Europe’s security environment is critically dependent on nature of the relationship between Russia and the broader west. What are the obstacles in the way of a stable partnership? Against the conventional wisdom that foregrounds domestic politics, we establish the importance of an abiding clash of definitions of national interest on both sides. The US and Russian strategic perspectives draw on the modern historical experience of both sides, are consistent with well-established international relations theories and are independent of particular personalities such as Putin’s. We demonstrate that though personalities, ideas and contingency played their roles, these basic clashing perspectives existed even during the euphoric days of the Cold War’s end. Success in negotiating an improvement in USA–Russian relations will require a pragmatic compromise between deeply divergent interests. Stable economic and political relations may be possible, but the first step in attaining it is recognizing the scale of the challenge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Bozo, Frederic, Andreas Roedder, and Mary Sarotte, eds., 2016. German unification: An international history (Routledge).
Burgoon, B., T. Oliver, and P. Trubowitz. 2017. Globalization, domestic politics, and transatlantic relations. International Politics. doi:10.1057/s41311-017-0040-1.
Chernyaev, Anatoly. 1997. Obiedineniie Germanii. Politicheskie mekhanizmy i psikhologicheskiie stereotypy. Svobodnaia mysl 8: 25–34.
Dunham, Will. 2014. Kerry condemns Russia’s ‘incredible act of aggression’ in Ukraine” Reuters Mar 2, 2014. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-usa-kerry-idUSBREA210DG20140302.
Friedberg, Aaron L. 2000. In the Shadow of the Garrison State: America’s anti-statism and its cold war grand strategy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Glaser, Charles L. 2010. Rational theory of international politics. The logic of competition and cooperation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Goldgeier, James. 1999. Not whether but when: The U. S. decision to enlarge NATO. Washington, DC: Brookings.
Goldgeier, James, and Michael McFaul. 2003. Power and purpose. U. S. Policy towards Russia after the cold war. Washington, DC: Brookings.
Graham, Thomas, and Matthew Rojansky. 2016. America’s Russia policy has failed. Foreign policy, October 13. https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/13/americas-russia-policy-has-failed-clinton-trump-putin-ukraine-syria-how-to-fix/.
Ikenberry, John. 2000. After victory: Institutions, strategic restraint, and the rebuilding of order after major wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Keohane, Robert O., and Celeste A. Wallander. 1999. Imperfect unions: Security institutions over time and space. Oxford: Clarendon.
Keohane, Robert O. 2001. Governance in a partially globalized world. American Political Science Review 95 (1): 1–13.
Keohane, Robert O. 2012. Hegemony and after: Knowns and unknowns in the debate over decline. Foreign Affairs 91 (4): 117–118.
Leffler, Melvyn P. 2007. For the Soul od Mankind. The United States, the Svoiet Union, and the cold war. New York: Hill and Wang.
Lieven, Dominic. 2000. Empire: The Russian empire and its rivals. London: John Murray.
Mearsheimer, J.J. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. Norton.
Mearsheimer, J.J. 2014 Why the ukraine crisis is the west’s fault: The liberal delusions that provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs.
Poe, Marshall. 2003. The Russian Moment in World History. Princeton University Press.
Rieber, Alfred J. 2015. Stalin and the struggle for supremacy in Eurasia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sestanovich, Steven. 2014. Maximalist: America in the world from Truman to Obama. New York: Vintage.
Shiraev, Eric, and Vladislav Zubok. 2000. Anti-Americanism in Russia; from Stalin to Putin. New York: Palgrave.
Smith, K.E. 2017. A European Union global strategy for a changing world? International Politics. doi:10.1057/s41311-017-0041-0.
Snyder, Jack. 1991. Myths of empire: Domestic politics and international ambition. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Taagepera, Rein. 1997. Expansion and contraction patterns of large polities: Context for Russia. International Studies Quarterly 41 (3): 475–504.
Traynor, I. 2014. Ukraine crisis: Vladimir Putin has lost the plot, says German chancellor. Guardian Monday 3 March 2014 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/ukraine-vladimir-putin-angela-merkel-russian.
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politcs. Addison-Wesley.
Westad, Q.A. 2005. The global cold war: Third world interventions and the making of our times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wohlforth, W.C. 1993. The elusive balance: Power and perceptions in the cold war. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Wohlforth, W.C. 2001. The Russian-Soviet empire: A test of neorealism. Review of International Studies 27: 213–235.
Zubok, Vladislav. 2003. Gorbachev and the end of the cold war: Different perspectives on the historical personality. In Cold war endgame: Oral history. Analysis, debates, ed. William C. Wohlforth. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.
Zubok, Vladislav. 2007. A failed empire. The Soviet Union in the cold war from Stalin to Gorbachev. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Zubok, Vladislav. 2016. Russia, the US, and the backstory behind the breakdown. The Wilson Quarterly, Winter.
About this article
Cite this article
Wohlforth, W.C., Zubok, V.M. An abiding antagonism: realism, idealism and the mirage of western–Russian partnership after the Cold War. Int Polit 54, 405–419 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0046-8
- USA–Russian relations
- Russian Foreign Policy
- US Foreign Policy
- NATO enlargement
- Russian worldview
- New Cold War