俄罗斯吞并的合法化叙事:动力还是借口?

Presian Dragiev
{"title":"俄罗斯吞并的合法化叙事:动力还是借口?","authors":"Presian Dragiev","doi":"10.26443/firr.v10i1.24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following the Russian Federation’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014, the Kremlin constructed a legitimizing narrative to justify its inflammatory foreign policy decision. This narrative in turn builds an argument for the legality of the annexation, as well as one for its morality. These arguments were presented as the driving forces for its decision to occupy and annex the peninsula and then diffused by Russia’s political class in addition to their security-related justifications. But a closer examination of these arguments and how they relate to realities on the ground suggests they are closer to being pretexts for the annexation than being its driving forces. This narrative offers a glimpse into how the Kremlin uses notions of identity, historical links, and international norms championed by the west to legitimize its foreign policies on the international scene.","PeriodicalId":417989,"journal":{"name":"Flux: International Relations Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Russia’s Legitimizing Narrative for Annexation: Impetus or Pretext?\",\"authors\":\"Presian Dragiev\",\"doi\":\"10.26443/firr.v10i1.24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Following the Russian Federation’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014, the Kremlin constructed a legitimizing narrative to justify its inflammatory foreign policy decision. This narrative in turn builds an argument for the legality of the annexation, as well as one for its morality. These arguments were presented as the driving forces for its decision to occupy and annex the peninsula and then diffused by Russia’s political class in addition to their security-related justifications. But a closer examination of these arguments and how they relate to realities on the ground suggests they are closer to being pretexts for the annexation than being its driving forces. This narrative offers a glimpse into how the Kremlin uses notions of identity, historical links, and international norms championed by the west to legitimize its foreign policies on the international scene.\",\"PeriodicalId\":417989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Flux: International Relations Review\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Flux: International Relations Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26443/firr.v10i1.24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Flux: International Relations Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26443/firr.v10i1.24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在俄罗斯联邦2014年3月吞并克里米亚之后,克里姆林宫为其煽动性的外交政策决定构建了一个合法化的叙事。这种叙述反过来又为吞并的合法性和道德性建立了一个论据。这些论点被认为是俄罗斯决定占领和吞并克里米亚半岛的驱动力,然后被俄罗斯的政治阶层传播开来,除了与安全有关的理由之外。但仔细研究这些论点,以及它们与实际情况的关系,就会发现它们更像是俄罗斯吞并俄罗斯的借口,而不是推动俄罗斯吞并俄罗斯的力量。这种叙述让我们得以一窥克里姆林宫如何利用西方倡导的身份、历史联系和国际规范等概念,使其在国际舞台上的外交政策合法化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Russia’s Legitimizing Narrative for Annexation: Impetus or Pretext?
Following the Russian Federation’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014, the Kremlin constructed a legitimizing narrative to justify its inflammatory foreign policy decision. This narrative in turn builds an argument for the legality of the annexation, as well as one for its morality. These arguments were presented as the driving forces for its decision to occupy and annex the peninsula and then diffused by Russia’s political class in addition to their security-related justifications. But a closer examination of these arguments and how they relate to realities on the ground suggests they are closer to being pretexts for the annexation than being its driving forces. This narrative offers a glimpse into how the Kremlin uses notions of identity, historical links, and international norms championed by the west to legitimize its foreign policies on the international scene.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信