The Foreign Policy of Vladimir Putin and its Impact on Global Security

Posted: March 17th, 2024

The Foreign Policy of Vladimir Putin and its Impact on Global Security
1. Introduction
The Russian Federation became an independent country after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The early years of post-Soviet Russia were dominated by Boris Yeltsin, who served as the first President of Russia from 1991 to 1999. After Yeltsin’s resignation, Vladimir Putin became the President of Russia in 2000 and has remained in power for almost two decades. One of the crucial aspects of Putin’s presidency is his foreign policy, which has become increasingly assertive over the years. There is a growing concern in the West about Russia’s international actions ranging from military interventions to disinformation campaigns in cyberspace. The Foreign Policy of Vladimir Putin and its Impact on Global Security is a research paper that explores the various aspects of Putin’s foreign policy and its implications for global security. The paper begins with an introduction, which provides some background information about the topic and explains the purpose of the research. I will write about how Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy has become more assertive and interventionist in the last decade. I will explain the different strands of foreign policy that Putin has undertaken, from the use of “soft power” in the near abroad to his increasing support for political parties in Europe. After setting out the main objectives of the research and the motivation behind it, I will focus on investigating how security, in its various forms, could be impacted by Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy. This ground-breaking approach to studying Putin’s international actions will help to illuminate key debates across the field of International Security. The research will also review the different types of security and how they could be influenced. This will include looking into everything from military security to the security of information in the digital age. Finally, predictions about the current and future state of global security will be examined. By analyzing how ‘hard power’ foreign policies have led to closer Russian alliances with regimes such as Bashar al-Assad’s in Syria and the knock-on effects on global security, the research aims to help scholars and policymakers alike to understand more in this vitally important area. Such understanding may ultimately lead to the development of more effective and targeted global security strategies that can counteract the impact of such foreign policies.
1.1 Background
1.1 Background
Modern Russia has a long history and is known for its culture and history. It is also known for the rise and fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 and its never going back to the totalitarian state that it once was, but it’s a very young democracy. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia underwent a process of Westernization and Democratization under President Boris Yeltsin. However, there was a lot of corruption which led to dissatisfaction with the government. In 1999, Vladimir Putin was elected and Russia started to head in a different direction. In recent times, the growing authoritarianism, expansionism, and hostility of Russia have returned to the forefront of the global stage, thanks to the actions and foreign policy of Vladimir Putin. He has been in power for 20 years, as either Prime Minister or President, and has shaped the way in which modern Russia operates. As a result, understanding and analyzing the tactics, motivations, and geopolitical intentions of Putin in his foreign policy is essential for the international community. This research will be looking at the aspects of Putin’s foreign policy and how it affects global security. More specifically, it will be analyzing the objectives behind his strategies and his usage of tactics in his foreign policy. This research will also aim to explore the implications of his foreign policy on global security and the future of world peace. The research also aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the entire argument by providing strong analytical knowledge and well-substantiated facts based on different stakes and perspectives. By the end, the intention behind the paper is to arrive at a solid conclusion of whether or not Putin’s foreign policy is threatening to global security.
Introduction
The foreign policy of Vladimir Putin and its impact on global security is a research paper that explores the various aspects of Putin’s foreign policy and its implications for global security. The paper begins with an introduction which provides background information and explains the purpose of the research.
