The Main Trends in the Formation of the Soviet Federal Socio-Territorial Space (1917 – 1922)

Sosenkov Fedor Sergeevich ORCID: 0000-0002-5645-9510 PhD in Law Associate professor, Department of Constitutional and Municipal Law, N. I. Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod 603002, Russia, g. Nizhnii Novgorod, prospekt Gagarina, 23, of. prospekt Gagarina, d. 23 f.sosenkov@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

 Introduction

The subject of the study is the process of formation of the Soviet federal socio-territorial space in the period 1917 – 1922, which includes the design of the state borders of Soviet Russia, the definition of the principles of the Soviet Federation (internationalism, the right of nations to self-determination), the subject composition of the RSFSR, the order of distribution of subjects and powers between the center and the regions, the scope of such powers and subjects of reference.

The purpose of this study was to study the trends in the formation of the Soviet Federation in the diversity of its subjects, the influence of these trends on outsiders of the next historical level of the Soviet Federation – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

The subject composition of the Soviet Federation initially did not have a definite character in terms of legal status. The conditions of the Civil War and military intervention determined the turbulent movement on the organization of the federal socio-territorial space. Bifurcation processes at this stage of the development of Soviet federalism were expressed in the division of single previously independent administrative-territorial units – provinces into new relatively independent national-territorial entities. 

For the purposes of this study, the author proposes to understand the Soviet Federation and Soviet federalism as follows: "The Soviet Federation is presented as a form of government based on the right of nations to self-determination, historically established on the territory of the former Russian Empire, assuming a significant amount of constitutionally fixed political and economic independence of the subjects of the federation from the center with their actual limitations, as well as the right of secession. Within the framework of this article, we understand Soviet federalism as a system of Marxist-Leninist ideological attitudes, norms of Soviet law, as well as practice in the field of administrative and territorial management of a multinational Soviet state" ^{[1, pp. 30-45]}.  

A certain part of modern historical and legal research is devoted to the formation and development of specific subjects of the federal state of the RSFSR in the 1920s – 30s.. In this connection, we note the article by L.V. Panteleimonova on the autonomy of the Chuvash people ^{[2, pp. 51-65]}; N.B. Salimov, who studied the political development of Bashkortostan ^{[3, pp. 276-280]}; B.B. Bulatov and D.S. Ramazanova on the political self-determination of the peoples of Dagestan ^{[4, pp. 556-563]}; the work of D.A. Amanzholova, in which the peculiarities of interaction of the RSFSR with its subjects are analyzed on the example of the KASSR ^{[5, pp. 67-82]}; E.A. Gunaev, whose scientific interest has spread to the southern Russian autonomous regions ^{[6, pp. 7-13]}.  Modern works devoted to the formation of the subject composition of the Russian Federation in the first years of its existence are generally quite rare, for example, the work of O.V. Kistrinova ^{[7, pp. 120-127]}.

This article is intended to identify some trends in the formation of the Soviet federal socio-territorial space in the period 1917 - 1922, based on the documents of the funds of the State Archive of the Russian Federation and the State Archive of Socio–Political History. 

The author draws attention to the fact that the cited archival documents preserve the spelling and punctuation of the original, as well as errors and typos that occur in the original text.  

Research methodologyIn the course of the study, a combination of the following methods was used.

Among the universal methods, dialectics should be singled out, which made it possible to approach the subject of research from the point of view of its development, revealing the patterns of occurrence and development. The general scientific methods used include the analysis of the first acts of Soviet legislation, as well as archival documents; the synthesis of empirical material; deductive and inductive methods, which allowed us to study the factors that contributed to the formation of the Soviet federal socio-territorial space; the structural-system method, which made it possible to substantiate the interdependence of trends in the formation of the subject composition of the RSFSR.  Private scientific methods are represented by the historical method, which is applied in the process of studying the subject of research within the chronological period of 1917 – 1922. Among the special methods, the formal legal method, which made it possible to study the first acts of Soviet legislation from the point of view of legal technology, and the comparative legal method, involving the comparison of the documents under study, were particularly in demand.  

DiscussionThe formation of the Soviet federative space took place in many ways by a "turnout order" and often in conditions of national conflicts.

Despite the common ideological basis – internationalism and the right of nations to self–determination - the corresponding conflicts of interests in the conditions of ethnic "strife" were inevitable.  For example, a report from representatives of the Muslims of the North Caucasus, the Yandarovs, dated December 1917, received by the People's Commissar for Nationalities, indicates the critical situation in Chechnya and Ingushetia on the eve of the formation of new federal units: "According to incoming information, now the Soviet Government will not strengthen agitation among the Mountaineers and Russians in in favor of an alliance between them, and also if he does not send his authorized representative to this region now, then bloodshed is inevitable between the Mountaineers of the Caucasus and the Russian population and infantry units, and in the aftermath of which there will be weakening of both sides, which, of course, the Cossacks are getting, after which they will not be threatened by anyone and they they will remain the full masters of the country and will continue the work of oppressing the peoples" ^{[8, l. 6 – 6 vol.]}. In April 1918, a telegram from Semipalatinsk reported provoking a conflict between the Russian and Kyrgyz peoples: ".... the servants of the governors, criminal criminals, formed a new socialist party "Ushzhuz" in quotation marks, they are under the banner of Bolshevism is conducting a black-hundred-nationalist tabloid agitation inciting the Kyrgyz people against the Russian and vice versa" ^{[8, l. 16]}.

