A critical analysis of selected realist theories as applied to the Russian policy towards Ukraine (2013-2022)

This master’s thesis analyzes the explanatory power of various realist schools of thought. The work begins with an overview of the main schools of thought of realism (classical realism, neorealism, neoclassical realism) and contrasts these with other schools of thought in international relations. Based on this overview, the thesis examines how each school explains the causes of the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war.

The analysis explores the interests of both the United States and Russia with regard to Ukraine. It becomes clear that the United States was interested in the continued existence of both the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation for various reasons. This aspect challenges the neorealist assumption that NATO’s eastward expansion provoked a legitimate Russian security response. The second chapter shows that the reasons for the Russian invasion of Ukraine lie less in Moscow's justified security concerns than in the ideological significance of Ukraine for Russia.

Building on this, the third chapter discusses the arguments of various realist theorists in relation to historical events such as NATO's eastward expansion, the Euromaidan revolution and the outbreak of war in the Donbas. A critical analysis of these argumentation structures shows that many realist explanations are weak because they mostly overlook the domestic aspects of Russian foreign policy. Only by combining structural insights with an understanding of domestic and ideational factors can the reasons for the outbreak of this war be explained in detail.