Flexible Sovereignties of the Revolutionary State: Soviet Republics Enter World Politics

in Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d'histoire du droit international
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


When Stalin demanded in 1944 that all Soviet Union republics be admitted to the un, he revealed a conception of sovereignty that diverged from the usual perception of Soviet diplomacy as exceedingly centralised. Soviet theories and practices of sovereignty consisted indeed in a mix of contradictory elements, illustrating the communist criticism of bourgeois international law, but also a willingness to re-use parts of it and tailor them to new political needs. This article focuses on this elastic approach to sovereignty, its legal expression and diplomatic rationale. Particular attention is paid to the sovereignty of Union republics, central to Soviet legal rhetoric, that led them to be active in the international arena in the 1920s and after 1944, and develop state institutions that would smooth up the transition to independence after 1991.

Flexible Sovereignties of the Revolutionary State: Soviet Republics Enter World Politics

in Journal of the History of International Law / Revue d'histoire du droit international



  • 4

    I.P. Trajnin‘K voprosu o suverenitete’Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo 2 (1938) 75–108; see too Sabine Dullin ‘How to wage warfare without going to war? Stalin’s 1939 war in the light of other contemporary aggressions’ Cahiers du Monde Russe 52 (2–3) (April–September 2011) 221–243.

  • 7

    Jane Burbank‘Souveraineté eurasienne: un régime, une proposition, un exemple’Histoire@Politique 27 (September–December 2015) doi: 10.3917/hp.027.0074.

  • 15

    Janice E. Thomson‘State Sovereignty in International Relations: Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Empirical Research’International Studies Quarterly 39 (2) (June 1995) 213–233.

  • 24

    Dennis Ogden‘Britain and Soviet Georgia, 1921–1922’Journal of Contemporary History 23(2) (April 1988) 245–258.

  • 36

    Jean-François Fayet‘En l’absence de relations diplomatiques et de puissance protectrice: La protection des intérêts soviétiques durant la période dite de transition’Relations internationales 3 (143) (2010) 75–88.

  • 39

    Joseph StalinMarxism and the National Question. Selected Writings and Speeches (New York: International Publishers1942); Alfred J. Rieber ‘Stalin as Georgian: The Formative Years’ in Sarah Davies/James Harris (eds.) Stalin. A New History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2005) 18–44.

  • 47

    Lev Trotsky‘O svoevremennosti lozunga “Soedinennye Shtaty Evropy” ’Pravda30 June 1923.

  • 48

    Robert Kelley‘Soviet policy on the European border’Foreign Affairs15 Sept. 1924.

  • 51

    Samuel Dobrin‘Soviet Federalism and the Principle of Double Subordination’Transactions of the Grotius Society 30 (1944) 260–283.

  • 56

    Catherine GousseffEchanger les peuples. Le déplacement des minorités aux confins polono-soviétiques (1944–1947) (Paris: Fayard2015) 51.

  • 58

    George Findlay ShirrasFederal Finance in Peace and War. With Special Reference to the United States of America and the British Commonwealth (London: Macmillan & Co1944) 3.

  • 59

    I.D. Levin‘“Desjat” let Stalinskoj Konstitutsii i razvitie sovetskogo federalizma’Sovetskoe Gosudarstvo i Pravo 11–12 (1946) 16.

  • 62

    Evgenij Korovin‘Amerikanskaja ekonomicheskaja pomoshch’ i natsional’nyj suverenitet’Sovetskoe Gosudarstvo i Pravo 9 (September 1949) 1–17.

  • 65

    E. Dolan‘The Member-Republics of the U.S.S.R. as Subjects of the Law of Nations’The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 4 (1955) 626–636.

  • 67

    Michael Collins‘Decolonisation and the “Federal Moment” ’Diplomacy & Statecraft 24(1) (2013) 21–40.

  • 68

    Todd Shepard‘À l’heure des “grands ensembles” et de la guerre d’Algérie. L’“État-nation” en question’Monde(s). Histoire espaces relations 1 (2012) 113–134.

  • 71

    J.S. Stanford‘The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties’The University of Toronto Law Journal 20(1) (Winter 1970) 18.

  • 73

    Masha Kirasirova‘“Sons of Muslims” in Moscow: Soviet Central Asian Mediators to the Foreign East, 1955–1962’Ab Imperio4 (2011) 114–115.

  • 77

    Jean Hostert‘Droit international et droit interne dans la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités du 23 mai 1969’Annuaire français de droit international 15(1) (1969) 104–105.

  • 79

    Grey Hodnett‘The Debate over Soviet Federalism’Soviet Studies 18 (4) (April 1967) 458–481.

  • 86

    Intervention of Lukashuk 4 April 1968United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties. First session Vienna 26 March–24 May 1968 (New York: un 1969) 66; James P. Nichol Diplomacy in the Former Soviet Republics (Westport-London: Praeger 1995) 21.

  • 87

    Intervention of Kearny 4 April 1968United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties . . . (1969) 65.

  • 89

    O. Khlestov‘Pravo mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov’Sovetskoe Gosudarstvo i Pravo 12 (1962) 62–69quoted by Uibopuu Die Völkerrechtssubjektivität der Unionsrepubliken der UdSSR 1975 (n. 9) 18–19.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 103 103 15
Full Text Views 243 243 3
PDF Downloads 18 18 1
EPUB Downloads 1 1 0