scholarly journals Legal cooperation between Russia and the USA: historical roots of modern problems

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-11
Author(s):  
R. V. Yengibaryan

Introduction. Relations between Russia and the United States have nearly three centuries of history, and for more than two hundred years the countries had diplomatic relations which were interrupted for sixteen years from 1917 to 1933. Perhaps the XIX century was the most peaceful and fruitful for our countries when the interests of the Russian Empire and the United States on the world stage did not contradict each other, often coincided, thus excluding confrontation between the two nation-states. The XIX century for Russia and the United States was marked by the singing of a number of bilateral treaties, including the treaty on the extradition of criminals, which consolidated their partnership.On the contrary, the XX century is marked by unstable and cyclical relations between the two countries. The rejection of Soviet power, the long period of non-recognition of the Soviet Union was followed in 1933 by mutual multifaceted cooperation between the USSR and the United States, which included the legal sphere, and by the allied relations during the Second World War. The second half of the twentieth century was the time of open confrontation between the two world giants, when the crisis of relations between the USSR and the United States put the world on the brink of world war III. In such conditions, there could be no talk of improving the legal framework of legal cooperation, and the agreement on the procedure for execution of court orders concluded in 1935 did not find its practical application.Modern Russia has assumed the entire burden of problems and contradictions in legal cooperation with the United States. Searching for ways out of them is possible only on the basis of historical analysis of their prerequisites, taking into account the peculiarities of modern international relations.Materials and methods. The methodological basis of the study is the dialectical method of cognition of phenomena in the relationship and mutual conditionality using a set of general and particular scientific methods of cognition of reality. The historical method contributed to the restoration of the chronological sequence of legal cooperation between Russia (USSR) and the United States. The method of actualization made it possible to identify the historical factors that determined the peculiarities of international cooperation in the legal sphere. The method of diachronization made it possible to identify certain successive stages in the development of international legal cooperation between Russia (USSR) and the United States, to compare them, to identify patterns of development.Results. In the framework of the study, the author found that inter-state legal cooperation is an integral part of the foreign policy of states. The international legal basis of cooperation between Russia and the United States in civil, family and criminal cases was created in a different historical era, does not meet modern international relations, and is poorly implemented by the justice authorities of the two States.There is no treaty on legal assistance in civil and family matters that is fundamental to the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of citizens of both States, and there are no provisions on extradition in the Treaty on legal assistance in criminal matters.Discussion and Conclusions. The international legal framework of cooperation between the Russian Federation (and earlier - the Soviet Union) and the United States of America in the legal sphere; the problems of implementation of international legal assistance in civil, family and criminal cases are researched. The main provisions of the Treaty on mutual legal assistance in criminal cases of 2000; multilateral Conventions on the service abroad of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial cases of 1965 are analyzed. The 1958 Convention on the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, the 1935 Agreement “On the procedure for the execution of court orders between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America” were explored. The prospects for the development of legal cooperation between Russia and the United States are shown.

This book uses trust—with its emotional and predictive aspects—to explore international relations in the second half of the Cold War, beginning with the late 1960s. The détente of the 1970s led to the development of some limited trust between the United States and the Soviet Union, which lessened international tensions and enabled advances in areas such as arms control. However, it also created uncertainty in other areas, especially on the part of smaller states that depended on their alliance leaders for protection. The chapters in this volume look at how the “emotional” side of the conflict affected the dynamics of various Cold War relations: between the superpowers, within the two ideological blocs, and inside individual countries on the margins of the East–West confrontation.


