scholarly journals Pridnestrovian fork: on the question of the basis and implementation of the choice of the Pridnestrovian people

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-47
Author(s):  
Roman Tatarov
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Historical Method ◽  
Official Position ◽  
The People ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Historical Heritage

The article presents a comprehensive analysis of the process of state building in Pridnestrovie based on the identification of the Pridnestrovian people. The issues of acquiring the mechanism of legitimacy of the Pridnestrovian state are considered, as well as tools for ensuring the Pridnestrovian choice in the realities of the XX-XXI centuries are presented. The analysis widely uses the historical method and systematic approach, which form an understanding of the degree of Russia’s involvement in regional processes, as well as the place of the foreign policy choice of the people of Pridnestrovie in the structure of Russian interests and the opinion of the citizens of the Russian Federation about the Pridnestrovian settlement. The author highlights the historical milestones in the formation of the Pridnestrovian identification code, comes to the conclusion that there is a significant difference in the content of the Moldovan foreign policy from the Pridnestrovian on this basis. Based on the data presented at the republican referendums in Pridnestrovie, as well as on the basis of the results of sociological surveys conducted on the territory of Pridnestrovie and on the territory of the Russian Federation, the peculiarities of the choice of Pridnestrovie are revealed, the opinion of Russians regarding the fate of Pridnestrovie is reflected. In addition, the official position of Russia on the Pridnestrovie settlement is indicated, which at present cannot be called strictly formed. It is shown that, being at the fork in the next cycle of the space-time continuum, the basis of the Pridnestrovian choice was the historical heritage of the republic, as well as the position of the Russian Federation on the settlement of Moldovan-Pridnestrovian relations. The hypothesis about the continuously growing role of Russia in the fate of Pridnestrovie, as well as the significant importance of Pridnestrovie for Russia, filled with historical, geopolitical and cultural content, was confirmed. The conclusion is made about an increase in the demand for protection of the national interests of Russia in certain segments of Russian public opinion.

EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL FACTORS OF EVOLUTION OF THE EURASIAN TRACK OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA’S FOREIGN POLICY

2021 ◽  
pp. 177-192
Author(s):  
Nicole BODISHTEANU
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Internal Factors ◽  
Republic Of Moldova ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Policy Direction

The author considers main external and internal factors of the formation of the Eurasian track in foreign policy of the Republic of Moldova from 2009 to 2020. Among main internal factors of the development of the Eurasian (as opposed to European) track of foreign policy, the author singles out: 1) coming to power of the pro-Russian president I. Dodon; 2) current orientation of the economy on the market of the CIS countries; 3) pro-Western parliamentary contingent and representatives of the Party of Action and Solidarity led by M. Sandu, who, on the contrary, helps to blur this track. Among external factors, the author does put an accent on: 1) the influence of the Ukrainian crisis on public opinion of Moldovan citizens towards Western institutions, and as a result, the growing popularity of the «pro-Russian» foreign policy direction; 2) «soft power» of the Russian Federation, mostly concentrated on a common language (Russian) and cultural values (literature, historical past, etc.); 3) willingness of Eurasian partners (mainly the Russian Federation) to provide assistance in crisis situations at no cost, unlike European and Western institutions, which traditionally indicate a number of democratic transformations in the recipient country as one of the conditions for providing assistance. The author comes to the conclusion that the Eurasian track of the foreign policy of the Republic of Moldova is still in its «infancy», but it has great potential and promises interesting prospects for a small state with a favorable geographical position, located at the crossroads of the most important transport routes between the West and the East.

scholarly journals “Crimea Acts” of 1954: International Legal Principles

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 4-29
Author(s):  
Vladimir Lafitsky
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
The People ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Venice Commission

Crimea was transferred to Ukraine by Russia in February 1954 in violation of not only of the constitutions of the USSR, Russia (RSFSR), and Ukraine (Ukrainian SSR) in force at that time, but also of the principles of international law. This thesis is substantiated by a detailed analysis of the legal acts that formalized the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine; by research into the historical context of their adoption; by an assessment of whether these acts conform to international legal standards; and by the testimony of the author of the present article, who consulted on draft Union Treaty in 1990–1991, in drafting laws of the Republic Crimea in 1994–1995, and in presenting the legal position of the Russian Federation on Crimea in the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe in March 2014. The author expands upon the legal position of Russia on Crimea and addresses existing conflicts in legislation of the Russian Federation as the legal continuer of the USSR and the RSFSR; applies the international legal means for protecting the interests and the will of the people of Crimea and to prevent further escalation of the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine.

scholarly journals Ensuring national security: political-legal aspects

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-41
Author(s):  
Grigorii Aleksandrovich Maistrenko
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Political Stability ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Russian Federation