1.2 Purpose of the Research
The primary aim of this research is to comprehensively analyze the foreign policy of Russian President Vladimir Putin in relation to global security. While there is a significant amount of literature on the topic, this research pursues an analytical approach. This involves the synthesis of information from various sources in order to build a structured argument. The overarching purpose is to enrich academic understanding of Putin’s foreign policy in the context of contemporary global security challenges. This is an important area of study, particularly in the light of Russia’s increasingly assertive posture in world politics. By evaluating the strategies that Putin adopts in order to achieve his goals, both practical and theoretical conclusions can be drawn about the nature and impact of his foreign policy. In addition, by identifying the specific security issues that Putin’s policy presents, it is possible to assess the implication of his actions for the wider global security environment. Ultimately, it is hoped that this research will provide a valuable resource for scholars and policymakers with an interest in Russian foreign policy. By presenting a detailed overview and consistent explanation for the main themes of Putin’s foreign policy, the research helps the reader to understand the interconnected processes and choices that are made at both national and international levels. This will help to promote awareness of the broader implications of Putin’s policy amongst the international community, thereby shaping the development of effective responses to the security challenges that his policy presents. Also, by evaluating the effectiveness of Putin’s strategies in relation to his stated objectives, it supports a more nuanced understanding of the potential long-term outcomes. By grounding the research in the Russian context and using contemporary examples, it communicates the significance and relevance of the Russian case in the study of global security. This allows important theoretical questions and broader analytical objectives to be pursued through the in-depth study of a specific research case. It is hoped that such study will also lead to further research questions and development in this particular area of security studies. By exploring the changing nature of security in the post-Cold War world through the main themes of Putin’s policy, this research also allows for critical evaluation of the emerging paradigms in global security.
2. Vladimir Putin’s Foreign Policy
The intervention in the Syrian civil war by Russia, with airstrikes targeting a variety of groups, in 2015 is in line with a key objective of Putin’s foreign policy: to combat terrorism and Islamic extremism.
In recent years, the annexation of Crimea and intervention in the Syrian war have been attributed to Putin’s desire to establish Russia as a major global power and his opposition to Western attempts to spread democracy through humanitarian intervention. The annexation of Crimea in March 2014 has been justified by the need to protect “Russian speakers and the interests of the people that have close historical, cultural, economic and even family ties with Russia” in the region, as stated by Putin in his speech recommending military intervention to the Russian parliament. Critics claim, however, that the military invasion and questionable democratic processes in Crimea suggest it was an act driven more by an attempt to regain a strategic warm water port for the Russian navy and an affirmation of Russia’s great power status.
However, key policies of Putin’s foreign policy, such as opposition to NATO and European Union expansion, reflect the idea of a clash between his worldview and that of the United States and its allies. This is backed up by Putin’s 2013 claim that “the process of NATO expansion has nothing to do with the modernization of the alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe… It was a rough game of politics.”
“Sovereign democracy” is a concept developed by the Kremlin and implies that certain countries may have their own democratic institutions, but the institutions and methods must first be approved by international law and finally by the leading democracy – the United States. It suggests that the West has historically sought to impose its own values and ideas on the rest of the world, and hence for democracy to be truly democratic in Russia, it must be independent of foreign influence. Since then, academic experts have stated that the development of technology and a globalized world has meant that the Cold War concept of “sovereign democracy” has become increasingly outdated.
After coming to power in 2000, President Vladimir Putin set about trying to restore Russia’s status as a leading world power. With the end of the Cold War, Russia had a declining economy and military, and he felt that the country was at risk of being taken advantage of by the West. In 2013, Putin laid out his foreign policy objectives in a speech at the Valdai Discussion Club, a forum for leading international scholars. He listed the idea of “sovereign democracy,” the development of Russia as a major global power, and the creation of a “Eurasian Union” as his main aims.
2.1 Overview of Putin’s Foreign Policy
Putin’s foreign policy is aimed at restoring Russia’s great power status, lost after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and creating a multipolar world. Putin views the collapse of the Soviet Union as the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century” and believes that it resulted in the loss of Russian territories, resources, and the role as one of the global superpowers. Therefore, a key objective of Putin’s foreign policy is to reverse the outcomes of this collapse. Another important objective is to secure Russia’s borders and create a security cordon. After the end of the Cold War, Russia’s sphere of influence, secured by the “buffer zone” of the Warsaw Pact countries, was substantially reduced and NATO enlargement and the expansion of the European Union into Eastern Europe have extended what Putin considers as the Western encroachment on Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. This means that Russia has become surrounded by the countries under the influence of the United States and NATO. As a result, Putin aims at strengthening Russia’s position in its so-called ‘near abroad’ – the former Soviet Republics. As for the global stage, Putin challenges the American global leadership and promotes a multipolar world. He criticizes the United States for overreliance on military force and interventions into other countries’ internal affairs, its exceptionalism doctrines and disrespect to international law and multilateralism. In his famous Munich speech in 2007, Putin argued that the unipolar world was inherently unjust because it allows only one sovereign – the United States – to dominate and interfere in other states’ affairs. He stressed the importance of international law and the role of the United Nations as a guarantee of peace and security and set out the vision of a new world architecture based on multipolarity.
