‍Central Asia and The Caucasus Journal

Abstract Russia’s extensive diplomatic efforts to govern and make the virtual space regulations, referred to as cyber diplomacy, have passed three stages of development so far. At first, the purpose of Russian cyber diplomacy was restricted to the prevention of militarization in the cyberspace, but the extending scope of the cyber and information wars made Russia enter the stage of convincing the governments to accept a series of rules governing the activities of states in the cyberspace. Russia further launched efforts to sign bilateral agreements with a number of Western states in order to ban the military use of information and communications technology against each other. This study examines the initiatives, priorities, motives, and consequences of Russia’s cyber diplomacy at the international, regional and bilateral levels and looks for an answer to the key question of “what is the intellectual origin of Russian cyber diplomacy and what purpose does it pursue?” According to the findings of the study, Russia’s cyber diplomacy is rooted in its comprehension of cyberspace as a new instrument for Western hegemony. Moscow’s ultimate purpose of making diplomatic efforts in the cyberspace is to end the regulatory authority of the entities advocating Washington, Brussels and NATO over the cyberspace and establish a global governance of the virtual space. The article is based on qualitative method (descriptive-analytical research) and has used inductive methodology. The descriptive statistics and the findings have been analyzed in the light of the concept of virtual space governance and the uncertain and fluid nature of this concept.

Abstract To understand why and how Moscow's internet capabilities are being used to defend against Western attacks, the present paper attempts to answer the following questions: Why Russia resorts to cyber weapons against Western targets? What are the characteristics of Russia's cyber war against the West and how is it pursued?
     This study is qualitative (descriptive-analytical) and is of Ex-Post Facto (causal) research category. An Inferential methodology has been utilized to analyze data in the context of the concepts of cyber warfare and political cyber-attacks. The Findings show that Moscow uses cyber weapons against Western targets to counter the West's hostile actions, especially in post-communist territories, considering high denial possibility and weakness of its kinetic components.  The most important feature of Russia's cyber war against the West is the development of the concept of cyber deterrence in this country to create a balance under the condition of normal military and political competition. On this basis, Russia's hybrid war against the West is mainly waged through distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, hacking, and utilizing malware.

Abstract Although there are currently no indications of conflict in the Arctic, Moscow's attempts to strengthen its assets and military positions in the region have been interpreted largely as militarism by Western media and political think tanks. However, all Russian strategic documents emphasize on Russia's economic profits being gained through the resources and routes of the Arctic and do not refer to any particular military threat in the region. This literature is to assess the nature of Moscow’s military presence and expansion in the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation, in order to discover its relation with two concepts of military modernization and militarism. Therefore, the author tries to find out the nature of the presence and expansion of Russian military capabilities in the Arctic over the past decade has mainly been based on military modernization or militarism, and its reasons. The basic findings prove that the nature of the presence and expansion of Russian military capabilities in the Arctic over the past decade have been due to Moscow's strategic goals (including defending its sovereignty in the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation against NATO, supporting economic interests and shipbuilding and benefiting them, and formalizing the role of Russia as a major power); based on military modernization and not militarism. Using descriptive-analytical method and relying on a defensive-invasive dualism under the theoretical approach of neo-realization, the author tries to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract Although the Ukrainian crisis was accompanied by tensions between Russia and the West and the imposition of mutual sanctions, demonstration of military power and diplomatic conflicts, it did not have a great impact on the Russian Federation's policies in the Arctic and its militarism in that region. At the same time, Moscow has managed to continue its cooperation in the Arctic despite current tensions with the West, and to extend its relations with other regional actors in a cooperative manner. The author attempts to find an answer for the following questions: a) Why Russia, in spite of its rivalry with the United States and the West, has not behaved contentiously in the arctic; b) why Ukraine's experience does not seem to happen in the Arctic? To answer the mentioned questions, the hypothesis has been tested through examining the two theoretical approaches of "complex interdependence" and "neo-realism" confirming that "the superiority of Russia's position in the Arctic and the lack of a serious threat to its interests in this area by the other powers has led Russia to play differently in the Arctic, in such a way that Moscow requires cooperation and, at least, avoids from tension in the region in order to gain its absolute interests. Therefore, the Ukrainian crisis has not had much influence on Moscow's understanding of the Arctic as an area of international cooperation and peace. The findings of this study, which are comparative and descriptive-analytical, confirm the validity of the research hypothesis.

Abstract Moscow and Beijing’s cooperation in developing energy resources as well as maritime and rail transportation infrastructures in the Russian division of Arctic, is a goal for which the two countries can cooperate for their shared interests. However, the mentioned cooperation has not led to a satisfactory result except in an LNG project in Yamal Peninsula. Therefore the present article tries to answer the following question: Why Russian and China have not been able so far to achieve an advanced level of cooperation and partnership irrespective of their shared interests and goals in the Arctic?” An analysis of Russia and China’s situation and their regional and global goals indicates that governments and especially the great powers are always concerned about their share in cooperation. Using analytical – descriptive method and defensive realism theoretical framework, the paper tries to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.