Authors

Discussion

For many, the renewal of Russian messianism after the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas seems obvious. There is, however, no general consensus among scholars about the role messianic narrative plays in foreign policy. Does it reflect Russian worldview or is it an instrument used to achieve political goals? This paper discusses this particular issue using empirical materials representing the official discourse of Russian foreign policy (2000-2018).

The findings reveal that messianic narrative is connected to three issues: (1) the country’s identity, (2) its status and (3) legitimacy of the ruling elite. Messianic narrative has five functions. Three are connected to Russia’s relations with the external environment. Firstly, talking about mission in foreign policy contributes to a coherent autobiographical narrative of the country. Secondly, it legitimates Russia’s claim to the status equal to other world powers. Thirdly, it helps to compensate the material deficits and the lack of accurate recognition in the international arena.

There are two more functions which are connected to the relations between the ruling elite and the population. They are related to legitimacy of power. In this context refereeing to mission might help to mobilise people towards a common goal (a positive action without a threat factor) or motivate people to “narrow the ranks” in face of danger.