지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2021.12
- 수록면
- 1 - 36 (36page)
- DOI
- 10.46694/JSS.2021.12.36.4.1
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article examines the background of the establishment of Central Asian ‘nation-republics’ in the 1920s-1930s, which is the period of the Soviet Union Building. And it also examines the process of defining the borders that determined the present five Central Asian countries. There were various responses of the Central Asian elites to the advance of the Bolshevik’s central government into Central Asia, ranging from active cooperation to extreme resistance.
Nevertheless, Central Asia was integrated into the Soviet Union and was divided into each ‘nation-republic’. The intention of the central government was fulfilled in the border setting process, but the ambition and division of the local elites also worked as a factor. Looking at these processes, it seems that there is a limit to the identification of the Soviet Union with the general imperialist countries of the West. Unlike the Western imperialist countries that divided and ruled colonies for their own expropriation and economic gain, it can be evaluated that the territory and the human and material resources were divided for the development of the entire vast federal state of the Soviet Union.
However, it is difficult to agree with the premise that the Soviet Union promotes the establishment of a nation-state by first creating a nation for the nation without a nation, and then creating the Soviet Union as a post-nationalist state. In the case of the Bukhara and Khiva Khanates, not only were they culturally outstanding, but they were also in the form of states, so it is difficult to see that they were only engaged in conflicts at the ethnic level, as identified by the Soviet central government. Nevertheless, the establishment of a nation-republics and the setting of the borders also promoted the centralization of the Soviet Union.
The process of demarcation from above has had a profound impact on the history of Central Asia. The border making formed new identities and created new conflicts. And it created enclaves and territorial disputes that continue to this day.
Nevertheless, Central Asia was integrated into the Soviet Union and was divided into each ‘nation-republic’. The intention of the central government was fulfilled in the border setting process, but the ambition and division of the local elites also worked as a factor. Looking at these processes, it seems that there is a limit to the identification of the Soviet Union with the general imperialist countries of the West. Unlike the Western imperialist countries that divided and ruled colonies for their own expropriation and economic gain, it can be evaluated that the territory and the human and material resources were divided for the development of the entire vast federal state of the Soviet Union.
However, it is difficult to agree with the premise that the Soviet Union promotes the establishment of a nation-state by first creating a nation for the nation without a nation, and then creating the Soviet Union as a post-nationalist state. In the case of the Bukhara and Khiva Khanates, not only were they culturally outstanding, but they were also in the form of states, so it is difficult to see that they were only engaged in conflicts at the ethnic level, as identified by the Soviet central government. Nevertheless, the establishment of a nation-republics and the setting of the borders also promoted the centralization of the Soviet Union.
The process of demarcation from above has had a profound impact on the history of Central Asia. The border making formed new identities and created new conflicts. And it created enclaves and territorial disputes that continue to this day.
목차
I. 머리말
II. 중앙아시아 경계 설정의 배경 : 볼셰비키 정부의 중앙아시아 진출과 지역 엘리트들의 대응
III. 경계 획정 과정 : 중앙아시아 ‘민족-공화국’ 경계 만들기
IV. 맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (47)
참고문헌 신청
고재남 / 1996 / 구소련지역 민족분쟁의 해부 / 경남대학교 출판부
구자정 / 2011 / 소비에트 연방은 왜 해체되었는가? - 소련의 “이중 체제”와 “민족 창조 정책”을 통해서 본 소련 해체 문제의 재고 - / 역사학보 (210):357~405
김대성 / 2012 / 중앙아시아 사회의 이해 / 한국외국어대학교출판부
노경덕 / 2020 / 제 1차 세계대전 말 유럽의 국제정치와 민족자결주의 / 역사학보 (245):33~62
박상철 / 2020 / 레닌의 혁명 사상과 민족자결주의: 제1차 세계대전 시기를 중심으로 / 역사학연구 (77):387~419
구자정 / 2011 / 소비에트 연방은 왜 해체되었는가? - 소련의 “이중 체제”와 “민족 창조 정책”을 통해서 본 소련 해체 문제의 재고 - / 역사학보 (210):357~405
김대성 / 2012 / 중앙아시아 사회의 이해 / 한국외국어대학교출판부
노경덕 / 2020 / 제 1차 세계대전 말 유럽의 국제정치와 민족자결주의 / 역사학보 (245):33~62
박상철 / 2020 / 레닌의 혁명 사상과 민족자결주의: 제1차 세계대전 시기를 중심으로 / 역사학연구 (77):387~419
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2022-349-000129264