Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

National Security
Reference:

Nazarov, M.M. Conflict potential for the secession (based on the studies in the regions).

Abstract: The author discusses the factors, which have the potential of negative influence on the territorial stability of the state. The author studies the modern theories of secession, as well as the topical Russian context, then the author points out the factors, which have secession potential. It is shown that secession can be facilitated not only by social and economic factors, but aqlso by the popular principles regarding the structure of the former USSR, which are reflected in the mass consciousness. The empirical basis for the article is formed by the comparative empirical studies in the regions of the Russian Federation, when the attitude of people towards a number of ideological elements of federation. The author also views the relations between the ideological positions and orientation and the conflict participation in the interests of national groups. The results of the studies show that ideological constants of the past translate through time and they create negative bases from the point of view of the stability of the Russian Federation. It is shown that negative ideological potential mostly relates to the conflict participation in the interests of the national group to which respondents belong.


Keywords:

political science, federalism, separatism, secession, ethnicity, nationalism, ideology, conflict, consensus, identity.


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Anisimova A., Echevskaya O. Sibirskaya identichnost' kak politicheskoe vyskazyvanie. Pro et Contra. 2012. ¹3 (55). S. 63.
2. Kudryashova I.V. Mozhno li legitimirovat' setsessii, ili o gosudarstvennoy sostoyatel'nosti novykh politiy. Politicheskaya nauka. 2011. ¹ 2. S. 75-104
3. Nazarov M.M. Rossiyskiy federalizm 90-kh gg.: tendentsii tsentralizatsii i detsentralizatsii / Rossiya federativnaya: problemy i perspektivy. M. ISPI RAN. 2002. S. 26 – 53.
4. Pugachev V.P. (red.) Vvedenie v politologiyu. Slovar'-spravochnik. M. 1996. S. 211.
5. Sidorenko A.I. Setsessiya: sposoben li federalizm predotvratit' ugrozu? Vlast'. 2010. ¹ 5. S. 68-72.
6. Filippov V. R. Kritika etnicheskogo federalizma. M. 2003.
7. Hughes, J. (2001) Managing Secession Potential in the Russian Federation, Regional & Federal Studies,11(3), 36-68.
8. Villiers, B. (2012) Secession – the Last Resort for Minority Protection, Journal of Asian and African Studies, 1, 1-16.
9. Costa, J. (2003) On theories of secession: minorities, majorities and the multinational state. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 6(2), 63-90.
10. Rywkin, M. (2006) The Phenomenon of Quasistates. Diogenes, 53, 23-28