EU and the US Sanctions Against Russia over its Invasion of Ukraine through the Lens of Bargaining Models
Notiek ielāde...
Datums
Autori
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Rīgas Stradiņa universitāte
Rīga Stradiņš University
Rīga Stradiņš University
Kopsavilkums
Šajā darbā tiek pētīts, kā Eiropas Savienības (ES) un Amerikas Savienoto Valstu (ASV) noteiktās ekonomiskās sankcijas ir ietekmējušas Krievijas Federācijas politisko uzvedību un stratēģisko nostāju pēc tās pilna mēroga iebrukuma Ukrainā 2022. gada 24. februārī. Tā vietā, lai koncentrētos tikai uz sankciju ekonomiskajām sekām, šajā pētījumā tiek izmantota politiskā perspektīva, lai novērtētu, vai un kā piespiedu ekonomiskais spiediens ir ietekmējis Krievijas kara laika politikas izvēles, publisko politisko retoriku un plašākus stratēģiskos aprēķinus. Pētījuma pamatā ir konflikta sarunu modelis, kas starptautiskās krīzes konceptualizē kā dinamisku stratēģisku mijiedarbību, kurā dalībnieki pārvērtē savu uzvedību, reaģējot uz izmaiņām savu nostāju uztvertajās izmaksās un ieguvumos. Šajā kontekstā sankcijas nedarbojas kā statiski soda instrumenti, bet gan kā signāli un instrumenti, kas paredzēti, lai mainītu pretinieka aprēķinus un politisko stratēģiju.
Hipotēze apgalvo, ka sankcijas ietekmē Krievijas ārpolitikas uzvedību, kad tās sašaurina Krievijas sarunu diapazonu un izraisa tās pilnīgu politisko pārkalibrēšanu politisko izmaksu dēļ, ko tā sedz no kara pret Ukrainu. Pētījumā tiek pētīts, vai sankcijas ir izraisījušas izmaiņas Krievijas politiskajā vēstījumā, stratēģiskajā komunikācijā, diplomātiskajā pozicionēšanā vai iekšējās režīma stratēģijās, tostarp represijās, elites saliedētībā un leģitimitātes pārvaldībā.
Izmantojot kvalitatīvo pētījuma metodi, disertācija balstās uz dokumentu analīzi, kas ietver valsts runas, politiskos paziņojumus, politikas dokumentus, preses relīzes un elites līmeņa diskursu. Šī pieeja ļauj izpētīt, kā būtiski ierobežojumi, pārvēršoties politiskā spiedienā, laika gaitā var potenciāli mainīt valsts preferences vai uzvedību.
Atzinumi liecina, ka, lai gan sankcijas ir radījušas reālu un kumulatīvu politisko spiedienu uz Krievijas vadību, tās vēl nav pārsniegušas slieksni, kas nepieciešams, lai izraisītu fundamentālas izmaiņas Krievijas ārpolitikā un kara politikā. Tomēr pierādījumi par retorisku adaptāciju, pastiprinātu iekšzemes autoritārismu un diplomātisko nostāju maiņu liecina, ka sankcijas pakāpeniski ietekmē Kremļa stratēģisko vidi un palielina turpmākās konfrontācijas politiskās izmaksas. Šie rezultāti apstiprina darījumu teorijas lietderību, lai izprastu ne tikai to, kad sankcijas var būt veiksmīgas vai neveiksmīgas, bet arī to, kā tās laika gaitā varētu ietekmēt politisko uzvedību.
Darbā noslēgumā ir norādīti iespējamie pētījuma ierobežojumi un turpmākie pētījumi par to, kā sankcijas var efektīvāk izmantot, lai ietekmētu valstu lēmumu pieņemšanu augstas likmes ģeopolitiskās krīzēs, un sniegtas pārdomas par piespiedu darījumu politisko raksturu starptautiskajās sistēmās.
