The Theory of Political Elite Divergence: Shaping Dividing Lines in the West’s Foreign Policies Towards Russia

Heightened uncertainty and conflictual environment fuel disintegration within political elites around the globe. These processes of "inter-elite divergence" give rise to dividing lines in foreign policy. Divergence unfolds through three stages: segmentation, fragmentation, and polarization. Segmentation refers to the division of elites into distinct clusters, with communication channels still intact. Fragmentation indicates a deeper rift, with sustained interaction diminishing and cooperation becoming increasingly limited. Polarization is marked by a complete breakdown of dialogue and the emergence of mutually exclusive positions. To assess each stage systematically, the article proposes an analytical framework based on three key variables: coherence, leadership, and integrity. This classification helps to avoid simplifications when estimating the state of elites. Applying this framework, the paper seeks to analyze patterns of elite divergence in the European Union and the United States, focusing particularly on disagreements over policy toward Russia. Between 2014 and 2022, EU elites experienced segmentation and fragmentation as regards sanctions policy – yet these divisions did not result in policy reversal. Signs of polarization in the U.S., partially triggered by dividing lines regarding relations with Russia, were more pronounced in domestic politics. Despite external contradictions, the overall US policy maintained its continuity. These cases demonstrate that the theory of divergence not only allows for capturing the "depth" of discursive differences, but also highlights that contradictions do not predetermine the inevitability of political dysfunction. By incorporating the concept of divergence stages, the analysis moves beyond the conventional dichotomy of "conflict – cooperation" when it comes to inter-elite interaction.

1. Alder S., Wang Y. (2022). Divide and rule: How political elites polarize society. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769435 (accessed: 14.01.2025).

2. Alexandrova S. (2021). Transformations in the Social Impact: Politics, Media, Social Networks. Postmodernism Problems. Vol. 11. No. 1. P. 58–75. https://doi.org/10.46324/PMP2101058

3. Almagro, M. (2023). Political polarization: Radicalism and immune beliefs. Philosophy & Social Criticism. Vol. 49. No. 3. P. 309–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537211066859

4. Alvesson, M. (2019). Leadership: Convergence and divergence in leadership relations. Journal of Management Inquiry. Vol. 28. No. 3. P. 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492617717339

5. Amurov M.A. (2020). Tipologiya sovremennykh politicheskikh elit [Typology of contemporary political elites]. Upravlencheskoe konsultirovanie. No. 5(137). P. 19–28. https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2020-5-19-28

6. Arbatli E., Rosenberg D. (2021). United we stand, divided we rule: how political polarization erodes democracy. Democratization. Vol. 28. No. 2. P. 285–307. DOI:10.1080/13510347.2020.1818068

7. Arriola L.R., Devaro J., Meng A. (2021). Democratic subversion: Elite cooptation and opposition fragmentation. American Political Science Review. Vol. 115. No. 4. P. 1358–1372. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055421000629

8. Böller F., Herr L.D. (2020). From Washington without love: congressional foreign policy making and US-Russian relations under president Trump. Contemporary Politics. Vol. 26. No. 1. P. 17–37. DOI: 10.1080/13569775.2019.1617655

9. Bolstad G., Riddervold M. (2023). Polarization, Trump, and Transatlantic Relations. In: A. Akande (ed.) The Perils of Populism: The End of the American Century? Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. P. 195–219. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-36343-6_8

10. Borg S. (2024). “A Battle for the Soul of This Nation”: How Domestic Polarization Affects US Foreign Policy in Post-Trump America. International Journal. Vol. 79. No. 1. P. 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207020241232986

11. Cheek T., Hamrin C.L. (2023). Introduction: collaboration and conflict in the search for a new order. In: T. Cheek, C.L. Hamrin (eds) China's Establishment Intellectuals. London; New York: Routledge. P. 3–20.

12. Chikhachev A.Y. (2022). Rossiysko-frantsuzskie otnosheniya pri prezidente Emmanyuele Makrone: dostizheniya i protivorechiya [Russian-French relations under President Emmanuel Macron: Achievements and contradictions]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 15. No. 1. P. 86–104. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu06.2022.106

13. Clayton K., Davis N.T., Nyhan B., Porter E., Ryan T.J., Wood T.J. (2021). Elite rhetoric can undermine democratic norms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol. 118. No. 23. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2024125118

14. Cunningham J., Moore M.K. (1997). Elite and mass foreign policy opinions: Who is leading this parade? Social Science Quarterly. Vol. 78. No. 3. P. 641–656.

