|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
163792
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
How do people form beliefs about the factual content of major events when established geopolitical orders are violently challenged? Here, we address the tragic events of 2 May 2014, in Odesa, Ukraine. There, Euromaidan protest movement supporters and opponents clashed following Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the onset of the Donbas conflict, culminating in the worst civilian death toll the city had seen since World War II. Shortly after, we surveyed Ukraine’s population about who they thought had actually perpetrated the killings and relate people’s answers to alternative narratives (frames) that an original content analysis finds were available to Ukrainian citizens through different media. We find evidence, consistent with theories of hot cognition and motivated reasoning, that the Odesa violence triggered emotional responses linked to ethnic, regional, and partisan identity, which then activated attitudes associated with these identities that, in turn, led people to adopt very different (sometimes highly improbable) beliefs about who carried out the killings. Ethnic identity in particular is found to have strongly moderated the effects of television, with Ukrainian television greatly influencing Ukrainians but backfiring among Russians, and Russian television mainly impacting non-Ukrainians. Education and local information are found to reduce susceptibility to televised factual narratives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
185344
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The term “Hybrid Warfare” has been defined and redefined in multiple diverse manners in the past two decades. Conventionally the concept of Hybrid Wars referred to a combination of regular and irregular forces to obtain synergy on the battlespace. However, following the Russian annexation of Crimea and the destabilization of Eastern Ukraine, the Western community has revisited the definition of Hybrid Wars and reconceptualized it. Interestingly, this term is approached by Russia and the West in quite a different style, as per their own purpose, i.e Russia claims to be a victim of Hybrid Wards waged by the West. This research investigates the philosophy of the two mentioned versions of Hybrid Warfare and finds both irrelevant to comprehend Russia’s wars in the post-Soviet geography. Instead, it suggests to retreat to the original definition of hybrid warfare, in the context of Ukraine and Georgia cases and thereby argues that Russia performs hybrid warfare to restrict foreign policy maneuverabilities of the former Soviet republics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|