11
Leaders
Leaders do not use power resources regardless of their nature. Governors use only
those parts of national power resources that government agencies can use to achieve
their goals. Fareed Zakaria believes that neoclassical realism is based on the hypothesis that “governments are temporarily expanding their national interests abroad,
whose key decision makers feel that their relative strength is increasing.” On the
other hand, the strength of the government of the time increases the ability of the
government to improve the ability to use national capacities (Zakaria 1998:38).
Foreign Policy and Energy Resources
In states where the energy sector has more close ties with the government, energy
sources have a higher status than governments that liberalize their oil and gas industry, and the energy sector has more open space to operate. Using energy sources as
an element of national power and turning it into state power will be harder in countries where the energy sector has a more leftist government. In this way, it becomes
clear why governments that are far from democracy are using more energy resources
in foreign policy (Shirkhani and Mohajer Pour 2012:33).
The classical realist foreign policy model can well explain the difference in the
behavior of the foreign policy of a state during different periods, for example, about
the role of energy in Russian politics during Putin’s presidency and Medvedev’s two
periods (Shirkhani and Mohajer Pour 2012:33).
In January 2006 and 2009, Russia cut off gas exports to Ukraine on the pretext of
price differences, using energy as a means of extracting European countries and
influencing the political process in Ukraine. But in Medvedev’s time, with his view
of the international distribution of power as an opportunity for the Euro-Atlantic
community to be established, energy was used, upon the cooperation of the US and
European nations, as a means to modernize the Russian economy and to establish a
reciprocal relationship with the West (Lough 2011:24).
This model also compares the foreign policy behavior of oil and gas exporting
countries. A state like Venezuela, with its national oil company and the state’s extensive involvement in energy for political purposes with a greater degree of intensity
than Saudi Arabia, despite the Aramco national corporation, but independent of
government and with a different perception of the policy of great powers in interinternational uses (Shirkhani and Mohajer Pour 2012:35).
Neoclassical realism can also explain the politics of transit countries by explaining it in the context of ensuring political stability and independence; for example, a
country like Turkey is seeking to enhance its impact on European countries, but a
country like Ukraine seeks to maintain its political stability against Russia’s influence through the support of European countries (Goldthau 2008:3).
Foreign Policy and Energy Resources
Leaders
Leaders do not use power resources regardless of their nature. Governors use only
those parts of national power resources that government agencies can use to achieve
their goals. Fareed Zakaria believes that neoclassical realism is based on the hypothesis that “governments are temporarily expanding their national interests abroad,
whose key decision makers feel that their relative strength is increasing.” On the
other hand, the strength of the government of the time increases the ability of the
government to improve the ability to use national capacities (Zakaria 1998:38).
Foreign Policy and Energy Resources
In states where the energy sector has more close ties with the government, energy
sources have a higher status than governments that liberalize their oil and gas industry, and the energy sector has more open space to operate. Using energy sources as
an element of national power and turning it into state power will be harder in countries where the energy sector has a more leftist government. In this way, it becomes
clear why governments that are far from democracy are using more energy resources
in foreign policy (Shirkhani and Mohajer Pour 2012:33).
The classical realist foreign policy model can well explain the difference in the
behavior of the foreign policy of a state during different periods, for example, about
the role of energy in Russian politics during Putin’s presidency and Medvedev’s two
periods (Shirkhani and Mohajer Pour 2012:33).
In January 2006 and 2009, Russia cut off gas exports to Ukraine on the pretext of
price differences, using energy as a means of extracting European countries and
influencing the political process in Ukraine. But in Medvedev’s time, with his view
of the international distribution of power as an opportunity for the Euro-Atlantic
community to be established, energy was used, upon the cooperation of the US and
European nations, as a means to modernize the Russian economy and to establish a
reciprocal relationship with the West (Lough 2011:24).
This model also compares the foreign policy behavior of oil and gas exporting
countries. A state like Venezuela, with its national oil company and the state’s extensive involvement in energy for political purposes with a greater degree of intensity
than Saudi Arabia, despite the Aramco national corporation, but independent of
government and with a different perception of the policy of great powers in interinternational uses (Shirkhani and Mohajer Pour 2012:35).
Neoclassical realism can also explain the politics of transit countries by explaining it in the context of ensuring political stability and independence; for example, a
country like Turkey is seeking to enhance its impact on European countries, but a
country like Ukraine seeks to maintain its political stability against Russia’s influence through the support of European countries (Goldthau 2008:3).
Foreign Policy and Energy Resources