15. Dahlberg L. (2007). Rethinking the fragmentation of the cyberpublic: from consensus to contestation. New Media & Society. Vol. 9. No. 5. P. 827–847. DOI: 10.1177/1461444807081228

16. Degterev D.A. (2016). Raspredeleniye kul'turnykh norm i tsennostey: agentnoye modelirovaniye [The spread of cultural norms and values: Agent-based modeling]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. No. 1. P. 141–152.

17. Dellmuth L., Tallberg J. (2023). Legitimacy politics: Elite communication and public opinion in global governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 260 p. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009222020

18. Dijkstra H., Debre M.J. (2022). The death of major international organizations: When institutional stickiness is not enough. Global Studies Quarterly. Vol. 2. No. 4. P. 1–13. DOI:10.1093/isagsq/ksac048

19. Domingues J.M. (2022). Power and rule, civilisations and the modern political dimension: parallelism, convergence and divergence in social evolution. International Review of Sociology. Vol. 32. No. 1. P. 174–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2022.2028404

20. Engelstad F. (2009). Democratic elitism–conflict and consensus. Comparative Sociology. Vol. 8. No. 3. P. 383–401. DOI:10.1163/156913309X447585

21. Entin M., Entina E., Babkina S. (2024). Prodovol'stvennye i energeticheskie krizisy 2020-kh godov kak instrument antirossiyskoy politiki stran Zapada [The food and energy crises of the 2020s as a tool of anti-Russian policies of Western countries]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 1–24. DOI: 10.46272/IT.2024.22.1.76.2

22. French J. (2017). The importance of segmentation in social marketing strategy. In: T. Dietrich, S. Rundle-Thiele, K. Kubacki (eds) Segmentation in Social Marketing: Process, Methods and Application. Cham: Springer. P. 25–40. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-1835-0_3

23. Friedman S., Reeves A. (2020). From aristocratic to ordinary: Shifting modes of elite distinction. American Sociological Review. Vol. 85. No. 2. P. 323–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122420912941

24. Fukai S.N., Fukui H. (1992). Elite recruitment and political leadership. PS: Political Science & Politics. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 25–36.

25. Gaman-Golutvina O.V., Soloveva D.D. (2021). Novaya politicheskaya elita Frantsii protiv staroy sistemy rekrutirovaniya [France’s New Political Elite Against the Old Recruitment System]. Polis. Political Studies. No. 6. P. 60–72. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.06.05

26. Golovin V.G., Golovina E.E. (2023). Elity v sovremennom sotsial'nom prostranstve [Elites in the modern social space]. Voprosy elitologii. Vol. 4. No. 3. P. 13–45. doi: 10.46539/elit.v4i3.157

27. Grebnev R.D. (2023). Strategicheskiye napravleniya vneshney politiki Rossii v mnogopolyarom mire: geopoliticheskiy podkhod [Strategic directions of Russia's foreign policy in a multipolar world: A geopolitical approach]. Sotsial'no-gumanitarnye znaniya. No. 3. P. 124–128.

28. Green J., Edgerton J., Naftel D., Shoub K., Cranmer S.J. (2020). Elusive consensus: Polarization in elite communication on the COVID-19 pandemic. Science Advances. Vol. 6. No. 28. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abc2717

29. Gromyko A.A. (2020). Pandemiya i krizis sistemy mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniy [The pandemic and the crisis of the international relations system]. Kontury global'nykh transformatsiy: politika, ekonomika, pravo. Vol. 13. No. 5. P. 6–19. https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2020-13-5-1

30. Henriksen L.F., Seabrooke L. (2021). Elites in transnational policy networks. Global Networks. Vol. 21. No. 2. P. 217–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12301

31. Higley J., Burton M.G. (1989). The elite variable in democratic transitions and breakdowns. American Sociological Review. Vol. 54. No. 1. P. 17–32. https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.37.2012.1.245-268

32. Higley J., Burton M.G. (2006). Elite foundations of liberal democracy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. 229 p.

33. Higley J. (2021). Elites, non-elites, and political realism: Diminishing futures for western societies. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. 176 p.

