The historiography of the eastern in Russia's foreign policy of the XVIII-XX centuries

Автор(ы): Obolkin Evgeny Sergeevich
Рубрика конференции: Секция 7. Исторические науки
DOI статьи: 10.32743/UsaConf.2021.8.23.297529
Библиографическое описание
Obolkin E.S. The historiography of the eastern in Russia's foreign policy of the XVIII-XX centuries// Proceedings of the XXIII International Multidisciplinary Conference «Recent Scientific Investigation». Primedia E-launch LLC. Shawnee, USA. 2021. DOI:10.32743/UsaConf.2021.8.23.297529

THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF THE EASTERN QUESTION IN RUSSIA'S FOREIGN POLICY OF THE XVIII-XX CENTURIES

Evgeny Obolkin

Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Humanitarian and Socio-Economic Disciplines, East-Siberian branch of the Russian State University of Justice,

Russia, Irkutsk

 

The Eastern question has become one of the most sharp diplomatic problems to which all powers belonged to some extent. For the first time, the term "Eastern Question" was used in Verona Congress (1822), in which the countries belonging to the Holy Union participated.

The relevance of the topic of the scientific article is that the "Eastern Question" during the second half of the XVIII - the beginning of the twentieth century. He played an important, and most often the main role in the international life of Europe, anterior Asia, North Africa, and involved the main part of European countries. Russia and European powers made an attempt to improve their authority in the East.

Great powers tried to promote the decay of the Ottoman Empire. They influenced Turkey, thus destroying the internal processes that occurred in the country. A large number of liberation movements of non-neurures peoples have increased.

Russia occupied not recently in the "Eastern Question". For Russian diplomacy, the main factor was the acquisition of Transcaucasia, the Northern Black Sea and Crimea. To promote your product, there was a free movement in the Black Sea Strait and the spread of influence on the Balkan Peninsula. There was also a need to protect the southern borders of Russia.

There is a large number of scientific and journalistic literature, which led to the essence of the Eastern Question. K. F. Marx and F. Engels for the first time gave their assessment about the Eastern Question and its events on the side of internationalism. K.Marks and F. Engels showed the intention of the royal government in the Eastern Question. G. J. Palmerston condemned the British and bourgeois oligarchy in the Eastern Question. The liberation of the Balkan peoples from Turkish Iga is considered the best solution to the Eastern Question. Only victory in the European revolution can lead to radical elimination of the Eastern Question.

Most of the historiography in the XIX century. The "Eastern Question" is devoted to the destruction and crisis of the Ottoman Empire, the policy of the Russian Empire and the Western European states. Immunity or distribution of the Ottoman Empire, as well as the rivalry of the great powers, therefore, considering historiography, it is necessary to highlight the works of S. S. Tatishchev, S. F. Zhigarev and P. Lavrovsky [1].

The main theme of S.S. Tatishchev was the foreign policy of the Russian government. S.S. Tatishchev came to the conclusion that the conflict between the Ottoman and Russian empires was the result of the difference between Christians and Muslims. Russian foreign policy is divided into "Western" and "Eastern". Parliament defended the position of Russia, to preserve the Ottoman Empire, and not its destruction. The contribution of Tatishcheva is that in most activities of Russian diplomacy, he stressed mistakes in the Russian government [2].

Russian policy in relation to the Eastern Question in the work of S.A. Marigreev (history in the XVI-XIX centuries, critical assessment and future tasks) "is presented in the form of historical books that analyze the history of Russia and the Ottoman Empire during the reign of Paul I, Nicholas I. He first concluded about Russian policies regarding the Eastern Question.

S. A. Zhigarev studied in the history of the eastern issue of conformity between the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and Western powers, and then came to the conclusion that Russia sought to preserve his influence in the "Eastern Question" [3].

P. Lavrovsky noted in his work "Eastern Question" Turkish conditions [4]. He explains the altruism of the Turks, and notes the causes of radical reforms. The author traces the relationship between the European states and the Ottoman Empire and revolutionary uprisings on the Balkan Peninsula in the XIX century. In his research, Lavrovsky followed the need for Turkey relations with European powers.

In the works of S. S. Tatishchev, S. A. Zhigarev and P. Lavrovsky concluded that the eastern issue in pre-revolutionary history was interpreted in different ways. They divided the policy of Nicholas I on Christian and Muslim [2]. They abandoned the aggressive intentions of the Russian state. But S.A. Inherova mentions economic interests in the Russian government, to gain access to the Black Sea.

Pre-revolutionary historians considered the Eastern Question as resistance to European powers for the Ottoman possession and the spread of the Byzantine heritage on the Russian state.

In the 20th century, many studies of Russian politics were conducted in the "Eastern Question. Sources on history with Marxist methods brought the theory of hostile design, not only in the Russian Empire, but also in other major powers in the" Eastern Question ". The Marxist concept is to analyze class Politicians, as well as domestic social equipment in other countries

The Eastern Question is also considered in the works of M. N. Pokrovsky in the foreign policy of Russia and in modern international relations. He criticized the ideas and actions of the royal government in the Eastern Question. Pokrovsky united the Royal Policy of Russia, in the acquisition of landowners and bourgeoisie of trade routes through the Black Sea. The main principle is. World War II 1914-1918, which contributed to the hostility between Russia and Germany.

