Pub Date : 2020-05-03DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1724389
Laure Delcour
focuses on the old propaganda slogan, the “Friendship of Nations” – now cynically devoid of any meaning. The chapter revives it by infusing it with real-life experiences, memories and understandings of Soviet migrants and Soviet citizens. Wistfulness does not give way to a blind nostalgia, as Sahadeo’s interviewees keep the narrative in place by astute comments comparing the friendship to that “of Robinson [Crusoe] and Friday” (p. 59). Chapter 3 focuses on place making practices, ambivalent welcome, and settling in. It tells the story of new beginnings, gender relations, cultural adaptions in spaces that officially lacked any form of social or ethnic segregation, but deep down were perfectly segregated (p. 91). Chapter 4 reveals how a Western concept of “race” will not do to explain the intersectionality of subordination experienced by “southern” migrants, and how ethnicity, nationality, social class, gender and social position help to revaluate and open up the discourse of Russian “racism”. Chapter 5 demonstrates the different forms, modalities and experiences of belonging in Soviet Moscow and St Petersburg and becoming svoi via personal networks or work collectives. Chapter 6 reviews the organizing analytical themes of the book – the journey, early adaptation, social mobility, links with home – through the lens of personal stories of four different traders, while Chapter 7 gives a migrant perspective to the turbulent years of perestroika, rising ethnic and linguistic tensions fuelled by extremist politics, volatile economics and bewildering legislation, as the Soviet period drew to a close. In sum, Sahadeo’s excellent book writes the much-needed pre-history, indeed prequel, to contemporary labour migration into Russia’s European cities, and firmly situates late Soviet migration as an intrinsic element of global change and development.
{"title":"The EU’s neighbourhood policy towards the South Caucasus: expanding the European security community","authors":"Laure Delcour","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1724389","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1724389","url":null,"abstract":"focuses on the old propaganda slogan, the “Friendship of Nations” – now cynically devoid of any meaning. The chapter revives it by infusing it with real-life experiences, memories and understandings of Soviet migrants and Soviet citizens. Wistfulness does not give way to a blind nostalgia, as Sahadeo’s interviewees keep the narrative in place by astute comments comparing the friendship to that “of Robinson [Crusoe] and Friday” (p. 59). Chapter 3 focuses on place making practices, ambivalent welcome, and settling in. It tells the story of new beginnings, gender relations, cultural adaptions in spaces that officially lacked any form of social or ethnic segregation, but deep down were perfectly segregated (p. 91). Chapter 4 reveals how a Western concept of “race” will not do to explain the intersectionality of subordination experienced by “southern” migrants, and how ethnicity, nationality, social class, gender and social position help to revaluate and open up the discourse of Russian “racism”. Chapter 5 demonstrates the different forms, modalities and experiences of belonging in Soviet Moscow and St Petersburg and becoming svoi via personal networks or work collectives. Chapter 6 reviews the organizing analytical themes of the book – the journey, early adaptation, social mobility, links with home – through the lens of personal stories of four different traders, while Chapter 7 gives a migrant perspective to the turbulent years of perestroika, rising ethnic and linguistic tensions fuelled by extremist politics, volatile economics and bewildering legislation, as the Soviet period drew to a close. In sum, Sahadeo’s excellent book writes the much-needed pre-history, indeed prequel, to contemporary labour migration into Russia’s European cities, and firmly situates late Soviet migration as an intrinsic element of global change and development.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"215 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1724389","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45126026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-03DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1759893
A. Nikitin
ABSTRACT This article provides a comparative analysis of the legal grounds for the deployment of the Russian Armed Forces in a series of conflicts in the Caucasus, namely in the disengagement between North Ossetia and Ingushetia (1992–1994), South Ossetia/Georgia (1992–2008), Abkhazia/Georgia (1994–2008), and in the Russian–Georgian War of 2008. The difficulties in codifying certain actions from the point of view of international law are detailed. The article discusses whether the political and military actions of Moscow in various Caucasian conflicts were driven and interconnected by one and the same logic, or were purely ad hoc fixes. Cases where Russia’s actions have been legitimized by securing mandate from a regional intergovernmental organization are differentiated from cases where it has acted on the basis of intergovernmental agreements, as well as from the application in certain cases of Article 51 (“the right of individual or collective self-defence”) of the UN Charter. The legitimacy or illegitimacy of the deployment of the Russian Armed Forces abroad is considered in the context of, and in comparison with, a series of cases where force has been used in conflicts by coalitions under a UN mandate, as well as by NATO and some Western powers.
