AVENUES FOR A WAY-OUT FROM RUSSIA – EU STALEMATE

  • Rusia
  • 0
  • 13179 Views
  • 2 July 2020

PASHENTSEV, EVGENY (ED.), 2020.  STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION IN EU-RUSSIA RELATIONS.  PALGRAVE MACMILLAN

This book  , edited by Evgeny Pashentsev, brings together a series of chapters written by Russian and non-Russian scholars to analyze the current state of relations between Russia and the European Union. The chapters were written, and the book published, at a time of exceptional stress in the relationship and the leitmotif of the book is the need and opportunity to explore ways in which this tragic situation might be changed.

The title of the book includes the phrase ‘strategic communication.’ This is defined by the editor (p.7) as the “synchronization of governmental deeds, words and images.” In the context of EU-Russia relations, what is meant by the ‘government’ is clear on the Russian side, but on the EU side there is an ambiguity: all EU member-states have governments while the EU itself has ‘governance.’ This is an important distinction as not all EU member-states have been equally hostile to Russia in recent years. Thus, the strategic communication of the EU towards Russia, while without doubt very hostile, may not necessarily accord with the interests of all its member-states.

This factor opens up the possibility of an improvement in EU-Russia relations through the operation of traditional bilateral state interests. This is an approach considered by the authors of this book, although the main thrust is on strategic communication at the supra-national level on the European side, i.e. the EU (there is no such ambiguity on the Russian side, whose strategic communication is easier to analyze if not necessarily understand).

All the authors concur that the strategic communication between Russia and the EU is based on outdated ideas. Although the current disastrous relationship between them was ostensibly triggered by events in Ukraine in recent years, it is quite clear that this is not the whole story that can fully explain the state of affairs. Instead, the strategy—especially but not exclusively on the European side—seems to have been driven by a latent suspicion of Russia that predates the birth of the Russian Federation in 1991 and was then promoted by later events.

The dismal depth to which strategic communication has fallen between Russia and the EU is brilliantly captured by the chapter entitled “Character Assassination as Strategic Communication in EU-Russia Relations.” Written by Sergei Samoilenko and Marlene Laruelle, two scholars based in the United States, the chapter demonstrates the psychological warfare dimension of character assassination and its increasing use in international relations—a facility made easier by modern means of communication. Yet this chapter also shows how, in the case of the EU, character assassination of Russia is driven by the European Parliament with other EU institutions being more reticent. This creates another avenue for changing the bilateral relationship as was emphasized in 2018 by the President of the European Commission when he stated: “This Russia-bashing has to be brought to an end” (p.145).

The damage done by character assassination is then explored in detail in the chapter entitled “Reputation Management of Russian Companies in the European Union in the Context of Russia and the EU’s Strategic Communication.” Written by Darya Bazarkina and Kaleria Kramer, the chapter examines the experience of reputation management of three Russian companies (Gazprom, Lukoil, and Sberbank) in the EU and its member-states. It appears that not all of the experience has been negative. Operating in individual European states, these Russian companies have often been quite successful in promoting a positive image while on the broader European stage Gazprom, for example, has done itself no harm by sponsoring the leading club football tournament (Champions’ League).

Other authors, notably Darya Bazarkina (in a separate chapter on counter-terrorism), Pierre-Emmanuel Thomann  and Marius Vacarelu consider ways in which the geopolitical interests of Russia and the EU might converge to bring about a change in the message currently being developed under strategic communication. These authors are undoubtedly correct in that the interests uniting both sides are far stronger than those that divide them and yet the thrust of current strategic communication is on the latter. Why that is the case is a story in its own right and these chapters are also very useful for showing the obstacles in the path of changing the narrative of strategic communication given the ways in which institutions, or even just parts of institutions, can be captured by self-interested groups with their own agendas.

One of the direct outcomes of EU strategic communication towards Russia has been the application of sanctions. In his chapter “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act: The Psychological Aspect and Its Meaning for EU-Russia Relations,” Evgeny Pashentsev broadens the debate to include the increasing use of sanctions by U.S. governments, especially during the presidency of Donald Trump, while showing how unilateral U.S. sanctions can poison the relationship between third parties. Pashentsev also demonstrates some of the methods and techniques used by Russia and its companies to evade the intended impact of sanctions.

This is a most timely book and the editor is to be congratulated for bringing it to the attention of the English-speaking audience. Evgeny Pashentsev’s role is not limited to that of the editor since he has written four of the nine chapters, which is a considerable contribution. All the chapters are well researched and clearly written (as well as translated), although they were, of course, completed before the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is too early to tell whether this new crisis will be the catalyst to bring about an improved relation between Russia and the EU, but—whether it does or not—there is plenty in this book to give one hope that a better relationship can be built in the future. This will require not just a change in strategic communication by both sides, but greater recognition of the positive role that can be played by other actors in the bilateral relationship: companies, nation-states, and non-state actors.

