权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

De-sovereignisation as an instrument of Russia's coercive diplomacy in the context of post-Soviet de facto states. A comparative study of Moldova and

去主权化是俄罗斯在后苏联事实上的国家背景下强制外交的工具。

基本信息

批准号：
2064576
负责人：
金额：
--
依托单位：
University of Birmingham
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Studentship
财政年份：
2018
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2018 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2064576
关键词：
De sovereignisation instrument Russia coercive

项目摘要

De-sovereignisation as an instrument of Russia's coercive diplomacy in the context of post-Soviet de facto states. A comparative study of Moldova and Ukraine (2014-2021)This project examines the de-sovereignisation processes occurring in Moldova and Ukraine as a result of Russian-instigated activities in the breakaway territories of the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR) and the Donetsk and Luhansk Peoples' Republics (DNR/LNR). De-sovereignisation is defined as the process(es) whereby a state selectively facilitates state- and nation-building activities that interfere with another state's ability to exercise control and authority over portions of its territory and population. By strengthening various attributes of sovereignty and statehood in de facto states (i.e. territorial entities having de facto sovereignty yet lacking international legal recognition), Russia automatically weakens those of their respective parent states, thereby making them more vulnerable to its influence. In particular, this thesis addresses the following research questions: How does Russia's role in supporting the viability of post-Soviet de facto states affect reintegration prospects into their parent states? How does Russia's involvement in the DNR/LNR compare to that in the PMR? To guide empirical research, this thesis relies on a refined version of coercive diplomacy theory, which implies the use of (verbal and non-verbal) threats and incentives to instigate behavioural change in a target state to the coercer's advantage. Thus, this project looks at how Russian state and non-state actors have been instrumentally promoting state- and nation-building activities in the PMR and the DNR/LNR with the aim to pressurise their respective parent states into complying with Russia's shifting demands advancing its overarching objective to maintain influence over the region. In short, this thesis argues that Russia uses post-Soviet borders as a bargaining chip to obtain concessions on its own terms. This study is based on the premise that ideas and interests are complementary, not mutually exclusive factors influencing decision-making. With this in mind, it examines how de-sovereignisation activities in Moldova and Ukraine are equally informed by Russian elites' understanding of state interests and their beliefs about sovereignty as an exclusive attribute of great powers, which in turn reinforce the assumption that neighbouring states have only nominal sovereignty. Critically, this project provides the first comparative study of such activities, operationalised into five domains: 1) political-diplomatic; 2) economic-financial; 3) military-security; 4) educational-cultural; 5) socio-legal. At the same time, this study distances itself from the conventional way of treating political and military leaders in de facto states as mere Russian proxies deprived of independent agency. Rather, it interrogates the extent to which local state- and nation-building initiatives are coordinated with Russia's ruling elite and examines whether these may generate policy dilemmas for Russia. There has been a tendency to emphasise the causes of Russia's military incursions into neighbouring countries, with little empirical analysis of the long-term consequences of such incursions on the ground. By contrast, this project acknowledges the complex and 'messy' realities of Russia-backed de facto states and uses apparent similarities as a starting point to examine in comparative terms idiosyncratic local developments and the ensuing challenges for reintegration prospects. This study relies on case-study analysis and draws on sources such as state documents and public statements issued by the de facto authorities and the Russian leadership, local newspaper releases, videos from state-controlled media outlets as well as semi-structured interviews with officials and experts from the countries under study.

去主权化是俄罗斯在后苏联事实上的国家背景下强制外交的工具。摩尔多瓦和乌克兰的比较研究（2014-2021）该项目研究了摩尔多瓦和乌克兰由于俄罗斯煽动在普里德涅斯特罗维亚摩尔达维亚共和国（PMR）以及顿涅茨克和卢甘斯克人民共和国（DNR/LNR）分离领土上的活动而发生的去主权进程。去主权化被定义为一个国家有选择地促进国家和民族建设活动的过程，这些活动干扰另一个国家对其部分领土和人口行使控制和权威的能力。通过加强事实上的国家（即拥有事实上的主权但缺乏国际法律承认的领土实体）的主权和国家地位的各种属性，俄罗斯自动削弱了各自母国的主权和国家地位，从而使它们更容易受到其影响。特别是，本文解决了以下研究问题：俄罗斯在支持后苏联事实上的国家的生存能力方面的作用如何影响其重返母国的前景？与 PMR 相比，俄罗斯对 DNR/LNR 的参与如何？为了指导实证研究，本论文依赖于强制外交理论的改进版本，该理论意味着使用（口头和非口头）威胁和激励措施来煽动目标国家的行为改变，以利于强制者的利益。因此，该项目着眼于俄罗斯国家和非国家行为者如何在俄罗斯联邦和民主共和国/卢森堡地区有效促进国家和民族建设活动，目的是迫使其各自的母国遵守俄罗斯不断变化的要求，推进其维持对该地区影响力的总体目标。简而言之，本文认为俄罗斯利用后苏联时期的边界作为讨价还价的筹码，以按照自己的条件获得让步。本研究的前提是思想和利益是互补的，而不是相互排斥的影响决策的因素。考虑到这一点，它探讨了摩尔多瓦和乌克兰的去主权活动如何同样受到俄罗斯精英对国家利益的理解以及他们对主权作为大国独有属性的信念的影响，这反过来又强化了邻国仅拥有名义主权的假设。至关重要的是，该项目首次对此类活动进行了比较研究，分为五个领域：1）政治外交； 2）经济金融； 3）军事安全； 4）教育文化； 5）社会法律。与此同时，这项研究与将事实上的国家的政治和军事领导人视为被剥夺了独立机构的俄罗斯代理人的传统方式保持了距离。相反，它质疑地方国家和国家建设举措与俄罗斯统治精英协调的程度，并研究这些举措是否可能给俄罗斯带来政策困境。人们倾向于强调俄罗斯军事入侵邻国的原因，而很少对此类入侵对当地造成的长期后果进行实证分析。相比之下，该项目承认俄罗斯支持的事实上的国家的复杂和“混乱”的现实，并使用明显的相似性作为起点，以比较的方式审视当地的特殊发展以及随之而来的重返社会前景的挑战。这项研究依赖于案例研究分析，并借鉴了事实当局和俄罗斯领导层发布的国家文件和公开声明、当地报纸发布的信息、国家控制媒体的视频以及对所研究国家的官员和专家的半结构化采访等来源。