In 1921, representatives of the Sunzhensky District Executive Committee of the Gorskaya A.S.S.R. appealed to the People's Commissar for Nationalities of the RSFSR about the critical situation of Russian villages in the republic. The Mountain Republic had about 65 thousand ethnically Russian population: "According to the administrative division of 10 villages of the Sunzhenskaya line: 1) Karabulakskaya, 2) Troitskaya, 3) Sleptsovskaya, 4) Nesterovskaya, 5) Assinskaya, 6) Voznesenskaya, 7) Terskaya, 8) Baryatinskaya, 9) Ilyinskaya, 10) Petropavlovsk, formerly forming the Grozny department, are now united into the Sunzhensky district. 7 villages are divided into national districts: Archon and Ardonskaya – to Ossetian, Nikolaevskaya and Zmeinskaya to Digorsky and Alexandrovskaya, Kotlyarevskaya and Prishibskaya to Kabarda" ^{[9, l. 23]}. The authors characterize the situation as a serious interethnic conflict: "The life of the Russian population of all villages, except those in Kabarda, has become unbearable and is heading towards total ruin and its survival from the borders of the Mountain Republic ..." ^{[9, l. 23]}. Russian Russians are not even motivated by national hostility, which may well be eliminated: "The reason for this situation is the alleged national and religious hostility of the Highlanders to the Russian and the lack of land, forcing the Russian population to displace, but both of these reasons are not the main ones. Under the old government, there were examples of peaceful cohabitation and joint work of Russians and mountaineers ... and now there is no such intransigence that cannot be overcome under the Soviet system as a harmful relic" ^{[9, l. 23 vol.]}. The true reasons are seen in the connivance of such spontaneous sentiments on the part of the Soviet authorities on the ground, moreover, such a practice to a certain extent , it was encouraged by the official authorities: "The local authorities, up to the district national executive committees and the City Council, knowing all this abnormal situation, do not take any measures against it. On the contrary, this situation is further aggravated by the open propaganda of the total eviction of Russians from the borders of the Mountain Republic, as it has been repeatedly at congresses, for example. The Constituent Gor. Republic, Chechen, etc. It is printed in newspapers as "Gorskaya Pravda", "Labor Chechnya". Thus, the practice of life is supported by the principled inaction of the authorities, confidence in impunity and official recognition of the inequality of different groups of the population. The villages classified as national districts are in a state of conquered and enslaved areas and are completely disproportionately burdened with duties with the mountain population – food, underwater and others.  All kinds of appeals and complaints of the Russian authorities of the Sunzhensky district, piles of protocols on murders and robberies remain without consequences as if they never happened" ^{[9, l. 24 vol.]}. Local authorities in fact withdrew from the subordination of the federal center in these matters: "The attitude of local authorities and even the City Council to the decisions of the supreme authority – the Central Executive Committee unacceptable, because the resolutions remain on paper, in fact, the arbitrariness described above reigns" ^{[9, l. 24 vol.]}. According to the authors of the appeal, a change in the administrative division of the Mountain Republic could solve the problems that have arisen: "Unite the entire Russian population of 17 villages at their request in one Sunzhensky District, with the specified above 7 villages that are not currently part of the organization can be merged into a district executive committee subordinate to the district. In view of the availability of the railway and the proximity of the communication route, such a design will not cause any inconvenience in the management and conduct of economic measures" ^{[9, l. 24 vol.]}. In addition, the resettlement policy could help to establish an appropriate balance: "To allow the settlement of empty evicted villages both by returning settlers and especially by German refugees from the Volga colonies and peasants of Samara, Saratov and Simbirsk villages, including them in the Sunzha District Executive Committee. These refugees with their families will easily put a heavy burden on society and contribute to the development of banditry, while settled on empty lands and in crumbling buildings, they will create and restore cultural values, and also serve as an example for natives who want to live together with Russians. The Sunzha District Executive Committee would provide all possible assistance to the new settlers..." ^{[9, l. 24 vol.]}.         

Often, the tasks of establishing Soviet power on the ground and suppressing the resistance of the bourgeoisie were intertwined with plans for the self-determination of national minorities and the formation of subjects of the proclaimed federation. Thus, in one of the reports, the head of the Department for Muslim Affairs of the North Caucasus and Dagestan at the Central Muslim Commissariat noted that in May 1918, "the department for Muslim Affairs of the Highlanders of the North Caucasus and Dagestan at the Central Muslim Commissariat ... sent to Dagestan ... a mountaineer teacher, Ch. Hikmat, whose purpose of the trip was to suppress the uprising of the bourgeoisie Both agitation among the local population and clarification of the situation on the ground" ^{[8, l. 11]}. At the same time, the regions themselves, which later took shape as autonomous republics of the North Caucasus, were not defined either personally or by their borders, but the structures of the People's Commissariat of the RSFSR performed the functions of forming and coordinating a new federal structure. This, in particular, is evidenced by the Note of the delegates of the Dagestan Regional Council of Workers' Deputies on the organization of the Department of the Highlanders of the North Caucasus. The document lists the tasks of this department, which "aims to implement the common policy and measures of the Soviet government in the life of the Highlanders, in accordance with the work plan of the said Commissariat: 1) Inform the Soviet authorities about the cultural and economic needs of the Highlanders of the North Caucasus; 2) inform  The Highlanders of the North Caucasus about all the political and social activities of the Central Soviet Government; 3) conducts the widest propaganda of the ideas of Soviet power among the mountain peoples; 4) Organizes Soviet power where it does not exist and promotes its proper construction where it originated; 5) Strives to create a single Regional Authority for all currently disparate national and territorial formations for the reunification through this body of the Caucasian Highlanders with the State Center on the basis of the Constitution of the R.S.F.S.R." ^{[10, L. 94-94 vol.]}.

Interethnic and interreligious clashes were, apparently, inevitable in the conditions of the Civil War and the period of post-war reconstruction. At the same time, the military and civilian Soviet authorities made every possible effort to prevent and stop such threats to the formation of a new administrative and political space ^[11]. 

In this regard, it should be noted an important characteristic feature of the formation of the subjects of the proclaimed Soviet Federation. The formation of its subjects on a national basis often took place precisely through the structures of the People's Commissariat. So, on October 27, 1918 The representative for the Kalmyks of the Astrakhan Region, a member of the Kalmyk Executive Committee, suggested that the People's Commissariat "open the Kalmyk department, which should set its task: 1) dissemination of the ideas of socialism among the Kalmyk people and their systematic implementation; 2) cultural and educational development of the entire Kalmyk people, since only by their cultural development the people can open the way to national self-determination and to organize their life on a new basis; 3) raising their economic well-being; 4) development of civil projects and criminal laws, respectively, with the customary law of the Kalmyks, laying the basis for the idea of socialism; 5) the regulation of land use both between the Kalmyks themselves and peasant societies and the development of additional instructions on the socialization of land and livestock, on the basis of the law on the socialization of land adopted by the 3rd All-Russian Congress of Soviets and 6) the development on the basis of the Soviet Constitution the bases and provisions of the administrative-territorial Kalmyk autonomy"

^{[10, l. 95 vol.Within the framework of the People's Commissariat for Nationalities of the RSFSR, departments for specific nationalities were created, which, even in the conditions of the Civil War going on in the respective regions, not only contributed to cultural and national development, but also formed the contours of the future regional government and regulatory regulation in the subjects of the Soviet Federation.          The formation of autonomous national subjects in the newly proclaimed RSFSR took place against the background of colossal objective difficulties. A general crisis: the food shortage that has engulfed the country, energy collapse, transport paralysis, the most severe sanitary and epidemiological situation with the most severe infectious diseases that caused a large-scale epidemic of typhus, ispnki - aggravated by the Civil War that raged on the territory of the former Russian Empire. Numerous documents attest to this. Thus, in the report to the People's Commissar for Nationalities on the economic state and cultural development of the Chuvash, it was noted that "the war ... had a negative impact" on the life of the population "the village lost the best workers, more than 3/5 able-bodied men were taken into the army. An approximate count of all Chuvash conscripted for military service gives a figure of 120 thousand" [10, l. 11]}. Resettlement sentiments were also noted among the Chuvash population. Due to the infertility of the soil and poor harvests, which were caused by undeveloped agricultural technologies, the Chuvash left partly Simbirsk province.

