RUCARR Distinguished Speaker Series
The Role of Traditional Moral Appeals in Putinite Autocracy
Speaker? Henry E. Hale, Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University (GW),
When? April 14th, 17:30-19:00
Where? Niagara, NI:C0E11 or on Zoom (click here for the Zoom link)
Abstract: Over the last decade and a half, Russia’s Kremlin has increasingly emphasized traditional moral values in its appeals for public support. This marked a major shift in regime strategy from its earlier “catch-all” approach to a socially divisive form of “wedge politics.” Has this worked? What have been the consequences of this strategy for the regime? In this event, the speaker will examine data from Russia to show that the results have been mixed. Traditional moral appeals’ most powerful effects have been to help the regime win support even from Putin opponents for major initiatives ranging from term-limit contravention to war. But at the same time, they have alienated some potential Putin supporters and inadvertently catalyzed a (relatively) moral liberal opposition coalition that is potentially larger than commonly believed.
In an era of resurgent multipolar competition, a fundamental update to our understanding of the reemerging concept of Spheres of Influence (SOIs) is needed. This analysis introduces the “Multi-Modal Sphere of Influence” (MMSOI) as a new analytical framework, positing that contemporary great powers project influence not just via coercion, but through a dynamic interplay of five modalities: military, economic, institutional, normative, and digital. This framework is used to deconstruct the intractable EU-Russia conflict in their “shared neighborhood” by bridging macro-, meso-, and case-level findings. At the macro-level, the core of the conflict is defined by different modalities of competition; this is not a symmetrical power struggle, but a structural clash between incompatible toolkits: the EU’s dominant normative, institutional, and economic modalities colliding with Russia’s reliance on its coercive-military and energy-based toolkit. This overlapping, multi-modal contestation creates, at the meso-level, a paradoxical environment for “in-between” states, granting them new avenues for hedging and agency while simultaneously exposing them to acute risks of coercion and conflict. Finally, the analysis unpacks the EU’s paradoxical role as an “antithetical actor.” While normatively rejecting SOIs, the EU’s institutional and regulatory expansion functions as a powerful, sui generis SOI-building tool, making it an unintentional geopolitical player. This synthesized approach explains the EU-Russia competition not merely as a regional dispute, but as a microcosm of 21st-century multi-modal, multipolar contestation.
