Academic literature on the topic 'Spazio Post-sovietico'

Fin dall’indipendenza ottenuta nel 1991, la Repubblica di Moldova è oscillata tra Oriente e Occidente, tra la Russia e l’Unione Europea. Inoltre, nel suo territorio multietnico si è creata una frattura che permane tutt’oggi (la autoproclamatasi Repubblica di Transnistria). Questo scritto indaga le principali cause della stasi politica ed economica del Paese. Infatti, nonostante le classi politiche che si sono succedute (comunisti, filo-russi e filo-europei) e i loro numerosi tentativi di sviluppo - compresa la cooperazione internazionale - il processo iniziato negli anni Novanta deve ancora essere completato. Dopo aver passato in rassegna la letteratura sul legame tra sviluppo e democrazie e aver delineato un quadro storico della Bessarabia, evidenzieremo i principali problemi che hanno ostacolato la crescita politica ed economica del Paese. Un problema come la corruzione, sia a livello statale che amministrativo, è un grosso ostacolo all'apertura dell'economia moldava sui mercati internazionali. La globalizzazione ha cambiato la vita delle persone. Mentre ci sono Paesi che si sono gradualmente o immediatamente adattati ad essa, l'economia moldava, tuttavia, è ancora ancorata al settore primario. In questo contesto, seguire il percorso dei Paesi che hanno superato con successo il periodo di transizione può essere una valida opzione per la Repubblica di Moldova. Pertanto, vari programmi e progetti possono essere realizzati con successo per lo sviluppo nazionale, che dovrà integrare il settore secondario e terziario. Organizzazioni internazionali come le agenzie delle Nazioni Unite, la Banca Mondiale, il FMI ed altri possono sostenere i Paesi emergenti con i loro finanziamenti e le loro conoscenze per raggiungere gli obiettivi dell'Agenda 2030, come l'eliminazione della povertà e la creazione delle basi per uno sviluppo inclusivo e sostenibile.

Northwestern Transcaucasia is one of the post-Soviet areas most affected by regional cleavages and ethno-political conflicts. Following the fall of the Russian Empire, Georgia tried to build its own statehood, while in Abkhazia and South Ossetia there was a confrontation between Kartvelian communities oriented towards Tbilisi and the Abkhazian and Ossetian ones facing Moscow and Ciscaucasia. With the Sovietization of Transcaucasia in 1921 and the creation of the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic (GSSR), South Ossetia was converted to an Autonomous Oblast within the GSSR, while Abkhazia became a proper SSR (albeit with an ambiguous Union Treaty with the GSSR) but, in 1931, it was downgraded to an Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic within the GSSR. For at least a decade after their Sovietization, Abkhazia and South Ossetia could benefit from a certain cultural and linguistic autonomy, but from the second half of the 1930s they were affected by a growing policy of Georgianization and, in the Abkhazian case, also by a massive Kartvelian immigration. After Stalin’s death and Beria’s execution in 1953, Abkhazians and South Ossetians experienced a new phase of broadening their cultural and linguistic rights. The following decades were characterized by the deepening of the contraposition and mutual stimulation dynamics between Abkhazian and Ossetian national identities and the Georgian one. In the second half of the 1980s, radical nationalism progressively imposed its hegemony over Georgian society and, in 1990, the GSSR parliament assumed the objective of the country’s independence. Consequently, the Abkhazian and South Ossetian legislative assemblies proclaimed their own sovereign republics. Then, in January 1991 Georgia attacked South Ossetia, resulting in the outbreak of military conflict in the region, during which both Tbilisi and Tskhinval declared their independence. In 1992, following the coup against the nationalist Gamsakhurdia and Shevardnadze’s return as Georgian leader, a ceasefire agreement between Tbilisi and Tskhinval was reached in June with Russian mediation, consolidating South Ossetian control over most of the region. Soon, the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) was involved in the ceasefire monitoring process, but failed to foster concrete steps towards a negotiated solution to the Ossetian-Georgian political conflict. Contextually, inter-ethnic tensions grew in Abkhazia and, in August 1992, Georgia militarily attacked the region, initially conquering a large part of it but subsequently suffering the progressive counter-offensive of the Abkhazians, who in September 1993 re-established their control over Sukhum and large part of the region. Meanwhile, in August 1993, the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG) had been established to monitor the conflict in Abkhazia. Following the Abkhazian military victory, a complex phase of Abkhazian-Georgian talks began, under the aegis of the United Nations and with the participation of the Russian Federation and the CSCE. Then, in May 1994, a ceasefire and separation of forces agreement was reached, with the establishment of a security zone on which a CIS peacekeeping contingent was deployed, and UNOMIG was expanded. Once the military dimension of the conflict was frozen, the parties were engaged in complex talks to reach a negotiated political solution, under the auspices of the UN and with an active role of Russia. However, the positions were no longer reconcilable: on the one hand, Tbilisi intended to establish its sovereignty over Abkhazia within the framework of a federalist compromise, on the other hand, Sukhum was willing to accept at most a confederal and symbolic solution. Therefore, in 1999, the parliament of the Republic of Abkhazia formally declared state independence, greatly reducing the prospects for a negotiated solution to the political conflict with Georgia.

