The features of trade interactions between Russian regions and partially recognized republics of the South Caucasus
https://doi.org/10.34020/2073-6495-2023-2-053-071
Abstract
The article is devoted to a comparative analysis of trade relations between the partially recognized post-Soviet states of the Republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia with the Russian regions in the period 2013–2021. The main sources of information are site data ru-stat.com with details by regions and groups of goods, the analysis of which allowed us to highlight the features of modern trade interactions. For example, the regional geography of Abkhazia’s imports is more diverse and constant compared to South Ossetia. In terms of exports, the most important for Abkhazia are food products, for South Ossetia – textiles.
Keywords
partially recognized states,
states de facto,
Republic of South Ossetia,
Republic of Abkhazia,
export,
import,
structure,
features,
Russian regions
Supporting agencies: The study was supported by the RFBR and MES RSO, project no. 20-514- 07001.
About the Author
S. V. Doroshenko
Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of the RAS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Svetlana.V. Doroshenko – Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Head of the Regional
Systems Adaptation Research Sector,
Yekaterinburg
References
1. Doroshenko S.V., Dzhabiev V.V. Sovremennye torgovye otnoshenija mezhdu Respublikoj Juzhnaja Osetija i rossijskimi regionami: osobennosti, tendencii, bar’ery, riski [Modern trade relations between the Republic of South Ossetia and Russian regions: Features, trends, barriers, risks], Vestnik Rossijskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Serija: Jekonomika [RUDN Journal of Economics], 2022, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 530–547. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2329-2022-30-4-530-547
2. Markedonov S.M. De-fakto gosudarstva: politicheskij fenomen postsovetskogo prostranstva [De facto states: the political phenomenon of the post-Soviet space. Bulletin of the Russian State University], Vestnik RGGU. Serija «Politologija. Istorija. Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija. Zarubezhnoe regionovedenie. Vostokovedenie» [Bulletin of the Russian State University for the Humanities. Series “Political Science. Story. International relationships. Foreign Regional Studies. Oriental Studies”], 2018, no. 1 (11), pp. 24–40. DOI: 10.28995/2073-6339-2018-1-24-40
3. Savin K.N., Shelomencev A.G., Dzhabiev V.V. Finansovaja osnova jekonomicheskoj sostojatel’nosti Respubliki Juzhnaja Osetija [Financial basis of economic viability of the Republic of South Ossetia], Voprosy sovremennoj nauki i praktiki. Universitet im. V.I. Vernadskogo [Issues of modern science and practice. V.I. Vernadsky University], 2021, no. 1 (79), pp. 980–110.
4. Sjomin A.N., Mazloev V.Z., Kibirov A.Ja. Agroturizm kak faktor social’no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija sel’skih territorij Respubliki Juzhnaja Osetija [Agrotourism as a factor of socio-economic development of rural territories of the Republic of South Ossetia], Jekonomika sel’skohozjajstvennyh i pererabatyvajushhih predprijatij [Economics of agricultural and processing enterprises], 2021, no. 11, pp. 66–72.
5. Shelomencev A.G., Goncharova K.S. Faktory social’no-jekonomicheskogo razvitija chastichno priznannyh i nepriznannyh respublik Kavkaza [Factors of socio-economic development of partially recognized and unrecognized republics of the Caucasus], Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta [Bulletin of MGIMO University], 2021, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 203–223. Available at: https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2021-5-80-203-223
6. Abushov K. Explaining Foreign Policy Deviations: The Strategic Rationale of Russia’s Recognition of Abkhazia’s and South Ossetia’s Independence, Ethnopolitics, 2022, vol. 21, no, 4, pp. 401–422. DOI: 10.1080/17449057.2021.1882117
7. Ahluwalia P., Miller T. Why did the World not learn lessons from South Ossetia and Abkhazia: Russia’s push into Ukraine? Social Identities, 2022. vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 147–149. DOI: 10.1080/13504630.2022.2057018
8. Ambrosio T., Lange W. The architecture of annexation? Russia’s bilateral agreements with South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Nationalities Papers, 2016, no. 44 (5), pp. 673–693. doi: 10.1080/00905992.2016.1203300
9. Bakke K.M., Linke A.M., O’Loughlin J., Toa G. Dynamics of state-building after war: External-internal relations in Eurasian de facto states, Political Geography, 2018, no. 63, pp. 159–173. DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2017.06.011
10. Beacháin D. Abkhazia and South Ossetia / Visoka G., Doyle J., Newman E. (Eds.). Routledge Handbook of State Recognition. 2019. P. 430–445. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351131759
11. Besolova E., Bekoeva I., Balikoeva M. General and specific traits in the folklore and ritual life of the peoples of the Caucasus (ethnolinguistic aspect), ECORFAN Journal Mexico, 2022, p. 24.
