane, S. N. The R in BRICs: Is Russia an Emerging Power? International Affairs
Royal Institute of International Affairs, 82(1), 4147.

2
THE COMPARISON OF RUSSIAS FOREIGN POLICY FROM 2008 TO 2013
The foreign policy of Russia has shown significant changes since the 2012
Presidential election. Though the Russian 2008 foreign policy has similarities with the
new Russian foreign policy of 2013, with the latter also defined its peculiarities in
terms of its regional relations and priorities with its former Soviet States, to include
the European and Asian countries.

In a paper written by Francisco J. Ruiz Gonzalez entitled, The Foreign Policy

Concept of the Russian Federation: A Comparative Study, the author illustrated the
three concepts which illuminate the main plans of Russian foreign action, and how
Kremlin perceived the changes in world geopolitics.4 Gonzalez offered two
conclusions. Firstly, it can be drawn from the comparative study that there is a form of
continuity in the three concepts of each policy with identical structures of the
documents, and a consolidation of all the three models. Secondly, the issues
highlighted were very much the same such as the broad concept of security, the
identification of a wide range of threats excluding conflicts, the vision of a multipolar
world, and geopolitical axis move to the Pacific and the supremacy of the states
against their rights of interference from other countries.5 The differentiation between
the 2008 and 2013 foreign policies are highlighted in Table 1.1

Table 1.1 A Comparison of the Concept Structure of the Russian Foreign

Policy 2008 and 2013

2008 Concept 2013 Concept

General provisions General provisions

Modern world and foreign policy of the Foreign policy of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation and modern world

Priorities for the Russian Federation to Priorities for the Russian Federation to
face global issues face global issues

Regional priorities Regional priorities

Designing and starting up the foreign Development and implementation of

policy of the Russian Federation foreign policy of the Russian Federation

(Source: Gonzales, F.J.R., The Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation: A
Comparative Study)

4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.

3
Russias Foreign Policy 2008 and National Strategy 2009
The Russian foreign policy took turns in amendments and revision starting from the
Post-Cold War Period. Russia as the largest state had to evolve into being self-reliance
but not totally abandoning interdependency among its neighbours. Consequently,
Russias economic recovery was greatly affected by its foreign and defence policies.
Russias Foreign Policy of 2008 saw the leadership of President Medvedev at the
helm. This was reflected in the new foreign poli-cy concept presented on June 15,
2008. On May 12, 2009, President Medvedev approved the Russian national security
strategy until the year 2020. These documents focused on Russias economic recovery
with the main concentration being on the relations with former Soviet states and
regional interests with the European communities. The policy emphasized the
development of an international posture primarily focused on the interests and the
balance of power.6

Ziegler in his article entitled Conceptualizing Sovereignty in Russian Foreign

Policy: Realist and Constructivist Perspectives, presented that Russia has remained
adept to remain as a state of major influence with its efforts to establish relations with
other countries. According to him, after the dissolution of the Union, Central Asian
countries which have acquired independence received high attention from great
powers, inside and outside the region in terms of their important geostrategic
positions, abundant energy and resource reserves, and diversified and heterogeneous
cultural patterns.7

In the book entitled Explaining Change in the Russian Foreign Policy written
by Christian Thorun in 2009, the author discussed theories in the analysis of the
change in Russias foreign policy. The author introduced two hypotheses. Firstly, the
hypothesis raised the question what kind of Russian foreign policy behaviour should
be expected in cases where the West are lacking a clearly defined policy, or a united
position on international issues. Secondly, how foreign policy planning weighs in
relevancy in Russian foreign policy when it comes to collective ideas on the state,
international relations, and strategy.8

Russias Foreign Policy 2013 and National Strategy 2015

In an article written by Andrew Monaghan in 2013, entitled, The New Russian
Foreign Policy Concept: Evolving Continuity, the author espoused that there were
flaws in the new Russian Foreign Policy Concept, just like in some documents, but it

6
Rumer, E. B. 2007. Russian Foreign Policy Beyond Putin First Edit., 23. New York: Routledge.
7
Ziegler, C. E. Conceptualizing Sovereignty in Russian Foreign Policy: Realist and Constructivist
Perspectives. International Politics, 49(4).
8
Thorun, C. 2009. Explaining Change in Russian Foreign Policy The Role of Ideas in Post Soviet
Russias Conduct towards the West. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.

