Russian International Relations Studies: Securitization of the ‘Soft Power’ Discours

Abstract

Due to the nature of the subject, political studies have always been marked by pronounced ideological bias and high dependence on sociopolitical context bordering at times on outright opportunism. Studies of ‘soft power’ serve a perfect example in that regard. For instance, the so called Ukrainian crisis seems to constitute a milestone in Russian studies of ‘soft power’, dividing them into ‘before’ and ‘after’. Since 2014, overly negative assessments of the ‘soft power’ concept have become increasingly popular. Their proponents regard ‘soft power’ as a euphemism for manipulative political technologies aimed at destabilizing situation in certain countries; as a mere smokescreen for a wholescale information warfare led by the West under the leadership of the United States against their political rivals. While reflecting objective trends in the development of international relations, like the increasing competition among the leading centers of power, such views constitute an interesting phenomenon in itself allowing one to better understand the current state of IR studies. For that purpose, the author applies securitization theory to examine academic articles which represent an ‘alarmist’ trend in the Russian studies of ‘soft power’. The paper is based on a narrow, postmodern understanding of this theory, according to which security is a particular discursive practice and the term ‘securitization’ is used to describe a specific mechanism of threats and challenges construction.

This element of securitization is quite prominent in alarmist papers, especially when it comes to the so-called ‘color revolutions’. As a result, such publications while seeking to promote national security might have an opposite effect. In trying to explain the driving forces of world politics, such publications, being based on idealist philosophy, tend to overemphasize the role of subjective factors. This leads to underrating the role of objective laws of the evolution of international relations, widening the gap between theory and applied political analysis. Such negative trends become particularly dangerous when it comes to strategic decision-making under increasing external pressure and in resource-limited settings as faced by the Russian Federation.