34. Hill C. (2008). Elites in European foreign policy-making: Consensus and competition. Review of Sociology. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 93–102. DOI:10.1556/RevSoc.14.2008.5

35. Hooghe L. et al. (2024). The Russian threat and the consolidation of the West: How populism and EU-skepticism shape party support for Ukraine. European Union Politics. Vol. 25. No. 3. P. 459–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165241237136

36. Jackson D., Jolly S. (2021). A new divide? Assessing the transnational-nationalist dimension among political parties and the public across the EU. European Union Politics. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 316–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116520988915

37. Kascian K., Denisenko V., Matonytė I. (2024). Baltic States’ EU membership: discursive search for (and failure to obtain) farewell from Russia. Journal of Contemporary European Studies. P. 1–16. DOI: 10.1080/14782804.2024.2349250

38. Keller F.B. (2018). Analyses of elite networks. In: H. Best, J. Higley (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Political Elites. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. P. 135–152. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-51904-7_11

39. Kertzer J.D., Renshon J. (2022). Experiments and surveys on political elites. Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 529–550. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-013649

40. Kertzer J.D., Zeitzoff T. (2017). A bottom-up theory of public opinion about foreign policy. American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 61. No. 3. P. 543–558. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QSXDUN

41. Khudoley K.K., Kolotaev Y.Y. (2024). Dividing Lines in the EU’s Common Foreign Policy: Russia as a polarising factor. Baltic Region. Vol. 16. No. 3. P. 87–107. DOI: 10.5922/2079-8555-2024-3-5

42. Kolosov V.A., Zotova M.V. (2022). Fragmentatsiya politicheskogo prostranstva i dinamizm sovremennoy sistemy granits [Fragmentation of political space and the dynamics of the modern system of borders]. Politicheskaya nauka. No. 4. P. 67–89. https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2022.04.03

43. Körösényi A. (2018). Political elites and democracy. In: H. Best, J. Higley (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Political Elites. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. P. 41–52.

44. Lamoso-González P. (2024). Revisiting liberal intergovernmentalism in CFSP: preference formation and the EEAS. Contemporary Politics. Vol. 31. No. 3. P. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2024.2387433

45. Lebedev A.N., Gordyakova O.V. (2021). Fenomen gruppovoy polarizatsii v politologii i politicheskoy psikhologii SShA i Evropy [The phenomenon of group polarization in the political science and political psychology of the USA and Europe]. Institut psikhologii Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Sotsial'naya i ekonomicheskaya psikhologiya. Vol. 6. No. 4 (24). P. 123–150.

46. Lebedeva M. (2022). Introduction. Transformation of the Political Organization of the World. In: M. Lebedeva, V. Morozov (eds) Turning Points of World Transformation: New Trends, Challenges and Actors. Singapore: Springer Nature. P. 3–14. DOI:10.1007/978-981-19-1758-5_1

47. Loizides N.G. (2009). Elite framing and conflict transformation in Turkey. Parliamentary Affairs. Vol. 62. No. 2. P. 278–297. DOI:10.1093/pa/gsn038

48. Lupton D.L., Webb C. (2022). Wither elites? The role of elite credibility and knowledge in public perceptions of foreign policy. International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 66. No. 3. DOI: 10.1093/isq/sqac057

49. Makarychev A., Terry G.S. (2020). An Estranged ‘marriage of convenience’: Salvini, Putin, and the intricacies of Italian-Russian relations. Contemporary Italian Politics. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 23–42. DOI: 10.1080/23248823.2019.1706926

50. Matsumoto T., Okazaki T. (2023). Elite mobility and continuity during a regime change.The British Journal of Sociology. Vol. 74. No. 2. P. 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.13000

51. Maynard J.L., Mildenberger M. (2018). Convergence and divergence in the study of ideology: A critical review. British Journal of Political Science. Vol. 48. No. 2. P. 563–589. DOI: 10.1017/S0007123415000654

52. Merkley E. (2022). Polarization eh? Ideological divergence and partisan sorting in the Canadian mass public. Public Opinion Quarterly. Vol. 86. No. 4. P. 932–943. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/cnzer

53. Michels R. (1999). Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy. London; NY: Routledge. 266 p.

54. Mizin V.I. (2020). Novye kontury strategicheskoy stabil'nosti v global'noy mnogopolyarnoj konkurentsii [New contours of strategic stability in global multipolar competition]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 18. No. 2. P. 141–168. https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2020.18.2.61.8

55. Mosca G. (2012). Istoriya politicheskikh doktrin [History of Political Doctrines]. Moscow: Mysl. 326 p.

56. Myrick R. (2021). Do external threats unite or divide? Security crises, rivalries, and polarization in American foreign policy. International Organization. Vol. 75. No. 4. P. 921–958. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818321000175

57. Najimdeen B. (2016). The Reconstruction of European Political and Public Sphere through a Constructivist Paradigm. Journal of European Studies (JES). Vol. 32. No. 2. P. 1–17.

58. Neimark M.A. (2020). V poisakh uskol'zayushchey real'nosti: Otnosheniye politicheskoy elity SShA k Rossii [In search of elusive reality: The attitude of the US political elite towards Russia]. Nauchno-analiticheskiy zhurnal Obozrevatel'-Observer. No. 4(363). P. 66–77.

