Beating the offside trap

Case studies in hedging and multi-vectorism

Bibliographic Data

ID8249772
AuthorsNeil Collins (0000-0003-1690-2079, Nazarbayev University), N R Collins (Nazarbayev University), Anuar Satmurzin (0009-0003-3606-1075, Ahmet Yesevi University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Pages1-14
Publication date2026-03-09
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEuropean Politics and Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2374-5126 • E-ISSN: 2374-5118
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/23745118.2026.2640005
OpenAlexW7134846712
LanguageEN
References cited28

The end of the Cold War has led to a reconsideration of global alignment formation narratives. Smaller states went beyond the simplicity of a balancing-bandwagoning dichotomy towards more delicate hedging strategies. Kazakhstan’s multi-vectorism, although often associated with hedging, resembles different engagement mechanisms. This research, thus, seeks to argue in favour of the conceptual distinction between hedging and multi-vectorism via the means of qualitative analysis of case studies of Serbia and Kazakhstan. This research will examine the mechanisms of establishing and signalling alignment preferences by Kazakhstan and Serbia to derive the patterns of engagement with regional heavyweights, and China in particular. The results imply a difference between the strategic mechanisms utilised by Kazakhstan and Serbia, which further indicates a distinction between hedging and multi-vectorism.

Context (archaeology · Perspective (graphical · Agricultural risk and resilience · Financial Risk and Volatility Modeling · Risk Management in Financial Firms

Tools

Open DOI