In this thesis the Russian Federation is investigated to understand if it still tries to continue its classic Soviet style of security perception in the post-Cold War era and its views concerning national security as reflected in Russia&#039 / s military doctrines. It is so obvious that the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the emrgence of Russia as an independent entity in the post-cold war era have compelled the Russian Federation to redefine its national interest. In this context it experienced a crisis of describing its identity and national interests in changing security environment. Although in the early years of Yeltsin it preferred close cooperation with the West then abandoned this approach. It was implied that some states and coalitions were still main threats to the security of the Russian Federation in the military doctrine and the near-abroad policy re-gained importance. In addition with the inauguration of Putin as the Russian President the reaction of the Russian Federation regarding both internal and external security issues displayed the growing significance of traditional interests and old-style security issues. Thus in this thesis it is asserted that the Russian Federation still tries to sustain its well-known traditional interests the classic Soviet style of security perception in the post-Cold War period. Therefore this study tries to explain this argument through examining the effects of its imperial past, transformation years and its situation in the new security environment of post-Cold War era under Yeltsin and Putin.

This thesis provides an empirical contribution to the existing literature regarding Russian foreign policy and its application in Russia's near abroad. The primary case study is Russian foreign policy instruments applied to the Eastern European country of Moldova. This thesis directly cites the Russian National Security Concept (RNSC) documents from 2000 and 2016 as the foundation for analysis of Russian foreign policy actions applied to both Eastern Europe and Moldova. A summation of the type of instruments used within Moldova, either "soft power" or "hard power" resources, citing specific examples of each, is included. The result of this thesis is a foundation for future research of Russian foreign policy based on Russian foreign policy documents, as it pertains to the former republics of the Soviet Union. / Master of Arts

Shortly after the February 2014 Euromaidan revolution which ousted pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, Russia orchestrated a rapid and mostly bloodless annexation of the Crimea. Following the removal of Ukrainian authority from the peninsula, the Kremlin focused simultaneously on legitimizing the annexation via an electoral reform in Crimea and fermenting political unrest in the Donbas. As violence broke out in the Donbas, anti-Ukrainian government militias were formed by defecting Ukrainian security forces members, local volunteers, and volunteers from Russia. The Kremlin provided extensive support for these militias which sometimes even came in the form of direct military intervention by conventional Russian forces. However, the use of state-sponsored militias by Russia is not a new phenomenon. Since the end of the Cold War, the Russian Federation has been relying on militias to help stabilize local security environments, and more recently, achieve foreign security policy objectives in the Near Abroad. By tracking the history of Vostok (East) Battalion during its two distinctly different iterations, first as a militia for the Yamadayev family which operated primarily in Chechnya as well as briefly in South Ossetia and Lebanon and then as separatist formation in Eastern Ukraine, my thesis seeks to examine why Russia uses militias. Using the theoretical frameworks of principle-agent relations and organizational hierarchy, my thesis examines post-Soviet military reforms to contextualize the Kremlin's rationale for utilizing militia groups as well as analyzing the costs and benefits Moscow ultimately incurs when it leverages militias as force projection assets domestically and in the Near Abroad. / Master of Arts

雖然俄羅斯民族主義在不同的歷史發展過程中，都起著不同的作用，但是其對西方的敵意卻似乎未曾改變。對於所有的俄羅斯政治家而言，適時的煽動俄羅斯民族主義，是助其掌握國家權力的一大要素。因此俄羅斯的民族主義一直深深影響著俄羅斯對外政策的走向。 自一九九三年之後，以極端民族主義者為主的俄羅斯民族主義，不但成為國內政治的一股新勢力，同時也對俄羅斯的對外政策產生極大的影響。分析從一九九一年到一九九八年的俄羅斯對外關係發展史，我們可以看出在一九九四年之後，俄羅斯明顯的從早期的親西方外交政策，逐漸轉變成為以國家利益為重的大國外交政策。亦即把對外政策的工作重點，從美國轉移到中國和「近鄰國家」地區。 本篇論文希望藉由分析國內政治中的民族主義因素，及其對俄羅斯對外政策的影響，以瞭解俄羅斯對外政策的實際走向。 / Although Russia nationalism has different functions in different historical stages, but its hostility to the west has never changed. To all Russian politicians, to abet Russian nationalism appropriately is one of the most important means to control the power of the state. That's the reason why Russian nationalism has always influenced the direction of Russian foreign policy. After 1993, Russian nationalism led by extreme nationalists is not only a new force in domestic affairs, but also critically influential in Russian foreign policy. Through the analysis of the foreign affair development in Russian history from 1991 to 1998, we can tell that after 1994 Russia has altered the pro-western foreign policy to the great state " velikaya derzhava " foreign policy, which emphasizes on the national interests. That means Russia has transferred their attention from America to China and the region of " near abroad ". The dissertation will analyze Russian nationalism in domestic policy and how it influences Russian foreign policy, we could then understand the real direction of Russian foreign policy.

The dissertation deals with the state of the relations between the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Russian Federation. The main questions to be addressed are: "Has the Russian attitude towards the OSCE changed? How has Russia dealt with the OSCE in the last years? Do the OSCE security commitments play any role in the formation of the Russian foreign policy?" To answer these questions different approaches from international relations theories have been used, but especially, those that better reflect the importance of national constrains in foreign affairs. The formation of national interests is therefore, a key element to understand and assess the evolution of the Russian foreign policy and, subsequently, the evolution of the OSCE- Russia relations. A case of study is included to show better how Russian policies upon the OSCE have evolved from a positive engagement towards scepticism about the future of Russia within the Organisation. 1