DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN THE HISTORY OF THE FAR EAST
A.E. Savchenko. The Far East in the Mirror of Development Projects. Preface
Dmitriy Pavlov, Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: email@example.com.
In this paper the author observes the aggregation of traditional and innovative elements in the Far Eastern policy of official St. Petersburg basing on one of two main projects of the Kwantung megaproject — Dalniy. Special attention is paid to the origin and development of this port city, its transport and industrial facilities as well as its governance model. The author uses the materials from the recently published book “Port Arthur and Dalniy, 1894—1904: The Last Colonial Project of the Russian Empire” that provides documentary evidence of the modernization type of the colonial government, which Russia maintained on the Kwantung Peninsula, the southern end of the Liaodong Peninsula, leased from China in 1898. It is noted that such general characteristic requires some comments. It is concluded that the combination of geopolitical objectives of finding warm-water ports: warm-water military and commercial ports in the Far East and the constructive role of the Russian tenant in material production, education and culture of the colonized territory caused demonstration of the paradoxical mixture of universal human interests and purely Russian needs, integration of old forms and methods, and innovative initiatives in the Far Eastern politics of late imperial Russia.
Keywords: Russian Empire, Dalniy, China, town planning, Kwantung Peninsula, Ñhinese Eastern Railway.
Ildar Hamzin, Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The paper focuses on the history of the formation and development of the port of Dalniy as an ambitious, promising and last colonial project of the Russian Empire. On March 15, 1898, a convention was signed between the Russian Empire and the Qing Empire, according to which the territory of the Liaodong Peninsula and its seaports were leased to Russia. The Kwantung Territory became the first and last colony of the Russian Empire located outside its borders. The port of Lyushunkou, already widely known as Port Arthur, was destined to become a military base of Russia, while the port of Dalianvan, which was named “Dalniy”, was intended to be a commercial port. The Russian presence on the Liaodong Peninsula has been well studied in Russian historiography in the context of the famous “Manchurian question” and the prehistory of the Russian-Japanese War of 1904—1905. However, the history of these Russian ports on the territory of China has not been much emphasized although this issue becomes more important due to new projects in the Russian Far East (Primorye-1, Primorye-2, the Northern Sea Route). The paper analyses the historical conditions under which the port of Dalniy was acquired, the first projects related to the construction of the city and the commercial port. Moreover, the author describes the issues of implementation of the free customs zone and development trends of the foreign trade in the Far East in the early years of its existence. The conclusions indicate the main advantages of Dalniy as a sea port and the first results of its performance.
Keywords: the port of Dalniy, Russia in the Far East, the Kwantung Territory, maritime trade of Russia.
Igor Lukoyanov, Saint Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, HSE University (St. Petersburg), Saint Petersburg, Russia. E-mail: email@example.com.
The paper is devoted to the history of the concept and construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway — the greatest achievement of the Russian Empire. The construction required tremendous labour and finance expenditures for over ten years and was worth the country’s annual budget. This research is important because a lot has been written about the Trans-Siberian Railway since its construction more than 100 years ago, but a complex full-fledged history of this project has not been provided yet. It is pointed out that the majority of authors paid attention to the technical aspects and the scope of the construction but preferred to describe than to analyze. The disadvantage of such approach is that it is impossible to study such impressive undertaking only as an engineering problem putting aside numerous political, economic and social issues. The bottom line of the history of the Trans-Siberian Railway is the variations of its structure plans. During the phase of searching for ideas as well as the planning and construction phases, the image and the goals of the longest railway in Russia and in the world changed repeatedly and radically due to various reasons.
Keywords: Trans-Siberian Railway, Russian Empire, S.Yu. Witte, Far East.
A.Å. Savchenko. Why Was the Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) Built? Another Side of the Last Megaproject in the East of the USSR
Anatolii Savchenko, Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnology of the Peoples of the Far East, FEB RAS, Vladivostok, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The history of the development of the Baikal-Amur Mainline zone contains an undisclosed potential for the research of state development projects in the late USSR. The Soviet leadership acted to oppose the growing internal crisis using the strategy of modernization by including the country’s natural resources in the international trade and gaining access to foreign technologies. Considering the BAM zone project as part of the development strategy, this paper aims to show both the context and the key constraints of the ambitious plan to create a new industrial area in the East of the country. The plans for the mainline construction were elaborated in the context of rethinking the Soviet Union’s place in the world economy, assumptions of strengthening its position as a supplier of natural resources to capitalist countries and keeping prices high for primary commodities. At the same time, the USSR had no technologies for the effective development in the East and relied on the supply of the latest equipment from Japan and the United States. This meant that all development plans were initially vulnerable to price fluctuations on commodity markets and to potential conflicts with geopolitical rivals.