In addition to economic problems, cultural isolation was noted among the Chuvash people: "Under such conditions, the peasant's view of intelligent workers was distrustful, which, of course, most of all separated him from them and was the reason for the isolation of the people …All this delays the cultural and economic development of the people and should be under the greater focus of State attention. The people, in order to be a cultural cohabitant among civilized nations, require urgent implementation of elementary practical knowledge that can have a beneficial effect primarily on the economic condition of the region. The higher the cultural level of a nation, the higher its consumption and the richer the means and methods of consumption" ^{[10, l. 12 vol.]}. At the same time, it should be noted that attempts to introduce school education as an important means of intellectualization of the population were made in the pre-revolutionary period, but public schools were clearly insufficient: "One school accounts for 300 children of both sexes with a norm of 30-40 students in school" ^{[10, l. 12 vol.]}. Such a folk school "could not justify its mission, mainly because teaching was conducted not in their native language, but in Russian, the native language did not develop. Under such conditions, the spiritual development and creative achievement of the nation was impossible" ^{[10, l. 12 vol.In a similar vein, the need for the development of national schools in other regions was justified. In particular, the Protocol of the I-th Congress of Mugallims (people's teachers – author's note) of the Bukeevskaya Horde contained the thesis that "no enlightenment, no culture is unthinkable if there are no national schools with teaching in their native language, therefore all the energy, all the efforts of our mugallims to spread knowledge among the people did not give the desired results on the one hand, the old government, instead of helping them, forbade the education of children, closed schools, on the other hand, the old mullahs sent the dark masses on the wrong path, spreading false and ridiculous rumors about the mugallim" [12, l. 23]}.    

 Russian Russian, which was carried out in imperial Russia, was met with a protest movement, which in particular was expressed in the actual ignorance of the Russian language by the local population, as evidenced by archival documents, "in a village where knowledge of the Russian language was not instilled, the population did not find interest in such knowledge, and the child broke his native language and distorted Russian words. Thus, man did not comprehend the consciousness that language is a powerful tool of every person in mental work and the engine of the highest creative achievement, that it can be developed and enriched with perfect forms and turns, that the development of literary language stands in close connection with the development of spiritual forces and goes in parallel, but with the conquests of the human mind in technology and science" ^{[10, l. 13 vol.]}.  The policy of cultural and educational orientation was also characteristic of other national regions of Soviet Russia, historically characterized by some lag behind the central regions in the field of education. Thus, according to the official note of the managing director of the People's Commissariat for Nationalities Affairs dated May 16, 1918, the need for financing cultural and educational societies in the Turgay region was noted ^{[12, L. 4]}. Also in July 1918, the Central Commissariat for National Affairs ordered to find out "whether there is any literature in the Tatar, Mordovian and Chuvash languages in Khvalynsky Uyezd" due to the fact that about 113,000 representatives of the indigenous peoples of the Volga region live there. The People's Commissariat also requested the number of required publications and the necessary amount of funding, and also noted that material support for these activities will be made immediately ^{[12, L. 13]}. It is characteristic that allocations for the development of the culture of the peoples of Soviet Russia were carried out during the difficult period of the Civil War and the general shortage of all kinds of resources, which once again underlines the desire to fully support the national development of all nationalities without exception, including to awaken in them a readiness for political self-determination. The support of national culture was carried out not only within the RSFSR, but also in other regions potentially ready for administrative-territorial consolidation. In particular, there was a shortage of printing houses in Azerbaijan that have the ability to replicate literature in the Turkic language: "The equipment of local printing houses is not so large that it is possible to satisfy at least partially and in a tolerable form the ever-increasing need for publishing Oriental literature. The lack of a sufficient amount of Muslim font for ordinary text typing, the complete absence of Hindu font, the lack of typesetters of the Turkic font and the complete absence of the latter for typing in other dialects raise the question of the need to print the mentioned literature not in a typographic, but in a lithographic way" ^[13]. 

It is noted that at the present time (1918), under the circumstances, the only way to achieve educational goals that would consolidate and develop national statehood within the Soviet Federation is the tools of the Russian language, in science and education: "The nationalization of the school should be carried out immediately, but at the same time bearing in mind that the nationalization schools, due to the lack of educational material, cannot immediately put teaching in schools on a nationwide scale, it is necessary for children of both sexes to open Russian preparatory classes with public money right now, to fully prepare students in them for admission to secondary educational institutions for further development of knowledge in higher educational institutions, only in this way it is possible to create cadres, scientific forces from the Chuvash themselves, which will later have to establish a link between nationalization and science. For the same purpose, it is necessary to establish a bureau for the translation of the press from Russian into Chuvash. A powerful tool of cultural and educational work should be the distribution of newspapers and pamphlets among the people, which, with a large percentage of illiterate people, can only be carried out by an active method of extracurricular education."  We observe a similar approach in the work of the Kyrgyz Department at the People's Commissariat for Nationalities, which in October 1918 reported that "a special translation department has been organized in the Khan's Headquarters, in which all the translation work of Russian, Soviet propaganda pamphlets, leaflets and proclamations into the Kyrgyz language, which has already been started, as well as in The task of the translation department is to translate textbooks and manuals from Russian into Kyrgyz for Kyrgyz national schools. A special law and legislative commission has been created in the Khan's headquarters, the purpose of which is to create a criminal and civil code in relation to the modern life of the Soviet Republic, which will be based on the ideas of socialism and the ordinary rights of the Kyrgyz" ^{[12, l. 21]}.   

The Soviet leadership rightly believed that the struggle against illiteracy, propaganda and agitation of proletarian ideals, and the formation of a Marxist-Leninist worldview were necessary for active participation in the socialist construction of the numerous nations and nationalities that inhabited Soviet Russia.   Only in this case it is possible to form the "apparatus of the future state administration", to carry out the "socialization of the earth", to establish "Soviet power", in this regard, all of the above "would produce great evolutionary significance in the people, preparing the people for active participation in the future construction of their well-being and cultural cohabitation with other peoples. Since the Council of People's Commissars has actually already put the country on the path of self-determination of peoples, we must think that it will respond to all the needs that will be felt on the ground" ^{[10, l. 13]}. In this regard, the need for nationalization is emphasized, which "requires a speedy solution and depends on raising the economic and cultural level of the people" ^{[10, l. 13]}.   The issues of political self-determination were closely connected with the processes of nationalization. The Soviet government rightly believed that the formation of "democratic national organizations, without which the work on the path of self-determination would be accidental and not creative" ^{[10, l. 13]} should be based on the domination of national ownership of the main means of production.  Following Marxist logic, the author of the document justifies the processes of self-determination within the framework of a federal state by the need for nationalization as an economic condition for political self-identification: "At first, the work will meet difficult conditions. Everything will be created out of nothing, the legacy of the past is too insignificant and cannot serve as a positive factor in creating new living conditions. But the problem of nationalization will inspire the people, as well as awaken the dormant forces of the people" ^{[10, l. 13]}. At the same time, I. Danilov also emphasizes the feedback of nationalization and the political self-determination of the nation, expressing the idea that "only a well-organized democratic national organization can direct the work of nationalization along the planned creative path" ^{[10, L. 14]}.              

Some forms of national self-determination, which were planned to be given the form of a subject of the federation, either did not come true, or they were implemented later.

