Under Vladimir Putin, Russia’s global ambitions have steadily increased, including in unstable areas of the Middle East, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere. For the most part, Moscow’s activities in these and other areas run counter to Western interests and undermine efforts to mitigate conflict through broad-based, transparent processes. This report outlines the factors that appear to be motivating the Kremlin’s conflict-zone interventions and places them within the larger context of Russian foreign policy interests.

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks at news conference in Moscow with President Erdogan of Turkey on March 5, 2020. (Pavel Golovkin/AP)
Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks at news conference in Moscow with President Erdogan of Turkey on March 5, 2020. (Pavel Golovkin/AP)

Summary

  • During the past decade, Russia’s foreign policy ambitions have steadily increased, including in areas of conflict or instability in the Middle East, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere.
  • Current Russian engagements in conflict zones are driven by the geostrategic interests and character of the traditional Russian state, global political ambitions and behavioral patterns inherited from the Soviet Union, and the political, economic, and private motives of the highly personalized Putin regime.
  • A rough overall pattern in Moscow’s interventions in conflict zones, based on proximity to the Russian heartland, is discernible: the closer to Russia, the more important are traditional geostrategic factors and the more willing the Kremlin is to commit resources.
  • In more distant conflict zones, such as those in the Middle East, North Africa, and Latin America, Russia places greater emphasis on global-political or opportunistic economic and private interests, and is more selective in deploying its resources.
  • Russia’s activities in conflict zones usually directly or indirectly run counter to Western interests. Still, it is sometimes possible for the United States and its allies to carve out space for cooperation with Russia on specific issues in conflict zones.

About the Report

This report examines the Russian government’s posture toward and reasons for involvement in conflicts in less-developed or fragile contexts. The views expressed in the report are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the U.S. government.

About the Author

Paul M. Carter, Jr., is a State Department Senior Fellow in USIP’s Office of Strategic Stability and Security. He is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, and most of his career as a diplomat and scholar has focused on Russia, the Soviet Union, and other countries of Europe and Eurasia. From 2017 to 2019, he was the US consul general in Yekaterinburg, Russia. He is the author of Chief Ideologist: M. A. Suslov and the “Science” of Communism in the USSR, published (in Russian) by Moscow State University in 2003.


Related Publications

In Russia’s Hybrid War on Europe, Moldova’s Critical Next 15 Months

In Russia’s Hybrid War on Europe, Moldova’s Critical Next 15 Months

Wednesday, May 1, 2024

A rising risk in southeast Europe is Russia’s sharpening of conflicts to block Moldova’s effort to join the European Union. The Kremlin is escalating a hybrid campaign to manipulate three Moldovan elections over the next 15 months. Moscow last week hosted the formation of a political bloc around its primary Moldovan ally, a fugitive billionaire convicted of the country’s worst-ever bank fraud — and sent a startling flood of pre-election cash that police seized at Moldova’s main airport. This is a critical season for Moldova’s democratic allies to help it defeat Russian disinformation and election subversion.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

Ukraine’s New U.S. Lifeline: Why It’s Vital and What’s Next

Ukraine’s New U.S. Lifeline: Why It’s Vital and What’s Next

Thursday, April 25, 2024

This week’s U.S. approval of nearly $61 billion in funds for Ukraine’s defense is a lifeline in the Ukrainians’ struggle against Russia’s unprovoked invasion and the assault on peace and rule of law in Europe and beyond. Ukrainian troops have been rationing ammunition, their lack of defensive missiles has exposed Ukrainian cities to Russian aerial attacks — and many military analysts predicted a probable collapse on part of Ukraine’s eastern defensive lines. While this U.S. action boosts Ukrainians’ capacities and morale, ending this war will need further funds, forces and security measures for those fighting and suffering for their survival — and for the redemption of international peace through rule of law.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

Asfandyar Mir on Why ISIS-K Attacked Moscow

Asfandyar Mir on Why ISIS-K Attacked Moscow

Monday, April 1, 2024

ISIS-K’s recent attack on the Russian capital was, in part, intended to assert the organization’s growing capacity to inflict terror beyond its home base of Afghanistan. “By reaching Moscow, ISIS-K is trying to signal it has the geographic reach to hit anywhere in the world,” says USIP’s Asfandyar Mir.

Type: Podcast

View All Publications