Russia as a great power, 1815–2007
Russia as a great power, 1815–2007
复制标题
俄罗斯作为一个强国，1815 年至 2007 年
DOI：
10.1057/jird.2008.7
复制
发表时间：
2008
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
I. Neumann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
I. Neumann
自彼得大帝时代以来，俄罗斯在国家体系的范围内寻求大国地位一直是一个持续的问题。拿破仑战争后，俄国认为自己已经获得了大国地位，但在克里米亚战争后却发现，它要么从未稳固地获得，要么已经失去了。自苏联解体以来，这一问题再次主导了外交政策辩论。第一部分介绍了界定大国的两种传统方式（韦伯主义与涂尔干主义），并建议，为了充分解释既有大国缺乏承认的原因，我们需要增加第三种方式，即关于治理的方式。这一举动的灵感来自福柯关于治理的出现的著作。俄罗斯缺乏社会力量，无法使其政权类型被认为与欧洲政权类型相提并论，这是阻碍俄罗斯寻求承认的关键问题。借鉴现存的历史研究，第2部分提出了实证证据，这一因素是目前和仍然是这样，在欧洲的代表性的俄罗斯。我的结论是，只要俄罗斯政府的理性偏离了当今霸权主义的新自由主义模式，倾向于直接国家统治而不是间接治理，西方就不会承认俄罗斯是一个完全成熟的大国。
Russia's quest for the status of great power within the confines of the state system has been an ongoing concern since the time of Peter. After the Napoleonic Wars, Russia thought it had acquired great power status, only to discover that, after the Crimean War, it had either never been firmly obtained or it had been lost. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the issue has once again dominated the foreign policy debate. Part 1 presents the two traditional ways of defining great power (Weberian vs Durkhiemian), and suggests that, in order to account fully for the lack of recognition by established great powers, we need to add a third, concerning governance. The inspiration for this move I take from Foucault's work on the emergence of governmentality. Russia's lack of social power to have its regime type accepted as being on a par with European ones is the key problem hampering Russia's quest for recognition. Drawing on extant historical studies, part 2 presents empirical evidence that this factor was present and remains so in European representations of Russia. I conclude that, as long as Russia's rationality of government deviates from present-day hegemonic neo-liberal models by favouring direct state rule rather than indirect governance, the West will not recognize Russia as a fully fledged great power.