Inner Asia as the Periphery of Two Empires, or the Paradoxes of the Political Imagination
Abstract
This article studies the dynamics of geopolitical imagination of Inner Asian borders. This concept originated in the 19th century as a synonym for Central Asia. However, the new international order and the cold War in mid-20th century changed its meaning. The article is an attempt to analyze changes of Inner Asian borders in the Oriental discourse over the past 70 years. The article contemplates key definitions of the region that appeared in 20th century in response to changes in the political situation. Information on the main research institutes studying this territory has been systematized. The focus was not only on the very borders of the region yet also on regional ascriptive political attributes. The study has revealed the special role of the cultural and civilizational factor in the formation of the geopolitical imagination and, accordingly, ideas on the region. As a result, optimal consistent criteria were identified. We propose our own logical definition of Inner Asia based on these criteria. This frontier region comprises Mongolia, the Chinese regions: the Inner Mongolia, the Tibetan Autonomous Region, the territory of Dongbei (historical Manchuria), as well as the Russian regions: the Republic of Altai, the Republic of Buryatia, the territory of the Buryat Ust-Ordynsky District within the Irkutsk Region, the Zabaykalsky Krai and the Republic of Tyva. This approach to understanding Inner Asia makes it a large-scale frontier space, where many economic and cultural exchanges between Russia, Mongolia and China take place.
About the Author
A. V. Mikhalev
Buryat State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alexey V. Mikhalev, Doctor of Political Science, director of Centre of political transformation studies
Smolina Street, 24a, Ulan-Ude, 670000
References
1. Abaev N.V. (2011). Inner Asia – the cradle of the Eurasian civilization. Novye issledovanija Tuvy, no. 4, pp. 163–171 (in Russian).
2. Brobst P. (2005). The Future of the Great Game: Sir Olaf Caroe, India’s Independence, and the Defense of Asia. Akron : University of Akron Press, 199 pp.
3. Bulag U.E. (2005). Where is East Asia? Central Asian and Inner Asian Perspectives on Regionalism. The Asia-Pacific Journal, vol. 3, no. 10, рр. 1–7.
4. Caroe O. (1969). Problems of power confrontation in Inner Asia. Journal of The Royal Central Asian Society, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 221–228.
5. Chistyakov K.V. (2001). Landscapes of Inner Asia: dynamics, history and use. St. Petersburg : St. Petersburg State University, 259 pp. (in Russian).
6. Di Cosmo N. (1999). State Formation and Periodization in Inner Asian History. Journal of World History, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–40.
7. Golman M.I. (2004). Mongolian studies in the West (centers, personnel, societies) 50s – mid 90s of the XX century. Moscow : Institute of Oriental Studies RAS, 334 pp. (in Russian).
8. Gorshenina S.M. (2019). The invention of the concept of Middle / Central Asia: between science and geopolitics, Washington : Central Asian Studies Program, George Washington University, 119 pp. (translation into Russian from French).
9. Fish S.M. (2001). The Inner Asian anomaly: Mongolia’s democratization in comparative perspective. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, vol. 34, no. 3, рр. 323–338.
10. Henze P.B. (1956). Politics and alphabets in Inner Asia. Journal of The Royal Central Asia Society, vol. 43, no. 1, рр. 29–51.
11. Honeychurch W. (2015). The Heartland of Inner Asia: Mongolia and Steppe Pastoral Nomadism // Inner Asia and the Spatial Politics of Empire. New York : Spriger, pp. 79–108.
12. Humphrey C., Sneath D. (1999). The End of Nomadism? Society, State and the Environment in Inner Asia. Cambridge : White Horse Press, 368 pp.
13. Imagining Asia(s): Networks, Actors, Sites (2019). Acri A., Ghani K., K Jha M., Mukherjee S. (eds.). Singapore : ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, 438 pp.
14. Kolosov V.A., Zotova M.V. (2015). Geopolitical vision of the world between Russian citizens: why Russia is not Europe. Politicheskie issledovanija, no. 5, pp. 170– 186 (in Russian).
15. Lattimore O. (1953). The New Political Geography of Inner Asia. The Geographical Journal, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 17–30.
16. Luzyanin S.G. (2021). Russia – Mongolia – China: historical and modern transformations. Vostok / Oriens, no. 5, pp. 141– 152. DOI: 10.31857/S086919080016633-3 (in Russian).
17. Luzyanin S.G. (2003). Russia – Mongolia – China in the first half of the twentieth century. Political relations in 1911– 1946 years. Moscow : Ogni – 320 pp. (In Russian).
18. Mackinder H.J. (1904). The geographical pivot of history. The Geographical Journal, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 421–37.
19. Miller A.I. (2006). The Romanov Empire and Nationalism: An Essay on the Methodology of Historical Research. Moscow : NLO, 248 pp. (in Russian).
20. Rossabi M. (1975). China and Inner Asia: From 1368 to the present day. New York : Pica Press, 320 pp.
21. Sinor D. (1997). Inner Asia: History, civilization, languages: a syllabus. London : Curzone press, 261 pp.
22. Sinor D. (1990). Introduction: the concept of Inner Asia. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. London : Cambridge University Press, рр. 1–18.
23. Taaffe R. (1990). The geographic setting. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. London : Cambridge University Press, рр. 19–40.
24. The Modernization of Inner Asia (1991). London : Routledge, 424 pp.
25. Todorova M. (1997). Imagining the Balkans. New York : Oxford university press, 257 pp.
26. Tolts V.V. (2013). “Russia’s Own East”: Identity Politics and Oriental Studies in the Late Imperial and Early Soviet Period. Moscow : NLO, 336 pp. (in Russian).
27. Zamjatin D.N. (2004). The power of space and space of power: geographical images in politics and international relations, Moscow : ROSSPEN, 349 pp. (in Russian).
28. Zheleznyakov A.S. (2009). The Mongolian Pole of the Political Structure of the World. Moscow : Institute of Sociology RAS, 272 pp.
Review
For citations:
Mikhalev A.V. Inner Asia as the Periphery of Two Empires, or the Paradoxes of the Political Imagination. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law. 2022;15(3):134-147. (In Russ.)
Views:
1060
Email this article 