PhD, engineer Horaţiu MOGA*
Abstract. The research aims to analyze the foreign policy relations of the Russian Federation with the European Union after the Russian-Ukrainian war. The article appeals to Operational Code Analysis which is focused on the study of the belief system of a political actor together with foreign policy patterns provided by the COPDAB database. The study focuses on explaining the concepts of escalation and de-escalation from the Operational Code Analysis and connecting them to the foreign policy typology offered by COPDAB. With the help of five transitions from the actor’s belief system (Predictability of the Political Universe, Control Over Historical Development, Role of Chance, Risk Orientation and Importance of Timing of Actions) we will explain the post-event consequences at the individual decision level. The article predicts that among the fifteen patterns of foreign policy in the next generation, the conflicting ones will be more likely to appear and thus a Cold War 2.0 will appear. The present article aims to be a beginning to expand the ways of evaluating the indicators of the Operational Code Analysis through new complementary approaches to the method of verbs in context that will increase their predictive ability.
Keywords: COPDAB, Operational Code Analysis, Russian Federation-UE relationship, Foreign Policy Analysis
INTRODUCTION
The research presents possible ways in which the Russian Federation can exert foreign policy pressure on the European Union and the Collective West in a future after the Russian-Ukrainian war. Our approach has as its starting point the COPDAB[1] typology of foreign policy behaviors that will exemplify future ways of escalation of the Russian Federation on the European Union. The choice of the COPDAB typology for explaining foreign policy behaviors is based on a variety of research[2] that the author has carried out over time and which have proven to have a profound power to deepen the understanding of states’ behavior. This study is part of the study area of foreign policy analysis. This together with international relations theory and geopolitics are the three basic areas of international business analysis. In our analysis, we will deal with a study whose object of research is the foreign policy relationship between the Russian Federation and the European Union, focused on a typology of Russian foreign policy and the consequences of the Russian belief system explained by the Operational Code Analysis[3]. The extension of the foreign policy analysis with the help of the Operational Code Analysis allows the evaluation of the belief system of the decision-makers at the level of individual analysis[4] in relation to the level of state analysis[5] defined by COPDAB. The approach of the Operational Code Analysis elements together with the behavioral typology of the COPDAB type deepens the neo-behaviouralist[6], poliheuristic[7] or prospective[8] research in foreign policy, providing great added value to our work. Our study will first deal with the elements of the COPDAB typology and then the specific indicators of the Operational Code Analysis. With the help of the Operational Code Analysis indicators (Predictability of the Political Universe, Control Over Historical Development, Role of Chance, Risk Orientation, Importance of Timing of Actions) we will explain a typology of foreign policy decisions organized hierarchically. Finally, it will be possible to use a synthesis of the two COPDAB scale analysis tools, respectively the Operational Code Analysis, to express the possible pressures of the Russian Federation on the European Union in the post-Russian-Ukrainian war era.
APPROACH
In this section we will begin our approach by defining the elements of the COPDAB scale as follows:
- Elements of cooperation:
- Voluntary unification into one nation;
- Major strategic alliance (regional or international);
- Military economic or strategic support;
- Non-military economic, technological or industrial agreement;
- Cultural or scientific agreement or support (non-strategic);
- Official verbal support of goals, values, or regime;
- Minor official exchanges, talks or political expressions–mild verbal support;
- Elements of neutrality:
- Neutral or non-significant acts for the internation situation;
- Elements of conflict:
- Mild verbal expressions displaying discord in interaction;
- Strong verbal expressions displaying hostility in interaction;
- Diplomatic-economic hostile actions;
- Political-military hostile actions;
- Small scale military acts;
- Limited war acts;
- Extensive war acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic costs.
The entire COPDAB scale is focused on a general behavior that includes models of cooperative, neutral or conflictual foreign policy. What is specific to this study is the conflictual foreign policy that will characterize the relations between the Russian Federation and the European Union for decades to come. So those from COPDAB08 to COPDAB15. Our analysis wants to express how the process of escalation or de-escalation goes through the COPDAB scale from COPDAB01 to COPDAB15 in the case of escalation, respectively from COPDAB15 to COPDAB01 in the case of de-escalation and how these interact with the indicators of the Operational Code Analysis: Predictability of the Political Universe, Control Over Historical Development, Role of Chance, Risk Orientation and Importance of Timing of Actions.