So, on December 8-10, 1917, the Bashkir Regional Congress was held, which called itself the "Kurultai (parliament), representatives of the people made a unanimous decision to recognize the autonomy of Bashkurdistan" ^{[8, l. 38]}. On April 3, 1918, a telegram of the All-Kyrgyz Council was sent to the People's Commissariat for National Affairs, the first paragraph of which read: "According to the resolution of the All-Kyrgyz Congress on December 5-13, it is necessary to immediately declare the territorial-national autonomy of Alash, which should include the regions of Semipalatinsk, Akmola, Turgai, Ural, Syr-Darya, Ferghana, Semirechenka, Bukeevskaya, Ordamagyshl district of Transcaspian region, Jizzakh district of Samarkand region, Amu-Darya department of Syr-Darya region. Kyrgyz of Biysk, Slavgorodsky, Zmeinogorodsky uyezd of Altai province" ^{[8, l. 36]}.  

The formation of the subjects of the Soviet Federation on the territory of the former Russian Empire was hindered not only by general disorganization and lack of experience in independent state-building, a low level of cultural and historical development, but also by the action of various nationalist forces. For example, in the report of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Armenia dated April 30, 1918, the situation in Transcaucasia is characterized: "The most undisguised nationalism dominates the life of Transcaucasia. Each of these peoples has its own special party, painted in the color of socialism and democracy, but in essence deeply hostile to both socialism and democracy … The Armenians have the Dashnak Tsutyun party, which for decades, taking advantage of the darkness of the masses and exploiting the issue of "Turkish Armenians", has poisoned the consciousness of Armenian workers and peasants and keeps the overwhelming majority of the Armenian working masses tied to nationalism. The Dashnak Tsutyun party is a party of Armenian imperialism and, funnily enough, with great-power dreams" ^{[10, l. 20]}.  The example of the Dashnak Tsutyun party shows how nationalist movements skillfully used revolutionary rhetoric about the right of nations to self-determination: "The slogan of the Russian revolution "self-determination of peoples" was only a slogan so far, it was artificially used to strengthen the authority of the same bogeyman "physical existence of the nation". Dashnak Tsutyun, which had lost its authority among the masses after the fall of the wave of the volunteer movement, at the beginning of the revolution got back on its feet and resurrected its former power and strength. The Armenian working masses under the command of petty–bourgeois nationalists - Dashnaktsakans once again stood in the close ranks of militant nationalism in the name of "self-determination of the Armenians (and not the peoples of Armenia), arm themselves from head to toe. In the name of freedom and the salvation of the nation, it is necessary to create national troops – this is the slogan that the Dashnaktsakans, barricaded by the National Council, carried out with stupid consistency and criminal shortsightedness. The overthrow of tsarism unleashed the forces of the bourgeoisie of small nations, and it was able to maintain the "unity of national forces", deftly diverted the attention of the proletariat and peasantry from the immediate tasks of the class struggle towards the same "physical existence of the nation" ^{[10, l. 21-22]}. 

The political palette of Transcaucasia would not be complete without coverage of the party activities of the Mensheviks in Georgia: "The Georgians are dominated by the Bolsheviks. Georgia is a petty–bourgeois peasant country and, despite this, has always been proud of a strong social democracy. Peculiar historical conditions – the venality of the Georgian nobles (loss of independence) inspired disgust among the masses of the Georgian peasantry towards the parties of the propertied classes and created psychological prerequisites for the success of Menshevik agitation and propaganda. The Georgian peasants seemed to be the most conscious element, free from any influence of nationalism. They sent mainly Social Democrats to the Duma..." ^{[10, l. 22]}. At the same time, the Georgian Mensheviks did not oppose, despite the social-democratic platform, but on the contrary, preached pronounced nationalism: "... the secret of the influence of the Social Democrats, which slipped in the time of autocracy in the mouth of Deputy Chkhenkeli and in the widespread liquidationism in Georgia was finally exposed by the great Russian revolution. The shell of Marxism quickly fell away and we saw G. Zhordania in the honorary role of chairman of the Georgian National Council, who warmly welcomed the Georgian nobles and the unification of the entire nation. The nationalism of the Georgian Social Democrats is a product of economic conditions and social relations before the Georgian intelligentsia, imbued with socialist ideas that defended the class interests of the proletariat, there was no Georgian bourgeoisie. In their search for an antagonist of the working class, the Georgian Social Democrats came across the Armenian bourgeoisie, whose long-standing struggle turned the class struggle into a national struggle against Armenians in general. The Georgian Social Democrats, without noticing themselves, absorbed the decomposing poison of nationalism day by day. That is why the Caucasus is not only the citadel of Menshevism in general, but it is glorified here to a considerable extent by liquidationism.   

Another nationalist party, Musavat, had a significant influence among the Azerbaijanis (who are called Tatars in the document mentioned above): "Religious fanaticism, nurtured by ignorance, is the string of the working masses on which the landlords – beks and khans played the music of their class desires superbly. The hungry and stripped, depersonalized and enslaved Tatar peasantry provides excellent material through which the Beks and Khans manage to strengthen their counter-revolutionary positions. And the party that holds the fanatical Tatar mass in its hands, according to its policy of separating the working people of various nationalities, corresponding to the Armenian Dashnaktsutyun and the Georgian Mensheviks, is called Musavat. A distinctive feature of this party is outright aggressiveness and undisguised chauvinism. It is sincerely unlike the "Dashnaktsutyun" and the Mensheviks, does not cover its bourgeois landlord essence and openly declares its nationalist demands" ^{[10, l. 22]}. At the same time, the same RSFSR often opposed nationalist movements in the Transcaucasian republics, which even before the formation of the Soviet Union testified to the movement towards an expanded Soviet federation ^{[14, 15, 16]}.  

Bourgeois nationalist forces had grown stronger before the victory of the October Revolution in full agreement and on a single class platform with the Russian bourgeois parties, their opposition was often of an external decorative nature: "... while the Transcaucasian landlords and capitalists were guaranteed complete inviolability of property, they even ignored the slogan of the revolution: "self-determination of nations." First, the establishment of bourgeois-landlord rule, and then "self–determination" and other freedoms - this course was the alpha and omega of the policy of not only the great-power Russian bourgeoisie, but also the Transcaucasian oppressors. This and only this explains the unity of the front, the front of all parts of Russia, and in particular the "unity" of Caucasian democracy with Russian democracy. It was the unity of the bourgeois-landowner front against the ever-increasing international proletarian movement" ^{[10, l. 24]}.   Thus, in the conditions prevailing after the October 1917 revolution in Transcaucasia, these former outskirts of the Russian Empire could not become subjects of the emerging Soviet Federation, largely due to the influence of powerful nationalist political movements.