2.2 Key Objectives
Putin’s foreign policy has been a subject of much analysis and debate among researchers and international policy experts. His message is clear: Russia wants to be an independent and competitive great power, not the one obedient to international rules in a system led by the United States. In line with this big idea, the core themes of Putin’s foreign policy can be summarized as follows: a) restoring power and respect that Russia once had in the eyes of the world; b) a clear shift towards a more pragmatic and less ideological policy style compared with previous Russian policy; c) Multipolarity – Putin has been continuously calling for a more balanced and just world order where “no single power would be able to dominate the international affairs”. This also highlights Russia’s ambition to regain the superpower status. He has cautiously built a comprehensive network of strategic partnerships and dialogues to maximize international support for Russia’s stability and development. For example, Russia has been strengthening the political relationship with former Soviet states by forging Eurasian Economic Union – an international body for economic integration comprising of five Eastern Europe and Northern Asia countries. Another more recent example will be the continuous 10 years strategic gas deal with China which will provide Russia a reliable and consistent export earnings source for its economic revival. However, the degree of success in pursuing these key objectives very much depends on Putin’s skill of implementation, global energy markets, the responses from major global powers like the United States and the public opinions of the Russian people.
2.3 Strategies and Tactics
Putin’s policies are designed to tighten the Kremlin’s control over international politics and to secure Russian interests as he defines them. Over the years, his strategic approach has shifted under the influence of changing domestic and international circumstances, and in response to shifts in the global balance of power. As a result, foreign policy experts can trace a logical progression of tactics from one that was based largely on cooperation with the West in the immediate post-Cold War years, to the assertive, multi-faceted approach that characterizes Putin’s presidency today. For example, in the immediate aftermath of his first presidential term, Putin’s government abandoned any aspiration of NATO membership and began stressing Russia’s “special” place in the world. This was manifested in the use of the veto in the UN Security Council against Western intervention in Syria, and a foreign and security policy doctrine that was adopted in 2013 which emphasized the importance of the “Eurasian space” and called for ever-closer integration of former Soviet countries under a Russia-centric framework. Whilst seeking to build an alternative to Western-led global order, it also involved a sustained opposition to Western political ideology, particularly the perceived spread of liberal democracy. Since 2014, this doctrine has extended further to the reliance on military force and the pursuit of active measures to destabilize perceived opponents abroad, escalation of information warfare and the promotion of a range of anti-Western political movements to disrupt European and American politics. The annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and subsequent support for separatists in Ukraine was a watershed moment in contemporary Russian foreign policy and marked the beginning of a more overtly aggressive phase in Putin’s strategies. The decision to use force to redraw borders and to operate military without Western consent was seen by many experts as a clear assertion of a long-term objective to establish a new Russian-led multi-state federal arrangement in the post-Soviet space. The use of hybrid tactics, involving a combination of proxy forces, misinformation campaigns and cyber attacks, has allowed Moscow to maintain a degree of strategic ambiguity around the extent of its ambitions in Eastern Europe and the degree of control that it seeks. This has had the effect of creating a situation in which the response of the international community has been weakened by a lack of consensus on how to interpret and respond to Russian actions.