4
serves as both a marker of the countrys evolving understanding of international
affairs, and serves as a timely reminder of its intention to establish itself as an
international centre and model nation.9

Russian President Vladimir Putin approved a new national security strategy for
his country on December 31, 2015. The timing may be perfectly attuned to Russias
new military doctrine which just came out on December 25, 2014. Olga Oliker, Senior
Adviser and Director on Russia and Eurasia Program from the Center for Strategic
and International Studies (CSIS) presented her views that the new security strategy,
which depicted how Russia is focused on increasing its influence and prestige by
focusing on cementing its national unity; a Russia that believes that it is
accomplishing its aims, but which simultaneously feels threatened by the United
States, and its allies.10 In short, what is present in Russias New National Security
Strategy is a document of an ambitious Russia that sees both constraints and
challenges in its national goals and interests.

Russias International Relations with the Big Powers

The word international is relatively a recent historical invention identified with the
philosopher Jeremy Bentham, who in 1780 introduced the term in his book
Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.11 According to Bentham,
international relations is the term used to identify all interactions between state-based
actors across state boundaries. It is most correlated with international regimes which
are further expanded into notions of international cooperation.12

Arkady Moses in his article written in 2012 entitled Russia's European Policy
Under Medvedev: How Sustainable Is a New Compromise? argues that Dmitry
Medvedev's term in office in 2008, despite the continuity in Russia's foreign policy
objectives, brought about a certain change in Russia's relations with the European
Union and the countries of the Common Neighbourhood. The western perceptions of
Russia as a resurgent power able to use energy as leverage vis--vis the EU were
challenged by the global economic crisis, the emergence of a buyer's market in
Europe's gas trade, Russia's inability to start internal reforms, and the growing gap in
the development of Russia on the one hand and China on the other.13

9
Monaghan, A. The New Russian Foreign Policy Concept: Evolving Continuity. Chatham
House, 13(2013), 23.
10
Oliker, O. 2016. Unpacking Russias New National Security Strategy. Center for Strategic
and International Studies.
11
Booth, K. 2014. Chapter I -Understanding the World. International Relations- All That
Matters,.67. Hodder Stoughton, McGraw Hill Companies.
12
Morgan, P. 2013. Liberalism. Allan Collins. Contemporary Security Studies,.3334. Oxford
University Press.
13
Moshes, A. Russias European policy under Medvedev: how sustainable is a new
compromise? Chatham House The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 88(1), 1730.

5
 Steven K. Voytek, in his research paper entitled, Eurasianist Trends in Russian
Foreign Policy: A Critical Analysis, examined and illustrated the presence of a
powerful Eurasianist doctrine currently influencing Russian foreign policy. Over the
past decade, a new brand of Eurasianism has emerged which this study identifies as
Geopolitical Eurasianism.14 In the paper, Voytek argues that various external and
internal factors have led to the rise of this paradigm that now affects the formulation
and implementation of Russian foreign policy. At present, the author Voytek
considers Geopolitical Eurasianism to be the principle doctrine guiding Russian
foreign policy over the past decade.

Alina Vladimirova wrote in the July 2014 Conference Paper that the adage
Russia and China are brothers forever, and this was a popular slogan in the Soviet
Union which perfectly shows how important it is to understand the Sino-Russian
relationship since 1950 in terms of political perceptions.15 The new Sino-Russian
friendship treaty signed on July 16, 2001, did make headlines, but most Western
observers have been indifferent to the emergence of the Sino-Russian partnership in
the 1990s, and have focused on its limitations while appreciating the international,
military, economic, and political interests, encouraging doubts.16

RUSSIAS ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN THE ASIA PACIFIC

Through the years, Russia has remained greatly focused in Europe though it has
territories mainly situated in Asia. Significantly, empirical data showed that Russia is
shifting its focus in the Asia Pacific region to develop based on its economic interests.
This is also in light of developing Russian territory located in Asia which is vastly
endowed with natural resources, but has remained undeveloped because of Russian
engagement in Europe.

