Browsing by Author "Dumur-Laanila, Hanne"

Ukraine crisis clashed in February 2014 when Russia annexed the peninsula of Crimea, violating therefore international laws. Since then the crisis has turned to fully fledged conflict situation and has ever since aggravated the EU-Russian relationship. This thesis analyses, how the foreign policy rhetoric between EU and Russia has evolved under the Russo-Ukrainian conflict and how are the prevailing discourses of the Self and other sustained. Social constructivism, and Chaïm Perelman’s “New Rhetoric” offers appropriate tools to examine EU-Russian rhetoric under the Ukraine conflict. While constructivism offers understanding on how social life and reality are constructed by humans, Perelman’s concept of new rhetoric deliver the toolbox for political interests, aims and intentions are associated to the construction of reality through the skilled use of language. The results demonstrate that while Merkel and Hollande, with the lead of the EU, has taken key positions to mediate between Ukraine, Russia and the representatives of the armed groups, the argumentation has been too marginalized, based merely on accusations on violation of international laws. The rhetoric proposed has not opened the space for more constructive dialogue. Further, especially Merkel has aimed to strengthen the positive image of the EU, while Hollande has adopted more pragmatic approach. Instead, Putin has adopted a more variable position in his argumentation form, underlining at the same time the rhetoric that strengthens the national image, and the old alignment and expansion politics of NATO. Putin hasn’t taken any systematic direction in his argumentation, as it has rather swerved from topic to another especially at beginning of the conflict. Consequently, the accusations, and denials expose, how the negative representation of the Other is sustained continually in the argumentation style.