3. Impact on Global Security
Putin’s assertive foreign policy aims to use Russian power and influence to bring about security for himself and Russia and to ensure that Russia emerges once again as a great power in the 21st century. However, his actions in Ukraine, which has led to the first attempt since the end of the Cold War to change international borders by force, have led to a range of responses from the West and have left Russia’s future intentions open to much interpretation. This has been made more complex by his actions in Syria and the relationships that he has begun to develop with Turkey and Iran in the peace process in Syria, in addition to a series of actions and utterances aimed at destabilizing western liberal democracies, such as the US and Britain. There are a number of security considerations for us, as the potential for regional conflict has been raised in Eastern Europe, tensions between Russia and the West have a direct impact on international organizations. Also, Putin has been trying to modernize Russia’s military, but it still faces some technical difficulties. For example, the United States is the only country to currently have the capability to project significant military power globally, with the only overseas military installations and basis in the world. Furthermore, the trend constantly seems to be moving towards non-state actors, notably terrorist organizations, who are increasingly making use of the tools of globalization to advance their aims. This issue of cybersecurity has been much discussed and debated in recent years, particularly within the arms control community. This is because new technological developments could, potentially fundamentally, undermine the principles and objects of existing treaties. For instance, it has raised the question as to how to include cyber warfare within the understanding of international law and within the International Law of Armed Conflict, including qualifying violent acts of a non-state actor. Finally, Russia has long been considered to be a great and significant military power, possessing a vast nuclear arsenal and a range of heavy weaponry such as tanks and sophisticated aircraft. However, with the start of the new Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) treaty process, signed in April 2010, both America and Russia committed to significant reductions in their nuclear arsenal and a binding legal commitment to maintain the arms control process. Nevertheless, a year later, in February 2011, the Russian Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, stated his intention to rearm Russia by committing over 20 trillion roubles (over 300 billion euros) to Russia’s widely publicized ‘State Armament Programme’ end date, in order to renew over 70% of Russia’s military equipment and 100% of its ‘communication and command systems’. Such a rearmament programme could potentially undermine decades of progress in terms of arms control and disarmament, seeking to undermine American global strategic predominance and regional immune systems such as NATO, and acting as a further barrier to flushing modernization and reforms in key areas of Russian society and state structure. However, the impact of Putin’s actions on cybersecurity are more fundamental and wide-ranging because it is not confined to existing treaty-making processes. Putin has expressed a desire to create a sovereign internet for Russia, amending the laws governing communication surveillance and expanding the means and methods for the Russian state to monitor and keep a check on internet traffic. Such actions are completely contrary to the spirit and letter of the multistakeholder approach to internet governance and regulation as encapsulated in, for example, the Internet Governance Forum and the Internet Governance Forum’s 2016 Outcome Document. The research paper analyzed a range of data from a variety of source materials, including government and academic reports, legal opinion, and newspaper articles, in order to properly fulfill the task.
3.1 Regional Conflicts and Instability
Given that the continuous conflict in Ukraine and the instability in the Middle East are two of the most concerning global security issues in recent years, there is a need to address and resolve these crises in order to uphold peace and prosperity on a worldwide basis.
The Russian claimed that its intervention in Syria was meant to fight against terrorist groups, including ISIS, and to stabilize the region. However, as commented by many Western scholars, the true intention of Putin was to re-secure the status of Russia as a major power and to expand its influence in the Middle East. Such intentions also reflect on his foreign policy objectives. By promoting itself as a key player in the region that is capable of defeating terrorists, Russia’s status in international security matters would be elevated. Similarly, the Syria crisis demonstrates the ambition of Putin to challenge the established world order led by the United States and its Western allies. The rivalry between the two world powers in different regions of the world is further exacerbated by the military actions and diplomatic frictions. All these points to the fact that Putin’s foreign policy has a significant negative impact on regional security and stability, as well as the power equilibrium among major powers.
In Syria, the Russian military intervention in 2015 completely changed the dynamics of the Syrian Civil War. The Assad regime, a long-time ally of Russia, was at the brink of collapse under the assaults of opposition forces. However, with the support from the Russian air forces and the Iran-backed militias, the situation was reversed. The war turned into a proxy war between Russia and the Western allies – the United States, the United Kingdom, and France. The stubborn support from Russia has enabled Assad to remain in power, although war crimes and human rights abuses by the regime have been reported constantly.