National security issues are crucial, multifaceted, and integral phenomena of social and political life of the country. This article explores the normative legal framework that regulates this sphere of social relations. The article presents an analysis of the features of legal support for national security as a problem of stabilizing society. Analysis is conducted on the peculiarities of legal support of national security as the problem of stabilization of society. The author notes that the national security policy, first and foremost should be aimed at ensuring geopolitical interests of the Russian Federation, its sovereignty, political stability, and progressive socioeconomic development. Research methodology employs complex and systemic approaches; systemic, functional, historical general scientific methods; analysis and synthesis as private scientific methods; formal-legal analysis of normative legal acts; and comparative legal method. It is claimed that in the sphere of domestic policy, the key prerequisite for achieving the protection of national interests should consists in unification of the nation in order to solve spiritual, cultural and material tasks due to the overall sustainability and consent in the country, nonviolent resolution of domestic social conflicts; while in the sphere of foreign policy – planning and implementation of foreign policy actions from the perspective of ensuring national interests. The author gives practical recommendations for further improvement of national security system of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals CONSIDERATIONS ON THE POLICIES OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TO ACHIEVE NATIONAL INTERESTS IN ITS NEAR ABROAD

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (72) ◽  
pp. 312-331
Author(s):  
Sergiu ȘARAMET
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Economic Sanctions ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Hard Power ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Near Abroad

The policies of the Russian Federation in its near abroad have been constantly changing. Taking into account this consideration, it is important to know what were thedetermining factors that influenced the policy orientation of the Russian Federation in the pursuit of national interests in those areas. In this context, are analyzed the policies through which the Russian Federation projects national interests in its near abroad such as “hard power”, which include military operations (the involvement of Russian troops as“peacekeeping forces” in the Republic of Moldova, Georgia and Tajikistan; stationing of large units and units on the territory of the former union republics; economic sanctions, etc.). In tandem with “hard power” policies, the Russian Federation also uses “soft power” policies (promoting the Russian language and culture, strengthening the presence of the Russian Federation in the information space, supporting the Russian diaspora).Keywords: policies, national interests, “hard power”, “soft power”, economic sanctions, military operations.

scholarly journals Ensuring the national security of the Russian Federation, state priorities, law-making

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (4) ◽  
pp. 27-31
Author(s):  
Valeriy Zhabskiy ◽  
Aleksander Shuvalov
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Western World ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
The Russian Federation

In the early 1990 s, the foreign policy concept in Russia was based on the policy of «Euro-Atlanticism», which presumed orientation towards the Western model of development, integration with the Western countries and a conflict-free vision of international relations. But unlike the era of «Cold War» with the USSR, the Western countries did not consider the Russian Federation to be equal in status and did not hasten the process of establishing strategic partnership. Russia has never managed to establish an alliance with the Western countries and become «part of the Western world», «Euro-Atlanticism» has not proved itself. In the late 1990s, a shift began to a course of «multi-vector» foreign policy, implying a multipolar system of international relations. Moreover, at the end of the twentieth century, the Russian Federation faced growing threats from the United States and the countries that make up the military-political bloc of NATO, which necessitated a rethinking of priorities and possibilities for ensuring the protection of Russia’s national interests and security, and the development and adoption of new doctrines and concepts on the subject. This article thus deals with the process of establishing State priorities on the basis of the principle of protecting the national interests and safeguarding the national security of the Russian Federation during the period 1999-2007.

TO THE QUESTION OF CHANGES IN THE STRATEGY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION NATIONAL SECURITY IN 2021

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-10
Author(s):  
I. A. Aleksandrov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Human Potential ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The People ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of

The paper considers a number of changes made to the Strategy of the Russian Federation National Security, which was approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation on July 2, 2021, in comparison with the previous strategy approved in 2015. The study is important since a new strategy has been recently enacted, and a uniform understanding of the key concepts reflected in this document seems essential. Some issues related to the fixed definitions of such concepts as “national security of the Russian Federation”, “national interests of the Russian Federation”, “strategic national priorities of the Russian Federation”, “national security protection”, “threat to national security”, “national security protection system” are analyzed. The study compares the definition of the concept “national security” fixed in the Strategy of the Russian Federation National Security, which was approved in 2021, with the options for other definitions given in the similar documents that were previously in force in Russia during the post-Soviet period of Russian history. The study additionally focuses on the transformation of national interests of the Russian Federation, which are enlisted in the recent strategy. In particular, the paper discusses the wording “saving the people of Russia, developing human potential, improving the quality of life and the well-being of citizens”. The author emphasizes that undervaluation of the strategic importance of the social sphere as a security factor in the course of economic and political reforms may cause threat of loss of citizens’ confidence in government officials, which, under certain conditions, can lead society and the country to a constitutional crisis and the collapse of federal status.

