Effective peacebuilding in a post-conflict region is one of the important themes in modern international politics. There is consensus that the support for post-conflict regions is indispensable in international society, and in some cases it is even considered their responsibility.
However, in this paper, a contrasting situation is presented where obtaining such international support for peacebuilding is difficult in post-conflict regions. The focus of this paper is on “unrecognized quasi-states,” which are political groups with an independent territory, a government, residents, and desire to be an independent state; however, they are not recognized by most states. If a post-conflict region to face such situation, obtaining bilateral and multilateral diplomatic support would be difficult, because of the ambiguity related to their legal status.
Not many arguments have been made regarding peacebuilding for unrecognized quasi-states. This paper suggests reasons for this by explaining the features of unrecognized quasi-states, limitations of diplomacy, and support from “patron states.” Then, how can understand the case of such a state that is not supported by patron states, but has made diplomatic efforts toward Western countries in the post-conflict period? Such a case is presented here in terms of the Maskhadov regime of the Chechen Republic, and by using this example, this paper reveals why problems can occur if a post-conflict region has unrecognized quasi-states in the peacebuilding period.
The paper is organized as follows. First the concept, origins, and survival factors of unrecognized quasi-states are summarized. Second, this paper answers why peacebuilding studies do not deal with unrecognized quasi-states. Third, the case of Chechnya is considered, and it is revealed how the Maskhadov regime attempted to diplomacy and why it failed.
The following conclusions are presented in this paper. First, the case of Chechnya designates that if post-conflict regions transform into unrecognized quasi-states, like the Maskhadov regime, peacebuilding process becomes very difficult. In this case, armed conflict recurred. Thus, this case indicates the problem how international society should react to unrecognized quasi-states during the period of peacebuilding.
Second, the case of Chechnya indicates that international involvement in peacebuilding has an arbitrary aspect similar to the support of patron states. J. Hughes, the British comparative political scientist, notes that a double standard exists in the policies of Western countries toward Chechnya and Kosovo. From the perspective of this paper, such a standard depends on the power balance between the central government and external actors.
Third, S. Pegg, one of the well-known researchers of unrecognized quasi-states, considers Chechnya a successful case that will become an independent state. However, today Chechnya's case is far from successful. Thus, Chechnya would be the indicator for understanding the future of the existing unrecognized quasi-states.

抄録全体を表示

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the theory and the movements of the politics in Azerbaijan, still in the midst of upheaval, and to offer a key to penetrate the future developments of the authoritarian system of the former Soviet Union.
Many of the post-Soviet republics established authoritarian regimes after the collapse of the Soviet Union. While the negative aspects of the authoritarian regimes are emphasized, they are often positively accepted as a necessary process for the former Soviet Union. However, there are different types of authoritarian regimes, thus should not be generalized.
Ayaz Mutaribov, the last communist leader, took the presidency of Azerbaijan, but he resigned due to the mismanagement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Abulfez Elchibei, then leader of the Popular Front, was elected President. Though, Elchibei was an idealist who believed in democracy, his idealism was far removed from the realities of Azerbaijan, which caused military losses, bringing chaos to the economy and to the society. Elchbei fell from power by a coup d'etat only a year after inauguration, generating skepticism over democracy among the people.
What people needed was Heydar Alyiev's return to power. Alyiev, a former elite politician of the Soviet era, became President in 1993. He established a firm authoritarianism by tightening domestic policies and keeping diplomatic balance. He established a cease-fire to Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in 1994, which he utilized for domestic affairs. The first half of the Alyiev's administration is regarded as “war-time authoritarianism.”
However, as the cease-fire and 1 million refugees and IDPs' in the country were taken for granted, and as the changing situation exposed the limits of the Soviet-style politics, the vulnerability of “war-time authoritarianism” was revealed. Moreover, since 1999, Alyiev suffered health problems and he gradually shifted his regime to what one may call “presidential monarchy”. Alyiev maintained monarchic rule gaining both domestic and international confidence by disguised democracy, with hereditary transfer of power to his son in mind.
He revised the constitution in August 2002 so as to appoint his son, Ilkham Alyiev, as his successor. Alyiev was running for the third term in October 2003 presidential election, but his health conditions failed him. He withdrew from the race in the last minute. Ilkham Alyiev won an overwhelming victory. It was the first hereditary transfer of power in the post-Soviet era.
Now that the “war-time authoritarianism” is no longer accepted, and Heydar Aliev, a symbol for the unification, lost, Ilkham Alyiev is exploring ways to rule his country. There are signs of democracy such as the release of political prisoners. Yet, his political power remains unknown.
The authoritarian system of Azerbaijan, now in the hands of the son of the first authoritarian by heredity, is transforming under the changing situation of the country. The experience of Azerbaijan, organizational changes and hereditary fiefdom, will be an example for other post-Soviet republics.

抄録全体を表示