Operational Code Analysis was invented by Nathan Constantin Leites in a famous study about the Soviet Politburo carried out for the American government in 1948[9]. The operational code concept was later refined by Ole Holsti and George Alexander[10] and completed by Mark Schafer and Stephen G. Walker[11].
Mark Schafer and Stephen G. Walker proposed that the belief system of an individual or collective, state or non-state actor be grouped into two categories[12]:
- The Philosophical Beliefs in an Operational Code
- The Nature of the Political Universe (P-1): ‘What is the “essential” nature of political life? Is the political universe essentially one of harmony or of conflict? What is the fundamental character of one’s political opponents?’. It has values like: Friendly, Mixed, Hostile.
- Prospects for Realizing Fundamental Values (P-2): ‘What are the prospects for the eventual realization of one’s fundamental values and aspirations? Can one be optimistic, or must one be pessimistic on this score; and in what respects the one and/or the other?’ It has values like: Optimism versus Pessimism.
- Predictability of the Political Universe (P-3): P-3. ‘Is the political future predictable? In what sense and to what extent?’. It has values like: Low to High.
- Control Over Historical Development (P-4): ’How much “control” or “mastery” can one have over historical development? What is one’s role in “moving” and “shaping” history in the desired direction?’. It has values like: Low to High.
- Role of Chance (P-5): ‘What is the role of “chance” in human affairs and in historical development?’. It has values like: Low to High.
- The Instrumental Beliefs in an Operational Code
- Direction of Strategy (I-1): ‘What is the best approach for selecting goals or objectives for political action?’. It has values like: Cooperative Mixed, Conflictual.
- Intensity of Tactics (I-2): ‘How are the goals of action pursued most effectively?’
- Risk Orientation (I-3): ‘How are the risks of political action calculated, controlled, and accepted?’. It has values like: Averse to Acceptant.
- Importance of Timing of Actions (I-4): ‘What is the best “timing” of action to advance one’s interests?’. It has values like: Low Flexibility to High Flexibility.
- Utility of Means (I-5): ‘What is the utility and role of different means for advancing one’s interests?’. It has values like: Low to High.
In the specialized literature, a wide range of research has been carried out that studied the relationship between the dynamics of the belief system specific to the individual decision level and typical variables for the systemic level described in this COPDAB typology research and the international system level.
In our study we aimed to create a connection between the pre- and post-event variation of Predictability of the Political Universe ΔP-3, Control Over Historical Development ΔP-4, Role of Chance ΔP-5, Risk Orientation ΔI-3 and Importance of Timing of Actions ΔI-4 with the escalation in foreign policy relations between the Russian Federation and the European Union/the Collective West after the war in Ukraine as complementary indicators to the already established P-1, I-1 and P-4.
All the variants of possible consequences of the Russian belief system can be found in the table below following the transition of the foreign policy behavior of the Russian Federation from pre-event values COPDAB01. Voluntary unification into one nation (in Russia-Belarus relations) to post values – event COPDAB15. Extensive war acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic costs (in Russia – USA / EU / NATO relations). The definition of the values of 1 or 0 for the five indicators of the Operational Code Analysis takes place as follows:
- Predictability of the Political Universe ΔP-3 is 0 when its post-event value is Low and 1 when its post-event value is High. Follow expression (1):
(1)
- Control Over Historical Development ΔP-4 is 0 when its post-event value is Low and 1 when its post-event value is High. Follow expression (2):
(2)
- Role of Chance ΔP-5 is 0 when its post-event value is Low and 1 when its post-event value is High. Follow expression (3):
(3)
- Risk Orientation ΔI-3 is 0 when its post-event value is Averse and 1 when its post-event value is Acceptance. Follow expression (4):
(4)
- Importance of Timing of Actions ΔI-4 is 0 when its post-event value is Low Flexibility and 1 when its post-event value is High Flexibility. Follow expression (5):
(5)
In the table below obtained on the basis of all possible binary combinations between the indicators Predictability of the Political Universe ΔP-3, Control Over Historical Development ΔP-4, Role of Chance ΔP-5, Risk Orientation ΔI-3 and Importance of Timing of Actions ΔI -4 the external policy of escalation of the Russian Federation vis-à-vis the EU/the Collective West can have values from COPDAB09 to COPDAB15 (COPDAB09. Mild verbal expressions displaying discord in interaction; COPDAB10. Strong verbal expressions displaying hostility in interaction; COPDAB11. Diplomatic-economic hostile actions; COPDAB12. Political-military hostile actions; COPDAB13. Small scale military acts; COPDAB14. Limited war acts; COPDAB15. Extensive war acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic costs).