14
Voytek, S. K. 2012. Eurasianist Trends in Russian Foreign Policy: A Critical Analysis.
15
Vladimirova, A. 2014. Perceptions of Rising Powers: Are Russia and China Still Brothers
Forever? World Congress of Sociology.
16
Wishnick, E. 2001. Russia and China Brothers Again? Asian Survey, 41(5), 797821.

6
 Figure 1.2 The Interplay of the Factors in the Policy Making Process
(Source: References and Illustration formulated by the researcher)

In international relations, the formulation of the foreign policy of all major

states actors would be critical and valuable in achieving their national and strategic
interests. Figure 1.2 is an illustration of a conceptual approach at how states formulate
their foreign policies according to sources and references compiled by the researcher.
There are six identified factors contributing to the foreign policy outputs of a state,
which are external, societal, individual, government sources. Additionally, legislation
in terms of policies and the leadership also plays a vital role. The interaction of these
factors within the state internally and externally with other factors as signified by the
arrows contribute to the formulation of a states foreign policy.

RUSSIAS EFFORTS TO BECOME A DOMINANT POWER

The early years of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR), and the relationship
between the United States was said to be bipolar. This was due to both states claiming
the status as the dominant power in the West and East territories. To illustrate the
concept of polarity in that period, the following illustrations is presented:

7
 State C
State A State B

State I
State D
USSR USA

State H
State E

State G
State F

Figure 1.3 - The Period of Bipolarity

The Early Years of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic and the United
States (Pre-and Post-World War I)
(Source: Conceptual illustration by the writer)

State C
State A State B

State I
State D
USSR USA

State H
State E

State G
State F

Figure 1.4- The Period of Unipolarity

Post-World War II to the Cold War saw the fall of the USSR with the
dissolution of the union leaving the United States as the sole major global power
(Source: Conceptual Illustration by the writer)

8
 The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic, known as the USSR entered a period
of relative instability, vulnerability, and weaknesses during most part of the 1990s.
The once great Russian empire saw its fall after the Gorbachev reign attempted to
open its doors for Western influence. However, after the Cold War, with the advent of
Vladimir Putin as President, Russia increased their political stability and started to
show a steady economic growth. Russia made use of the policy windows of
opportunities that were opened to it as a consequence of the terrorist attacks in the
United States on September 11, 2001, and the war in Iraq in 2003.17 These new
situations gave rise to the aspirations of Russia to assess its capabilities, resources,
policies and relations both domestically and internationally to become a dominant
power not only in Europe, but also in the Asia-Pacific region.

The turn of events precipitated the periods of unipolarity. However, as seen by

analysts in the future, with Russia aiming to claim its dominance, China as an
emerging economic power followed by India and South Korea, recent economic and
military developments in both the West and East blocks, would result to a multi-polar
world. In the next decades, it is predicted that a multipolar world will remain and
prevail and the United States will cease to become the sole hegemon. In the multipolar
world, it is also assumed that two most influential states will remain to be Russia and
the United States.

Russia has shared the status of a global power and major influence before the
collapse of the Soviet Union. Though it hopes to consolidate the former Soviet states
again to regain the Great Russian Empire, it cannot wait to see the realization of that
goal. Thus, even on its own, as the modern Russian Federation, it hopes to reign as a
great civilization. This sense of patriotism is what sets apart Russia from other
civilizations. Putin will use this to appeal to the scattered compatriots to go back to
their Russian homeland and once again rebuild its empire in the next decades. He can
only do so when a progressive Russia becomes ready to muster a stronger form of
unity amongst its people.

Russia is shifting its foreign policy to foster political relation towards the Asia
Pacific. This is while pouring its efforts to achieve its strategic interest to become a
dominant power, even though its relations has turned sour with the European
community, which was coupled with the sanctions by the West. Leadership played a
very vital role together with its foreign policy. Under the Putins administration, both

17
Hedenskog, J., Vilhelm Konnander, Nygren, B., Ingmar Oldberg & Christer Pursianen
2007. Russia as a Great Power Dimensions of Security Under Putin.3rd Edition. Routledge Taylor and
Francis Group.