The formation of the subject composition of the RSFSR in the first years of its existence was influenced by a number of factors, the determining one of which was often the military. Thus, according to the report of the Chairman of the Turgay Regional Executive Committee in June 1918, "On May 31, 1918, the Turgay Regional Executive Committee of the Soviets of Workers, Peasants and Kyrgyz deputies issued a resolution on the transfer of the regional control center from the city of Orenburg to the city of Kostanay ... For such a decision, the committee members put forward the following considerations. 1) The Orenburg province, in particular the environs of the city of Orenburg, are currently the base of military operations of the Orenburg Soviet troops against the Cossacks operating under the command of the famous ataman Dutov and seeking to overthrow Soviet power on the eastern outskirts of European Russia. 2) The control center of the Turgay region, being on a territory alien to it and at such an alarming time, turned out to be completely cut off from its region and deprived of the opportunity not only to strengthen Soviet power in it and organize a real force here to protect this power, but even has absolutely no connection with the largest county centers of its region, as a result, the cities of Kustanai, Aktyubinsk, Turgai, Irgiz, and the city of Temir of the Ural region, which has re-joined the Turgai region, are left to themselves and in matters of military, administrative and food character are forced to act independently without a common system, which is so necessary in a complex state apparatus" ^{[12, l. 11]}.  Thus, considerations of military expediency caused the relocation of the administrative and political center of the Kyrgyz national movement from Orenburg to Kostanay. Subsequently, the specified center did not return to Orenburg, which determined its fate as the administrative center of the eponymous region within the RSFSR.        

In the first years of Soviet power, not only the subject composition of the formed federation remained unclear, but also the subjects of the federation and the regions. Thus, the People's Commissariat for Nationalities of the RSFSR, in a letter to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee dated May 11, 1918, notes that it does not object to the formation of national units in the respective national regions: "it considers it permissible to form national detachments of the Soviet Army only on the territory of this nationality (for example: Ukraine, Bashkiria, Armenia, etc.). ... In connection with all of the above, we appeal to you with a request to notify all the Soviets of Workers' and Peasants' Deputies that on all issues related to national affairs and, in particular, on the formation of new detachments, they appealed to the People's Commissariat for Nationalities" ^{[10, l. 30 – 30 about.]}. Thus, the order of assigning military functions to the subjects of the federation, unsafe for the unity of the state, could be created. Under these conditions, the People's Commissariat for Military Affairs on May 21, 1918 noted that the issue "of creating a military force from the Kirghiz was fundamentally resolved at the congress of the Kirghiz of the Turgai region on March 8 (21) of this year and met with support from the central government, which resulted in the formation of the Turgai military district" ^{[12, L. 2]} However, during the Civil War, any military assistance was not superfluous for the Bolsheviks and clarifying the formal procedure for the implementation of defense functions was clearly not on the agenda. In addition, the military sphere was an important tool for the formation of national elites, which could later become a support in the formation of the subjects of the Soviet Federation in line with the doctrine of the Bolshevik Party. Thus, in the report of the head of the Kyrgyz Department at the People's Commissariat for Nationalities in October 1918, it was noted that "in addition to the command staff of Russian natives, it is necessary to take measures so that the Kyrgyz youth who received education would go to military courses in order to subsequently take command positions in the regiment. The Kyrgyz have also responded to the invitation to enroll in military courses and there are already those who have signed up to go to study military affairs. It is highly desirable that some benefits be provided for these young people when they enroll in courses and their admission would take place in an accelerated manner" ^{[12, l. 29]}.      

Even in the conditions of the civil war, the federal center took care of the formation of the regulatory legal framework of the newly formed subjects. At the same time, representatives of the People's Commissariat had to take into account local national customs in the formation of legal norms on the instructions of their governing body. Thus, M. H.-G. Tungachinui and H.I. Bekentaev received an official task not only to "spread the ideas of socialism among the Kyrgyz people and systematically implement them", but also to carry out "cultural and educational development of the entire Kyrgyz people", to raise the level of "its economic welfare", to settle land use issues "as between the Kyrgyz themselves and displaced peasants on the basis of the socialization of the land adopted by the 3rd All-Russian Congress of Soviets," but also to develop drafts of "civil and criminal laws according to the ordinary rights of the Kyrgyz people on the basis of the ideas of socialism."  The People's Commissariat for Nationalities Affairs authorized the above-mentioned employees "on the basis of the Soviet Constitution to work out the provisions of the administrative-territorial Kyrgyz autonomy" ^{[12, L. 14]}.   

At the same time, there were processes of formation of power structures within the Soviet Federation, ensuring the interaction of the center and national regions. In an extract from the minutes of the meeting of the Plenipotentiary Representation of the Turkestan Republic dated September 14, 1918, it was reported that "the Central Turkestan Representation on issues related to Turkestan is being formed in Moscow" as part of "The Plenipotentiary Representative of the All-Russian Central Government of the Central Government of the Turkestan Republic, member of the Supreme Revolutionary Council of the Republic, Commander of the Eastern Front of the 7th Army, Comrade Kobozev, Plenipotentiary representatives of the Turkestan Republic are members of the extraordinary delegation of Ts. I.K. tt. Troitsky and Yusupov" ^{[17, L. 6]}.

In the conditions of an unstable federal statehood, the formation of authorities in autonomous republics and autonomous regions also took place. For example, in the process of bringing the Constitution of the RSFSR into line with the Constitution of the USSR in 1924, the ball noted the need to "specify exactly in the Constitution whether there will be CEC or regional executive committees in the autonomous regions. There are CICs in many areas. It is necessary to introduce uniformity" ^{[18, l. 35]}. In this regard, the initiative shown by the Kalmyk region is mentioned: "With the exception of the Kalmyk region, which in one document appropriated the name of the CEC, in all other regions the highest authorities are called regional executive committees" ^{[18, l. 35]}.   

Soviet Russia followed the path of forming a complex model of state structure, in which certain regions – autonomous republics were part of the RSFSR as subjects of the federation, while others – provinces, territories - on the rights of administrative-territorial units. The question of the state-legal nature of the autonomous regions was resolved in the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1925 in the manner indicated by D.I. Kursky: "... the rights of parts of the federation can only be assigned to autonomous republics ... republics have such an apparatus that really provides the known beginnings of the federation and therefore only autonomous republics can be interpreted as parts of the the autonomous regions have a provincial-scale apparatus, they enjoy autonomy and support from the central government of the federation, but they are part of the RSFSR not on the basis of federation, but on the basis of administrative inclusion" ^{[19, l. 27]}.     

Judging by the documents, the RSFSR, both on the eve and during the Civil War, considered many parts of the former Russian Empire in its political orbit, potentially considering them as part of the future common geopolitical space. This once again confirms the thesis that the borders of the Soviet Federation and its subject composition are not predetermined in advance. So, already on November 17, 1917, the People's Commissar for Nationalities was informed about the formation of a temporary Commissariat for Polish Affairs, in the organization of which the following organizations took part: "1) The Social Democracy of Poland and Lithuania; 2) The Polish Socialist. Party ...; 3) Polish Social. Party (rev. fraction); 4) Cultural-enlightenment. Prometheus; 5) The Main Committee ... of the Polish Military Union; 6) The Central Committee of Soldiers' Revolutionary Clubs; 7) The Central Committee of Evacuated Railway Workers" ^{[10, L. 1]}. The Provisional Commissariat had a fairly extensive structure, which generally indicates the plans assigned to it in terms of influencing the politically active part of the Poles who were in Soviet Russia:

"I) Labor Department: a) working department; c) department of evacuated railway workers; c) liquidation commission; 

II) Military Department;

III) Department of Prisoners of War;

IV) Refugee Department;

V) Cultural and Educational Department;

VI) Press Department" ^{[10, l. 1]}.

