Preview

RSUH/RGGU Bulletin Series "Political Science. History. International Relations"

Advanced search

De-facto States: the Post-Soviet Political Phenomenon

https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2018-1-24-40

Abstract

If viewed from a formal-legal point of view, the de facto entities (the ones which are most important for the present discussion: Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria and the so called People’s Republics in the South-Eastern Ukraine) do not exist for the international community. However the “virtual” existence of these states does not prevent them from being real participants in the political and security processes in the post-Soviet space. Many momentous events in Eurasia are connected, in some way, with the developments around such statelets. The author considers the establishing of the de facto states in the context of the USSR dissolution, of the ethno-political self-determination during this process and the transformation of the international law after the end of the “Cold War”. He defines the unrecognized states, creates their typology and explains their similarities and differences. In his view, the phenomenon of the de facto entities is not limited exclusively to the “frozen conflicts’’, so a productive analysis of these formations is not possible without considering their domestic dynamics, the peculiarities of nation/state-building and the processes of democratization. The author pays special attention to the importance of the Eurasian de facto states to the international affairs, particularly in the context of the lack of common criteria for self-determination and territorial integrity of states.

About the Author

S. M. Markedonov
Russian State University for the Humanities
Russian Federation

Sergey M. Markedonov, PhD in History, associate professor

bld. 6, Miusskaya sq., Moscow, 125993



References

1. Lynch D. Separatist States and Post-Soviet Conflicts. International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs). 2002;4(78):831-48.

2. Markelova AA. Secession as a Political Phenomenon. Sotsium i vlast’. 2017;3(65):52-3. (In Russ).

3. De Waal T. Black Garden: Armenia and Azerbaijan Trough Peace and War. New York; London: New York Univ. Press Publ.; 2003. 358 p.

4. Pegg S. International Society and the De Facto State. Aldershot: Ashgate Publ.; 1998. 308 p.

5. Kolstø P., Malgin A. The Transnistrian Republic: A Case of Politicized Regionalism. Nationalities Papers. 1998;1(26):103-28.

6. Meron R. After Empire: Russia and the Southern Near Abroad. V: The New Russian Foreign Policy. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press Publ.; 1988. P. 220–232.

7. Cornell SE. Autonomy as a Source of Conflict: Caucasian Conflicts in Theoretical Perspective. World Politics. 2002;2:245-76.

8. Lynch D. Engaging Eurasia’s Separatist States: Unresolved Conflicts and De Facto States. Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press Publ.; 2004. 175 p.

9. Broers L. The Politics of Non-Recognition and Democratization. V: Broers L, ed. Accord: An International Review of Peace Initiatives: The Limits of Leadership: Elites and Societies in the Nagorny Karabakh Peace Process. 2005;17:68–71.

10. Kupchan C. Independence for Kosovo. Foreign Affairs. 2005;6(84):152-60.

11. Tamás G. Ethnarchy and Ethno-Anarchism. Social Research. 1996;63(1):147-90.

12. King C. The Benefits of Ethnic War: Understanding Eurasia’s Unrecognized States. World Politics. 2001;3:524-52.

13. Kolstø P. The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States’. Journal of Peace Research. 2006;6(43):723-40.

14. Ó Beacháin D. Electoral Politics in Abkhazia. Paper presented at the conference “After the Melting of Frozen Conflicts”, University of Tartu, Estonia, May 27-29, 2010. [Manuscript.]

15. Ó Beacháin D. The dynamics of electoral politics in Abkhazia. Communist and PostCommunist Studies. 2012;45:165-74.

16. Blakkisrud H., Kolstø P. Dynamics of de facto statehood: The South Caucasian de facto states between secession and sovereignty. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. 2012;2(12):281-98.

17. Caspersen N. Unrecognized States: The Struggle for Sovereignty in the Modern International System. Cambridge: Polity Publ.; 2012. 210 p.

18. Markedonov S., Tekushev I., Shevchenko K., eds. Abkhazia: Between the Past and the Future. Prague: Medium orient Publ.; 2013. 134 p.

19. Kudelia S. Domestic Sources of the Donbas Insurgency [Internet]. PONARS Eurasia. 2014. Sept. (data obrashcheniya: 23 dec. 2017). URL: http://www.ponarseurasia.org/memo/domestic-sources-donbas-insurgency

20. Umland A. In Defense of Conspirology: A Rejoinder to Serhiy Kudelia’s Anti-Political Analysis of the Hybrid War in Eastern Ukraine [Internet]. PONARS Eurasia. 2014. Sept 30. (data obrashcheniya 23 dec. 2017). URL: http://www.ponarseurasia.org/node/7274

21. United Nations organization. on membership [Internet]. (data obrashcheniya: 3 nov. 2017). URL: http://www.un.org/ru/sections/member-states/about-unmembership/index.html (In Russ.)

22. Convention on Rights and Duties of States (inter-American), December 26, 1933. Lillian Goldman Law Library [Internet]. (data obrashcheniya: 25 jan. 2017). URL: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/intam03.asp

23. Brownlie I. Principles of Public International Law. 5th ed. oxford: oxford Univ. Press Publ.; 1998. 784 p.

24. Shaw M. International Law. 4th ed. Grotius Publication, Cambridge Univ. Press Publ.; 1997. 449 p.

25. Trifunovska S., ed. Yugoslavia through Documents. From Its Creation to Its Dissolution. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publ., 1996. 1346 p.

26. King C. The Ghost оf Fгееdоm. А History of the Caucasus. oxford Univ. Press Publ.; 2008. 314 p.

27. Nolte G. Principles of International Law: Self-Determination and Territorial Integrity – as Applied to the Cases of Abkhazia, Kosovo and South ossetia. Conflict in Post-Soviet Europe. The South Caucasus: Are there Scenarios for Resolution? Berlin: Federal Foreign office, Foreign Service Academy Publ.; 2009. 206 p.

28. Report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict on Georgia. [Internet]. (data obrashcheniya 17 dec. 2017). URL: https://ru.scribd.com/document/20427542/Tagliavini-Report-Georgia-Volume-I

29. Troebst S. “We Are Transnistrians!” Post-Soviet Identity Management in the Dniester Valley. Ab Imperio. 2003;1:437-66.

30. Tsutsiyev AA. Territories of problematic sovereignty. V: Papers of the Institute of Eastern Europe. Moscow, 2006. Issue 1. p. 19-35 (In Russ.)

31. Yannis A. The Concept of Suspended Sovereignty in International Law and Its Implications in International Politics. European Journal of International Law. 2002;13:13-35.

32. Lapidus GW. Contested Sovereignty: The Tragedy of Chechnya. International Security. 1998;1(23), Summer:5-49.


Review

For citations:


Markedonov S.M. De-facto States: the Post-Soviet Political Phenomenon. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin Series "Political Science. History. International Relations". 2018;(1):24-40. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28995/2073-6339-2018-1-24-40

Views: 930


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2073-6339 (Print)