CONFLICT POTENTIAL OF CENTRAL ASIA AND INTERNATIONAL LAW

After the collapse of the USSR, the states of Central Asia managed to avoid (with rare exceptions) the sharp conflicts typical of the Caucasian and European regions. This circumstance can be explained by various reasons, but should not inspire excessive optimism: the conflict potential of the region is quite large; existing contradictions can be easily exacerbated; turbulence taking place in other post-Soviet regions may spread to Central Asia. Existing international legal instruments appear insufficient and need to be improved; the weakness of the post-Soviet international legal tradition hinders this work. The main groups of contradictions existing in the region are contradictions arising from the national delimitation in the Soviet Union (1924); contradictions related to the decisions of the central authorities of the USSR (for example, to the use of the Semipalatinsk test site); contradictions that arose as a result of the collapse of the USSR (in particular, the problem of distribution of water resources); conflict situations that take place on the periphery of the region (the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, etc.). The author defines approaches to their international legal qualification and tools that can be used to mitigate or eliminate them. The creation of a new integration supranational organization could be a comprehensive solution, this prospect, however, looks distant. The reform of existing associations (the EAEU and the CIS), which pay attention exclusively to economic issues, also looks unlikely. More realistic at this stage is the policy of small deeds, which involves a thorough analysis of individual problems and the development of local solutions. The approach to resolving international disputes in the post-Soviet space, which took shape in the nineties of the twentieth century, is characterized by the following main features: politicization of public rhetoric, predominant use of conciliation mechanisms, Russia’s monopoly on mediation and good offices, lack of attention from the legal doctrine. It is currently changing: states are increasingly appealing to international law and applying to international courts; along with Russia, the United States, Turkey and China began to act as intermediaries; international legal doctrine has finally begun to pay due (but still insufficient) attention to these issues. The international legal policy of the Russian Federation and the policy of integration associations with its participation should take into account these general and objective trends.