Sub-State Actors in International Relations and the Evolution of Federalism (Cooperation between the Komi Republic and Hungary in the First Half of the 1990s.)

Sergey P. Arteev – Alumnus of History Department, Piritim Sorokin Syktyvkar State University. Russia, 167001, Syktyvkar, avenue Oktyabrsky, 55. E-mail:
Вся статья: 

DOI 10.24833/2071-8160-2018-2-59-145-164 (Read the article in PDF)

The paper is devoted to the problem of asymmetrical international interaction of sub-state actors. It touches upon the erosion of Westphalian sovereignty at present time. This problem is under discussion in conjunction with the evolution of federalism. Author attempts to clarify the relation of international activity of world politics sub-state actors and type of interaction between central and regional levels of government. For this purpose the article presents the analysis of the cooperation between the Republic of Komi (part of Russian Federation) and the Republic of Hungary in the first half of the 1990s. In addition author focuses on the role of international relations of sub-state actors in the democratic transition. The main method of the investigation is historical institutionalism. This research method provides a necessary result. The investigation based on data from the Foreign policy archive of the Russian Federation and publications in Hungarian and Russian newspapers. There are foreign and Russian research papers on the question. Scientists from different fields develop this issue. For carrying out the purpose of investigation offer typology of Russian regions regarding to their external relations, indicate the possible definitions of the key terminology of international activities of Russian regions and is a brief overview of the establishment of Russian-Hungarian relations on a new base in the late Soviet and early post-Soviet periods. It should be noted that the model of interaction between the Komi Republic and Hungary is typical of many of the basic parameters for international activities of Russian regions in the chronological framework. In conclusion the paper reads that to the medium of the 1990s came a partnership type of relationship between Сentre and Komi concerning Komi-Hungarian cooperation. This fact proves the possibility of the positive role of asymmetric international relations of sub-state actors, including the period of democratic transition.

Key words: international relations of the state regions, Russia, Hungary, Komi Republic, federalism, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, historical institutionalism

