IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v11y2020i5p588-597.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Hedging Goes Wrong: Lessons from Ukraine’s Failed Hedge of the EU and Russia

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholas Ross Smith

Abstract

When confronted by the competing zero‐sum regional strategies of the EU and Russia between 2010 and 2013, Ukraine chose to aggressively pursue a dual‐aligned hedge. This policy choice, in part, helped precipitate a disastrous outcome: the Ukraine crisis. Using the insights of the literature on smaller power hedging and regional security complex theory, it is argued that Viktor Yanukovych misperceived the geopolitical feedback emanating from the Eastern Europe security complex, leading it to pursuing a suboptimal foreign policy. Hedging was still the optimal foreign policy for Ukraine, but arguably a more modest form of hedging was required. It is argued that Ukraine’s experience raises important questions about the actorness of smaller powers to pursue hedging strategies in geopolitically‐charged regional security complexes.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholas Ross Smith, 2020. "When Hedging Goes Wrong: Lessons from Ukraine’s Failed Hedge of the EU and Russia," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(5), pages 588-597, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:11:y:2020:i:5:p:588-597
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12862
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12862?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walt, Stephen M., 1988. "Testing theories of alliance formation: the case of Southwest Asia," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(2), pages 275-316, April.
    2. Richard G. Whitman & Ana E. Juncos, 2013. "Stasis in Status: Relations with the Wider Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51, pages 155-167, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ido Oren, 1994. "The Indo-Pakistani Arms Competition," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(2), pages 185-214, June.
    2. Shenkar Oded & Arikan Ilgaz, 2010. "Business as International Politics: Drawing Insights from Nation-State to Inter-Firm Alliances," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(4), pages 1-33, January.
    3. Muhammad Kabir, 2019. "The Role of Side Payments in the Formation of Asymmetric Alliances: Forging the US–Pakistan Alliance," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 6(2), pages 162-188, August.
    4. Martin Wagener, 2009. "Reliable Kingdom? The USA, Thailand, and the Logic of Bandwagoning," Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, Institute of Asian Studies, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 28(3), pages 39-80.
    5. Iftikhar Lodhi, 2021. "Globalisation and public policy: bridging the disciplinary and epistemological boundaries [Which synthesis? Strategies of theoretical integration and the neorealist-neoliberal debate]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(4), pages 522-544.
    6. Richard G. Whitman & Ana E. Juncos, 2014. "Challenging Events, Diminishing Influence? Relations with the Wider Europe," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52, pages 157-169, November.
    7. Ana E. Juncos & Richard G. Whitman, 2015. "Europe as a Regional Actor: Neighbourhood Lost?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53, pages 200-215, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:11:y:2020:i:5:p:588-597. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.