The Logic Behind Modern Autocracy: Realism vs. Domestic Political Survival. The Case Study of Russia's Aggression Against Ukraine.
Author
Garasin, Oleg
Term
4. semester
Education
Publication year
2025
Submitted on
2025-05-28
Pages
66
Abstract
This thesis examines whether Russia’s aggression against Ukraine is better explained by the regime’s need for domestic political survival than by external security concerns or a power-maximizing strategy. It compares two approaches: Realist theories (offensive and defensive realism), which interpret state behavior in light of NATO expansion and regional power dynamics, and the frameworks of informational autocracy and spin dictatorship (Guriev and Treisman), which describe how authoritarian regimes maintain power by controlling information, shaping narratives, and protecting their legitimacy. The analysis finds that Realist accounts clarify the strategic context but do not fully explain the timing and scale of Russia’s actions in 2014 and 2022. Viewed through a domestic survival lens—where information management and the struggle for legitimacy are central—the motivations fit better. The thesis argues that the annexation of Crimea in 2014 was closely tied to mobilizing nationalist sentiment and boosting domestic support, whereas the full-scale invasion in 2022 was driven more by a need to regain legitimacy. Overall, the study suggests that internal regime needs were decisive for both the timing and intensity of these actions.
Dette speciale undersøger, i hvilket omfang Ruslands aggression mod Ukraine bedst kan forklares af regimets behov for indenrigspolitisk overlevelse frem for ydre sikkerhedshensyn eller en strategi for at maksimere magt. Det sammenligner to tilgange: realistiske teorier (offensiv og defensiv realisme), som ser staters adfærd i lyset af NATO-udvidelse og regionale magtdynamikker, og rammerne informationsautokrati og spin-diktatur (Guriev og Treisman), som beskriver, hvordan autoritære regimer bevarer magten ved at styre information, forme fortællinger og værne om legitimitet. Analysen finder, at realistiske forklaringer belyser den strategiske kontekst, men ikke fuldt ud kan redegøre for timingen og intensiteten af Ruslands handlinger i 2014 og 2022. Set gennem et indenrigspolitisk overlevelsesperspektiv, hvor informationskontrol og kampen for legitimitet er centrale, fremstår motiverne mere overbevisende. Specialet argumenterer for, at annekteringen af Krim i 2014 var tæt forbundet med et ønske om at mobilisere nationalistiske følelser og øge den hjemlige opbakning, mens fuldskala-invasionen i 2022 i højere grad var drevet af et behov for at genvinde legitimitet. Samlet peger studiet på, at regimets interne behov var afgørende for både tidspunkt og omfang af handlingerne.
[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords