Club of miscreations: Moscow-backed illegal pseudo-statelets threaten international order

As Russia is vying for control over larger swathes of Eastern Ukraine, its client pseudo-statelets elsewhere in the post-Soviet space are forging closer cooperation, enhancing Moscow's expansionist aims. 

In 1991, when the Kremlin was compelled to accept its “jurisdictional retrenchment” in the form of the disintegration of the Soviet Union, it did not leave the geography of its dominance as a benign master. A group of quirk-entities within the territories of the former satellites - Transnistria in Moldova, Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia and the so-called “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic” (NKR) in Azerbaijan – were directly or indirectly facilitated by Russia for transformation into illegal statelet miscreations. 

These territorial formations, in addition to being the seemingly intractable source of ethnic strife and continuous vexation for the respective nations, served as a geopolitical tool, equipping the Kremlin to maintain considerable leverage over the former Soviet republics.

In 2014, when the separatists from Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Eastern Ukraine joined the club, in the form of “Donetsk People’s Republic” (“DPR”) and “Luhansk People’s Republic (“LPR”), it was already self-evident that the Moscow-backed so-called breakaway regions would be integral to an even grander revisionist foreign policy agenda, the potential consequences of which were going to be too hideous to contemplate.

Union of the Deplorables

This club of the deplorables does not exist as a collection of sparsely-dotted entities within the post-Soviet space as eccentric quirks of harmless disposition. They actively cooperate and form some sort of axis of evil in their way, threatening democracy and freedom.

For instance, on 24 May, the so-called “foreign minister” of the Armenian separatists of Karabakh, David Babayan, visited Tskhinvali, Georgia, where he met his “colleagues” from South Ossetia, “DPR” and “LPR”. This episode is a case in point and bespeaks a wider agenda that unites them. 

The illegal statelets share common attributes. They all embody militant separatism and resort to the language of “self-determination”, advocating an externally enforced, military-backed sham referendum to achieve the unhallowed objective. 

Although the degree of direct Russian involvement and support varies, they all owe the origins of their existence to the Kremlin’s acquiescence and backing. Alone, they are inconsequential and incapable of threatening the territorial integrities of the respective sovereign states.

These entities also vocally support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or any other measure propounded by the Kremlin. The unrecognized “NKR”, for example, has lent its support for the recognition of the “DPR” and the “LPR”, in an attempt to fortify its place under the Kremlin’s radar. South Ossetia and Abkhazia behaved in the same fashion. The former has sent its “volunteers” to back the separatists in Eastern Ukraine.

The fundamental commonality defining these also explains the reason why these entities have formed the Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations, unofficially known as the Commonwealth of Unrecognized States. The self-declared intention is aimed at achieving international legitimacy by joining the Russian-led Eurasian Union. The “DHR” and “LHR” are essential elements of this identical pattern, and now that Russia recognized them in February 2022, the likelihood of their entering the community in question seems to be a foregone conclusion.

As stated above, the Moscow-sponsored so-called breakaway territories enable the Kremlin to maintain a foothold in these countries, forming the basis of power projection and frustrating their attempts to seek closer ties with the West. On a more practical level, the continuous existence of these problem-infested regions serves the purpose of undermining their attempts to join the EU and NATO. The former is not primed to accept a member with territorial integrity issues. The latter would think twice before considering a country at war.

Outright annexation

Russia’s policy, at present, in relation to these statelets, appears to be experiencing some shift in emphasis. Previously, “outright annexation” did not seem to be a plausible move, but now in the light of the ongoing turmoil in Ukraine, the Kremlin is considering a more robust line. Some British and American sources suggest that Moscow may resort to a “referendum mode of annexation” in the currently occupied Mariupol, Kherson and other Ukrainian cities by September of this year.

In South Ossetia, events are moving with more rapidity. The unrecognized authorities in Tskhinvali are set to hold a referendum on 17 June. The purpose is to legitimize the process of joining Russia.

The situation concerning the Armenian separatists of Karabakh is different. The illegal entity based in Khankandi, Azerbaijan, has never been recognized by any UN member, including Armenia, its backer. It has never been permitted into any conceivable internationally-recognised legal domain, and has been an outcast from the very inception of its so-called existence. 

In line with Article 4 of the trilateral ceasefire deal signed by Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia, the remnants of the Armenian military forces were bound to leave the territory of the former Nagorno-Karabakh. But it has not happened yet. 

The ambiguity of the present situation is that the "NKR" remnants are still in the Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, and the Kremlin, through its peacekeeping forces, effectively preserves their continuous existence, thereby representing a threat to Azerbaijani territorial integrity.

Orkhan Amashov