{"title":"Legal norms or ad hoc fixes? International legal aspects of Russian military involvement in conflict settlements in the Caucasus","authors":"A. Nikitin","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1759893","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1759893","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article provides a comparative analysis of the legal grounds for the deployment of the Russian Armed Forces in a series of conflicts in the Caucasus, namely in the disengagement between North Ossetia and Ingushetia (1992–1994), South Ossetia/Georgia (1992–2008), Abkhazia/Georgia (1994–2008), and in the Russian–Georgian War of 2008. The difficulties in codifying certain actions from the point of view of international law are detailed. The article discusses whether the political and military actions of Moscow in various Caucasian conflicts were driven and interconnected by one and the same logic, or were purely ad hoc fixes. Cases where Russia’s actions have been legitimized by securing mandate from a regional intergovernmental organization are differentiated from cases where it has acted on the basis of intergovernmental agreements, as well as from the application in certain cases of Article 51 (“the right of individual or collective self-defence”) of the UN Charter. The legitimacy or illegitimacy of the deployment of the Russian Armed Forces abroad is considered in the context of, and in comparison with, a series of cases where force has been used in conflicts by coalitions under a UN mandate, as well as by NATO and some Western powers.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"163 - 178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1759893","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49619655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-03DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1776957
N. Silaev
ABSTRACT The article examines contemporary nationalities policy in Russia, based on a case study of Stavropol krai in the northern Caucasus. In order to reveal the informal mechanisms of nationalities policy this research analyses the practices of the ethnic group-making used by the regional bureaucracy. The key argument is that the ethnic divisions, rather than being embedded within the society as everyday social categorizations, are imposed by the bureaucracy in order to make social space more transparent and manageable. The resulting use of ethnicity as a political tool has much in common with the Soviet approach in this field. However, unlike the Soviet nationalities policy, in today’s Russia ethnicity is not pervasive, and the nationalities policy as described is directed only at a small share of the population.
{"title":"Ethnicity as a tool and nationalities policy as practice: the case of Stavropol krai","authors":"N. Silaev","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1776957","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1776957","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article examines contemporary nationalities policy in Russia, based on a case study of Stavropol krai in the northern Caucasus. In order to reveal the informal mechanisms of nationalities policy this research analyses the practices of the ethnic group-making used by the regional bureaucracy. The key argument is that the ethnic divisions, rather than being embedded within the society as everyday social categorizations, are imposed by the bureaucracy in order to make social space more transparent and manageable. The resulting use of ethnicity as a political tool has much in common with the Soviet approach in this field. However, unlike the Soviet nationalities policy, in today’s Russia ethnicity is not pervasive, and the nationalities policy as described is directed only at a small share of the population.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"196 - 213"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1776957","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49423029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-05-03DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1759888
A. Sushentsov, N. Neklyudov
ABSTRACT The Caucasus has always been a formative region for Russian foreign policy-making. While the North Caucasus has retained its position as Russia’s most fragile and politically instable region, the South Caucasus provided the most pressing security challenges shaping Russian foreign policy since the early nineteenth century. In this article, we argue that the Caucasus comprises a distinct environment that exposes the underlying features of the Russian grand strategy, namely its propensity to hard power and balancing, and yet, at the same time, the fragility of Russia’s position within such a turbulent region. The historical strategic equation with Turkey and Iran has in recent decades been supplemented with a competitive Russia-NATO security dynamic in the Black sea. The threat of possible NATO enlargement in the South Caucasus forces Moscow to draw particular attention to the southern direction of its defences. The situation has become even more complicated with the onset of the Ukraine crisis and Russian engagement in Syria. Historical experience teaches Russia to cease any other foreign policy endeavours until the Caucasus is at peace or at least does not threaten a spill-over of instability. For now, this is a very distant prospect.
{"title":"The Caucasus in Russian foreign policy strategy","authors":"A. Sushentsov, N. Neklyudov","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1759888","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1759888","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Caucasus has always been a formative region for Russian foreign policy-making. While the North Caucasus has retained its position as Russia’s most fragile and politically instable region, the South Caucasus provided the most pressing security challenges shaping Russian foreign policy since the early nineteenth century. In this article, we argue that the Caucasus comprises a distinct environment that exposes the underlying features of the Russian grand strategy, namely its propensity to hard power and balancing, and yet, at the same time, the fragility of Russia’s position within such a turbulent region. The historical strategic equation with Turkey and Iran has in recent decades been supplemented with a competitive Russia-NATO security dynamic in the Black sea. The threat of possible NATO enlargement in the South Caucasus forces Moscow to draw particular attention to the southern direction of its defences. The situation has become even more complicated with the onset of the Ukraine crisis and Russian engagement in Syria. Historical experience teaches Russia to cease any other foreign policy endeavours until the Caucasus is at peace or at least does not threaten a spill-over of instability. For now, this is a very distant prospect.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"127 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1759888","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48722148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-28DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1754737
Harun Yılmaz
{"title":"Leadership and nationalism in Azerbaijan: Ali Mardan Bey Topchibashov, founder and creator","authors":"Harun Yılmaz","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1754737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1754737","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"9 1","pages":"90 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1754737","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41817362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-28DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1755215
C. Zürcher
{"title":"Armenia and Azerbaijan: Anatomy of a Rivalry","authors":"C. Zürcher","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1755215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1755215","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"9 1","pages":"87 - 88"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1755215","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42856419","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-04-16DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1728499
A. Kazantsev, P. Rutland, S. Medvedeva, I. Safranchuk
ABSTRACT The article analyzes the evolution of Russia’s policy in secessionist conflicts in the post-Soviet space in 1991–2018. The authors differentiate the patterns of Russian policy between the “first” and “second” generation of frozen conflicts. The “first generation” includes four conflicts of an ethno-linguistic nature that arose out of the collapse of the USSR in the early 1990s (Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Pridnestrov’e and Karabakh). Most commentators interpret Russia’s actions in the “second generation” conflicts as centralized, directly controlled by the president of Russia, and driven by Russia’s opposition to NATO expansion, and some extend this logic back to the conflicts of the 1990s. However, this article argues that this was not true of Russian policy for the “first generation” conflicts in the early 1990s. In that period the policies of the Yeltsin administration were a product of struggle of different forces both in Moscow and outside of it. The “first generation” conflicts all primarily originated as a result of local grievances. Gradually, shifts in the broader geopolitical landscape in Eurasia, especially the growing confrontation between Russia and the West, led to a reconfiguration of the logic of these conflicts, turning them into the elements of Russian-Western geopolitical opposition.