1953 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-167
Author(s):  
S. Bernard

The advent of a new administration in the United States and the passage of seven years since the end of World War II make it appropriate to review the political situation which has developed in Europe during that period and to ask what choices now are open to the West in its relations with the Soviet Union.The end of World War II found Europe torn between conflicting conceptions of international politics and of the goals that its members should seek. The democratic powers, led by the United States, viewed the world in traditional, Western, terms. The major problem, as they saw it, was one of working out a moral and legal order to which all powers could subscribe, and in which they would live. Quite independently of the environment, they assumed that one political order was both more practicable and more desirable than some other, and that their policies should be directed toward its attainment.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 222-229
Author(s):  
Kaniet Zhamilova ◽  

This work is dedicated to learn about the Kyrgyz - US relationships after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The paper analyzed the political and economic relationships between two independent countries after 1991. This work is identified the three steps of the development of bilateral relationships, analyzed how the cooperation changes during the different president administrations and how do external and internal problems affected on it. It has also identified that the relationship between the United States and Kyrgyzstan in political and economic sphere was different as far as presidents were different. So, every president had their own ideas, provisions, strategies and priorities based on their awareness and knowledge of politics and international relations.


Author(s):  
David M. Edelstein

This chapter traces the deterioration of Soviet-American relations at the end of World War II and into the beginning of the cold war. While the United States and the Soviet Union found common cause during World War II in defeating Hitler’s Germany, their relationship began to deteriorate as the eventual defeat of Germany became more certain. The chapter emphasizes that it was growing beliefs about malign Soviet intentions, rather than changes in Soviet capabilities, that fuelled the origins of the cold war. In particular, the chapter details crises in Iran, Turkey, and Germany that contributed to U.S. beliefs about long-term Soviet intentions. As uncertainty evaporated, the enmity of the cold war took hold.


Author(s):  
Kal Raustiala

The single most important feature of American history after 1945 was the United States’s assumption of hegemonic leadership. Europeans had noted America’s enormous potential since at least the nineteenth century. After the Civil War the United States had one of the largest economies in the world, but, as noted earlier in this book, in geopolitical terms it remained a surprisingly minor player. By 1900 the United States was playing a more significant political role. But it was only after 1945 that the nation’s potential on the world stage was fully realized. Victory in the Second World War left the United States in an enviable position. Unlike the Soviet Union, which endured devastating fighting on its territory and lost tens of millions of citizens, the United States had experienced only one major attack on its soil. Thanks to its actions in the war America had great influence in Europe. And the national economy emerged surprisingly vibrant from the years of conflagration, easily dominant over any conceivable rival or set of rivals. When the First World War ended the United States ultimately chose to return to its hemispheric perch. It declined to join the new League of Nations, and rather than maintaining engagement with the great powers of the day, America generally turned inward. The years following the Second World War were quite different. In addition to championing—and hosting—the new United Nations, the United States quickly established a panoply of important institutions aimed at maintaining and organizing international cooperation in both economic and security affairs. Rising tensions with the Soviet Union, apparent to many shortly after the war’s end, led the United States to remain militarily active in both Europe and Asia. The intensifying Cold War cemented this unprecedented approach to world politics. The prolonged occupations of Germany and Japan were straightforward examples of this newly active global role. In both cases the United States refashioned a conquered enemy into a democratic, free-market ally—a significant feat. The United States did not, however, seek a formal empire in the wake of its victory.


1973 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-83
Author(s):  
Robert Starr

On October 18, 1972 the United States and the Soviet Union completed the negotiation of a comprehensive series of arrangements covering trade between the two countries. A Trade Agreement, consisting of nine articles and three annexes, and complemented by several exchanges of letters, establishes a new legal framework for the development of US-USSR trade.


2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-644
Author(s):  
MARTIN H. FOLLY

The Second World War continues to be an attractive subject for scholars and even more so for those writing for a general readership. One of the more traditional areas of focus has been the ‘Big Three’ – the alliance of the United States with Britain and the Soviet Union. Public interest in the three leaders – Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin – remains high, and their decisions continue to resonate in the post-Cold War era, as demonstrated by continued (and often ahistorical) references to the decisions made at the Yalta Conference. Consequently, while other aspects of Second World War historiography have pushed into new avenues of exploration, that which has looked at the Grand Alliance has followed fairly conventional lines – the new Soviet bloc materials have been trawled to answer old questions and using the frames of reference that developed during the Cold War. This has left much to be said about the nature of the relationship of the United States with its great allies and the dynamics and processes of that alliance, and overlooked full and rounded analysis of the role of that alliance as the instrument of Axis defeat.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document