Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorPääbo, Heiko
dc.contributor.authorKalm, Helga
dc.contributor.otherTartu Ülikool. Sotsiaal- ja haridusteaduskondet
dc.contributor.otherTartu Ülikool. Riigiteaduste instituutet
dc.date.accessioned2012-11-06T13:35:42Z
dc.date.available2012-11-06T13:35:42Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10062/27914
dc.description.abstractAfter Estonia joined the European Union and NATO in 2004, there has been a lot of talk about what Estonian identity in foreign politics is and what it should be. There has also been some debate about whether Estonia is too aggressive in its relations with Russia. Building on Alexander Wendt’s idea of social constructivism, we analyzed Estonian foreign policy towards Russia and Georgia. Estonia has close relations with both of the countries. Also both of the countries have had some internal problems in regards to democracy. We looked at the representations of Russia and Georgia in the speeches of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The analysis starts with the year 1994 as the transition period started to stabilize and clear long-term policies were beginning to be formed. After analyzing the representations of Russia and Georgia we also looked at the representation of the 2008 conflict between Russia and Georgia in the discourse of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In general, Russia is seen as aggressive actor in International Relations that does not respect international law and is unwilling to cooperate in economic and boarder issues. After concluding that Georgia is represented mainly as a recipient of development aid and as a victim in the conflict, we looked at Estonian own identity. Estonian self-representation as a democratic European country conflicts with Russian and Georgian type identity, as both of them are less democratic. In the case of relations with Georgia it does not stop the formation of collective identity, which is mainly based on homogeneity and common fate. However, in relations with Russia it adds to the already existing image of Russia being an aggressive state that is unpredictable. In short, it further disables the formation of a collective identity, which is a base for friendly relations between countries. In conclusion, we can see that different identities influence relations differently depending on the context and that in the course of interaction these identities are being constantly reproduced.en
dc.description.urihttp://tartu.ester.ee/record=b2624691~S1*estet
dc.language.isoetet
dc.publisherTartu Ülikool
dc.subject.otherpoliitiline identiteetet
dc.subject.othervälispoliitikaet
dc.subject.otherkonstruktivism (filos.)et
dc.subject.otherVenemaaet
dc.subject.otherGruusiaet
dc.subject.otherbakalaureusetöödet
dc.titleRiiklik identiteet kui välispoliitika kujundaja: Eesti välispoliitiliste erisuste seletamine Venemaa ja Gruusia näitelet
dc.title.alternativeState identity in foreign politics: explanation of differences in Estonian foreign policy towards Russia and Georgiaen
dc.typeOtheren


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record