{"title":"Russia’s policy in the “frozen conflicts” of the post-Soviet space: from ethno-politics to geopolitics","authors":"A. Kazantsev, P. Rutland, S. Medvedeva, I. Safranchuk","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1728499","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1728499","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article analyzes the evolution of Russia’s policy in secessionist conflicts in the post-Soviet space in 1991–2018. The authors differentiate the patterns of Russian policy between the “first” and “second” generation of frozen conflicts. The “first generation” includes four conflicts of an ethno-linguistic nature that arose out of the collapse of the USSR in the early 1990s (Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Pridnestrov’e and Karabakh). Most commentators interpret Russia’s actions in the “second generation” conflicts as centralized, directly controlled by the president of Russia, and driven by Russia’s opposition to NATO expansion, and some extend this logic back to the conflicts of the 1990s. However, this article argues that this was not true of Russian policy for the “first generation” conflicts in the early 1990s. In that period the policies of the Yeltsin administration were a product of struggle of different forces both in Moscow and outside of it. The “first generation” conflicts all primarily originated as a result of local grievances. Gradually, shifts in the broader geopolitical landscape in Eurasia, especially the growing confrontation between Russia and the West, led to a reconfiguration of the logic of these conflicts, turning them into the elements of Russian-Western geopolitical opposition.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"142 - 162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1728499","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49046960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-03DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-25517-6
Laura Luciani
{"title":"Women’s everyday lives in war and peace in the South Caucasus","authors":"Laura Luciani","doi":"10.1007/978-3-030-25517-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25517-6","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"217 - 218"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/978-3-030-25517-6","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49429890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-27DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1732101
S. Markedonov, M. Suchkov
ABSTRACT Today, the Caucasus region receives much less attention among scholars and decision-makers than a few years ago. Eurasian security studies are currently dominated by the coverage of the armed conflict in east Ukraine and the turbulence in the Middle East. The South Caucasus, however, remains rather unstable due to its geopolitical fragility. As Russia and the United States (US) find themselves in the midst of the most severe crisis in their relations since the end of the Cold War, their relationship in this sensitive part of Eurasia deserves every attention. While looking in this paper at the bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington in the Caucasus region, the authors seek to avoid framing the present state of the relationship as a second edition of the Cold War. Instead, the basic reasons for disagreements between Russia and the US in the Caucasus since the dissolution of the USSR are critically examined. The authors also aim to explain specific reasons driving Russia's and the US' respective engagements in regional security issues. They also focus on similarities and specifics of the US and Russian policies vis-à-vis regional ethno-political conflict resolution processes in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh.
{"title":"Russia and the United States in the Caucasus: cooperation and competition","authors":"S. Markedonov, M. Suchkov","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1732101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1732101","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Today, the Caucasus region receives much less attention among scholars and decision-makers than a few years ago. Eurasian security studies are currently dominated by the coverage of the armed conflict in east Ukraine and the turbulence in the Middle East. The South Caucasus, however, remains rather unstable due to its geopolitical fragility. As Russia and the United States (US) find themselves in the midst of the most severe crisis in their relations since the end of the Cold War, their relationship in this sensitive part of Eurasia deserves every attention. While looking in this paper at the bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington in the Caucasus region, the authors seek to avoid framing the present state of the relationship as a second edition of the Cold War. Instead, the basic reasons for disagreements between Russia and the US in the Caucasus since the dissolution of the USSR are critically examined. The authors also aim to explain specific reasons driving Russia's and the US' respective engagements in regional security issues. They also focus on similarities and specifics of the US and Russian policies vis-à-vis regional ethno-political conflict resolution processes in Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Nagorno-Karabakh.","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"179 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1732101","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47802117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-02-11DOI: 10.1080/23761199.2020.1725735
Agnieszka Kubal
{"title":"Voices from the Soviet edge: southern migrants in Leningrad and Moscow","authors":"Agnieszka Kubal","doi":"10.1080/23761199.2020.1725735","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2020.1725735","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37506,"journal":{"name":"Caucasus Survey","volume":"8 1","pages":"214 - 215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2020-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/23761199.2020.1725735","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48701056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：