Description
Since Russia’s ‘authoritarian turn’, marked by the 2013 Foreign Policy Concept, Russian high-level foreign policy discourse has frequently employed emotionally charged language, particularly towards the West. These discourses often encompass defensive narratives, positioning Russia within an anti-imperialist framework intended to resonate with Global South countries, which have grown significantly as alternatives to Western partnerships since 2013. Given this shift, one would expect Russia’s discourses towards the Global South to feature a similar, if not stronger, use of emotional expressions to foster solidarity, cooperation, and shared emotional identity in opposition to Western influence. However, this paper reveals a puzzlingly limited emotional engagement in Russia’s addressing the Global South. An initial assessment shows that, despite intensified engagement, Russia’s discourses towards Global South countries exhibit a markedly restrained use of emotional expressions compared to its discourses involving Western issues. Emotional peaks, moreover, occur predominantly in response to Western behaviour or ‘accusations’ regarding Russian actions in the Global South. Emotionalisation in discourses centred exclusively on Russo-Global South interactions is thus minimal. Focusing on two key ‘blocs’ of states - BRICS and the African Union (AU) - this paper examines how and why high-ranking Russian officials minimise emotional language in direct engagement with non-Western partners. By adopting an intersubjective, social-constructivist conceptualisation of emotions and emotionalisation, I comparatively analyse official Russian-language statements by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergei Lavrov, and Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova towards BRICS and AU from 2013 to the present. To accomplish this, I employ a mixed-method design integrating Emotional Discourse Analysis (EAD) with Sentiment Analysis. In doing so, this paper contributes to ongoing debates in International Relations regarding Russo-Global South relations by offering insights into Russia’s nuanced discursive articulation and use of emotions within specific geopolitical contexts, alongside possible hierarchical variations in emotionality within Russian political discourse.