 

This text was firstly published by the website Russia in Global Affairs  https://eng.globalaffairs.ru/articles/way-out-from-russia-eu/ , who allowed to publish on our site. We are grateful for this and we hope for a longer cooperation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Russian Security Cannot be Anti-Russian

  • 0
  • 2653 Views
  • 15 March 2022

To reflect on the period where the world now finds itself, we propose the term “cold hot war”, as this period has significant differences from the classical notion of the “Cold war”. Within the framework of the old Cold War, military confrontation between the two superpowers was always indirect. “Proxy” conflicts only emerged between their respective allies, when there was an intersection of interests in various regions of the world, but these never happened direc

citește mai mult

Russian Leadership Changes: How it was, is and how it might be

  • 0
  • 2770 Views
  • 3 January 2022

Now that 2022 is finally here, it means Russia’s next presidential election is just two years away. The way has been paved for Vladimir Putin to run again if he chooses. The will he/won’t he? question is a favourite of pundits as is speculation of a potential or likely successor. Russia’s next leader will be immensely consequential, as will the time when he or she takes over.

It’s certainly possible that by the end of t

citește mai mult

Researchers from Six Countries Discussed the Challenges for International Psychological Security in the Context of the Use of Artificial Intelligence

  • 0
  • 24643 Views
  • 23 November 2020

On 12 November 2020, a panel discussion "Artificial Intelligence and International Psychological Security: Theoretical and Practical Implications" was held at St. Petersburg State University as part of the international conference "Strategic Communications in Business and Politics" (STRATCOM-2020).

The discussion was moderated by Konstantin Pantserev – DSc in Political Sciences, Professor of the St. Petersburg State University,

citește mai mult

Conferință despre Transnistria, 4 – 5 Martie 2022

  • 0
  • 2526 Views
  • 8 March 2022

Împlinirea a 30 de ani de la unul dintre cele mai dificile momente ale istoriei estului Europei a constituit temeiul unei conferințe științifice de prestigiu organizate în colaborare de către instituții de învățâmânt și cercetare din Chișinău, Târgoviște și București.

Conferința cu titlul „Războiul de pe Nistru din 1992: 30 de ani după...” a fost organizată de către Asociația Națională a Tinerilor Istorici din Moldova (ANTIM),

citește mai mult

Forcing the Correct Choice: Deterring Right-Wing Radicals and Preventing Threats to Nuclear Facilities in Ukraine

  • 0
  • 2365 Views
  • 7 March 2022

According to official statements by the Russian Federation, its army’s special military operation in Ukraine aims to both “demilitarize” and “denazify” the country. This operation is being carried out in a large state with a developed nuclear power industry, fairly powerful army (the largest in Europe outside of Russia and Turkey) and high firepower (22nd place in the world according to 2022 Military Strength Ranking (Global Firepower, 2022)). One of the primary o

citește mai mult

Azebaijan, cheia geostrategică a Asiei Centrale

  • 0
  • 22481 Views
  • 13 February 2018

După destrămarea URSS, Azerbaijanul a fost statul ex-sovietic care alături de    republicile Baltice a avut o dezvoltare constantă și durabilă. Desigur, aici pot fi adresate unele critici regimului de la Baku cu privire la democrație, care în opinia multor analiști este doar mimată la Baku. Însă faptul adevărat este că acest stat a reușit să își gestioneze eficient resursele de care dispune pentru a deveni o societate prosperă. I se atribuie Azerbaijanului etichet

citește mai mult

Malicious Use of AI and Challenges to Psychological Security: Future Risks

  • 0
  • 1137 Views
  • 20 May 2024

In April 2024, the International Center for Social and Political Studies and Consulting International Center for Social and Political Studies and Consulting with the help of the International Research Group on Threats to International Psychological Security through Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence (Research MUAI) published the report citește mai mult

Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges for BRICS Psychological Security on International Forum “Russia and Ibero-America in a Turbulent World: History and Prospects”

  • 0
  • 1368 Views
  • 17 October 2023

On October 5, within the framework of the VI International Forum “Russia and Ibero-America in a Turbulent World: History and Modernity” at St. Petersburg State University, two sessions of the panel “Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence and Challenges for BRICS Psychological Security” were held under the chairmanship of Professor Evgeny N. Pashentsev.

citește mai mult

Presentation of “The Palgrave Handbook of Malicious Use of AI and Psychological Security” at international forum in St. Petersburg

  • 0
  • 1381 Views
  • 17 October 2023

On October 4, 2023, as part of the international forum "Russia and Iberoamerica in a Turbulent World: History and Modernity", held at the School of International Relations of St. Petersburg State University, the presentation of the collective monograph "The Palgrave Handbook of Malicious Use of AI and Psychological Security" took place. The presentation was attended by the editor and co-author of the publication – DSc., professor Evgeny Pashentsev, leading researc

citește mai mult