Vladimir Putin and Foreign Policy: The Annexation of Crimea

On March 18 2014, Russia, under the direction of President Vladimir Putin, annexed the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea. (Myers, Barry, 2014)  When the facts surrounding the annexation are examined, not only do Putin’s motivations remain relatively unclear, but also his philosophy on foreign policy is left open for interpretation.  Based on his actions in Crimea, does Vladimir Putin make decisions from the perspective of realpolitik, liberal internationalism, or constructivist foreign policy?

To adequately evaluate Putin’s foreign policy in terms of his engagements in Crimea, what Russia had to gain and lose from those engagements must first be considered.  In terms of gains, an annexation of Crimea could potentially provide Russia with a valuable tourist destination and resort location.  The Black Sea beaches and other amenities of Crimea attracted more than 5.9 million tourists in 2013. (Rudenko 2014)  Another Russian territory in Eastern Europe could also increase Russia’s influence in Europe as a whole.  Likewise, Russia annexing Crimea shows the European Union and its allies that Putin has no respect for international rules of engagement and that Russia’s actions cannot be easily predicted. 

However, for every modest gain there seemed to be a fairly measurable loss.  Since Crimea’s annexation, the peninsula has attracted far fewer tourists than in previous years due to a Ukrainian boycott of the region and few feasible transportation methods available for Russians willing to make the trip. (Rudenko 2014)  Crimea also receives approximately 80% of its water and 90% of its electricity from Ukraine, meaning Russia will need to compensate Ukraine for its utilities while spending even more money connecting Crimea to mainland Russia. (Winning, De Carbonnel, 2014)  Despite the fact Russia’s influence in the region over the very long term may increase with the annexation of Crimea, in the short term Russia has alienated itself from the powerful international discussions it fought so hard in which to be included.  This can be evidenced by Russia’s banishment from the G8, now G7, coalition. (Pace 2014)

So where do the gains and losses absorbed by Russia from annexing Crimea leave President Vladimir Putin’s philosophy on foreign policy in terms of the three main international relations theories? 

If Putin were a liberal internationalist, he would have failed miserably to carry out the foreign policy’s tenets.  In no way has Putin spread liberal ideas for peace and prosperity by negotiating through institutions.  Putin did the very opposite by completely forgoing any negotiation and simply relocating forces to support the Russian rebels in Crimea.  Putin only created conflict and destabilized the region while banishing his state from global institutions.

If Putin practiced Realpolitik, he would be largely interested in Russia’s national interest and security.  In other words, is Russia more powerful, from a realist perspective, as a state before or after annexing Crimea?  In the short term, Russia has damaged its economic power by incurring massive expenses with few immediate returns on investment.  However, in the long term, Crimea provides Putin and Russia with a valuable territory on the Black Sea, a potential buffer zone between Ukraine and mainland Russia, and a likely profitable tourist attraction for Russian citizens once transportation to the peninsula is made more convenient.  Militarily, Putin didn’t have to commit large assets to Crimea because of the considerable support for Russia already present in the region.  Russia has gained access to a peninsula that can be used for naval purposes and a long-term economic asset without any significant military loss.

Could Putin be a foreign policy constructivist?  He certainly does not value international organizations as influential actors on the world stage.  Conversely, Putin has proven he believes societal circumstances have changed internationally and thusly his responses to laws set into place under past circumstances should change accordingly.

            Putin is most definitely not a liberal internationalist.  However, he shares some characteristics with both constructivist foreign policy and realpolitik.  Based on his actions in Crimea, Putin likely makes his foreign policy decisions as a realist constructivist.  His stated motivations for annexing Crimea consisted of bringing a people back to Russia that had always identified themselves as Russian.  He viewed the west, mainly NATO and EU states, as the other and Russia as the self. (Myers, Barry, 2014)  Considering the annexation of Crimea, Vladimir Putin is a constructivist realist in terms of foreign policy.

Myers, S., & Barry, E. (2014, March 18). Putin Reclaims Crimea for Russia and Bitterly Denounces the West. Retrieved September 28, 2014.

Pace, J. (2014, March 24). G8 Summit In Sochi Canceled, G7 Leaders To Meet In Brussels Instead. Retrieved September 28, 2014.

Rudenko, O. (2014, August 25). Tourism suffers in Crimea as Ukraine shuns breakaway region. Retrieved September 28, 2014.

Winning, A., & De Carbonnel, A. (2014, June 5). Russia faces struggle to wean Crimea economy off Ukraine supplies. Retrieved September 28, 2014.