The Baltic and generally Western direction of the expansion of the Soviet Federation did not lose its relevance, but rather became even more relevant with the end of the Civil War. So, in 1921, within the framework of the People's Commissariat, it was planned to create a Council of Nationalities on the rights of a collegium. The draft of the corresponding provision assumed that "in addition to the chairman, representatives of six (6) national departments are introduced into the composition of the Council: Finnish, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish and Jewish" ^{[20, L. 26]}. At the same time, the planned structure was again aimed not so much at promoting the national and cultural development of the respective ethnic groups, as at the formation of political and territorial autonomies in the future: "The first five nationalities are of great political importance, in contact with their bourgeois Republics, they live in fairly compact masses and in the future may develop into Autonomous Republics in the future." That is, Soviet federalism, figuratively speaking, performed to some extent the function of "exporting the revolution" ^{[20, l. 26]}. As a result, the draft version of the Regulation on the Council of Nationalities under the People's Commissariat of March 5, 1921, the circle of participants in this body was expanded at the expense of both nationalities already geographically defined within the RSFSR and those on this path: "The Council of Nationalities consists of: People's Commissar, members of the Board of the People's Commissariat, chairman of the national representations of the Autonomous Republics and Regions of Bashkir, Belarusian, Buryat, Votsky, Gorsky, Dagestan, Mari, Mordovian, German, Tatar, Turkestan, Chuvash, Yakut and heads of Jewish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish, Finnish and Estonian national departments" ^{[20, L. 26]}.              

The People's Commissariat for Nationalities Affairs had a Ukrainian branch that informed the leadership of the Commissariat about the news of the newly emerged Ukrainian power under the leadership of Hetman Skoropadsky, interacting with the Ukrainian consul in Moscow. The tasks of the Ukrainian Department consisted, among other things, "in organizing Ukrainian Public opinion in favor of the Russian Soviet Federative Republic: carrying out the ideas of such throughout Ukraine" ^{[21, l. 22]}.

For example, in July 1918, the law on citizenship of the Ukrainian state was transmitted to the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR ^{[21, l. 29-34]}. The relevant departments, in particular the Ukrainian ones, also conducted cultural and educational work in order to develop the corresponding national culture in the RSFSR. For example, on October 28, 1918, the Ukrainian Department advertised: "The Ukrainian Department of the People's Commissariat for Nationalities on November 1, at 10 a.m., invites all Communist comrades and sympathizers and those who want to take part in the celebration of the opening of the monument to the Ukrainian national hero-poet SHEVCHENKO on the opening day of the monument (November 10) to the commissariat building..." ^{[21, l. 53]}.   Thus, the Ukrainian branch of the People's Commissariat of People's Commissariat became a parallel center of Ukrainian policy on the part of the Soviet government, which to a certain extent prepared the further state unification of the two republics. 

Similar departments were created in relation to other nationalities and former national suburbs. So, on December 12, 1918, a letter was sent to the People's Commissariat of Railways from the Liquidation Commission for the Kingdom of Poland under the Polish Commissariat of the People's Commissariat for Nationalities of the RSFSR, expressing concern about the political future of Belarus: "The Lithuanian and Belarusian National Commissariats are interested in ensuring that employees of counterrevolutionary mood are not among the employees to be returned, and such b. part was appointed there by the Tsarist Government, and employees who do not stand at all on the point of view of the Soviet Government. The creation of Soviet institutions in Lithuania and Belarus has a huge general political character and in this case it is necessary that the best workers of the Soviet Government be sent to the areas now liberated from occupation" ^{[22, l. 83]}.  

At the same time, the national commissariats created in the People's Commissariat for National Affairs grew and acquired a more extensive structure. So, on June 7, 1918, the Temporary manager of the affairs of the Belarusian National Commissariat, N.S. Semenovich, presented a report to the People's Commissariat of the RSFSR on the need to create an agitation and political department at the Belarusian Commissariat. The document emphasizes that "the main task of the Commissariat's activity was, is now strengthening the power of the Soviets among the Belarusian working masses and the agitation work that would contribute to the further development of the Social Revolution on the territory of Belarus" ^{[10, l. 37]}. In order to achieve these goals, N.S. Semyonovich finds it necessary to "organize, through propaganda of the ideas of Soviet power, the working and peasant Belarusian masses, who could at the right moment stubbornly resist the aggressive aspirations of the German imperialists and the rapidly impending reaction from the local bourgeoisie" ^{[10, l. 37 vol.]}. The author of the document strongly condemns the bourgeois the essence of the governing bodies formed in Minsk and their course towards the creation of a separate statehood from Soviet Russia: "... The Minsk Secretariat, and the so-called Belarusian Rada, being the government of capitalists and landlords, destroys one after another the gains of not only the October Revolution, but even all the rights that the working people acquired at the beginning of the March days. Destroying all the civil and economic gains of the Revolution, the Rada and the Secretariat enter into close communication with the German authorities and conduct negotiations on behalf of the unauthorized people regarding the proclamation of Belarus as an independent state unit under the protectorate of Germany" ^{[10, l. 38-38 vol.]}. Propaganda and agitation for Soviet power are seen as a pledge of the connection between Russia and Belarus: "It is necessary to immediately establish a close connection with the Belarusian masses, with the help of those political parties and organizations that, standing on the platform of the Soviets' power, would, on the one hand, be the connecting links between the Commissariat and the working classes of Belarus, on the other, would be the conductors of those ideas that are embedded in the basis of the Commissariat's activities and would serve as direct leaders in the organization of the peasantry in the field" ^{[10, l. 37 vol.]}. The report points to the close connection between the RSFSR and the Belarusian working people: "The working peasantry and the workers of Belarus at this terrible moment are waiting for help from the entire Russian Socialist Soviet Republic, and in this regard, the 5th All-Russian Congress of Soviets should take all steps to save the working Belarus" ^{[10, l. 61]}. Moreover, The Belarusian National Commissariat also planned to convene the All-Belarusian Congress of Soviets, and, based on the documents of the State Archive of the Russian Federation, it can be concluded that Belarus is potentially considered as part of the RSFSR: "1. To recognize the All-Belarusian Congress of Soviets as urgently necessary and subject to early convocation. 2. To recognize the All-Belarusian Congress, upon its convocation, as the highest regional body of Soviet power. 3. To single out from the 5th All-Russian Congress of Soviets a special Organizational Bureau from representatives of the provinces that are part of Belarus and instruct this Bureau, together with the Belarusian National Commissariat and left-wing political parties, to convene the All-Belarusian Congress. 4. To release one hundred thousand rubles (100,000 rubles) from the funds of the State Treasury as an advance payment for the costs of convening the Congress" ^{[10, l. 61 vol.]}.   

