Justice in the Process of Regional Conflict Settlement: Analysis of Russia’s Strategy, 1992-2021

Author:

Kaveshnikov Nikolay Yu.ORCID

Abstract

Research in the field of regional conflict resolution rarely touches on the issue of justice. This paper aims to identify what understanding of international justice underlies Russia’s actions as a mediator/peacekeeper in the process of regional conflict resolution in the 1990s-2010s. The study also contributes to the understanding of Russia’s foreign policy by clarifying Moscow’s views on the essence and parameters of a just global order. The paper provides a study of the dominant Russian views on the essence of justice in international relations. It offers an insight into Russia’s peace-making and conflict resolution activities in the context of the three concepts of global justice and taking into account the factor of national interests. The study concludes that the dominant understanding of international justice in Russia is that which corresponds to Allen Buchanan’s concept of subjective justice. In Moscow’s view, international justice is a set of rules developed in the process of consensus driven negotiations between the great powers. According to this logic, a just settlement of the regional conflict is possible only on the basis of the consensus of the parties to the conflict and in accordance with the interests of the global and regional powers concerned. The fair interaction of the great powers in the settlement of the regional conflict and the impact that the conflict resolution could have on the development of the international order were of crucial importance for Moscow within the period under consideration. Moscow’s activity in the conflict resolution in the post-Soviet space generally corresponded to the model of justice as mutual recognition, but with absolute priority of Russian national interests. The strategy for resolving regional conflicts in the post-Soviet space could only be understood in the broad context of relations with Western countries and has changed in line with the development of these relations.

Publisher

Peoples' Friendship University of Russia

Subject

Political Science and International Relations,History,Development

Reference17 articles.

1. Arbatova, N. K. (2019). Three dimensions of the post-Soviet “frozen” conflicts. World Economy and International Relations, 63(5), 88-100. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-5-88-100

2. Bogaturov, A. D. (2007). Three generations of Russia’s foreign policy doctrines. Mezhdunarodnye Processy, 5(1), 54-69. (In Russian).

3. Buchanan, A. (1990). Justice as reciprocity versus subject-centered justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 19(3), 227-252.

4. Danilov, D. A. (2012). Russia - EU: Features of political dialogue. In O. Potemkina (Ed.), The European Union in the 21st century: A time of trials (pp. 519-548). Moscow: Ves’ Mir publ. (In Russian).

5. Devyatkov, A. V. (2010). “Kozak memorandum” in the history of the Transdniestrian settlement. Izvestiya Altajskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, (4-2), 52-57. (In Russian).

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3