SOFT POWER OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: ARCTIC VECTOR

Морозова М.П.

student of the Higher School of Social Sciences, Humanities and International Communication, e-mail: [email protected]

Scientific supervisor: Freiberg M.V., Teacher of the English Language Department

Currently, the position of any state, any modern economy depends largely on the availability of energy resources. The Arctic region, thanks to its huge mineral reserves and convenient transport infrastructure, attracts the attention of many transnational corporations and countries of the world. Now in the Arctic, there is a clash of national and group interests; disputes about the belonging of the Arctic zones are escalating; military activity is increasing. However, it is obvious that the hot conflict is not beneficial to anyone, so the use of hard power and traditional methods of fighting seems unrealistic. In this regard, the countries with interests in the Arctic are currently forming a policy of soft power as one of the key directions of their foreign policy.

First, it is necessary to consider the key concept of soft power. Joseph Hiring, the Harvard University professor was the first to form it in 1990. In some of his works (Calling to leadership: the changing nature of American power (1990), and Soft power. Terms of success in world politics (2004)) he refers to soft power as the ability of one state to change the behavior of another through means of attraction and persuasion [1]. The components of Naya's soft power are cultural, political values and state involvement in world politics. His doctrine of this concept is still a key, though initially it was designed to establish the authority of the American system of values and create a successful integration of these values into the global system. As for Russia, after explaining the key essence of soft power during the 1990s, this term was used only in scientific works of American and international relations specialists. It gained practical value only in the 2000s, when the concept of foreign policy began to shift towards the creation of a positive image of the state in the world community.

To understand how widely one or another country uses the tools of soft power in foreign policy, you can consider the international rating of soft power (Global Ranking of Soft Power). In 2017, the United States moved to the 3^rd place after topping the list for a long time. The 17^th place is taken by Norway (it is the third among the Scandinavian countries: Sweden – 9^th place, Denmark – 11^th place). China and the Russian Federation, which have risen by several positions in comparison with the last year, follow each other and take places 25 and 26, respectively. [2, p. 43]

Having analyzed the above-mentioned sources, we can conclude about the main subjective and objective indicators specialists based upon in their research. Typically, it involves six major factors or sub-indices:

Enterprise (business) is not an indicator of economic power or output. Rather, it is intended to take into account the relative attractiveness of a country's economic model in terms of its competitiveness, its potential for innovation and its ability to promote entrepreneurship and trade. [2, p. 31]

Culture: if a country’s culture promotes universal values by which other countries can easily identify them, it makes them naturally attractive to others. The sub-index of culture also includes measures such as the annual number of international tourists visiting the country, the global success of the country’s music and film industry, and even the country’s international sports skills. [2, p. 30]

Digital (digital technology), includes the media, our daily social interaction, the rest of the media. The inclusion of a digital sub-index is intended to cover the level at which countries have exchanged technology, the extent to which they are connected to the digital world and their use of digital diplomacy through social media platforms. [2, p. 31]

Government (government), which is designed to assess the political values of the state, public institutions and the main results of public policy. Key evaluation measures: individual freedom, human development, violence in society and government effectiveness. The government sub-index assesses the extent to which a country has an attractive governance model and whether it can yield positive results for its citizens. Potential partners for international cooperation are likely to be drawn to States with well-functioning governance systems. [2, p. 30]

Engagement (global engagement) aims to measure the country's diplomatic resources, global reach and contribution to the international community. In fact, it reflects the ability of states to interact with the international system, to stimulate cooperation and, ultimately, to generate global results. Indicators such as the number of embassies/high-level commissions abroad, membership in multilateral organizations and development assistance abroad will be important. [2, p. 30]

Education (education), a particularly important indicator in this index, will be the country's ability to attract foreign students or facilitate student exchange. Previous research exchanges in the field of education provide empirical evidence on the reputational benefits that arise in the host country when foreign students return home. It has also been shown that the exchange of foreign students has positive indirect pulsating effects when returning students speak on behalf of the host country. The contribution of countries to global science and education is also important. The indicators that make up the factor include the number of foreign students in the country, the relative quality of their universities and the academic output of higher education institutions. [2, p. 31]

In the Arctic region, the issue of the use of soft power is now very acute, new challenges to global security are approaching lack of resources, ensuring benefits, etc. The strongest economies of the Arctic region are modernized in order to develop the Arctic resources profitably and effectively and establish control over communications and territory throughout the Arctic.