Potentially, Soviet federalism could spread to those territories and nationalities that were not previously even part of the Russian Empire, therefore, the geopolitical scale of the Soviet leadership went far beyond the borders of Soviet Russia. In the report of the plenipotentiary representative of the Central Executive Committee of the Turkestan Republic dated September 28, 1918, it was stated that "for the management of affairs concerning the Turkestan Republic, it is necessary to establish a Turkestan-Muslim department at the Commissariat for National Affairs ... under the direction of the Plenipotentiary Representation and in full charge of it. The subjects of the department are determined by a special instruction that has to be issued for the management of the department. The Department is divided into four sub-departments, namely: 1. Uzbek. 2. Tajik. 3. Kyrgyz. 4. The Young Bukhara Committee. The purpose of the establishment of the Young Bukhara committee is to develop revolutionary activities in the Bukhara Khanate, to support revolutionary organizations emerging in this region with the aim of political education of the masses; to take measures for the economic prosperity of the Region. The committee's responsibilities also include the development of cultural and educational activities among the population through the publication of books, brochures and other printed works and their wide dissemination" ^{[17, l. 7]}. The significance of such events was justified by the speaker by the absence of a revolutionary press from the center in the far outskirts, such as Turkestan, the entire population is drawn into active political life by current events. Meanwhile, literature and even newspapers either do not get to the outskirts at all or get there so late that they lose their interest. Therefore, the sending of printed works is urgently necessary" ^{[17, l. 7]}. Thus, the development of federal relations during the Civil War in the views of the leaders of Bolshevism was in line with the general doctrine of the world revolution, which was shared by most Bolshevik leaders.   

In our opinion, it should be concluded that the RSFSR and the chosen model of building a federation in Soviet Russia served to a large extent as an example in the construction of a new federation – the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. This is how the well-known lawyer and statesman P.I. Stuchka reasoned on this score: "... The Constitution of the USSR is an improvement of the Constitution of the RSFSR, i.e. the Constitutions of the RSFSR and the USSR form a single whole" ^{[19, L. 25]}. That is, according to this logic, the federative roots of the Soviet Union are in the RSFSR.

Within the former Russian Empire, there were complex processes of transformation of state-political relations in the direction from the regime of the metropolis in the person of the imperial power to the construction of its own statehood. Based on archival documents, it is necessary to give an interesting example of the formation of power in Lithuania, which is convincingly evidenced by the manifesto of the Provisional Revolutionary Workers' and Peasants' Government of Lithuania, which emphasizes that "in the name of the rebellious workers and the poorest peasants of Lithuania, in the name of the Lithuanian Red Army, we declare the power of the German military occupation of the Lithuanian Tariba (State Council of Lithuania - author's note.) deposed. All power passes into the hands of the Soviets of workers, landless and low-land deputies" ^{[23, l. 2]}. The program document of the State Council of Lithuania eloquently indicated: "the hour of liberation from the unbearable oppression of the German occupiers, humiliation and poverty has struck. The hour of liberation from the age-old oppression of landlords, kulaks and capitalists has struck, who on the mountain of the people have amassed enormous wealth during the terrible massacre they experienced" ^{[23, l. 2]}. At the same time, the Commissariat for Lithuanian Affairs operated under special conditions of occupation. So, in a memo dated May 6, 1918, the Commissioner for Lithuanian Affairs reported to the leadership of the People's Commissariat of the RSFSR: "The work in the areas occupied by the Germans of the Commissariat for Lithuanian Affairs is as follows: Bolshevik literature and emissaries are sent there to Pskov, Polotsk, Minsk, Mogilev, and other cities; party workers are sent to Lithuania (two already sent – Bolsheviks) … They are obliged, having joined local Bolshevik organizations, where there will be such, to work in the spirit of revolutionary Marxism – the revolutionary Communist Party" ^{[10, l. 54]}. In addition, the Lithuanian Commissariat planned to "convene a conference of communist representatives of all occupied regions in Russia to develop a common work plan" ^{[10, l. 55]}. These documents convincingly prove that the formation of new independent state-power relations was based on the class principle. They indicate the direction of deep comprehensive cooperation with the RSFSR, which in the future could result in confederate and even federal relations. 

This trend is strongly evidenced by the fact that the People's Commissariat for Nationalities held meetings in February 1918 with representatives of national commissariats of potential subjects of the Soviet Federation. Thus, the State Archive of the Russian Federation contains a document containing a transcript of one of these events, which in particular emphasizes the call for workers to take power into their own hands: "Everywhere organize the power of the Soviets of Workers and small-land deputies. ... Long live the victory of the Soviet Republic of Lithuania, long live the Soviets of Workers' Deputies, long live the Red Army, long live the World Workers' Revolution, long live socialism!" ^{[23, l. 6]}. From the workers of Lithuania, the chairman of this delegation was V. Mickiewicz–Capsukas.

The mass media covered the activities of the People's Commissariat for Nationalities. In the Leaflet of the information department dated May 25, 1918, No. 2, it was noted about the active position of the Turkestan workers, the delegation of the Caucasus, Transcaucasia: "the area of Soviet power", - noted in the Leaflet of the information department of the People's Commissariat for Nationalities (hereinafter – the Leaflet of the Information Department), - "grows in parallel with the understanding of the population of the true goals of the Bolsheviks" ^{[23, L. 14]}. 

The Board of the Kyrgyz Department initiated a petition to the People's Commissariat for Nationalities to grant a place in the board of the Commissariat to a representative of the Kyrgyz Department. The members of the Kyrgyz Department stressed that their efforts are carried out agitation "among the Kyrgyz people" ^{[23, l. 18]}.

The newspaper "Znamya Truda" notes that "the Minsk Zemstvo Assembly petitions for the formation of the "Minsk Region" with the inclusion of Grodno and Kovno" ^{[23, l. 16]}.  The events in Latvia, similar to the events in Lithuania, are covered by the newspaper "Life", emphasizing that "in Riga, as well as in Minsk, there are unrest due to lack of food" ^{[23, L. 14]}. "Circles of communists among soldiers are being founded everywhere" ^{[23, l. 14]}, the newspaper Moskovskie Izvestia notes. Thus, the Sovietization of the so-called national outskirts of the former Russian Empire was widespread.  The space within which the RSFSR will exist was conceived in the early years of Soviet power extremely widely, up to the borders of the Russian Empire that disappeared from the political map of the world. This is evidenced in particular by the letter of the People's Commissar to the editorial office of the newspaper "Pravda" dated August 1, 1918 with an explanation of the position: "In my report, I said: "The nationalities inhabiting Russia should be divided into 3 groups: nationalities living in conditions of a developed capitalist economy (Poland, the Baltic Region); nationalities inhabiting economically backward territories (the Volga region) and, finally, foreign tribes leading a semi-nomadic lifestyle (Kyrgyz, Siberian foreigners etc.) ^{[10, l. 63 – 63 vol.]}"     

The understanding of the subject composition of the RSFSR was not fully defined, but it had a pronounced practical significance.   Thus, in the Leaflet of the information department No. 3 dated May 27, 1918, it was noted that "Ukrainians demand from the Russian delegation to determine which states are part of the Russian Federation. Rakovsky replied that the federation in Russia means the Union of Soviets" ^{[23, l. 19]}. 