L’obiettivo di questo studio è quello di analizzare i diversi tentativi di integrazione dello spazio geopolitico post-sovietico promossi dall'Unione Europea (UE), con la Politica Europea di Vicinato, e dalla Russia, in particolare con l'Unione Economica Eurasiatica (UEE). La tesi si propone di analizzare la genesi di questi progetti di integrazione sia economici che politici ed i loro successivi sviluppi, in particolare in relazione allo stato armeno. Il crollo dell’Unione Sovietica vede la nascita quindici stati indipendenti nello spazio post-sovietico che indubbiamente continuano ad essere legati a Mosca, ma ai quali si presenta l’opportunità di riformarsi politicamente ed economicamente secondo il cosiddetto modello occidentale. Pertanto, nell’area post-sovietica, l’influenza dei progetti a guida russa e l'influenza della Politica Europea di Vicinato, si incontrano e si scontrano. L’UE con la Politica Europea di Vicinato e la successiva dimensione regionale, denominata Partenariato Orientale, si pone l’obiettivo di promuovere i valori occidentali espandendo così la sua influenza negli stati post-sovietici. L’obiettivo dell’UE si scontra con le aspirazioni di Mosca, la quale è impegnata a tentare di riguadagnare un ruolo egemone nella regione. In conclusione, senza avere la pretesa di essere esaustiva, la tesi analizza la situazione dell’Armenia ed i suoi legami con la Russia, i quali hanno determinato l’entrata di Erevan nell’UEE. Inoltre, ponendo l’accento sui fattori che determinano l’acuta dipendenza di Erevan da Mosca, la tesi valuta se le relazioni dell’UE con l’Armenia possano portare ad un distacco di quest’ultima dalla Russia.

The phenomenon of post-cold war fragmentation, above all the gradual disintegration of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia and the re-emergence of a number of sub-national (ethnic-groups, tiny an small states etc.) and supranational actors, have taken scholars of international law and politics by surprise, thus baring in a flash the link between what we have come to regards as international politics and the exclusive, central position of the nation-state. The author analyses interpretative models of fragmentation within the contemporary theory of International Relations (including new theories of Russian and Eastern-European researchers) to see which of them best captures the essence and the dynamics of the fragmentation in the post-Cold War world. In fact, "orthodox" traditional theory is in difficulty in the face of new international developments, because it continues to a state-centered approach which is increasingly outdated. It is in this fact that the bugbear of a "return to the Middle Ages", of a "Neo-Medievalization", proves to be, despite itself, an important cognitive aspect. The contemporary fragmentation is more deep than the one which followed the First World War and does not bring the previous historical circumstances, but places it outside the modern model of the community of nations : it is not a regression, but a departure from it. This study offer an investigation of the break-up of states in Eastern Europe, as well as an explanation (theoretical and empirical) of the impact of this transformation on international relations and suggests some theoretical insights. The author took into account both domestic factors and those international aspects which influenced the course of disintegration of states. It is possible to establish the causal significance of various factors and thus lay the all-important groundwork for future, possible general theory of post- Cold War fragmentation. The close of an historical cycle of concentration of power has above all produced a profound collapse of territorial state, a crisis of statehood and of the constituents of the idea of state, particularly of borders and sovereignty. At present the former Yugoslav and soviet spaces are increasingly under the sway of uncontrollable forces of disintegration.

The research focuses on the complex situation concerning the rigid definition of national cultural identities in the post-Soviet space. In contemporary Ukraine the conflict between alternative cultural models reflects social and political struggles. The contemporary Ukrainian literature in Russian represents a productive field of research in order to analyze the post-Soviet national context. Such a literary phenomenon rises in the interstitial passage between Ukrainian fixed opposite identifications: we deal with a proper hybrid phenomenon which grows out of the passage from the Soviet domination to the national independence.

The Caucasus is a hinge between East and West; a looted border territory for centuries (from Persians to the Turks) and later, under the Soviet regime, it was invested by a violent russification. Despite these vicissitudes, many Caucasian regions managed to keep part of their traditions and their pride kept hidden over the years by necessity. Today the looting of the area continues in a different form. This time by the inhabitants themselves, as well as by foreign construction companies, with the connivance of the great international studies of architecture. In both cases, the reason is that running after the fast modernisation is easy. Tourism is the alibi. And the construction industry is the means.