9
from the late 1990s, to the latter part of 2010, the Russian Federation has been slowly
rebuilding its empire. Much of the criticism of many European states, and the United
States, its annexation of Crimea was not a welcomed gesture, and was viewed as
territorial expansionism. To its defense, Putin stressed that it is not by necessity, but
by its identity and its duty to gather Russian compatriots that necessitated such
actions. This resulted in an indifferent relationship with the European community.
Thus, Putin has expanded his foreign policy towards Asia. This, however, does not
amount the so-called Pivot to Asia, since Russia has been in Asia geographically
ever since. This is even though they had not focused explicitly on trade relations with
the ASEAN states. This is now the grand strategy that Putin is hoping to play which
can variably change the geopolitical landscape in the Asia Pacific Region.

RUSSIA BALANCING THE UNITED STATES

Russia plans to become deeply involved in the global and regional economic life of
the Asia-Pacific, and already has some experience interacting with the Asia-Pacific
states. The countries of the Asia-Pacific are joining global partnerships and are
capable of gaining advantages from them. This approach to the practical aspects of
globalization is quite compatible with the Russian point of view. Russian leadership
will not remain to see that the United States being the sole hegemon and remain a
global power on its own.

Russias Political Interests

A book by written by Gerald R. Watson and Jack O. Nguyen entitled Russia:
Developments and United States' Interests examines the current political, economic,
security, and U.S. interest issues facing Russia today.18 Although Russia may not be
as central to U.S. interests as was the Soviet Union, cooperation between the two is
essential in many areas. Russia remains a nuclear superpower and still has a major
impact on U.S. national security interests in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Russia
has an important role in the future of arms control, the non-proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction and the fight against terrorism.19 Russia is an important trading
partner and is the only country in the world with a greater range and scope of natural
resources than the United States, including vast oil and gas reserves. Many of Russia's
needs - food and food processing, oil and gas extraction technology, computers,
communications, transportation, and investment capital are in areas which the United
States is highly competitive, although bilateral trade remains relatively low.

18
Watson, G. R. & Nguyen, J. O. (Eds.). 2012. Russia: Developments and United States
Interests. Nova Science Publishers.
19
Nichol, J., Woolf, A. F. & Cooper, Wi. H. 2012. Russia: Developments and United States
Interests. (G. R. Watson & J. O. Nguyen, Eds.). Nova Science Publishers.

10
 In the global firepower power index, Russia remains as the second military
power in the world, second to the United States. A comparison of the military
firepower capabilities of the United States, Russia and China are depicted in the
following tables:

Table 1.5- Comparison of United States, Russia and Chinas Military

Firepower/Aspect

Source: Global Fire Power

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail

Table 1.6- Comparison of United States, Russia and Chinas Naval Assets, Military
Budget and Labor Force

Source: Global Fire Power

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail

11
To date, Russia still remains the second military power in the world, after the United
States continually competing in assets and capabilities. China places second
continually upgrading and amassing its military capabilities.

Russias shift of its foreign policy is to balance the United States as a global
power. The new and modern Russia under the leadership of President Putin has really
poured efforts in the attempt to stress its role in a multi-polar world in order to achieve
near parity with the United States. These actions are evidenced in the changes in its
foreign policy in terms of domestic and international circumstances specifically in the
Ukraine Crisis and the existing restrictions and sanctions. It may not appear to be
obvious, but aside from the collaboration and cooperation between China and Russia,
the latter is balancing the United States as a dominant power primarily in the Asia
Pacific region. Russia and the United Stated are observed to be balancing and counter-
balancing each other with their bilateral ties. Russian bilateral ties with the United
States does not speak of a formal alliance nor does it prevent each state from strategic
partnerships with the other large states like China, Japan, South Korea, and India or
any other state that is not an ally or partner with the other. This is to Russias
advantage as it balances and consequently competes with the United States as a global
power. Also, with China as an emerging power in terms of economy and hoping to
become one militarily, Russia will have to balance the former in order to gain
significance and dominance in the region again.