12. Blakkisrud H., Kolstø P. From Secessionist Conflict Toward a Functioning State: Processes of State- and Nation-Building in Transnistria, Post-Soviet Affairs, 2011, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 178–210. DOI: 10.2747/1060-586X.27.2.178
13. Buzard K., Graham B.A.T., Horne B. Unrecognized states: a theory of self-determination and foreign influence, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 2017, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 578–611.
14. Galkina T.A., Popov F.A. Russia’s borders with Abkhazia and South Ossetia on four scales: Analysis of the political discourse, Reg. Res. Russ., 2016, no. 6, pp. 258–266. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970516030023
15. German T. Russia and South Ossetia: conferring statehood or creeping annexation? Journal of Southeast European and Black Sea, 2016, no. 16 (1), pp. 155–167. doi: 10.1080/14683857.2016.1148411
16. Gerrits A., Bader M. Russian patronage over Abkhazia and South Ossetia: implications for conflict resolution, East European Politics, 2016, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 297–313. DOI: 10.1080/21599165.2016.1166104
17. Golunov S. Pandemic Borders of Post-Soviet De Facto States, Journal of Borderlands Studies, 2022, no. 37 (4), pp. 741–760. DOI: 10.1080/08865655.2021.1943495
18. Hoch T. Independence or unification with a patron state? not such’ dichotomous ideas as one would think: Evidence from South Ossetia, Studies of Transition States and Societies, 2020, no. 12 (1), pp. 68–89. Available at: http://publications.tlu.ee/index.php/stss/article/view/859/697
19. Hoch T., Kopeček V. (Eds.). De Facto States in Eurasia (1st ed.). Routledge. 2019. 324 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429244049
20. Hoch T., Souleimanov E., Baranec T. Russia’s role in the official peace process in South Ossetia, Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, 2014, no. 23, pp. 53–71. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/bog-2014-0004
21. Kolsto P. The sustainability and future of unrecognized quasi-states, Journal of Peace Research, 2006, no. 43 (6), pp. 723–740. doi: 10.1177/0022343306068102
22. Kolsto P. Biting the hand that feeds them? Abkhazia–Russia client–patron relations, Post-Soviet Affairs, 2020, no. 36 (2), pp. 140–158. doi: 10.1080/1060586X.2020.1712987
23. Kolsto P., Blakkisrud H. Russia’s neighborhood policy and its eurasian client states: no autocracy export, Russia in Global Affairs, 2021, no. 2, pp. 38–62. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6374-2021-19-2-38-62
24. Krasniqi G. Contested territories, liminal polities, performative citizenship: a comparative analysis, EUI Working Paper RSCAS, 2018, no. 13, p. 60.
25. Lynch D. Separatist states and post-Soviet conflicts, International Affairs, 2002, no. 78 (4), pp. 831–848. doi: 10.1111/1468-2346.00282
26. Matsuzato K. Transnational minorities challenging the interstate system: Mingrelians, armenians, and muslims in and around Abkhazia, Nationalities Papers, 2011, no. 39 (5), pp. 811–831. doi: 10.1080/00905992.2011.599376
27. Miarka A. Para-states as an instrument for strengthening Russia’s position – the case of Transnistria, Journal of Strategic Security, 2020, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1–18. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.13.2.1750
28. Minakov M. On the extreme periphery. The status of post-soviet non-recognised states in the world-system, Ideology and Politics Journal, 2019, no. 1 (12), pp. 39–72.
29. Nishikawa-Pacher A. The diplomacy of post-Soviet de facto states: ontological security under stigma, International Relations, 2019, no. 33, pp. 563–585.
30. O’Loughlin J., Toalb G., Kolosovc V. Who identifies with the “Russian World”? Geopolitical attitudes in southeastern Ukraine, Crimea, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Transnistria, Eurasian Geography and Economics, 2016, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 745–778. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2017.1295275
31. O’Loughlin J., Kolosov V. A. Building identities in post-Soviet “de facto states”: cultural and political icons in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia, Transdniestria, and Abkhazia, Eurasian Geography and Economics, 2020, no. 58, pp. 691–715.
32. Sebentsov A.B., Karpenko M.S., Gritsenko A.A. et al. Economic Development as a Challenge for “De Facto States”: Post-Conflict Dynamics and Perspectives in South Ossetia, Reg. Res. Russ., 2022, no. 12, pp. 414–427. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970522700277
33. Souleimanov E.A., Abrahamyan E., Aliyev H. Unrecognized states as a means of coercive diplomacy? Assessing the role of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Russia’s foreign policy in the South Caucasus, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 2018, no. 18 (1), pp. 73–86. doi: 10.1080/14683857.2017.1390830
34. Ulas H. The Dynamics of Social Movements in Unrecognized States – A Comparative Study, Front. Polit. Sci., 2021, no. 3, p. 724125. doi: 10.3389/fpos.2021.724125
Review
For citations:
Doroshenko S.V. The features of trade interactions between Russian regions and partially recognized republics of the South Caucasus. Vestnik NSUEM. 2023;(2):53-71. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.34020/2073-6495-2023-2-053-071
Email this article 
