The Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation in the 1990s in the assessments of domestic social Democratic parties

Vorobev Aleksandr Olegovich Master's degree; Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences; P. Lumumba Peoples' Friendship University of Russia 121354, Russia, Moscow, Vitebsk str., 3 nperu07@icloud.com

Introduction

With the collapse of the USSR and the socialist bloc in Eastern Europe, Russia entered a phase of new development and the choice of new modernization paths. In the 1990s, the world was changing and the political systems of the countries were changing. In Western scientific discourse, ideas began to appear about the end of history, about the unification of the world system within the framework of a single ideology of neoliberalism, denying? former communist and authoritarian regimes ^[1]. In contrast to this popular theory, in 1993, the concept of the clash of civilizations by S. Huntington appeared, which runs through new cultural and religious antagonisms ^[2]. Geopolitician Z. In 1997, Brzezinski wrote the work "The Great Chessboard", in which he also developed the theory of an imminent clash of civilizations ^[3].

Neoliberal thinkers, remarkably, influenced some ultra-left philosophers by shifting their discourse to the right. So, in 2004, left-wing thinkers A. Negri and M. Hardt wrote the work "Empire", which developed the idea of the progressivity of neoliberal globalization and unification of ideologies in the postmodern world ^[4]. It is important that the common feature of these works is the underestimation of the role of Russia and its influence on world processes, the elevation of the role of the West and capitalism as a "messiah" in the new unipolar world, which in itself is extremely one–sided. However, the story does not end, and political and geopolitical processes turn out to be many times more complicated and diverse than described by neoliberal thinkers.

In this regard, it is important to trace the evolution of Russia's foreign policy, to identify the assessments that were given to it by representatives of various political forces, and in particular by the Social Democratic parties. The 1990s were a time of growing prestige of the Social Democratic parties in Europe. Over the years, the Labour Party in Great Britain, the Social Democratic Party in Germany, and the Socialists in Italy came to power. They had a noticeable impact on world politics and at the same time on social democratic discourse in other countries, including Russia, which made the Social Democrats a prominent force in Russian politics in the 1990s.

There is an extensive historiography devoted to the history of the formation of the Russian multiparty system after the collapse of the USSR. In particular, the works of Yu.G. Korgunyuk ^[5], A. N. Tarasov ^[6] present an analysis of the political programs of the parties, including the left, social democratic wing, including their assessment of the country's foreign policy strategy and its implementation in new historical conditions. K. S. Orlov's dissertation research is devoted directly to the political history of social democratic parties and movements in Russia in the 1990s.^[18]

Among the general works on the history of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation in the 1990s, the works of A.V. Vakhrameev ^[7], K. E. Meshcheryakov ^[8], T.A. Shaklein, A.N. Panov, A.S. Bulatov ^[9], Primakov E.M. ^[10], V.S. Buyanov ^[11], Yu. L. Adno, S. A. Afontsev, A. S. Bogacheva ^[12].

The dissertation studies of A.V. Berendeev ^[13], I. Valestani ^[14], E.M. Kolykhanova ^[15], A.M., Chaika ^[16], E.V. Sturba ^[17] also considered various directions of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation. K. S. Orlov's dissertation research is devoted directly to the political history of social democratic parties and movements in Russia in the 1990s.^[18]

In general, the Russian historiography devoted to the revival of multiparty system in Russia and the history of its foreign policy is very extensive, however, special studies of foreign policy during the time of Boris Yeltsin in the assessments of the parties and party leaders of the country are not enough, which opens up a wide opportunity to study this topic.

The research was based on various types of published and archival sources (in particular, the materials of the foundation number 662 – the Social Democratic Party of Russia) in the Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History (RGASPI)^[30].. The work also uses the programs of the social democratic parties of Russia ^{[19, 20],} journalistic sources (works of leaders of parties and movements of the left)^{[21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]}.

By the beginning of the collapse of the USSR, the evolution of social democratic political thought was observed in Western European countries under the influence of geopolitical changes. In 1999, Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor G. Schroeder formulated a new concept of social democracy - the "third way", which implied a revision of the views of the moderate left in the economy (a revision of the attitude towards the "welfare state", a departure from the evolutionary model of overcoming capitalism), as well as foreign policy (alliance with countries with neoconservative ideology, refusal to support social movements in third world countries). It is obvious that the revision of social democracy did not begin in 1999, but immediately after the collapse of the socialist system in 1989, when international social democracy began to shift to the right. In Germany, a similar shift of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) led to the formation in 1990 of the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), which focused on loyalty to the social democratic tradition of the 1950s and 1960s. The same processes took place in the UK, countries Scandinavia, Italy.

In Russia, similar processes of dividing social democracy into right and left wings began in 1992, with the formation of left-wing social democratic parties: The Socialist Party of Workers (SPT) and the Party of Labor (PT), which opposed the more moderate ones - the Social Democratic Party of Russia (SDPR) and the Russian Party of Social Democracy (RPSD).

