AOC: The Dynamics of Secessionist Regions: Eurasian Unrecognized Quasi-States after Kosovo's Independence

AOC：分离主义地区的动态：科索沃独立后欧亚大陆未被承认的准国家

• 批准号: 0827016
• 负责人: John O'Loughlin
• 金额: $ 75万
• 依托单位: University of Colorado at Boulder
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2008
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2008-10-01 至 2014-09-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0827016&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: AOC; Dynamics; Secessionist; Regions; Eurasian

Quasi-states are secessionist regions that have established internal territorial sovereignty but lack widespread recognition and legitimacy as states. Despite their tenuous and contested status, such regions have long been features of world political maps. A U.S-Russian research team will focus on four quasi-states in the Balkans-Black Sea region - Kosovo, Transdniester Moldovan Republic (TMR) in Moldova, Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia. These sites were chosen because of research access, contrasting historical experiences, sources of dispute between Russia and the Euro-Atlantic community, and the varied implementation of international norms of refugee protection and recognition of self-determination. Two fundamental research and policy concerns are raised by quasi-states. First, how and why do certain quasi-states endure and, second, why are some more successful at accumulating legitimacy than others?The contested declaration of independence by Kosovo in early 2008 and concern about a precedent effect render these questions particularly timely. The establishment of internal and external legitimacy in the wake of wars that defined the political unit is a key factor in accounting for the robustness of quasi-states. The specific research questions include: a) What is the character and localized distribution of the agricultural, industrial, trade, social and political dynamics of the unrecognized quasi-states? b) What factors (war experience, governance structure, nation-building and identity construction, migration or displacement, border relations and international control) helps explain these distributions? c) How do state-aspirant elites work across a variety of scales to promote legitimacy, in the wake of the Kosovo precedent? d) How appropriate is it to make comparisons between these 4 cases? e) How does the enduring of quasi-states affect global norms concerning ethnic cleansing and violence?To overcome potential difficulties in accessibility and reliability, a multi-methods data gathering approach has been adopted to examine the internal legitimacy of quasi-states across a variety of scales. This includes public opinion sampling of about 1000 persons in each study site (among both residents of the quasi-states and the displaced populations), focus group discussions (including about 400 persons in all) and elite interviews. Public and unpublished statistical data are also analyzed in a geographical information system, incorporating land cover change derived from repeat Landsat satellite imagery over the past 20 years.The four frozen conflicts are outcomes of civil wars in the 1990s that were characterized by ethnic cleansing, destruction of infrastructure, and deteriorating relations between the countries from which the secessionist quasi-states splintered and external supporters (Russia in three of the cases). The quasi-states themselves are often marked as grey zones of smuggling (especially drugs and weapons), money laundering, border violations, transit points of terrorists, and refuges of criminals beyond the reach of international law. Without more information about the conditions inside the quasi-states (level of legitimacy with their own populations, the extent and nature of their contacts with the supporting countries, the willingness of the populations to accept territorial compromises or other settlement options, the level of inter-ethnic distrust, and border controls), policy formation and implementation is significantly removed from "facts on the ground".

准州是分裂主义地区，它们已经建立了内部领土主权，但缺乏广泛的认可和作为国家的合法性。尽管其身份脆弱且竞争激烈，但这些地区长期以来一直是世界政治地图的特征。美国俄罗斯研究小组将重点关注巴尔干黑海洋地区的四个准州 - 科索沃，科索沃，摩尔多瓦，阿布哈兹和佐治亚州南奥塞梯的Transdniester Moldovan Republic（TMR）。 之所以选择这些地点，是因为研究的访问，对比的历史经验，俄罗斯与欧洲大西洋社区之间的争议来源，以及国际难民保护规范的实施以及对自决的认可。准州提出了两个基本的研究和政策问题。首先，某些准州如何以及为什么要耐心，其次，为什么有些人比其他人更成功地积累合法性？科索沃在2008年初对独立的独立声明，并担心对这些问题的效果特别及时。在界定政治单位的战争之后，建立了内部和外部合法性，这是计算准国家稳健性的关键因素。具体的研究问题包括：a）未识别的准国家的农业，工业，贸易，社会和政治动态的特征和本地分布是什么？ b）哪些因素（战争经验，治理结构，国家建设和身份构建，移民或流离失所，边境关系和国际控制）有助于解释这些分布？ c）在科索沃先例之后，国家 - 苏葡萄酒精英如何在各种规模上工作以促进合法性？ d）在这4个案例之间进行比较有多合适？ e）准国家的持久如何影响有关种族清洗和暴力行为的全球规范？为了克服可访问性和可靠性的潜在困难，采用了多方法收集方法来检查各种规模的准态的内部合法性。这包括在每个研究站点（准州的居民和流离失所的人群）中对大约1000人进行的公众舆论抽样，焦点小组讨论（包括大约400人）和精英访谈。在一个地理信息系统中还分析了公共和未发表的统计数据，并结合了过去20年中重复陆地卫星图像所衍生的土地覆盖变化。这四个冻结的冲突是1990年代的内战结果，在1990年代，这些冲突是由种族清洁，基础结构和替代的国家替代的国家（disterive of sepinters of sepsime of sepsime of sepsition）的特征案件）。 准州本身通常被标记为走私（尤其是毒品和武器），洗钱，边境侵犯，恐怖分子的过境点以及犯罪分子的避难所，超出国际法的范围。没有更多有关准州内部状况的信息（与他们自己的人群的合法性水平，与支持国家的接触的程度和性质，人口的意愿接受领土妥协或其他定居选择，种族间的不信任程度，边境控制和实施的水平），政策形成和实施均显着脱离了“地面”。