Geographies of imperial identity

The Energy of Russia

“…One motive for Russian political and energy actors to oppose mainstream international understanding of climate change, or at least to cast serious doubts on climate change as a human-induced process, could be in both the specific interests of the energy sector in maintaining the status quo in domestic energy policy and in the general interests of Putin's regime in reducing the likelihood of criticism by the Russian people toward the hydrocarbonbased political and economic system. Furthermore, referring to the literature on identity construction based on materialities of energy in Russia (Bassin 2006;Bouzarovski and Bassin 2011;Grib 2009;Rogers 2012; see also Rutland 2015), we find that climate denial discourse in Russia could be strategically used to strengthen a national identity constructed on the notion of Russia as a 'hydrocarbon giant' or 'energy superpower'. As noted by the abovementioned scholars, there is the wish of the leadership to strengthen the role of hydrocarbons as the basis for Russia's Great Power status.…”

Knockin’ on Heaven’s Door: Russia, Central Asia and the Mediated Expansion of International Society

“…109 The paper highlighted three main facts. First, it identified a blind-spot in the common narrative of the expansion of EIS, arguing that a standard of civilisation did not exist only between 'the West and the rest', but also within the 'West' itself.…”

“…A deeper understanding of the wider historical context where Russia operated, particularly in the years immediately after the Crimean War, revealed not that Russia was outside EIS, but certainly that it was situated in a peripheral tie, and was not seen as fully conforming to the European standard of civilisation: 'European Russia retained its superiority relative to its Asiatic colonies, but rather than standing at one with the West, Russia was seen instead to occupy an intermediary position between the two'. 109 The paper highlighted three main facts. First, it identified a blind-spot in the common narrative of the expansion of EIS, arguing that a standard of civilisation did not exist only between 'the West and the rest', but also within the 'West' itself.…”

“…81 The Central Asians, in particular the nomads, were depicted as barbarians and backward, but nonetheless subjected to the same laws of the Empire, in the process of achieving a 'uniform standardised framework of imperial civil order, or grazhdanstvennost'. 82 Vasilii Kliuchevskii, historian and academic, spoke of Russia as 'colonising itself'.…”

“…76 Interestingly, the expansion eastwards collapsed Russia's European frontier of the Urals, created in 1725 as part of Peter the Great's European agenda. 77 Secondly, differently from other colonial empires, the Russian government did not have a deputy Ministry for colonial administration. While the Inter-ministerial Asiatic Committee worked only from 1820 to 1847, the Asiatic Department within the Foreign Ministry ceased to have administrative responsibilities for Central Asia already in 1873.…”