CONCLUSION
What does it take to be a global power in todays world? As discussed, global power
is a more contemporary term for great power, as it is traditionally employed in
international relations. The term superpower was a result of the 20th century politics of
nuclear weapons technology, though the term did not fully transform into the nuclear
dimension in 1944. In context, the classification of a superpower came about during
the Cold War, with the possession of weapons of ultimate destruction and nuclear
superpower capability with the deterrence that comes with it. It was then broadened
by globalization that a global superpower does not merely denote nuclear power but
must attain and maintain sufficient diplomatic, economic and military resources for
preserving the international order in which great powers presume and assume
themselves as the main actors. To sum it all up, a global power is required to promote
international order, possess the formidable military capability and the communicated
will to use it as necessary, engage productivity in transnational projects such as global
justice as well as combat transnational threats such as terrorists and violent extremists.
In this context, the question now remain, does Russia fulfill the criteria? As shown in
this paper, Russia shifted its focus from Europe to the Asia-Pacific through its foreign

12
policy in 2013 to maintain its economic interests, to achieve its strategic interest to
become a dominant power and to balance the United States. In conclusion, the shift of
Russias focus from Europe to the Asia-Pacific through it foreign policy from 2008 to
2013 is due to the international system, as Russia aims to maintain its economic
interests, to achieve its strategic interest to become a dominant power and to balance
the United States. As presented, empirical evidence has shown that the international
system plays an important role in influencing a states behavior in determining their
foreign policy. This is in tandem and in coordination with the theory of neorealism.

REFERENCES

Booth, K. 2014. Understanding the World. International Relations- All That Matters.
Hodder Stoughton, McGraw-Hill.

Dellios, R. 2005. The rise of China as a global power. Culture Mandala: The Bulletin
of the Centre for East-West Cultural and Economic Studies, 6(2), 10.

Evans, G. & Newnham, J. 1990. The Dictionary of World Politics-A Reference Guide
to Concepts, Ideas and Institutions. Evans & Newnham The Dictionary of World
Politics-A Reference Guide to Concepts, Ideas and Institutions, First Edition., 14.
Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Garnett, J. 2013. The Causes of War and the Conditions of Peace. Baylis, Wirtz, &
Gray. Strategy in the Contemporary World,.4th Edition., United Kingdom: Oxford
University Press.

Hedenskog, J., Konnander, V., Nygren, B., Oldberg, I. & Pursianen, C. 2007. Russia
as a Great Power Dimensions of Security Under Putin. (J. Hedenskog, Vilhelm
Konnander, B. Nygren, Ingmar Oldberg, & Christer Pursianen, Eds.)3rd Edition.
Routledge Tayor and Francis Group.

Huntington, S. P. 1996. Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New
York: Simon and Schuster.

MacFarlane, N. S. The R in BRICs: Is Russia an Emerging Power? International

Affairs Royal Institute of International Affairs, 82(1), 4147.

Monaghan, A. The New Russian Foreign Policy Concept: Evolving Continuity.

Chatham House, 13(2013), 23.

Morgan, P. 2013. Liberalism. Allan Collins Contemporary Security Studies, 3334.

Oxford University Press.

13
Moshes, A. Russias European policy under Medvedev: how sustainable is a new
compromise? Chatham House the Royal Institute of International Affairs, 88(1),
1730.

Nichol, J., Woolf, A. F. & Cooper, W. H. 2012. Russia: Developments and United
States Interests. (G. R. Watson & J. O. Nguyen, Eds.). Nova Science Publishers.

Rumer, E. B. 2007. Russian Foreign Policy Beyond Putin First Edition., 23. New
York: Routledge.

Oliker, O. 2016. Unpacking Russias New National Security Strategy. Center for
Strategic and International Studies,.

Thorun, C. 2009. Explaining Change in Russian Foreign Policy The Role of Ideas in
Post-Soviet Russias Conduct towards the West. United Kingdom: Palgrave
Macmillan.

Voytek, S. K. 2012. Eurasianist Trends in Russian Foreign Policy: A Critical

Analysis.

Vladimirova, A. 2014. Perceptions of Rising Powers: Are Russia and China Still
Brothers Forever? World Congress of Sociology.

Wishnick, E. 2001. Russia and China Brothers Again? Asian Survey, 41(5), 797821.

Watson, G. R. & Nguyen, J. O. (Eds.). 2012. Russia: Developments and United

States Interests. Nova Science Publishers.

Ziegler, C. E. Conceptualizing Sovereignty in Russian Foreign Policy: Realist and

Constructivist Perspectives. International Politics, 49(4).

14