Keywords: Russian Far-East, Baikal-Amur Mainline, external economic relations, State Planning Committee, development programs.
Sergey Pestsov, Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnology of the Peoples of the Far East, FEB RAS, Vladivostok, Russia. Å-mail: email@example.com.
In recent years, the ordinary life and development in Russia has been determined, for the most part, by “national” projects. Most of them can been categorized as so-called megaprojects. Their distinctive features are the combination of many interrelated projects with a common goal, high cost, labor intensity and duration of implementation. At the same time, their inherent characteristics are often cost overruns, low efficiency and poor return on investment. The projects related to the development of the Far East and the Arctic are among the large-scale megaprojects. The recent decision to unite them under the auspices of the Ministry of the Russian Federation for the Development of the Arctic and the Far East has made them even more ambitious. This makes it important to study and assess the conceptual feasibility, possibilities and prospects of these initiatives. The first part of the paper is devoted to the analysis of possible strategies for the implementation of tasks related to the development of the Russian Arctic, the features of traditional (“the Soviet model”) and new corporate approaches. The second part examines plans and prospects for the integration of the development projects in the Arctic and the Far East as well as the major role of the Northern Sea Route in the integration of these peripheral macro-regions. In the end, there are some conclusions and considerations regarding the reasons and incentives for the construction of the Pacific Arctic.
Keywords: Arctic, Far North, Far East, Pacific Arctic, China, megaprojects, development of territories, regional development strategies, Northern Sea Route, regional programs, raw materials.
Sergei Ivanov, Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnology of the Peoples of the Far East, FEB RAS, Vladivostok, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The paper reviews the history of projects of special economic zones in the late Soviet period from mid-1988 to early 1990. Using the concept of assemblage, it shows the non-linear development of the SEZ idea due to the diversity of actors involved in its elaboration and their motivations. The author analyzes how expert and bureaucratic communities took up an ill-prepared initiative of the state leader, which did not find the support among leading experts and officials but became a significant element of urban policy. The paper concludes that despite the broad vision of SEZs as a promising mechanism for transforming the economy and, in particular, the foreign economic sphere, the actors of the zonal assemblage did not reach a consensus on the technical tools for implementing the idea. Under these circumstances, the Soviet government’s work ended up in an unspoken attempt to postpone the implementation of the SEZs from early 1990, but by that time local bureaucracy had already picked up this idea. The local actors’ goal was to turn from an object into a subject of improvements, i.e. to carry out reforms of the economic and administrative system of the city under their own leadership and in accordance with their vision. The study is based on the documents from central and regional archives, semi-structured interviews with the participants involved in elaborating SEZs, and media materials.
Keywords: perestroika, special economic zone, development project, SEZ, assemblage.
A.V. Kuteleva, P.O. Salnikova, K.E. Chernilevskaya, E.I. Shevchuk. The Free Port of Vladivostok: Trends and Prospects for Development
Anna Kuteleva, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: email@example.com.
Polina Salnikova, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Klavdiya Chernilevskaya, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: email@example.com.
Egor Shevchuk, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Since 2015, the Free Port of Vladivostok regime has been functioning on the territory of five Far Eastern regions. The federal authorities introduced it as an economic environment that would attract foreign investment to these territories, share technologies and international practices, foster grassroots entrepreneurship, and stimulate international trade with the Asia-Pacific countries. It offered a simplified customs regime, a reduction in customs duties for entrepreneurs, tax benefits, and an immunity from time-consuming audit inspections. However, over the past five years, the regime has not been able to fully reveal its potential. This paper presents the analysis of the Free Port’s development and highlights the most significant problems that impede the implementation of the concept of the Free Port, including administrative and legal regulation, conflicts of interests, strategic contradictions, and malpractices. The research is based on the analysis of official documents and legislative acts, statistical data, and analytical materials published by the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East, as well as sixteen interviews with the representatives of the business community of the Primorye Region, residents of the Free Port of Vladivostok, members of the Far East Investment and Export Agency and the Far East Development Corporation, and diplomatic representatives of China and Korea in Vladivostok.