LAND QUESTION IN THE ACTIVITIES OF KABARDIAN PUBLIC ASSOCIATIONS IN THE BEGINNING OF THE XXI CENTURY

Kavkazologiya ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 185-204
Author(s):  
A.V. KUSHKHABIEV ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Rural Settlements ◽  
Political Situation ◽  
Separate Category ◽  
The People ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
A Priority ◽  
The Republic ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Land Question

The article shows that the land question was a priority in the activities of Kabardian public associations at the beginning of the XXI century. Kabardian public associations protested against the decisions of the Parliament of the KBR in 2005–2009 on the liquidation of inter-settlement territories and their distribution among some rural settlements. The leaders of the Kabardian national movement announced a disproportion in the distribution of «inter-settlement territories» along ethnic lines – the allocation of more than 90% of inter-settlement territories to villages with a predominantly Balkarian population, and appealed to the leadership of the Russian Federation and the KBR with requests to repeal of all laws on the boundaries of municipalities adopted in the KBR in 2005–2009 and the subsequent adoption of the law «On distant pastures», with the allocation of mountain pastures in a separate category of land, equally belonging to mountainous and lowland villages, regardless of the nationality of the people living there. In the context of the aggravated socio-political situation, the Parliament of the KBR suspended consideration of a draft law on changing the boundaries of municipalities in the republic (November 2009), and also adopted a law (June 2011), according to which distant pastures are classified as republican property and are not subject to privatization. But, despite the normative acts adopted by the Parliament of the KBR, the distributed «inter-settlement territories» remained in the use of some rural settlements.

scholarly journals TURKEY AND RUSSIA AS MAJOR PLAYERS IN THE BLACK SEA: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-30
Author(s):  
Nuri Demirel
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Black Sea ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
The Black Sea ◽  
Black Sea Region ◽  
The World ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Republic Of Turkey

Currently, the Republic of Turkey plays a vital role in international processes taking place on the world stage. Since ancient times, at the crossroads of the paths between the world of East and West, the Republic of Turkey claims to have an excellent position in the relations of these regions with each other, as well as in their internal processes and events. The universal location between Europe and Asia makes Turkish foreign policy one of its main political issues, especially in the field of regional cooperation. Moreover, the changes in the world of recent decades, such as the collapse of the USSR, revolutions and military operations in eastern countries, the transition of Crimea to Russia, lead to the fact that Turkey pursued its foreign policy thoughtfully and actively, taking the most advantageous positions for itself. An essential region for pursuing Turkish policy is the Black Sea region. The events of recent years have significantly affected him and the role that large states play in him, such as the Republic of Turkey and the Russian Federation. It also began to arouse great interest among states and regions of the Western world, such as the European Union. The changed geopolitical structure of the Black Sea region has led to the need for its members to determine their positions and areas of interaction in which they are ready to cooperate or, on the contrary, to oppose each other. In this article, the author will examine the relations of the Turkish Republic and the Russian Federation in the Black Sea region and its importance. In this study, political relations, security, economy, energy, and security will be discussed. In the conclusion of the study, the current state of Turkey-Russia relations and assessments will be made about its future.

Russia’s foreign policy in the age of Boris Yeltsin through the eyes of Slovak diplomats (1993–1999)

2020 ◽  
pp. 151-171
Author(s):  
Viktor V. Nikitin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Archival Documents ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Basic Approaches ◽  
The One ◽  
Foreign Ministry

ased on archival documents from the Embassy of the Slovak Republic in Moscow, which are being introduced into scholarly use for the first time, this essay discusses the two basic approaches of Slovak diplomats to Russian foreign policy. The first approach, utilised during the era of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Andrei V. Kozyrev, was described by Slovak representatives in Russia criticising its pro-Western policy that they said did not meet Russian national interests, but was then being pursued by the then top of the Russian Foreign Ministry. They saw the main problems of Russian diplomacy as being the deterioration of the socio-economic situation of the population of the Russian Federation on the one hand, and Kozyrev's emphasis on “strategic partnership” with the United States on the other, which gave rise to growing anti-American sentiments both among the political elite and the Russian electorate. This led, in particular, to a situation where even the most important bilateral agreements between Russia and the United States were perceived by the deputies of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation as a betrayal of Russian national interests. The second approach, which appeared in Slovak diplomatic reports under the next head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Evgeny M. Primakov, was characterised by, after modifying both their rhetoric and approach to foreign policy, criticism of the minister, which resulted in an attempt by Western countries, especially the United States, to have him removed from his post. This is because Slovakia did not need even a hint of a conflict between Russia and the West, since both the Western and the post-Soviet spaces became the most important and, in a sense, even irreplaceable areas of Slovak foreign policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document