Forum: NATO and Russia

Pifer, Steven; Kulesa, Łukasz; Bahr, Egon; Neuneck, Götz; Troitskiy, Mikhail; Kroenig, Matthew

doi:10.1080/00396338.2015.1026090

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At present, Latvia benefits from increased physical presence of NATO forces within Latvia (Bruge 2015, Vitkus 2015, Partschefeld 2015, Braw 2015, Kara-Murza 2015, Fruhling and Lasconjarias 2016, Clem 2016. However, some contend that the NATO presence is largely to blame for Latvian tensions with Russia (Pifer et al 2015, Lukin 2015, Charap and Shapiro 2016, Arbatova and Dynkin 2016, and some doubt whether NATO would actually respond if Russia were to launch some form of military activity in the Baltic States (Braw 2015, Kroenig 2015, Clem 2016.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perhaps most concerning for Latvia and NATO, Russia is more than willing to militarily threaten Latvia (BBC Russian Service 2016, Charap and Shapiro 2016). Though Russia may never follow through with those threats, NATO troop buildup in the region is not going to improve relations between Latvia and Russia (Braw 2015, Kroenig 2015, Pifer et al 2015, Charap and Shapiro 2016, Fruhling and Lasconjarias 2016, Paszewski 2016.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the primary discussions in the current literature focuses on whether EU and NATO membership would even benefit Georgia and Moldova. Some argue that membership would certainly benefit Georgia and Moldova, primarily because membership helps distance these states from Russia (Pifer et al 2015, Fruhling and Lasconjarias 2016, Paszewski 2016, Fiott 2016, although others argue that these states are much better off without the EU or NATO (Crocker 2015, Lukin 2015, Pifer et al 2015, Makarychev 2015, Kazharski and Makarychev 2015, Paenke 2015, Vilson 2015, Arbatova and Dynkin 2016. The argument against EU and NATO membership stems, in part, from the perception that the EU and NATO do not really want to expand but are dangling the carrot of membership in front of Georgia and Moldova simply to stabilize and democratize the region: not because they actually intend to expand (Boedeltje and van Houtum 2011, Dimitrovova 2012, Joenniemi 2012, Cottey 2012, Bechev 2015, Buscaneanu 2015, Dragan 2015.…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Does Latvia Matter in Regional Geopolitics?

Lamoreaux

Dyerly

2018

Journal on Baltic Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As early as 1994, scholars, analysts and policymakers began to wonder the extent to which the Baltic States mattered in the relationship between Russia and the West. The general consensus for the following 20 years was that the Baltic States matter considerably, especially following their inclusion in both the EU and NATO in 2004. However, in the past few years two trends have emerged which begin to call this accepted knowledge into question. First, the relationship between Russia and the West has turned more hostile following nearly 20 years of detente. The West insists (especially NATO) insists that it is within its right to protect states that were formerly part of the Soviet Union/Russia’s “near abroad”. Russia, on the other hand, insists that NATO incursion into the “shared neighborhood” is a violation of trust and overstepping normal geopolitical bounds.Second, the Baltic States who once presented something of a united front for the West against Russia, no longer appear to have a common approach to foreign policy. While Estonia leans toward Scandinavia, and Lithuania leans toward Poland and Ukraine, Latvia is a bit of an odd man out with nowhere to turn. Furthermore, even other states in the Shared Neighborhood no longer seem to see Latvia as a valuable ally within the West. Considering this state of affairs, this paper considers whether Latvia matters anymore in regional geopolitics, or whether they are losing relevance.

show abstract

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does Latvia Matter in Regional Geopolitics?

Lamoreaux

Dyerly

2018

Journal on Baltic Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These views are shared by a larger body of literature within International Relations that regards the demise of the INF Treaty as yet another revisionist move by Russia [Pifer et al 2015;Kühn 2019;Larsen 2019]. More broadly, the literature points to Russia's revisionist foreign policy towards the West [Borgen 2009;Yost 2015;Sushentsov, Wohlforth 2020].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis as practice: routinizing Russia – U.S. security rivalries

Neklyudov,

Baykov,

Shchekin

2023

Полис

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to the debate on how an international crisis may contribute to ontological security. We argue that ontological security can paradoxically be achieved through escalating practices capable of provoking international crises. By merging ‘practices’, a fairly distinct theoretical perspective of International Relations, with ontological security, we seek to expand Jennifer Mitzen’s premise that “even dangerous routines provide ontological security” and consider practices as a source of attaining ontological security. To partake in the practical turn in ontological security studies, we borrow the concepts of Practice Turn in IR, habitus (disposition), and field (environment). After substantiating the connection between the two theories, we take the demise of the INF Treaty as an example of a crisis. We argue that the INF Treaty, as a field, has become a source of ontological threat to both the U.S. and Russia. Following the end of the Cold War, the U.S. and Russia have constantly changed their habitus by developing key missile technologies and deteriorating bilateral relations. Accordingly, the changed habitus no longer conformed to the realities of the field, making its delegitimization by both sides self-evident.

show abstract

From the War Against Georgia to the Annexation of the Crimea and the Following Increase of Military Tension

Eichler

2021

Global Power Shift

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forum: NATO and Russia

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Does Latvia Matter in Regional Geopolitics?

Does Latvia Matter in Regional Geopolitics?

Crisis as practice: routinizing Russia – U.S. security rivalries

From the War Against Georgia to the Annexation of the Crimea and the Following Increase of Military Tension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About