59. Oskina O.I. (2020). Transformatsionnye peremennye politicheskoy kul'tury sovremennoy politicheskoy elity [Transformational variables of the political culture of the modern political elite]. Voprosy elitologii. Vol. 1. No. 3. P. 52–73. DOI: 10.46539/elit.v1i3.26

60. Pareto V. (2011). Transformatsiya demokratii [Transformation of Democracy]. Moscow: Territory of the Future. 208 p.

61. Pertiwi L.A. (2024). The EU's Approach to Sanctions on Russia: A Critical Analysis of the Existing Literature. Central European Journal of International & Security Studies. Vol. 18. No. 3. P. 61–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51870/NOEX4475

62. Portela C., Pospieszna P., Skrzypczyńska J., Walentek D. (2021). Consensus against all odds: explaining the persistence of EU sanctions on Russia. Journal of European Integration. Vol. 43. No. 6. P. 683– 699. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2020.1803854

63. Rogowski J.C., Sutherland J.L. (2016). How ideology fuels affective polarization. Political Behavior. Vol. 38. P. 485–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-015-9323-7

64. Romanova T.A. (2024). In Different Languages 2.0. Russia in Global Affairs. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 72–92. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6374-2024-22-1-72-92

65. Sanders J. (1980). Shaping the Cold War Consensus: The Soviet Threat, Interelite Conflict, and Mass Politics in the Korean War Era. Berkeley Journal of Sociology. Vol. 24. P. 67–136.

66. Saunders E.N. (2022). Elites in the making and breaking of foreign policy. Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 25. No. 1. P. 219–240. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041719-103330

67. Schäfer M.S., Metag J. (2021). Audiences of science communication between pluralisation, fragmentation and polarization. In: M. Bucchi, B. Trench (eds) Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology. London; New York: Routledge. P. 291–304. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003039242

68. Schultz K. A. (2017). Perils of polarization for US foreign policy. The Washington Quarterly. Vol. 40. No. 4. P. 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2017.1406705

69. Shakleina T., Rogers R. (2018). Historical Trajectory of the US-Russia Relationship. Perception and Misperception. Fletcher Security Review. Vol. 5.

70. Shavitt S., Jiang D., Cho H. (2016). Stratification and segmentation: Social class in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology. Vol. 26. No. 4. P. 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2016.08.005

71. Singh R.S. (2024). The Biden and Trump Doctrines in Comparative Perspective. In: S. A. Renshon, P. Suedfeld (eds) Presidential Leadership and Foreign Policy: Comparing the Trump and Biden Doctrines. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. P. 17–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52799-9_2

72. Sjursen H., Rosén G. (2017). Arguing sanctions. On the EU's response to the crisis in Ukraine. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 55. No. 1. P. 20–36. DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12443

73. Smakotina N.L., Volkov A.V. (2024). Transformatsiya mirovogo poryadka v usloviyakh mezhdunarodnoy nestabil'nosti: otkrytyy mir i sinergiya tsivilizatsiy [Transformation of the world order under conditions of international instability: Open world and synergy of civilizations]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 27. Globalistika i geopolitika. No. 1. P. 3–22. DOI: 10.56429/2414-4894-2024-47-1-03-22

74. Spartak A.N., Frenchuzov V.V. (2022). Vliyanie antirossiyskikh sanktsiy na yevropeyskuyu ekonomiku [The impact of anti-Russian sanctions on the European economy]. Rossiyskiy vneshneekonomicheskiy vestnik. No. 12. P. 7–17. https://doi.org/10.24412/2072-8042-2022-12-7-17

75. Stolle D. (2024). Aiding Ukraine in the Russian war: unity or new dividing line among Europeans? European Political Science. Vol. 23. P. 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-023-00444-7

76. Suhonosov, A.P. (2022). Politicheskie elity v usloviyakh rosta novoy volny mirovogo krizisa [Political elites in the context of the growth of a new wave of the gobal crisis]. Issues in Elitology. Vol. 3. No. 2. P. 51–63. DOI: 10.46539/elit.v3i2.104.

77. Woods M. (1998). Rethinking elites: networks, space, and local politics. Environment and Planning A. Vol. 30. No. 12. P. 2101–2119. https://doi.org/10.1068/a302101

78. Ziegler C.E. (2018). International dimensions of electoral processes: Russia, the USA, and the 2016 elections. International Politics. Vol. 55. No. 5. P. 557–574. DOI:10.1057/s41311-017-0113-1

79.