The formation of the constituent structure of the RSFSR took place in the period 1917 – 1922, especially actively, characterized by the formation of new autonomous republics and regions, raising the status of autonomous regions to republics. Thus, the Balkarian Congress of Soviets was concerned about the political fate of Balkaria in connection with the separation of Kabarda from the Mountain Republic, sending in this regard a corresponding note to the People's Commissariat of the RSFSR: "The separation of Kabarda from the G.S.S.R. to the Autonomous Region raises the question of the future fate of the Balkarian people. Balkaria cannot remain in the City Republic in the future, because in the 1st it is separated from the city of S.S.R. geographically and is poorly connected economically and culturally, and in the 2nd it is impossible to resolve the land issue with Kabarda, remaining in the City of S.S.R. due to the subordination of Kabarda directly to the center of R.S.F.S.R." ^{[20, L. 30]}. The way out of this situation is the following: "... Balkaria needs to be separated from the GSSR into an Autonomous Region directly subordinate to the center of the RSFSR" ^{[20, L. 30]}.  At the same time, a reasoned objection was raised by the idea of connecting Balkaria with the neighboring Kabardian region. The reasons for the inexpediency of such a step were the following: "1) Balkaria is a completely separate nationality with an independent language, special conditions of life, character, etc.

2) In economic terms, Balkaria has its own peculiarities. In Balkaria, cattle breeding dominates, while agriculture prevails in Kabarda.

3) From time immemorial, Balkaria has been completely dependent on Kabarda economically and politically, which is one of the reasons for its backwardness in economic and cultural relations. Merging with Kabarda before the destruction of Kabarda's economic dominance due to its large land and in the presence of national inequality means the continuation of the old policy" ^{[20, l. 30]}.   

In the period between the October Revolution and the formation of the USSR, the processes of federal unification also took place in geographically vast and ethnically diverse regions of Transcaucasia. So, on November 8, 1921, at the Plenum of the Kavburo, it was unanimously decided to create a Transcaucasian Federation, combining economic, financial, military and foreign policy in the person of the Union Council. ... an open campaign on this occasion is going well" ^{[24, l. 2]}. At the same time, the unification of the Transcaucasian republics pursued broader goals than the economic, military and foreign policy coordination of their potentials. In fact, this consolidation served as a model for future unification processes in relation to the Soviet socialist republics. The formation of the RSFSR made it possible to "formalize the military relations of the RSFSR with Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia through a military convention, which would in fact provide the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic with full rights regarding the staging of military affairs in the three Transcaucasian republics in all respects" ^{[25, L. 1]}. In the resolution of the Kavburo "On the Federation of Transcaucasia" Adopted at the Plenum of the Kavburo on November 2, 1921, it was pointed out: "The isolated state existence of the Transcaucasian republics weakens them in the face of capitalist and bourgeois countries; an honest political union of the republics will serve as a solid guarantee against any attempts on them by counter-revolutionary forces and will strengthen Soviet power on the borders of the Middle East. Political unification will enable the republics to establish an honest economic union among themselves, attempts to conclude which have been made repeatedly. Meanwhile, the economic disunity of the republics deepened the already difficult economic situation of the Caucasus, poverty and ruin of the masses and caused a number of misunderstandings between the republics. The Caucasus is a single economic entity and its economic development can only go under the sign of the all-Caucasian economic association. Finally, the existence of numerous People's commissariats and institutions in the three republics consumes a lot of effort and money, creates unnecessary parallel work in many bodies. Therefore, administration by joint efforts in the main and most important branches of state administration will strengthen and fertilize Soviet work. Proceeding from this, the Kavburo considers ... it is necessary to conclude a federal union between the republics primarily in the field of military, economic and financial work and foreign policy" ^{[26, l. 1-6]}. Thus, the creation of the ZSFSR is seen by its leadership as the optimal form of organization and management capable of freeing the population of the three republics from unnecessary and burdensome bureaucratization. related to the functioning of the power apparatus in each subject.  Accordingly, federalism makes it possible to avoid duplication of legal regulation, including the functions of state authorities, their accompanying reporting and other official documentation. Federal relations have a positive effect, as the responsible party leaders rightly noted, on the elimination of conflicts in the legal regulation of public relations at different levels. At the same time, it should be noted that the unification processes were not uniformly progressive. Certain excesses were associated with contradictory positions held by prominent representatives of the Bolshevik leadership. So, for example, in the telegram of L.V. Kamenev and Bukharin addressed to G.K. Ordzhonikidze, regarding the mandatory implementation of the resolution of the plenum of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) on Georgia's entry into the Union of the Transcaucasian Federation, says: "Our speech against Great Russian nationalism did not follow the defense of Georgian nationalism at all: You should know that the resolution of the Plenum on joining the Union of the Transcaucasian Federation must be precisely implemented and can be reviewed again only by a new Plenum, if the Central Committee wants it, the tone of your open note is a profound violation of party morals. We advise you to stop squabbling and work on the basis of Tseki solutions" ^[27]. At the same time, there were also opposing points of view due to centralist aspirations. So, S.M. Kirov in a telegram addressed to G. K. Ordzhonikidze notes: "It turned out that work is being done here against the Transcaucasian Federation for an alliance directly with Moscow. We urgently sent all correspondence on this subject with Moscow, telegrams from Lenin, Kamenev, and so on" ^[28].     

The formation of the constituent structure of the RSFSR was complex, far from always progressive, accompanied by numerous interethnic conflicts, the course of which was complicated by the events of the Civil War and military intervention. As a result, the RSFSR included regions whose totality did not coincide with the borders of the former Russian Empire. The RSFSR did not cover those territories that, judging by the materials studied, were considered in the political orbit of the Bolshevik leadership. In our opinion, largely for this reason, the process of forming a single federal political space was not completed, which led to a significant extent to the unification of the RSFSR, Ukraine, Belarus and Transcaucasia into a new type of federation.

As conclusions regarding the formation of the subject composition of the RSFSR, the following can be noted.

1. The experimental nature of the construction of the Soviet Federation in the absence of appropriate political and legal experience.

2.        The ideocracy of the Soviet federal state, based on internationalism and the right of nations to self-determination.

3. The complex nature of the Soviet Federation, its national-territorial nature with a clear asymmetry in favor of national subjects. Under these conditions, such purely territorial regions as territories and provinces were considered exclusively as administrative-territorial units.

4.        The initial non-resolution of the borders of the Soviet Federation.

5. The indefinite subject composition of the federation, constantly changing, both qualitatively and quantitatively, in the conditions of Civil War and other objective difficulties. Qualitative changes were expressed, in particular, in raising the status of national subjects from autonomous regions to autonomous republics.

6.          Situational and individual nature of the distribution of subjects of competence and powers between the center and the regions.