Keywords: Free Port of Vladivostok, Russian Far East, foreign direct investment, development.
V.V. Kuklina, N.E. Krasnoshtanova. A Chain Reaction of Infrastructural Development and Its Local Social Consequences: The Case of the Western Section of the BAM
Vera Kuklina, Sochava Institute of Geography SB RAS, Irkutsk, Russia, George Washington University, Washington, USA. E-mail: email@example.com.
Natalia Krasnoshtanova, Sochava Institute of Geography SB RAS, Irkutsk, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
In this paper we propose to discuss the issues of a chain reaction caused by the development of different types of transport infrastructure. The issues of infrastructural projects impact on local communities have long been widely discussed by social researchers. However, the northern and Arctic regions remain less studied in this regard while the situation there is more complex, especially at the intersections of various types of transport infrastructure. The problems of interaction between different kinds of infrastructure are especially manifested in the regions of extractive development, such as the north of the Irkutsk Region and the Republic of Buryatia. The materials for the analysis were obtained as a result of field studies in the north of the Irkutsk Region and the Republic of Buryatia in 2016, 2017, 2019, and 2020, as well as on the basis of the analysis of satellite data and maps of the regional infrastructure development. The construction of the Baikal-Amur Mainline and later oil and gas pipelines became an impetus for the development of other types of infrastructure, not only in the oil and gas extractive activities but also in logging. However, limited access to the pipeline and oil service roads has caused conflicts between the industrial companies and the local population. Local hunting trails are at the lowest level in such a hierarchy and are often destroyed and blocked by infrastructure development. A deeper and more detailed analysis of the social consequences of infrastructural development contributes to an understanding of the hierarchies of power that exist in Russia.
Keywords: transport infrastructure, remote settlements, indigenous peoples.
CHINA AND JAPAN IN THE HISTORY OF PACIFIC RUSSIA
Zhanna Bazhenova, Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnology of the Peoples of the Far East, FEB RAS, Vladivostok, Russia. E-mail: email@example.com.
After the end of World War II, Japan renounced all of its territorial acquisitions, including Karafuto — a part of Sakhalin Island south of the 50th parallel, the right to possession of which it received under the Portsmouth Peace Treaty of September 5, 1905. The paper analyzes the main features that distinguished Karafuto from the other colonies of Japan. The author indicates that the Japanese launched economical activities on the island long before it became the formal colony of Japan. With a similar ethno-demographic profile, Karafuto was the most integrated territory with the metropolis, the only external territory that was included in “proper Japan” as a native prefecture. The size of the settler community in Karafuto, which consisted of over 400,000 settlers, and the speed of its growth are comparable to some of the largest and most well-known settler colonies in the world. The Japanese government was insistent that agriculture and farmers provided the most solid basis for the formation of the permanent population of the colony. However, agriculture was significantly inferior to fishing, forestry and mining industry in the structure of the colonial economy. Despite the seasonal nature of the fishing, which meant high migration mobility and the lack of government support, fishing families played an important role in the settlement of Karafuto. The author reveals the complex and contradictory process of identity formation amongst various groups of Japanese colonizers who struggled to reconcile the nationalist demands of loyalty to the “mother country” with the demands of creating a sense of belonging to their new homeland.
Keywords: the Japanese colonial empire, Karafuto, settler colony, migrations, Karafuto-cho, agriculture, fishery, colonial identity.
Anna Averina, Khabarovsk Territorial Museum after N.I. Grodekov, Khabarovsk, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The paper summarizes the initial stage of the Soviet-Japanese cooperation as part of the opening of direct aviation communication between the USSR and Japan. Upon signing the 1956 Joint Declaration and a number of agreements (for example, the Fisheries Convention, the Trade Agreement, etc.), a new stage in Soviet-Japanese relations began, which was characterized, among other things, by growing contacts between the parties. The leading place was assigned to trade and economic relations. However, there were no passenger airline and sea services between the USSR and Japan until 1961. The intensified Soviet-Japanese contacts put the transport problem on the agenda. From 1956, the parties discussed several projects of the air route, and one of them became the baseline when the Soviet-Japanese agreement on the opening of direct flights was signed in 1966. It was revealed that the Trans-Siberian air route became not only a cross-border airline connecting two states but also positioned itself as a transit and shortest route from Japan to Europe. A well-developed network of airfields, a large number of professional flight and technical personnel, a significant aircraft manufacturing industry and the successful experience of the international transit airline (the USSR-Japan) allowed the USSR to further increase its presence in the air transport balance of the Asia-Pacific Region (APR). The paper is based on the unpublished documents from the Russian State Archive of Economics.