The political motive of Putin behind the Ukraine crisis is to deter the eastward expansion of both the European Union and NATO, as Ukraine has expressed strong desires to integrate into the Euro-Atlantic community. This would shrink the influence of Russia in the region and weaken its status as a major power, which is against the objective of Putin’s foreign policy.
The conflict in Ukraine broke out in 2014, when the then Ukrainian President, who was a pro-Russia politician, was forced to step down due to public protests against his decision to suspend the signing of an association agreement with the European Union. In response, Russia annexed Crimea, a territory of Ukraine, claiming that it was meant to protect the rights of ethnic Russians in the peninsula. The Russian military support for separatist rebels has been a major cause for the continued unrest in Eastern Ukraine, which has claimed numerous lives over the years.
Another key impact of Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy on global security is regional conflicts and instability. Putin has been known for using military forces and political means to influence neighboring countries in an attempt to create instability in the region. This is particularly true in Ukraine and Syria.
3.2 Influence on International Organizations
Overall, various countries’ foreign policy interacts and influences the powers in the global system as a whole. Putin’s ambition in rebuilding the Russian Empire leads to security crisis in Europe, while Chinese emphasis on sovereignty and American foreign policies creates the “America First” trend. As a result, there is no standard solution to explain and tackle the political ambitions and conflicts between countries as every country’s characteristic inevitably relies on certain elements of human nature, such as sound national security – spreading influences around the world. However, in the current global system, with great advancements in technology and living standards, promoting mutual benefit and unity of different countries through regional organizations is still the most efficient way to maintain global stability and outweigh the influences of individual aggressive foreign policies. As is demonstrated in “What is strategy?,” it states that states in the world are tending to work cooperatively “to produce an outcome which provides them with benefits, this will involve a closer, more binding system and frequent interactions.” Therefore, the logical answer to why a nation would participate more fully in regional organizations than in global ones lies in the shared belief in and necessity of regional security.
In addition to regional conflicts, Putin’s Russia also undermines the sovereignty and authority of international organizations, for example the European Union and NATO. According to the German Marshal Fund of the United States, Putin’s regime “actively seeks to generate mistrust and discredit the European Union, and is highly interventionist in its neighbors’ internal politics.” As a result, many researchers observe, the Kremlin supports and donates financial aids to some right-wing or far-left political parties in Europe, which campaign for the exit from the European Union or NATO. In fact, Putin’s Russia is not just a passive member in the international organization today – by influencing the referendums and elections inside their members, the effectiveness and unity of these organizations are undermined and the age-old democratic system is eroded. Also, Putin has a formal military alliance with China and takes part in military exercises as a joint. “It indicates that a multi-polar world – led by autocratic power – is emerging,” Dr. Smola states in the Journal of International Security Affairs. “Democracy and existing international organizations are under severe threat since the underlying fabric of the current world order, the Western-led value and liberal-based system, is now being challenged.”
3.3 Cybersecurity and Information Warfare
The Russian Federation was very successful in building its capacity for cyber warfare and also engaged in a series of cyber attacks against various countries. In the meantime, Russia put more emphasis on the protection of its cyber infrastructure. A number of legislative documents are enacted in the cybersecurity and they formed the legal framework for the cybersecurity in Russia. For example, the Information Security doctrine was approved by the President of Russia in the year of 2000. The doctrine provides the concrete guidelines and principles to ensure the security of the state’s cyber environment. Later on, the law on the state policy in the field of cyber security was signed by the President of Russia in October 2010. This is the first legislation that addresses the issue specific to the cyber security in Russia and it provides the organizational framework and the concrete measures to protect the critical infrastructure. Also, Russia is actively participating in the international collaboration and critical infrastructure protection. For example, the Russian Federation and the United States of America have established a bi-national commission. This commission provides the communication and cooperation between the two countries in many areas, including critical infrastructure protection and cybersecurity. Also, as one of the security council members of the United Nations, Russia has supported the efforts to prevent conflicts and maintain peace by addressing the security related challenges in the cyber space. Recently, in order to improve the global governance in the field of cybersecurity, Russia has initiated a draft resolution in the 5th committee of the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly. This is the first session of the United Nations General Assembly that takes up cyber security issues and the draft resolution was adopted by consensus. The resolution welcomes all the international efforts that are already made in promoting an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful ICT environment and also calls upon member states to develop the comprehensive strategies to fulfill the set goals. Russia’s actions on cyber security on the one hand, they reflect the growing concerns of the state’s national security and strategic interests in the cyber space. On the other hand, such actions also indicate the aspiration of Russia to take an active part in the global initiatives to improve the cyber security worldwide.
