Abstract
Even the most casual glance at a map of the world provides the onlooker with a satisfying sense of completion: the globe has been divided up into legally equal sovereign states, and all territories and peoples fall under the jurisdiction of one or another of these units. The world is a complete matrix of colours and lines that leaves nothing to chance. The blank spots have been filled in. The map of the former Soviet Union conjures a similar satisfaction. Fifteen new states emerged from the Soviet collapse. All of the territory has been divided up. Formal jurisdiction has been claimed across all of the post-Soviet space. At least, so it seems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Reported in Jamestown Monitor, 6(224), 1 December 2000.
Henceforth, these will be referred to as PMR, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh.
An exception is Edward Walker, ‘No Peace, No War in the Caucasus: Secessionist Conflicts in Chechnya, Abkhazia and Nagorno-Karabakh’, Center for Science and International Affairs (CSIA), Occasional Paper, SDI: Harvard University, February 1998.
On the notion of a de facto state, see the theoretical work of Scott Pegg, International Society and the De Facto State, Aldershot, 1998.
5. This section draws on the author’s chapter, ‘The Tajik Civil War and the Peace Process’, Civil Wars, Special Edition on post-Soviet conflicts, 4(4) Winter 2001.
See Human Rights Questions: HR Situations and Reports of the Special Rapporteurs and Representatives, United Nations A/51/483/Add 1, 24 October, 1996, prepared by Francis Deng for 51st Session of the GA.
7. See discussion by author in ‘Euro-Asian Conflicts and Peacekeeping Dilemmas’, in Y. Kalyuzhnova and D. Lynch (eds), The Euro-Asian World: A Period of Transition, London, 2000.
See, for example, Joel S. Migdal, Strong Societies and Weak States, State–Society Relations and States Capacities in the Third World, Princeton, 1988; Mohammed Ayoob, ‘State-making and third world security’, in J. Singh and T. Berhauer, The Security of Third World Countries, Dartmouth, 1993; and William Zartman (ed.), Collapsed States: The Disintegration and Restoration of Legitimate Authority, London, 1995.
9. Barry Buzan, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security Studies in the Post-Cold War Era, Hemel Hempstead, 1991.
Shirin Akiner noted the stress placed on the Tajik identity in her recent work on Tajikistan, Tajikistan: Disintegration or Reconciliation?, London, 2001.
12. Scott Pegg, International Society and the De Facto State, Aldershot, 1998, p. 26.
Gunnar Agathon Stolsvik, The Status of the Hutt River Province (Western Australia), A Case Study in International Law, Bergen, 2000, p. 29.
Alan James, ‘Sovereignty – a ground rule or gibberish?’, Review of International Studies, 10, 1984, p. 11.
Interview with the author, Chis,inau˘, Moldova, 13 July 2000.
Interview with the author, PMR, 11 July 2000.
18. On the difference between the declaratory and the constitutive approach, see discussion in Michael Ross Fowler and Julie Marie Bunce, ‘What constitutes the sovereign state?’, Review of International Studies, 22, 1996, pp. 400–2.
24. On this notion, see Graham Smith, V. Law, A. Wilson, A. Bohr, and E. Allworth, Nation Building in the Post-Soviet Borderlands: The Politics of National Identities, Cambridge, 1998, pp. 13–19.
25. From ‘War-making and state-making as organized crime’, in Peter Evans, D. Rueschemeyer and T. Skocpol (eds), Bringing the State Back In, New York, 1985, cited in an interesting article by Hugh Griffiths, ‘A political economy of ethnic conflict: Ethno-nationalism and organized crime’, Civil Wars, 2, 2, Summer 1999, pp. 56–73.
Interview with the author, NKR, 15 August 2000.
Svante E. Cornell, 2001, p. 47.
This point emerged from a discussion between the author and Bruno Coppietiers in November 2000.
See the comments by Boris Pastukhov, 18 April Moldovan information service, Infotag.
Interview with the author, Chis,inau˘, Moldova, 13 July 2000.
Paata Zakareishvili, ‘Political responsibility and perspectives for conflict resolution in Georgia–Abkhazia’, in Natella Akaba (ed.), Abkhazia–Georgia:Obstacles on the Path to Peace, Sukhum, Abkhazia, 2000, pp. 9 and 24–9.
For an examination of Russian peacekeeping, see the author’s Russian Peacekeeping Strategies towards the CIS, London, 1999.
33. Ann Maria Alonso, ‘The politics of space, time and substance: State formation, nationalism and ethnicity’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 23, 1994, pp. 379–405.
Interview with the author, Abkhazia, 31 July 2000.
Interview with the author, Nagorno-Karabakh, 15 August 2000.
For a discussion of ways to move towards settlement of these conflicts, see the author’s Managing Separatist States, EU Institute of Security Studies Paper, 2001.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2004 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lynch, D. (2004). Separatist States and Post-Soviet Conflicts. In: Slater, W., Wilson, A. (eds) The Legacy of the Soviet Union. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230524408_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230524408_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-51377-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-52440-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)