Academicians E. V. Tarl, M. V. Tailov and A. L. Narotinitsky in his work on the history of diplomacy showed stages of development, main trends and needs of European countries in the Balkan Peninsula [5]. E. V. Tarl published an article in the first part of this work dedicated to Nikolai I. Foreign Policy. He criticized the violent nature of the policies of England and France in the "Eastern Question", appreciated the conflict of interest between the Government of the Russian Empire and British political problems in the Ottoman Empire, considered Western powers system.

The concept of "Eastern Question" originated in the middle of the XVIII century. E. I. Zelenva and I. V. Greenless in his work "Eastern question in the foreign policy of Nicholas I: the geopolitical aspect and the" Eastern Question "in the foreign policy of Nicholas I under the geopolitical and geostrategic angle of view," speaks of an understanding of the new approach to solving "Eastern Question" during the reign of Nicholas I.

The question was in the Russian-Persian and Russian-Turkish relations. From historical analysis, it is not enough to justify defeat in the Crimean War during the reign of Nicholas I, so you can forget about geopolitical, regional and political factors.

Geopolitics and geostrategia are two different political thinking [6]. Geostraffic is based on the laws of geopolitics and terminology of geopolitics, but does not allow power methods in solving interstate problems and seeks to regional and planetary cooperation on the basis of general political, economic, social and spiritual values.

The approval of the decisive policy of Russia with European countries and the interaction with them will be the main geostrategic interest. If the advantages of European integration (geostrategic) would occupy the main part in the foreign policy doctrine, then the Russian Empire would have the prospects for integration into the European political space, this would be a geostrategic approach [6].

The relations of the Ottoman and Russian Empires, according to the authors, influenced geostrategic and geopolitical factors. It is these types of thinking that were used in the policies of the emperors Alexander I and Nicholas [6]. Applying, the geostrategic direction Alexander I allowed all intra-terrace contradictions, and Nikolai I kept all European states in fear [7].

In the worldview of Nikolai I, political realism over idealism prevailed, and its directions in the foreign policy of Russia were developing. For strengthening on the South and Eastern Front, Nicholas I combined sea and ground forces to work together and improving the result. But the main course of Russia was to improve the influence on the Black and Mediterranean Sea.

For the development of directions, as geostrategia and geopolitics, the Russian government has become [7]. It planned its goals based on world importance, which served as the impetus for the development of these areas.

Consequently, the work of E. I. Zelenueva and I. V. Greenly served as a certain impetus to the study of the modern problem of the "Eastern Question". They reviewed the foreign policy trends of Nicholas I.

The main stages of the Russian-British confrontation in the XIX century about the Eastern Question are considered in Article V. V. Zyuzin and V. V. Kasparyan "Crimean War in the context of the Rossia-British confrontation 30-50s of the XIX century.". The most basic in the Eastern Question, they allocated, firstly, the liberation of the enslaved peoples of the Ottoman Empire against the Turkish pressure and the formation of independent states [8]. Secondly, we considered the problem in the east matter, that the leading power of Europe was aimed at seizing the main positions of the Ottoman Empire. The Balkans saw their liberator Russia against which Austria, United Kingdom and France performed. Third, Russia freely wanted to have a free right of the passage of ships through the Black Sea Straits in the Mediterranean Sea.

The authors pay attention to a number of successful wars of Persia with the Ottoman Empire, thus Russia has strengthened its influence in the Balkans [8]. Strengthening the Russian position in the East and the Caucasus, strained the relationship between Russia with Great Britain.

It can be concluded that modern historians studying the Eastern Question during the reign of Nicholas I return to political, economic, diplomatic relations and prisoners between states of contracts. Modern historians are fully exploring the diplomatic relations of the Russian Empire with England, France, Austria and Prussia.

 

References:

  1. Tatishchev S. S. Emperor Nicholas First and foreign courtyards. Historical essay. - SPb.: Typography I. N. Skorovhodov, 1889. - 459 p.
  2. Tatishchev S. S. Foreign policy of Emperor Nicholas First. - SPb.: Typography I. N. Skornhodova, 1887.- 639 p.
  3. Zhigarev S. A. Russian policies in the Eastern Question. T. I. - M.: University Typography, 1896. - 465 p.
  4. Lavrovsky P. Eastern question. - M.: Higher School, 2019. - 64 p.
  5. History of diplomacy: T. I / Ed. V.P. Potmkin. - M.: Oziz: State. Soc. - ECON. Publisher. 2020. - 566 p.
  6. Zelenv E. I., Zelenova I. V. Eastern question in the foreign policy of Nicholas I: geopolitical aspect. // Bulletin St. Petersburg University. Series 9. Issue 2., 2005. - P. 63 -77.
  7. Zelenva I. V., Zelenv E. I. "Eastern Question" in the foreign policy of Nicholas I under a geopolitical and geostrategic angle of view. // Historiography and sources of the history of Asian countries and Africa. Vol. 23.: Interunion. Sat / Ed. B. N. Mednichenko. - SPb.: Publisher S.-Petersburg. University, 2005. - P. 61 - 84.
  8. Zyuzin V. V., Kasparyan V. V. Krymskaya (Eastern) War in the context of the Russian-British opposition of the 30-50s. XIX century // Patriotic and foreign history: problems, opinions, approaches. Scientists of the Department of Domestic and Foreign History. Release VI. / Under total. ed. V.P. Ermakova. - Pyatigorsk: PGLU, 2006. – P. 243-273.