3.4 Arms Control and Nuclear Proliferation
Arms control and nuclear proliferation have been important components of international security since the end of the Cold War. Successful arms control treaties have been signed between the United States and Russia, which have been crucial in reducing the salience and significance of nuclear weapons globally. However, the global security landscape has been marked by new and emerging challenges to nuclear non-proliferation. For example, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the arms control process was fundamentally changed due to the coexistence of the United States and Russia as the only two recognized nuclear states. As such, the bilateral arms control framework meant that the process of nuclear disarmament was slow as the multilateral engagement needed to generate a comprehensive test ban and a viable non-proliferation treaty (NPT) was effectively blocked. Under Putin, the Russian government has been increasingly dismissive of arms control processes. For example, the United States recently withdrew from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which many scholars have cited as the formal end of the EU/US/Russia arms control process. The future of arms control has once again been thrown into question due to the decision by the Trump administration to withdraw from the 1992 Open Skies Treaty in November 2020. This increasing abandonment of nuclear arms control treaties has raised significant concern among the global security community, as the potential for an unconstrained nuclear arms race becomes an increasing reality. Concurrently, as the US seeks to ratify a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia and China, the US Director of National Intelligence has recently confirmed that a previously classified US intercontinental ballistic test missile was launched earlier this year in a sign of a US pivot toward offensive missile technology. As a result, the cooperation between the United States and Russia that Putin sought by meeting with the Trump administration to explore a new arms control framework now appears increasingly unlikely to materialize, and global security may be irreparably impacted.
4. Conclusion
In conclusion, Vladimir Putin views the dissolution of the Soviet Union as “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.” Furthermore, he sees the United States and the West more generally as impeding Russia’s ability to keep control of its own territories and to have a say in its “near abroad.” As a result, his foreign policy is aimed at expanding Russian influence, opposing American and European interests, and overturning the international order established after the end of the Cold War. However, while Putin has been successful in some areas, such as the annexation of Crimea and the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union, it would be incorrect to refer to these attempts as a new “Soviet-style” expansion. This is mainly because Russia’s ability to project power is limited by a weak economy, corruption, a loss of potential great power allies, and a failure to modernize the military. As a result, it seems more likely that Putin will continue to rely on “soft power” tactics to try and carve out a sphere of influence in his “near abroad.” Indeed, many critics of US foreign policy have lamented the fact that Putin has outmaneuvered Obama and inspired a resurgence of Russian interests in regions all over the world. This, alongside Russia’s role in the Syrian civil war, which has seen military intervention for the first time outside the former Soviet Union, is deeply concerning for global security and the stability that America and Europe have worked to establish for over twenty years. As previously mentioned, the annexation of Crimea and the outbreak of conflicts in Ukraine and Georgia have caused the greatest alarm. In fact, many international security experts are beginning to reconsider the relevance of realist theory in the modern world as a result of the flare-up of Russian foreign policy aggression. Relativists who stress the importance of ideas and identity in shaping international relations now have plenty of evidence to suggest that they were right in assuming class-conflict based Marxist explanations for war and security are outdated, with ethno-cultural factors coming to the forefront in many studies. And with the apparent resurgence of power politics, the United Nations and other supranational security bodies risk losing significance in an international system that prizes sovereignty above all else. It is submitted, therefore, that Russia’s return to aggressive and expansionist foreign policy has caused global insecurity to reach a level not seen since the Cold War. However, in the face of a weak economy and social instability at home, the use of more “traditional” great power tactics doesn’t seem viable for much longer. Either Putin’s foreign policy will succeed in overturning the international order and thus secure Russia’s position as a superpower, or dissatisfaction amongst the Russian people will grow to fever pitch and force changes in the Kremlin. One cannot ignore that it is the unknown future of Putin’s foreign policy which makes analyzing his impact on global security today so critically important.
