This work discusses the role of the economic elites of Russia and Ukraine in the development of relations between the two countries in the period between 1994-1998. A “Pragmatist approach” to bilateral relations, that emerged in Kyiv and in Moscow in the mid-1990s, and the doctrine of CIS integration are identified as the ideological underpinnings for the participation of the economic elites in the process of foreign policy-making. According to these approaches, economic elites in Russia and Ukraine share similar economic interests derived from the necessity to restore a post-Soviet common economic space. Convergent interests of the economic elites are assumed to be powerful incentives to increase bilateral co-operation and eventually foster economic and political reintegration between the two countries. In an analysis based on the study of domestic sources of foreign policy, the author contests these approaches. This work argues that, contrary to expectations, the consolidation of nation-based economic elites led to the emergence of conflicting rather than convergent interests. The redistribution of national wealth, following the demise of the Soviet structure of state-ownership, sparked a struggle between domestic and economic elites for the control of economic resources. The penetration of external economic actors was viewed, in this perspective, as a factor that might upset the delicate balance of power between domestic institutions and economic agents. A nationalist vocabulary, resulting from a century-long struggle for independence, was used in Ukraine to express a protectionist mood against Russian competitors. This research contributes to the debate on co-operation between states and the role that domestic factor play in encouraging or hindering such a process. In particular, this study supports the argument that recently established independent states are less prone to join co-operation schemes, especially when a process of redistribution of national resources follows the demise of the previous regime. The economic elites may be identified in this process as active participants or even promoters of nationalist movements.

This thesis examines how the three Baltic countries constructed their internal and external sovereign statehood in the interwar period and the post Cold War era. Twice in one century, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were confronted with strongly divided multiethnic societies, requiring a bold and wide-ranging ethnics policy. In 1918 all three Baltic countries promised their minorities cultural autonomy. Whereas Estonian and Latvian politicians were deeply influenced by the theories of Karl Renner and Otto Bauer, the Lithuanians fell back on the historic Jewish self-government in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Many politicians were convinced that the principle of equality of nationalities was one of the cornerstones of the new international order, embodied by the League of Nations. The minority protection system of the League was, however, not established to serve humanitarian aims. It only sought to ensure international peace. This lack of a general minority protection system was one of many discussion points in the negotiations of the Estonian and Latvian minority declarations. Although Lithuania signed a much more detailed minority declaration, its internal political situation rapidly deteriorated. Estonia, on the other hand, established full cultural autonomy with corporations of public law. Although a wide-ranging school autonomy was already established in 1919, Latvia never established cultural self-government. The Second World War and the subsequent Soviet occupation led to the replacement of the small historically rooted minority groups by large groups of Russian-speaking settlers. The restoration in 1991 of the pre 1940 political community meant that these groups were deprived of political rights. In trying to cope with this situation, Estonia and Latvia focused much more on linguistic integration than on collective rights. Early attempts to pursue a decolonisation policy, as proposed by some leading Estonian and Latvian policymakers, were blocked by the ‘official Europe’ which followed a policy analogous to the League of Nations.

This study concerns the sources of the revolutionary Bolshevik elite's social and ethnic origins in Late Imperial Russia. The key finding is that the Bolshevik leadership of the revolutionary years 1917--1924 was highly ethnically diverse in origin with non-Russians---Jews, Latvians, Georgians, Armenians, Poles, Lithuanians, and Ukrainians---constituting nearly two-thirds of the elite. The 'Russian' Revolution was led primarily by elites of the empire's non-Russian national minorities. This thesis therefore considers the sources of their radicalism in the peripheries of the multinational empire. / Although the 'class' language of socialism has dominated accounts not only of the causes of the Revolution but also of the sources of Bolshevik socialism, in my view the Bolsheviks were more a response to a variety of cultural, linguistic, religious, and ethnic social identities than they were a response to class conflict. The appeal of a theory about class conflict does not necessarily mean that it was class conflict to which the Bolsheviks were responding; they were much more a product of the tensions of a multi-ethnic imperial state than of the alienating 'class' effects of an industrializing Russian state. / How 'peripherals' of the imperial borderlands came to espouse an ideology of the imperial 'center' is the empirical focus. Five substantive chapters on Jews, Poles and Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Transcaucasians, and Latvians, consider the sources of their radicalism by contextualizing their biographies in regional ethnopolitics and in relationships to the Tsarist state. A great attraction of Russian (Bolshevik) socialism was in what it meant for ethnopolitics in the multi-ethnic borderlands: much of the appeal lay in its secularism, its 'ecumenical' political vision, its universalism, its anti-nationalism, and in its implied commitment to "the good imperial ideal". The 'elective affinities' between individuals of different ethnic strata and Russian socialism varied across ethnic groups, and often within them. One of the key themes, therefore, is how a social and political identity is worked out within the context of a multinational empire, invoking social processes such as nationalism, assimilation, Russification, social mobility, access to provincial and imperial 'civil societies', linguistic and cultural choices, and ethnopolitical relationships.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina Wilmington, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves [84]-90)

Thesis (D.M.A.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2007. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-06, Section: A, page: 2239. Adviser: Donna Buchanan. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 217-231) Available on microfilm from Pro Quest Information and Learning.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina Wilmington, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves: [108]-116)

Thesis--Universität Bonn, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 556-589) and index.

Zugl.: Frankfurt/Oder, Univ. Viadrina, Diss., 2004

Master's paper--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Information and Library Science. / Advisor: Charles B. McNamara. Bibliographic description of the military periodicals of the André Savine Collection of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Library. The periodicals were published in the twentieth century outside the Soviet Union by various former Russian White Army organizations.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Johns Hopkins University, 1931. / Vita. Published also without thesis note. Bibliography: p. 235-242.