The ‘Near Abroad’ (Ближнее Зарубежьe) in Russian Rhetoric and Law
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
The ‘Near Abroad’ (Ближнее Зарубежьe) in Russian Rhetoric and Law
German Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 66 (2023), Iss. 1 : pp. 11–35
Additional Information
Article Details
Pricing
Author Details
Angelika Nußberger, University of Cologne, Academy for European Human Rights Protection ,
Abstract
Abstract: The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. Nevertheless, the idea of a Eurasian region with a common culture and destiny remained. This idea was expressed in the term ‘near abroad’, which from the Russian perspective encompassed all the former Soviet republics. However, it soon became clear that this vision was not necessarily shared by those concerned. The Baltic States switched sides; other States such as Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova were torn between Europe and the ‘Russkiy mir’. The development of the States in Russia’s neighbourhood remained central to Russian foreign policy, even though the concept of the ‘near abroad’ was not explicitly incorporated into the ‘foreign policy concepts’ elaborated before 2023. The rulings of the Russian Constitutional Court on the annexation of Ukrainian territories reflect the evolution of the official position. While the 2014 judgment on the annexation of Crimea is formalistic and avoids addressing the problems of a ‘new’ international law for the ‘near abroad’, the four (identical) judgments on the annexation of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts in 2022 clearly set out a new vision. According to them, the Russian Federation is allowed to reinterpret basic concepts of international law such as sovereignty, the prohibition of the use of force, the principle of self-determination, and territorial integrity in the light of its dominant position in the region and its responsibility for the Russian-speaking.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Angelika Nussberger\nThe ‘Near Abroad’ (Ближнее Зарубежьe) in Russian Rhetoric and Law | 11 | ||
| I. Introduction – ‘Good Brother’-Rhetoric and Power Politics | 11 | ||
| II. The Invention of the ‘Near Abroad’ | 14 | ||
| A. Divergent Views on Regional Integration in the Post-Soviet Space | 14 | ||
| B. Geopolitics and Constitutional Identity | 18 | ||
| 1. Constitutional Self-Definition of Russia’s Neighbours Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova | 18 | ||
| 2. Constitutional Self-Definition of Russia | 19 | ||
| C. The OSCE’s View of the Status Quo of Russia’s ‘Near Abroad’ | 21 | ||
| III. The ‘Near Abroad’ in the Russian Concept of Foreign Policy 2023 | 21 | ||
| A. ‘Near Abroad’ v. ‘European Region’ | 21 | ||
| B. Elements of the ‘Good-Brother-Model’ and Dominance | 23 | ||
| C. International Law for the ‘Near-Abroad’ | 24 | ||
| IV. ‘Near Abroad’ and the Brezhnev Doctrine | 26 | ||
| V. Law, Legal Nihilism, or Propaganda – the Judgments of the Russian Constitutional Court on the ‘Near Abroad’ | 27 | ||
| A. Prelude – the Russian Constitutional Court and the War in Chechnya | 28 | ||
| B. The Formalist Approach – the Russian Constitutional Court and Crimea | 29 | ||
| C. The Substantive Approach – the Russian Constitutional Court and the Annexation of the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia Oblasts | 31 | ||
| VI. Conclusion | 35 |