The case study of the global economy’s impact on Russia is especially interesting to examine. In terms of globalization, Russia has chosen a unique strategy for engaging with the global economy and increasing its influence globally, which can be referred to as sovereign globalization. This development occurs even though the process of globalization implies the reduction of the states’ autonomy. This paper aims to review the security reasoning of Russia for the United States and European states concerning globalization.
One explanation for the security motivation of Moskow is the plan of President Putin to increase the global impact of Russia while maintaining the state as a relatively secure and free from outside influence. Kirshner (2008) states that a country’s security is affected by “by reshaping state capacity, recasting relative power, and revising the calculations associated with international conflict.” (363).
According to Gould-Davies (2016), Russia’s policy concerning the global economy and development can be described as “sovereign globalization.” The primary motive for such a strategy is the desire to have control over the state while enabling economic prosperity, which affects the United States and other countries. This was supported by limiting foreign access to economic activity and minimizing the state’s debt.
Considering the historic left and rights limits of Russia and the Soviet Union and despite these aspirations, Russia’s sovereign globalization has not been successful since its economic impact, which relied on the energy industry has not resulted in a sufficient global influence of this state. Gould-Davies (2016) argues that this is due to choosing a historically weak element of Russia’s impact on the global arena – the economy.
The global economy is evolving towards more freedom within the countries and different markets, which enables more developed states such as the United States or members of the European Union to excel. Russia is a significant market for the states of the former Soviet Union, which provides it with influence and power to exert control over some decisions made within these territories (Gould-Davis, 2016; Turoma, Ratilainen, and Trubina, 2018, 655).
Russia’s recent political decisions have affected its historic alliance with many states. Mainly, the security implications of Russia are connected to the seizure of cooperation between the country and the West, which lasted for twenty-five years (Trenin, 2018). Energy is an essential element of Russia’s global influence, moreover, it has a very significant impact on the European states. Gould-Davis (2016) argues that Russia’s strategy was affected by significant changes within the global energy structure. For instance, the export growth that relied on energy industry has declined in recent years.
Global and regional aspirations are connected to Russia’s desire to increase its global impact. Monetary systems are affected by globalization as well since the effect of global financial markets and organizations, for instance, the International Monetary Fund continuously increases (Kirshner, 2008, 363). Within this system, the impact of the United States has increased, which mitigates Russia’s influence.
Military projection and Russia’s strategic moves may prompt the United States and European countries to increase their military presence in some territories. Trenin (2018) argues that in accordance with Russia’s military strategy, the state aims to mitigate the impact of NATO in Europe. Other steps taken by the government include military actions in the Middle East, and both are aimed at securing Russia as a significant global military force.
Trenin (2018) explores the military implications of Russia’s security by citing the conflict in Ukraine, which also affected the economic state of Russia due to sanctions from other countries. Overall, based on this evidence, one can state that the security implications of Russia for the United States and Europe are connected to Russia’s aspiration to enhance its global impact while remaining a sovereign state.
References
Gould-Davies, Nigel. 2016. “Russia’s Sovereign Globalization.” Chatham House. Web.
Kirshner, Jonathan. 2008. “Globalization, American Power, and International Security.” Political Science Quarterly 123 (3): 363-389.
Trenin, Dmitri. 2018. “Avoiding U.S.-Russia Military Escalation DUirng the Hybrid War.” Carnegie.
Turoma, Sanna, Saara Ratilainen, and Elena Trubina. 2018. “At the Intersection of Globalization and ‘Civilizational Originality’: Cultural Production in Putin’s Russia.” Cultural Studies, 32: 5, 651-675. Web.