ΔI-3 | ΔI-4 | ΔP-3 | ΔP-4 | ΔP-5 | |
15 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
14 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
13 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
12 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
11 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
10 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
09 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
08 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
07 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
06 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
05 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
04 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
03 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
02 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
01 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
00 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
The experience of the last Cold War showed us that from the first confrontations between the communist and the capitalist bloc in the Korean peninsula and Indochina to the foundation of the CSCE at the beginning of the 70s, a generation has passed. Probably the same amount of time will pass until the next normalization of relations between the Collective West and the Euro-Asian bloc dominated by the Russian Federation and China. The possible consequences of the Russian belief system are exemplified in the table above in the half that is not marked with gray. The table lines marked in gray are specific to the risk-free relations specific to the Russian Federation-EU before the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24.02.2022. These eight lines marked in gray are specific to the supposedly risk-free Russian – EU relations regulated by bilateral economic and political agreements. The white lines numbered from 07 to 00 are specific to the new relations based on risk and confrontation between the EU / NATO / the Collective West and the Russian Federation. For the next generation of 30 years, we estimate that there will be a Cold War 2.0 in Europe with two combatants, the Russian Federation and NATO. For the Russian belief system, it will be assumed that the variation of Risk Orientation ΔI-3 relation (4) will have values close to High for all this time specific to the lines from 07 to 00. For the variation of Importance of Timing of Actions ΔI-4 when ΔI- 4 = 1 it is possible that foreign policy is focused on foreign policy actions such as COPDAB10. Strong verbal expressions displaying hostility in interaction; COPDAB11. Diplomatic-economic hostile actions; COPDAB12. Political-military hostile actions that involve diplomatic and propaganda actions in Western countries, large-scale cyber actions in online space and large-scale military maneuvers with a strong media component. If ΔI-4 = 0, then the escalation enters the last phase specific to nuclear war preparations. The Russian forces as the first nuke strike will annihilate the main Western targets in Europe and North America with hypersonic weapons, then the second nuke strike will follow with intercontinental ballistic weapons and as the third nuke strike the Poseidon underwater drones carrying nuclear loads will be used. If ΔI-4 = 0, then the foreign policy behavior of the Russian Federation will be COPDAB15. Extensive war acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic costs. When at least one of the indicators ΔP-3 or ΔP-4 are equal to 1 (expressions (1) and (2)), the Russian Federation will engage for a short time in small-scale military actions such as COPDAB13. Small scale military acts or COPDAB14. Limited war acts. But considering the conventional numerical inferiority of Russia in front of NATO, these will only be the preview of a nuclear conflict. If ΔP-5 is equal to 1 (expression (3)) escalation to COPDAB15. Extensive war acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic costs with nuclear means will be immediate and automatic by the Russian Federation as it is considered a problem of national survival. For a more accurate study of the Operational Code Analysis indicators, an approach with verbs in context[13] and/or an interpretive analysis of them can be used.
CONCLUSION
The research was inaugurated with a review of the COPDAB international event bank and the Operational Code Analysis. Although both analysis tools are consolidated over time and proven through laborious research, a synthesis between the two has proven to be beneficial. Our research defined all the elements of the Operational Code Analysis focusing on the study of the variations Predictability of the Political Universe ΔP-3, Control Over Historical Development ΔP-4, Role of Chance ΔP-5, Risk Orientation ΔI-3 and Importance of Timing of Actions ΔI-4 as consequences of the escalation in the foreign policy of the Russian Federation from pre-event values COPDAB01. Voluntary unification into one nation (in Russia – Belarus relations) to post-event values COPDAB15. Extensive war acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic costs (in Russia – USA / EU / NATO relations). The conclusion of the table presented in the paper as consequences of the risk of confrontation between NATO/EU and the Russian Federation shows a correlation in its ability to intuit the dynamics of the political environment in which it finds itself with the management of resources that ensure the projection of its military power or the chance to conquer in lack of this projection. The present article explores new ways of using Operational Code Analysis in a predictive way and aims to enrich the baggage of approaches in the area of foreign policy analysis. We consider that the piece of resistance in the predictive analysis proposed by the synthesis in the COPDAB typology of foreign policy and Operational Code Analysis is made up by the variation relations of Predictability of the Political Universe ΔP-3, Control Over Historical Development ΔP-4, Role of Chance ΔP- 5, Risk Orientation ΔI-3 and Importance of Timing of Actions ΔI-4 numbered with indexes (1), (2), (3), (4), (5). The present article aims to be a beginning to expand the ways of evaluating the indicators of the Operational Code Analysis through new complementary approaches to the method of verbs in context that will increase their predictive ability. The research is part of foreign policy analysis and is comple-mentary to predictive research in geopolitics and international relations, aiming to improve predictive capabilities based on the indicators of the Operational Code Analysis and the COPDAB data bank.
