Former Republics

From “Imperial” Union to Commonwealth of Independent States

Toward the end of 1991 Soviet Union ceased to exist. On December 21, 1991, eleven of its former republics officially declared its dismissal. The other four (Baltic countries and Georgia) practically supported this historical act. A great country which had stretched out on the huge Eurasian space with the population of over 320 million people and with powerful military and economic potential comparable only to the USA disappeared from the world map. The world was ready to accept 15 independent states. The active and rapid process of their diplomatic recognition is ongoing.

The sudden and spontaneous collapse of the USSR had really shaken the world. The August putsch which was a failure was the last mine which finally exploded the Soviet empire. The desperate attempts of its ex-President Gorbachev to save the Union as a sovereign state at any cost suffered an utter defeat. Having eliminated the USSR, the former republics established the Commonwealth of Independent States and declared that the latter was now a state. The aim of the Commonwealth is to facilitate the transition of the former republics into a new status. Its main purpose is to bring the policy of the state members into agreement in the spheres of common interest.

This action brought about a decisive and obviously historically inevitable step. It helped bring the Soviet country out of the state of vagueness when the “war of laws” and the incessant “fight for sovereignty” led to complete anarchy. It started new period of history of nations that inhabit one-sixth of the Earth surface.

The liberation movement in the majority of the republics acquired a bright national tinge and was expressed in a powerful current of meetings demanding national rights and religious freedoms. At the beginning the forces of the national liberation movement spoke for granting the republics more independence; but later having come into power these forces demanded complete state independence and most of them, secession from the USSR. The Governments and the Parliaments of the Baltic republics were the first to adopt such a decision. They were soon followed by Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, and Ukraine.

The growth of the national and religious consciousness and liberation movement is undoubtedly a progressive phenomenon. But the tenseness of the situation was in the strengthening of the separatist tendencies in the national, religious liberation movement. The attempts of the Soviet government to hold up this process by force resulted in bloodshed. This happened in Kazakhstan, then in Azerbaijan, later in Georgia, Tadjikistan, Lithuania, in Caucasus, etc.

This tragic ending can be explained by the stagnation of the Party authorities of the country. Having declared “perestroika” and “glasnost,” having announce the necessity of new ways of thinking, having brought to life new political powers and religious freedoms, former Soviet leaders could not break away from the old system. Their wish was to “retouch,” to renew the system but not to break it.

The Soviet Union was conceived by them as a “one and indivisible” state with all its attributes of authoritarian authorities. They recognized the possibility of a future confederation, but opposed any demands for sovereignization perceiving in them infringement of the center’s role. Thus, they had finally opposed themselves to the republics that wanted real freedom politically, nationally, and religiously.

The creation of Commonwealth at the meeting of the Presidents of three Slavic republics (Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine) was grounded in the striving of Russia to preserve the union with Ukraine. The referendum on December 1, 1991, which adopted the resolution on the independence of Ukraine gave rise to the signing the Belovezhski agreements; but the following evolution of Commonwealth resulted in confirming quite contrary priorities.

The Presidents of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tadjikistan, and Turkmenistan felt ignored and declared their wish to become consistors of the Commonwealth of Independent states, enjoying equal rights. As a result of negotiations in Alma-Ata the membership of CIS was extended (December 21, 1991). Eleven of the fifteen former republics joined the Commonwealth. Only Baltic countries and Georgia were outside it.

From the very beginning, Russia’s policy has been to consolidate CIS. Later it turned out that it was difficult to divide the property of the former Soviet Union (what is more, the military property). Therefore, the necessity to cooperate with the countries which show their readiness became obvious. This approach was manifested in signing the agreements selectively. Only some of them have been signed by all the states-members but many of them – only by 6-7 countries. The idea of developing CIS “at different speeds” has led to growing stratification and differentiation. The most ardent advocates of CIS are Kazakhstan, Russia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and to a lesser extent Armenia. But the first four countries make up the “nucleus” of Commonwealth. At the same time there is a group of countries indifferent to strengthening CIS. Azerbaijan and Moldova have not ratified the agreement and have not taken part in it. Ukraine, remaining in the Commonwealth, is against creating executive structures in CIS. The majority of the agreements signed by it are aimed at the temporary support of the infrastructure of the former USSR. The country believes that the complete collapse of the infrastructure might be painful for all the former republics. The similar attitude is taken by Turkmenistan. Evasive policy is followed by Belarus. Though it supports the initiatives on developing the Commonwealth in its social-economic sphere, Belarus would not agree to participate in creating the military-political union of CIS countries.

All European republics of the former USSR distinctly identify themselves as European states, not as a part of Eurasian space. On that ground, the projects for all the republics of the former Soviet Union to come together again under one common roof are not serious. The tendency for keeping away from the Commonwealth which was manifested in 1992 lends to the transformation of the original conception of the Commonwealth. It is gradually but distinctly turning into a Russian-Middle Asian union. The development of the trend strengthens estrangement of Russia from Europe raising the significance of an Asian direction of its policy.

Former Republics