4.1 Evaluation of Putin’s Foreign Policy
A major goal of Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy has been to create a situation where Russia can fulfill its vast potential as a leader on the world stage. He has seen the collapse of the Soviet Union as a great tragedy and believes that the major Western powers have taken advantage of Russia in the years since. He has been very critical of the way in which Western nations, especially the United States, have imposed their own standards of democracy and human rights on other countries. Putin has made it clear that he sees the United States as a major rival. In a speech given in Munich in 2007, Putin was very critical of the United States for seeking to create a world where there was only one dominant superpower. He argued that such a situation would not be stable and would not be just. He spoke of the need for a multipolar world, where many different countries could have a say in decisions that affected their citizens. This kind of comment from a major world leader was quite unusual and the speech has been described as marking the moment when Russia began to challenge what it sees as the hegemony of the United States. However, it is also clear that from the very beginning of Putin’s presidency, his long-term vision has been to restore Russia to the kind of global status that the Soviet Union once enjoyed. To this end, he has worked to increase and consolidate Russian influence in all areas of the world. He has courted partners in Latin America, for example, and has become very involved in the Middle East, particularly with Syria. He has also worked to build alliances with countries that share his stance on international issues. In recent years, his foreign policy has become increasingly confident and defiant. This has been seen most clearly in the way that the Russian state has been blamed for the attempted murder of former double agent Sergei Skripal in the UK. This shows that human rights abuses and illegal actions are a fundamental part of Putin’s foreign policy. Overall, it is clear that Putin’s approach to foreign policy is opportunistic and manipulative and he is always working to increase Russian power and influence while being very critical of the West. It can be seen that his foreign policy contains a mix of hardheaded pragmatism and a deeply held viewpoint that the major Western powers are wrong to intervene in the sovereign affairs of other nations. But perhaps most importantly, Putin is always working to increase Russian power and influence globally, whether it is through building alliances or direct action.
Section 4.1 – Evaluation of Putin’s Foreign Policy
4.2 Implications for Global Security
Putin’s foreign policy and its implications for global security are of great concern to most countries. There are doubts and concerns regarding his intentions that will lead to long-term stability or, on the other hand, increase insecurity. Based on the worst-case scenario, if Putin’s global objectives inadvertently lead to a nuclear war, it would be the single largest global security implication from Putin’s foreign policy. However, the most significant and direct implication of Putin’s foreign policy for global security is the engagement of the military in Syria. Also, the impact of Putin’s foreign policy on cybersecurity and information warfare is a serious concern across the globe. It is the query of the researchers whether a world power such as Russia seeks to develop further international support for cybersecurity in the form of United Nations-backed cybersecurity regulations enforcing the norm of sovereignty in cyberspace or simply exploit the legal loopholes which don’t cover every place in the digitized modern world. Putin’s approach advances the national interests of Russia rather than the collective security aims of the international community. As a result, it leads to a decline in the importance and efficacy of the current system of international organizations and their collective security measures. Arms control and nuclear proliferation are also significant harms and direct implications of Putin’s foreign policy for global security. The world has witnessed a qualitative and quantitative change in arms control and nuclear proliferation under the Putin era. The increasing amount of armaments and the new battlefield developments in the global security era underline the requirement for substantial new treaties and agreements to be put in place. After treating with this large amount of information and analysis, it is very clear now what is at stake in understanding Putin’s foreign policy and his ambitions on the global scene. That means an effective transition and containment plan is required. To further determine the speed and direction of the foreign policy implementation, Putin’s ambitions towards regional stability and national security would need to be addressed comprehensively. This would involve a set of long-term strategic goals. Cultivating opportunities for Russia to move toward a more positive and constructive role in the international security environment and effective steps to assure the security needs of Russia itself as well as its people.