References
- COPDAB https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/7767. Accesat în 26.03.2023
- Horaţiu Moga, “Poliheuristic Foreign Policy Analysis under Uncertainty of Gilpinean Hegemony an Neoliberal Hobbesian Anarchy of Cyberpolitics”, International Journal of Cyber Diplomacy / 2020, Volume 1. https://ijcd.ici.ro/2020/poliheuristic-foreign-policy-analysis-under-uncertainty-of-gilpinean-hegemony-an-neoliberal-hobbesian-anarchy-of-cyberpolitics/. Accesat în 26.03.2023
- Mark Schafer şi Stephen G. Walker, “Beliefs and Leadership in World Politics: Methods and Applications of Operational Code Analysis”, First published in 2006 by Palgrave Macmillan
- M. Breuning, “Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction”, Palgrave Macmillan; 2007
- Stephen G. Walker, Akan Malici, Mark Schafer, “Rethinking Foreign Policy Analysis: States, Leaders, and the Microfoundations of Behavioral International Relations (Role Theory and International Relations)”, Routledge; 1st edition, 2011
- Alex Mintz, Karl DeRouen Jr., “Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making”, Cambridge University Press, 2010
- Rose McDermott, “Risk-Taking in International Politics: Prospect Theory in American Foreign Policy”, University of Michigan Press, 1998
- Nathan C. Leites, “The Operational Code of the Politburo”, The Rand Corporation, 1951, https://www.rand.org/pubs/commercial_books/CB104-1.html. Accesat în 6.03.2023
* Superior Expert at the National Financial Information Center, Braşov, Associate teaching staff at Constanţa Maritime University, Horaţiu Moga has a double degree in Electronics and Political science and holds a doctorate in Engineering.
[1] COPDAB https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/7767. Accesat în 26.03.2023
[2] Horaţiu Moga, “Poliheuristic Foreign Policy Analysis under Uncertainty of Gilpinean Hegemony an Neoliberal Hobbesian Anarchy of Cyberpolitics”, International Journal of Cyber Diplomacy / 2020, Volume 1. https://ijcd.ici.ro/2020/poliheuristic-foreign-policy-analysis-under-uncertainty-of-gilpinean-hegemony-an-neoliberal-hobbesian-anarchy-of-cyberpolitics/. Accesat în 26.03.2023
[3] Mark Schafer şi Stephen G. Walker, “Beliefs and Leadership in World Politics: Methods and Appli-cations of Operational Code Analysis”, First published in 2006 by Palgrave Macmillan
[4] M. Breuning, “Foreign Policy Analysis: A Comparative Introduction”, Palgrave Macmillan; 2007, pp. 115-141
[5] Ibidem, pp. 141-163
[6] Stephen G. Walker, Akan Malici, Mark Schafer, “Rethinking Foreign Policy Analysis: States, Leaders, and the Microfoundations of Behavioral International Relations (Role Theory and International Relations)”, Routledge; 1st edition, 2011
[7] Alex Mintz, Karl DeRouen Jr., “Understanding Foreign Policy Decision Making”, Cambridge University Press, 2010
[8] Rose McDermott, “Risk-Taking in International Politics: Prospect Theory in American Foreign Policy”, University of Michigan Press, 1998
[9] Nathan C. Leites, “The Operational Code of the Politburo”, The Rand Corporation, 1951, https:// www.rand.org/pubs/commercial_books/CB104-1.html. Accesat în 26.03.2023
[10] Mark Schafer şi Stephen G. Walker, “Beliefs and Leadership in World Politics: methods and Applications of Operational Code Analysis”, First published in 2006 by Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 3-25
[11] Ibidem.
[12] Ibidem, pp. 25-53
[13] Mark Schafer şi Stephen G. Walker, “Beliefs and Leadership in World Politics: Methods and Appli-cations of Operational Code Analysis”, First published in 2006 by Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 25-53