1. Alexandrov O. B. Regiony vo vneshnej politike Rossii. Rol’ Severo-Zapada [Regions in Russia’s foreign policy. The Role Of The North-West]. Moscow, Moskovskii gosudarstvennyi institut mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii (Universitet) Publ., 2005. 187 p. (In Russian).
2. Barabanov O.N. Vnutrigosudarstvennye regiony kak aktory v mezhdunarodnykh otnosheniiakh: zarubezhnye tendentsii i polozhenie sub”ektov Rossiiskoi Federatsii. Obshchestvo, politika, nauka: novye per-spektivy [Domestic regions as actors in international relations: foreign trends and the situation of subjects of the Russian Federation. Society, politics, science: new perspectives]. Moscow, Moskovskii Obshchestvennyi nauchnyi fond Publ. 2000. no. 114. pp. 477-501 (In Russian).
3. Busygina I., Lebedeva E. Sub”ekty federatsii v mezhdunarodnom sotrudnichestve [The subjects of the Federation in international cooperation]. Analiticheskie zapiski, 2008, iss. 3 (32). Moscow, Moskovskii gosudarstvennyi institut mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii (Universitet) Publ., 2008. 28 p. (In Russian).
4. Ivanov I.S. Novaia rossiiskaia diplomatiia. Desiat’ let vneshnei politike strany [The New Russian diplomacy. Ten years of foreign policy]. Moscow, OLMA-PRESS Publ., 2002. Pp. 192-198. (In Russian).
5. Izhak L. Politicheskaia istoriia Vengrii. 1944-1990 [The political history of Hungary. 1944-1990]. Moscow, The Institute of Russian history of Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2006. Pp. 246-247. (In Russian).
6. Lebedeva M.M. Mirovaia politika [World politics]. Moscow, Aspekt Press Publ., 2007. 365 p. (In Russian).
7. Likhachev V.N. Rossiia i Evropeiskii soiuz v mezhdunarodnoi sisteme (diplomatiia, politika, pravo) 1998-2004 gg. [Russia and the European Union in the international system (diplomacy, politics, law), 1998- 2004] Kazan’, Tsentr innovatsionnykh tekhnologii Publ., 2004. Pp. 53-66. (In Russian).
8. Makarychev A.S. Rossiiskie regiony kak mezhdunarodnye aktory [The Russian regions as international actors]. Nizhnii Novgorod, 2000. 114 p. (In Russian).
9. Makarychev A.S. Federalizm epokhi globalizma: vyzovy dlia regional’noi Rossii [The Federalism of the epoch of globalism: the challenges for regional Russia]. Polis, 2000, no.5, pp. 81-97 (In Russian).
10. Markushina N. Y., Kharlampieva N. T. Regiony vo vneshnej politike Rossii. Rol’ Severo-Zapada [The North-West Federal Okrug: external relations]. Saint Petersburg, Saint Petersburg University Press Publ., 2008. 260 p. (In Russian).
11. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia v XXI veke. Global’noe v regional’nom, regional’noe v global’nom [International relations in the XXI century. Global to regional, regional to global] / Ed. by A.S. Makarycheva. Nizhnii Novgorod, Nizhegorodskii gosudarstvennyi lingvisticheskii universitet Publ., 2000. 183 p. (In Russian).
12. Moiseev A.A. Suverenitet gosudarstva v mezhdunarodnom prave [State sovereignty in international law]. Moscow, VostokZapad Publ., 2009. 384 p. (In Russian).
13. Monich Iu.I., Volotov O.G. Rossiiskovengerskie otnosheniia: problemy i perspektivy [Russian-Hungarian relations: problems and prospects] / Institut mezhdunarodnykh ekonomicheskikh i politicheskikh issledovanii Rossiiskoi Akademii nauk. Proekt «Rossiia i Vostochnaia Evropa». Moscow, 1994. Arkhiv vneshnei politiki Rossiiskoi Federatsii [The Foreign policy archive of the Russian Federation]. Collection 77. Inventory 74. Folder 111. Case 3. Sheet 27. (In Russian).
14. Petrash E., Shpannenberger N. Nepreryvnost’ vengerskogo natsionalizma pod znakom sistemnoi transformatsii [The continuity of Hungarian nationalism under the sign of transformation]. Natsionalizm v pozdnee- i postkommunisticheskoi Evrope [Nationalism in late and post-Communist Europe. In 3 volumes]. Ed. by E. Ian. Vol. 2. Natsionalizm v natsional’nykh gosudarstvakh [Nationalism in national states]. Moscow, ROSSPEN Publ., 2010. P. 435.
15. Plotnikova O. V. Teoriia, sistema i praktika mezhdunarodnykh sviazei regionov [Theory, system and practice of international relations of the regions]. Novosibirsk, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2004. 262 p. (In Russian).
16. Tolstykh V. L. Mezhdunarodnaia deiatel’nost’ sub”ektov Rossiiskoi Federatsii [International activity of subjects of the Russian Federation]. Moscow, International relations Publ., 2004. 176 p. (In Russian).
17. Federalizm [Federalism]. Busygina I., Zakharov A. Sum ergo cogito. Politicheskii mini-leksikon [Political mini-lexicon]. Moscow, Moskovskaia shkola politicheskikh issledovanii Publ., 2006. P. 227-228. (In Russian).
18. Iarovoi G.O., Belokurova E.V. Evropeiskii Soiuz dlia regionov: chto mozhno i nuzhno znat’ rossiiskim regionam o ES [The European Union for regions: what can and should know the Russian regions of the EU.]. Saint-Petersburg, Norma Publ., 2012. 368 p. (In Russian).
19. Bolleyer N. Federal Dynamics in Canada, the United States, and Switzerland: How Substates’ Internal Organization Affects Intergovernmental Relations. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 2006, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 471–502.
20. Cantori L.J., Spiegel S.L. The International Relations of Regions. Polity, 1970, no. 4, pp. 397-425.
21. Farrell H., Newman A.L. Domestic Institutions Beyond the Nation-State: Charting the New Interdependence Approach. World Politics, 2014, no. 2, pp. 331-363.
22. Hall P., Taylor R. Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 1996, no. 44, pp. 936-957.
23. Kukucha C.J. An Independent Foreign Policy for Canadian Provinces? International Trade and Sub-Federal Autonomy. An Independent Foreign Policy for Canada? Challenges and Choices for the Future. Toronto, University of Toronto Press Publ., 2009. Pp. 163-182.
24. Michelmann H.J. Federalism and International Relations: The Role of Subnational Units. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 1991, no. 4, pp. 865-866.
25. Pierson P. When Effect Becomes Cause: Policy Feedback and Political Change. World Politics, 1993, no. 45, pp. 595–628.
26. Reynolds P.A. Non-state Actors and International Outcomes. British Journal of International Studies, 1979, no. 2, pp. 91- 111.
27. Shu-Yun M.A. Political Science at the Edge of Chaos? The Paradigmatic Implications of Historical Institutionalism. International Political Science Review, 2007, no. 28 (1), pp. 57-78.
28. Thelen K. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics. Annual Review of Political Science, 1999, no. 2, pp. 369-404.
29. Tierney S. Reframing Sovereignty? SubState National Societies and Contemporary Challenges to the Nation-State. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2005, no. 1, pp. 161-183.