51·çÁ÷

Associate Professor of Political Science took to Twitter to share her perception of relations between the United States, Russia, and the United Kingdom in response to prominent realist Stephen Walt’s latest article in Foreign Policy magazine. She agrees this isn’t Cold War 2.0, but suggests Russia, a declining power, is dangerous.

See the full thread below:

is right on: This isn't Cold War 2.0, & treating it as such blinds us to the dangers of a rising China (& prevents creative responses to the kinds of threats Russia poses).

But I think he underplays the dangers of a declining Russia. /1

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

Jack S. Levy's argument about declining powers' motivations for preventive war really resonates with me. Great powers who see their military power rapidly declining get skittish… /2

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

And this skittishness can be amplified by domestic characteristics, such as the degree of influence of the military on domestic leadership, the degree to which the society sees war as an acceptable means of resolving political disputes, and the risk orientation of its leaders. /3

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

In Russia's case, not only are many high ranking officials members (or former members) of the military or security services, but the military has been taking on a more direct and public role in foreign policy. /4

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

Decades of militarism encouraged by the state has resulted in an elite that places a high premium on military power, and embraces a more expansionist foreign policy. /5

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

Furthermore, Putin's government has encouraged a brand of patriotism that melds nationalistic and militaristic elements, and which explicitly targets youth. /6

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

But of course, it aims more broadly — the nationalistic (and often militaristic) messages in Russian media have been well covered. /7

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

So Russia possesses 2 out of 3 of the domestic characteristics Levy pointed to as increasing the likelihood of a declining state's embrace of preventative war. But what about Putin? Is he risk-philic, or risk-averse? /8

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

The jury is still out on that one — Putin is certainly not reckless.

But he is also not paralyzingly risk-averse by any means: he seems to thrive on taking calculated risks. /9

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)

So while I do agree with Walt that in the long run, the volume of the threat posed by Russia is declining, I think in the short run, there are plenty of reasons for Putin to lash out. Destabilization of everyone else seems like a pretty rational strategy for a declining power.

— Valerie Morkevicius (@vmorkevicius)