Keywords: Soviet-Japanese relations, the Soviet-Japanese agreement on the opening of direct air traffic, “Aeroflot”, air transport.
Chu Ling, Inner Mongolia University of Technology, Russia-Mongolia Research Center, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia, China. E-mail: email@example.com.
The paper analyzes the consequences of the coronavirus pandemic for the global energy market and the state of Chinese-Russian energy cooperation. The paper examines the influence of the coronavirus epidemic on the strategically important area of state security and economic development of both China and Russia — the oil and gas sector. Moreover, it describes the geopolitical and economic factors that have changed the situation in the global energy market. After a major outbreak of diseases caused by the new coronavirus, unprecedented events are taking place in the global energy market. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a huge effect on the development of the energy sector and led to the largest decline in energy demand and oil prices in history. A new situation with a double drop in global energy demand and supply is having a serious impact at the moment. Changing conditions in this area carry serious risks for China and Russia as the main players in the global energy markets. The paper reveals the prospects and ways of deepening Chinese-Russian energy cooperation in the post-pandemic period. It is concluded that China and Russia should take advantage of the historic opportunity to improve the mechanism of the energy dialogue between the two governments, to enrich the comprehensive strategic partnership, and to jointly confront threats and challenges in global economic markets. As part of the integration of the Eurasian Economic Union and the “One Belt, One Road” Initiative, the two countries should strengthen innovative cooperation, develop research exchanges in the field of energy technologies, and work together to improve the level of comprehensive energy cooperation between China and Russia. In the post-pandemic period, the deepening of the strategic cooperation between China and Russia in the energy sector is of great and long-term importance for both countries in order to increase the resilience of the energy market to risks and to create an “energy cooperation community”.
Keywords: coronavirus pandemic, energy cooperation between China and Russia, price war, Chinese-Russian relations.
THE 100TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FAR EASTERN REPUBLIC
L.V. Kuras, B.D. Tsybenov. The Far Eastern Republic: From the “Safe House” to the “Cradle” of the Mongolian Revolution
Leonid Kuras, Institute of Mongolian, Buddhist and Tibetan Studies of SB RAS, Ulan-Ude, Russia. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Bazar Tsybenov, Institute of Mongolian, Buddhist and Tibetan Studies of SB RAS, Ulan-Ude, Russia. E-mail: email@example.com.
The paper analyzes the formation and the evolution of the Far Eastern Republic as a basic entity, mediator and a peculiar “safe house” for Mongolian revolutionaries in their relations with Soviet Russia. The creation of the Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Party on the territory of the “buffer state” makes it possible to consider the Far Eastern Republic the “cradle” of the Mongolian revolution. The authors point out a significant role of the Political Centre which was founded by the Mensheviks and the socialist-revolutionaries in November 1919. The question about the “buffer state” was raised during the negotiations between the Political Center and the Revolutionary Military Council of the Fifth Army and the Siberian Commissariat in Tomsk in January 1920. Despite its short existence, the Far Eastern Republic left a distinctive mark in the history of the Russian Far East. Under the influence of the Far Eastern Republic and Soviet Russia, fundamental changes happed in Outer Mongolia — the former national remote area of the Qing Dynasty. The authors emphasize the role of Troitskosavsk in the organization of the Mongolian Revolution of 1921 and the first Soviet Representative of the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR in Mongolia O.I. Makstenek, who organized a historic meeting of the Mongolian “group of seven” with the authorities of the Far Eastern Republic and Soviet Russia. O.I. Makstenek worked closely with the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Far Eastern Republic B.Z. Shumyatsky on the issues of the arrangement and movement of the Mongolian delegation. The authors reveal the core of subsequent events shortly before the Mongolian Revolution of 1921 including the stay and activities of the Mongolian delegation in Irkutsk, Troitskosavsk, on the territory of the Dzhida Valley, and the end of the military campaign of Baron Ungern to Mongolia. All described revolutionary events in Russia and Outer Mongolia in 1920—1921, where Troitskosavsk played a special role, developed dynamically and entirely in the mainstream of transnational history.
Keywords: Soviet Russia, Far Eastern Republic, FER, “buffer state”, Troitskosavsk, O.I. Makstenek, the Mongolian revolution.