Framing the national question in Central and Eastern Europe: A quadratic nexus?

Framing the national question in Central and Eastern Europe: A quadratic nexus?
复制标题

构建中欧和东欧的民族问题：二次关系？

DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
David J. Smith
David J. Smith
中科院分区：
--
文献类型：
--
作者：
David J. Smith

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

本文源于对爱沙尼亚过去“民族问题”的研究 十年-恢复爱沙尼亚共和国之间的关系，其大，主要是 俄罗斯人的“非名义”人口和一个俄罗斯国家， 捍卫居住在非俄罗斯共和国的所谓“同胞”的权利。 前苏联（Smith，1997）。乍一看，爱沙尼亚的情况显然 构成了罗杰斯·布鲁贝克（Rogers Brubaker）著名的“三位一体”的一个明显例子 联系“-三种形式的民族主义的动态互动， 后社会主义国家的政治。爱沙尼亚的国籍和语言政策， 例如，通常被描述为“国有化”措施，旨在恢复 单一民族国家这些政策受到俄罗斯和美国的谴责。 “俄语”政党的代表以及 爱沙尼亚境内的组织，他们继续主张建立一个两国或多国的国家， 国家地位的变体（Vetik 1999）。然而，在我自己的研究过程中， 很明显，Brubaker理论的基础可以在许多方面受到质疑。 道理因此，以下是对“三元关系”的批判性分析。最重要的是我 Brubaker认为，Brubaker忽视了欧盟等国际组织的关键作用， 北约、欧安组织和欧洲理事会在塑造后共产主义身份方面的作用 中欧和东欧的政治。在这方面，我建议， 谈到将国有化国家、少数民族和外部 民族家园的机构，一个上升和扩大'欧洲-大西洋 空间“。我将试图说明我所理解的'二次关系'， 关于爱沙尼亚的案例。
This paper stems from research on the ‘national question’ in Estonia during the past decade – the relationship between the restored Estonian Republic, its large, mainly Russophone ‘non-titular’ population and a Russian state which has reserved the right to defend the rights of so-called ‘compatriots’ residing in the non-Russian republics of the former Soviet Union (Smith 1997). At first sight, the Estonian case apparently constitutes a clear example of what Rogers Brubaker has famously termed the ‘triadic nexus’ – the dynamic interaction of three forms of nationalism which has informed the politics of the post-socialist states. Estonia’s citizenship and language policies, for instance, are commonly depicted as ‘nationalising’ measures intended to restore a unitary nation-state. These policies have been condemned both by the Russian Federation and by representatives of ‘Russian-speaking’ political parties and organisations within Estonia, who continue to argue for a bi-national or multi-national variant of statehood (Vetik 1999). In the course of my own research, however, it has become clear that the bases of Brubaker’s theory can be questioned on a number of counts. What follows is therefore a critical analysis of the ‘triadic nexus’. Above all, I argue, Brubaker neglects the crucial role of international organisations such as the EU, NATO, the OSCE and the Council of Europe in shaping the post-communist identity politics of Central and Eastern Europe. In this regard, I suggest it would be more apt to talk of a quadratic nexus linking nationalising states, national minorities and external national homelands to the institutions of an ascendant and expansive ‘Euro-Atlantic space’. I will attempt to illustrate what I understand by the ‘quadratic nexus’ by making reference to the Estonian case.