This thesis investigates how economic sanctions imposed by the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have influenced the political behavior and strategic posture of the Russian Federation following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. Rather than focusing solely on the economic consequences of sanctions, this research employs a political lens to assess whether and how coercive economic pressure has shaped Russia’s wartime policy choices, public political rhetoric, and broader strategic calculations. The study is guided by the bargaining model of conflict, which conceptualizes international crises as dynamic strategic interactions in which actors reassess their behavior in response to shifts in the perceived costs and benefits of their positions. Within this framework, sanctions function not as static tools of punishment, but as signals and instruments designed to alter the adversary's calculus and political strategy. The hypothesis proclaims that: Sanctions affect Russia’s foreign policy behavior when they narrow Russia’s bargaining range and induce its full political recalibration because of the political costs it bears from the war against Ukraine. The research explores whether sanctions have led to changes in Russia’s political messaging, strategic communication, diplomatic positioning, or internal regime strategies—including repression, elite cohesion, and legitimacy management. Using a qualitative research method, the thesis relies on document analysis of state speeches, political statements, policy documents, press releases, and elite-level discourse. This approach enables an exploration of how material constraints —when translated into political pressure—may potentially reshape a state’s preferences or behavior over time. The findings indicate that while sanctions have imposed real and cumulative political pressure on the Russian leadership, they have not yet crossed the threshold required to induce a fundamental change in Russia’s foreign and war policy. However, evidence of rhetorical adaptation, intensified domestic authoritarianism, and shifting diplomatic alignments suggests that sanctions are incrementally influencing the Kremlin’s strategic environment and raising the political cost of continued confrontation. These results support the utility of bargaining theory in understanding not only when sanctions may succeed or fail, but also how they could affect political behavior over time. The thesis concludes with possible research limitations and future research for how sanctions can be more effectively leveraged to influence state decision-making in high-stakes geopolitical crises and offers reflections on the political nature of coercive bargaining in international systems
This thesis investigates how economic sanctions imposed by the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have influenced the political behavior and strategic posture of the Russian Federation following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. Rather than focusing solely on the economic consequences of sanctions, this research employs a political lens to assess whether and how coercive economic pressure has shaped Russia’s wartime policy choices, public political rhetoric, and broader strategic calculations. The study is guided by the bargaining model of conflict, which conceptualizes international crises as dynamic strategic interactions in which actors reassess their behavior in response to shifts in the perceived costs and benefits of their positions. Within this framework, sanctions function not as static tools of punishment, but as signals and instruments designed to alter the adversary's calculus and political strategy. The hypothesis proclaims that: Sanctions affect Russia’s foreign policy behavior when they narrow Russia’s bargaining range and induce its full political recalibration because of the political costs it bears from the war against Ukraine. The research explores whether sanctions have led to changes in Russia’s political messaging, strategic communication, diplomatic positioning, or internal regime strategies—including repression, elite cohesion, and legitimacy management. Using a qualitative research method, the thesis relies on document analysis of state speeches, political statements, policy documents, press releases, and elite-level discourse. This approach enables an exploration of how material constraints —when translated into political pressure—may potentially reshape a state’s preferences or behavior over time. The findings indicate that while sanctions have imposed real and cumulative political pressure on the Russian leadership, they have not yet crossed the threshold required to induce a fundamental change in Russia’s foreign and war policy. However, evidence of rhetorical adaptation, intensified domestic authoritarianism, and shifting diplomatic alignments suggests that sanctions are incrementally influencing the Kremlin’s strategic environment and raising the political cost of continued confrontation. These results support the utility of bargaining theory in understanding not only when sanctions may succeed or fail, but also how they could affect political behavior over time. The thesis concludes with possible research limitations and future research for how sanctions can be more effectively leveraged to influence state decision-making in high-stakes geopolitical crises and offers reflections on the political nature of coercive bargaining in international systems
Description
Starptautiskā pārvaldība un diplomātija
International Governance and Diplomacy
Socioloģija, politoloģija un antropoloģija
Sociology, Politics and Anthropology
International Governance and Diplomacy
Socioloģija, politoloģija un antropoloģija
Sociology, Politics and Anthropology