An important place in the programs of the political parties of the Russian Federation was occupied by provisions related to the assessment of the country's foreign policy activities at the current moment and in the future, which corresponded to the political position of a particular party.

The left-wing parties are no exception in this regard. In particular, the Russian Social Democratic parties, which were not distinguished by their solidity, demonstrated a difference in their assessments of Russia's foreign policy. Using the terminology of A. Gramsci, the historical bloc of domestic social Democrats was not formed, instead, the fragmentation of discourse prevailed - the left social Democrats were close to the communist ideology, and the right – to liberal values. This was largely due to the issue of political tradition. The orthodox Social Democrats did not want to break the link with Marxism. Marxism and its more moderate variation in the person of Bernsteinism declared, albeit evolutionary, but still overcoming the capitalist system, the preservation of the welfare state. In foreign policy, it was to preserve the tradition of supporting third world countries and progressive anti-colonial leftist movements, which corresponded not only to the Marxist tradition, but also to the concept of world-system analysis. The right-wing Social Democrats, in turn, went to a complete break with Marxism, becoming increasingly closer to the liberal movement and advocating the socialization of capitalism. In foreign policy, such a rejection of Marxism led to a Eurocentric understanding of international relations, recognition of the West's civilizational dominance in the world.

To begin with, let's consider the assessments of representatives of the right wing of Russian social democracy, which they gave to the foreign policy course of Russia in the 1990s.

The views of the right-wing Social Democrats were based on the concept of the civilizational connection between Russia and the West. Ideologically, this was similar to the course of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation in the early 1990s, which was very clearly outlined by the then Minister of Foreign Affairs of the country A. Kozyrev. He stressed the need for the country's integration into NATO and the EU ^{[23, p. 211],}.The Social Democratic Party of Russia in its program shared the foreign policy course of the Russian authorities ^{[19, p. 20]} Positively assessing the new world order, one of the leaders of the SDPR B. Orlov wrote that in the 1990s a new era of unified security for all countries of the world began, respectively, under these conditions, major geopolitical conflicts were impossible ^{[21, p. 152]}. This concept is extremely similar to the ideas of the neoliberal thinker F. Fukuyama and his theory of the end of history. The right-wing Social Democrats thus advocated not only civilizational, but also ideological and political integration of Russia with the West. The representative of the Social Democratic Party of Russia, P. Kudyukin, wrote about the importance of Russia studying the experience of Western democracies in countries where social Democrats who defended the principles of the welfare state were in power at that time ^{[30, L.3]}. In this aspect, Kudyukin formulated the idea of the institutional integration of the social democratic West and Russia. Later, A. Arbatov, being a member of both the Yabloko party and the SDPR, stated that there were no contradictions between NATO and Russia and the possibility of the country joining NATO was a priority option ^{[20, p. 113]}.

The right-wing Social Democrats had similar assessments with the authorities regarding other foreign policy areas, in particular, with regard to the CIS and Asian countries. The SDPR advocated the improvement of Russia's relations with the CIS countries, for mutually beneficial cooperation with these countries, which could contribute to the economic growth of the country. The party held the same position in assessing Russia's cooperation with Asian countries, even those where "authoritarian regimes" existed. It was about China and the DPRK. However, there was no integration prospect in the direction of developing relations with the CIS and Asian countries. Therefore, relations with Western countries were considered by the SDPR as a priority aimed at integration, while interaction with the rest of the world, including with "dictatorships" and "autocracies", was seen exclusively in the economic sphere.

Thus, it can be concluded that the right-wing Social Democrats positively assessed the foreign policy of the Russian Federation, agreeing in their assessments of its priorities and goals with the country's leadership. This was largely due to the fact that the ideology of the SDPR and other right-wing social democratic parties was similar to the liberalism and discourse of the leadership of the Russian Federation at that time.

In many ways, in contrast to the right, the left-wing Social Democrats were skeptics about the West and the foreign policy course of the Russian Federation. Among such parties were nationalist ones: The National Salvation Front, the Congress of Russian Communities, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Communists from the Russian Communist Workers' Party, Labor Russia and other organizations. While nationalists and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation used civilizational analysis to a greater extent to identify contradictions between Russian and Western civilizations, Orthodox Communists focused more on the struggle against capitalism. In general, the Russian public discourse of that time was dominated mainly by anti-Western rhetoric. The parties that criticized the foreign policy of the Russian authorities agreed on euroscepticism, anti-globalism and rejection of the West as a hegemonic civilization. The general idea was expressed by the leader of the Communist Party G.A. Zyuganov, who expressed concern about the strengthening of the West and proposed to develop relations with the "Global South"^{[24, p.142]}. The left-wing Social Democrats agreed on similar general assessments, but considered foreign policy not only from a civilizational, but also from an economic point of view.

Taking into account the preservation of the social democratic tradition of the mid-twentieth century. In their concepts, the left-wing Social Democrats of Russia turn to a Marxist formational approach, focusing on the influence of the economy on foreign policy processes. Special attention in the concepts of the left-wing social Democrats began to be paid specifically to the countries of the third world, taking into account the fact that the European social Democratic parties in the 1960s and 1970s supported precisely these political forces. In this regard, the world-system analysis began to spread rapidly among Russian left-wing social Democrats in the 1990s.