According to the research group of industry analysts, there are about 83 billion barrels of oil under the Arctic ice, which is 13% of the world's undiscovered reserves, natural gas stores amount to 1,550 trillion cubic meters, and the total value of diamonds and rare earth metals like gold, tungsten, mercury, molybdenum, silver, nickel and cobalt, exceeds 30 trillion dollars. [3]

It is enough to look at the Russia's geopolitical strategy in the Arctic to understand that the Russian Federation is most interested in stability and strengthening its influence in the region. Russia’s borders spread over 3 million square kilometers (18% of the total area), including 2.2 million square kilometers of land, where more than 2.5 million people live. This is more than 54% of the total population of the entire Arctic (4.6 million) [4].

There is paragraph 99 in the National Security Strategy of Russia stating that the development of equal and mutually beneficial international cooperation in the Arctic is of particular importance [7], but Russia’s efforts in the socio-economic development of the Northern territories constituting one fifth of the country’s area, are perceived quite contradictory, for which cause our country now does not have obvious allies among the Arctic countries, and many of its actions are regarded as expansion and seizure. Indeed, the Russian Federation has a great military potential in the Arctic, but it exists only to protect its own borders and national interests. Therefore, the Russian Federation needs to continue strengthening of its positions in the Arctic, which is a strategic task of state importance, to protect national interests, to keep its dominant role in the North (Northern Sea Route) and to build up general transport infrastructure.

The latest foreign policy concept of the Russian Federation, approved by the President on November 30, 2016, defines soft power as a tool for solving foreign policy problems. Notably, it is based on the capabilities of civil society, information and communication, humanitarian and other methods and technologies that complement traditional diplomatic methods.

It is necessary to intensify not only financial, economic, political and military methods, but also to pay attention to the new tools of diplomacy. It is particularly important to develop the information component of the strategy (for example, digital diplomacy). An important role will be assigned to the Barents Euro-Arctic region with the help of which it is necessary to intensify scientific, technical and economic cooperation. We need to strengthen control over fishing activities in the Arctic region.

As for the scientific and cultural factor, the Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M. V. Lomonosov, the Federal Research Center for Integrated Studies of the Arctic of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Kola scientific Center RAS etc. shall remain the key actors [8, p. 131]. It is necessary to continue sending Russian scientific expeditions to the Arctic.

Special attention should be paid to the various Arctic-related events such as forums (e.g. Arctic – Territory of Dialogue). It is important to pursue sound environmental policies through an active exchange of ideas, innovations and practices. We should not forget the indigenous and small-numbered Arctic peoples and continue to provide them with comfortable living conditions that are consistent with their traditions and economic way of life. Attracting large-scale domestic and foreign investments to the region will play an important role in creating a positive image of the Russian Federation.

As we can see, Russia is just beginning to make full use of the soft power tools in its foreign policy in the Arctic. The emphasis is mainly on cooperation (economic, social and environmental) within such organizations as the Arctic Council and the Barents Council. In addition, much attention is paid to the business sector, there are many new projects attractive to foreign investments, mainly in the field of mining and mineral processing. International forums are successfully held on the initiative of the Russian Federation. For example, the Arctic is a territory of dialogue. A scientific expedition is launched annually onboard the NARFU Arctic Floating University. Unfortunately, very often the actions of our state within the framework of soft power are perceived as propaganda, which is why our government is still designing its position to represent our state only from the positive side.

To do this, it is necessary to define the main goals, main objectives, strategic priorities and mechanisms for the implementation of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic, as well as to adopt a system of measures for strategic planning of socio-economic development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation and ensuring national security.

REFERENCES

1. Nye J. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. N.Y., 2004.

2. The Soft Power, A Global Ranking of Soft Power. Portland, 2017.

3. The Russian Arctic in the modern geopolitical conditions. 28-10-2016 [Electronic resource] - URL: http://csef.ru/ru/politica-i-geopolitica/501/rossijskaya-arktika-v-sovremennyh-geopoliticheskih-usloviyah-7168(Date of access: 12.11.2017).

4. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 296 of 02.05.2014 On Land Territories of the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation.

5. Bulletin of the MSTU, vol. 17, Issue 3, 2014. Article by Y.F. Lukin Arctic Cooling Against the Return to the Instruments of the Cold War.

6. Joseph Nye Jr. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone/Oxford University Press, 2002.

7. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 683 of 31 December 2015 On the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation.

8. A. I. Smirnov. The Arctic: Network Diplomacy 2.0 in the Discourse of Global Security, Arkhangelsk, NARFU, 2016.