As is known, European and Asian scientists I. Wallerstein, S. Amin and A.G. Frank formulated the concept of the world system of capitalism and the economic exploitation of the periphery by the countries of the center in the 1960s. The world-system analysis is based on both the classical formational approach and the stadium approach, which was new for that time. Among the representatives of the Russian world-system school, it is worth noting several scientists who were the direct leaders of the left-wing social democratic parties: R. Medvedev (SPT), B. Kagarlitsky (PT) and A. Buzgalin (PT). In the world-system analysis, several regions are distinguished: the countries of the center (Europe, the USA), which are the richest and most developed centers of accumulation of the capitalist world-system, the semi–periphery, which include Russia, Turkey, India, Brazil, and the periphery - the rest of the world, poor, completely absorbed by the influence of the countries of the center and partly the semi-periphery. Analyzing the 1990s, the left-wing social Democrats, using world-system analysis, deduced the concept that Russia, entering the capitalist world-system, turns into a colony of central countries and, instead of the former influence on the world stage, its role in the new system is determined only by the amount of minerals that can be exported abroad. Accordingly, foreign policy Russia, according to the left, was controlled by the West.

In this regard, R. Medvedev wrote about the imminent colonization of Russia, its transformation into a raw material base: "The Russian ruling oligarchy itself, alien to the national interests of the country, sees its colonization as a guarantee of its own well-being" ^{[11, p. 56].} One of the leaders of the Labor Party, B.Y. Kagarlitsky, also noted the desire of the Russian authorities in the 1990s to fully integrate into the Western world and adopt the political model of Western institutions, which, in his opinion, was impossible under neoliberal capitalism, since it would only lead to an increase in Russia's dependence on the West, its deindustrialization and transformation into a raw material an appendage without its own production ^{[9, p.14]}.

In contrast to Western hegemony, the left wing of the Russian Social Democrats also focused on the countries of the CIS, Asia and the so-called "Global South", which were considered as an alternative to the unipolar world. Thus, the Socialist Workers' Party focused on the importance of Russia's cooperation with third world states. At the same time, the party paid special attention to the economic system of China and the success of the Chinese economy. R. Medvedev in his book "The Rise of China" noted the prospects of combining market and socialist economic methods, believing that this policy helped China become the second economy in the world ^[12]. In many ways, this was similar to the ideology of the left-wing Social Democrats, who advocated increased government intervention in the economy while maintaining a market system. This model eventually became dominant not only in China, but also in Brazil during the presidency of Lula Da Silva, in South Africa and partly in India – the countries that are now part of the BRICS. The left-wing Social Democrats also insisted on deepening relations between Russia and the CIS countries, and advocated the integration of the Union of Independent States into a single economic space, similar to what existed earlier when all countries were united in the USSR ^[26].

In general, it can be noted that the left-wing social Democrats in their assessments of Russia's foreign policy proceeded from a formational approach and the theory of world-system analysis. They were close to the countries of the semi-periphery and the periphery, which in the future could fight against the hegemony of the countries of the center, offering a different social alternative to the West.

Conclusion

As the study showed, modern Russian social Democratic parties had different views on the nature of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation in the 1990s. These assessments were based on relevant ideological attitudes regarding the nature of political systems and foreign policy concepts of different countries. The study of these estimates is especially important in the modern conditions of transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world. It should also be noted that modern social democracy is experiencing a new dawn today. Recently, the Labour Party, led by leader Keir Starmer, came to power in the UK, which ideologically is now, in many ways, the successor of Tony Blair, a representative of the right wing of the Social Democrats. The right-wing Social Democrats are now in power in Spain, Germany and other countries as well. At the same time, left-wing Social Democrats are gaining popularity in Europe and around the world – J.L. Melenchon's Unconquered France, Sarah Wagenknecht's Union in Germany, left-wing opposition MPs in the House of Commons led by Jeremy Corbyn in the UK. In some Latin American countries, left-wing Social Democrats are in power altogether – in Chile, Mexico, Brazil, Bolivia and Colombia. The influence of the right and left Social Democrats on international politics is now extremely great. For example, the right-wing Social Democrats, in most cases, support Israel in the Gaza Strip, advocate the supply of weapons to Ukraine. Germany and the United Kingdom are the leaders in the supply of weapons to Ukraine now. In turn, the left-wing Social Democrats are categorically against Israel's war in the Gaza Strip, arms supplies to Ukraine, they oppose NATO and its expansion. For example, Brazilian President Lula da Silva makes many statements demanding an end to the Israeli genocide in Gaza or organizing a peace summit on Ukraine with the participation of Russia. This fact captures the ongoing split in the social democratic movement and at the same time captures the influence of the international social democratic movement on domestic and world politics, which requires a study of their ideology and their assessments of foreign policy.