Risks of the state territory disintegration (case studies of Mexico, Venezuela and Chile)

Spatial disintegration is understood in the study as a process of disruption and destruction of system-forming connections between territorial units of a state. Based on previous studies carried out by other authors, seven factors of spatial disintegration are identified, namely historical, socio-economic, electoral, ethno-cultural, transport, military-strategic and foreign-political. To quantify the risks of spatial disintegration, a calculation method has been developed that allows for a comparative analysis of the danger of disintegration for particular countries as integral systems, and for their administrative-territorial units.

The risks of spatial disintegration are calculated for three Latin American countries, i. e. Venezuela, Mexico and Chile, which are quite different in socio-economic, ethno-cultural and political-administrative terms. The greatest risk of spatial disintegration is characteristic of Venezuela. The most significant risks of spatial disintegration at the subnational level are typical for the Tachira state in Venezuela; for the Baja California and Tamaulipas states in Mexico; and for the Arica y Parinacota and Araucania regions in Chile.

The correlation analysis between the parameters showing the effect of various disintegration factors is carried out. The following correlations are significant for Mexico: positive between socio-economic and foreign policy factors and negative between socio-economic and ethno-cultural, socio-economic and transport factors. The correlation between socio-economic and ethno-cultural factors is positive in Venezuela, as well as between foreign policy and electoral factors, and negative between socio-economic and electoral factors. Only two significant correlations were found for Chile: between socio-economic and military-strategic factors, and socio-economic and foreign policy factors.

The principal components method made it possible to identify two leading components in the Latin American countries under study. The first one is frontier regions with a high level of human development, which at the same time are less integrated into economic and transport links with their internal neighbors. The second one is "implant” regions, which differ from the main regions of the country by racial composition and in which the power control of the mother state is strengthened.

1. Avramenko A.V. Separatizm: sushchnost’ i problemy [Separatism: essence and problems). Ph.D. Thesis in Politics, Moscow, 1997. 205р. (In Russian)

2. Baklanov P.Ya. Integratsionnye i dezintegratsionnye protsessy na Dal’nem Vostoke Rossii [Integration and disintegration processes in the Russian Far East], Regional'nye issledovaniya, 2002, no. 1, p. 12-19. (In Russian)

3. Buhaug H., R0d J.K. Local determinants of African civil wars, 1970-2001, Political Geography, 2006, vol. 25, no. 3, p. 315-335.

4. Emel'yanov A.I., Zherlitsyna N.A., Sidorova G.M. Mezhdunarodnye konflikty XXI veka [International conflicts of the 21st century], Moscow, Moscow St. Linguistic un-ty Publ., 2019, 148 p. (In Russian)

5. Fadeeva I.A. Dezintegratsionnye protsessy v stranakh Evropy: prichiny i vliyanie na Rossiyu [Disintegration processes in European countries: causes and the effect on Russia], Fundamental'nye issledovaniya, 2018, no. 4, p. 125-129. (In Russian)

6. Hegre H., Østby G., Raleigh C. Poverty and Civil War Events, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2009, vol. 53, no. 4, p. 598-623.

7. Ker-Lindsay J. The Foreign Policy of Counter Secession: Preventing the Recognition of Contested States, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012, 215 p.

8. Kharlamenko A.V. Separatizm v Bolivii i Ekvadore nachala XXI veka [Separatism in Bolivia and Ecuador at the beginning of the 21st century], Latinskaya Amerika, 2013, no. 12, p. 53-59. (In Russian)

9. Kolossov V., O'Loughlin J. Pseudo-states as harbingers of a post-modern geopolitics: The example of the Transdniestrian Moldovan Republic (TMR), Geopolitics, 1998, no. 3, p. 151-176.

10. Korobeev A.I., Lobach D.V. Terrorizm, ekstremizm i nasilie v sovremennoi Meksike: sostoyanie i dinamika [Terrorism, extremism, and violence in modern Mexico: state and dynamics], Aziatsko-tikhookeanskii region: ekonomika, politika, pravo, 2014, vol. 16, no. 1-2, p. 131-144. (In Russian)

11. Kozer L. Funktsii sotsial'nogo konflikta [Social conflict functions], Moscow, Ideya-Press Publ., 2000, 109 p. (In Russian)

12. Kuznetsov D.A. Traektorii regional'nogo razvitiya Latinskoi Ameriki v XXI veke [Latin America in the 21st century: regional development trajectories], Vestn. Mosk. un-ta, Ser. 25, Mezhdunar. otnosheniya i mirovaya politika, 2020, no. 12(2), p. 44-70. (In Russian)

13. Libman A.M., Kheifets B.A. Modeli ekonomicheskoi dezintegratsii. Integratsiya i dezintegratsiya [Models of economic disintegration. Integration and disintegration], Evraziiskaya ekonomicheskaya integratsiya, 2011, no. 2(11), p. 4-18. (In Russian)

14. Lipset S.M. Political Man. The social Basis of Politics, 2nd ed., London, 1983, 586 p.

15. Morelli M., Rohner D. Resource concentration and civil wars, Journal of Development Economics, 2015, no. 117, p. 32-47.

16. Newman D., Paasi A. Fences and neighbours in the postmodern world: boundary narratives in political geography, Progress in Human Geography, 1998, no. 22(2), p. 186-207.

17. Paddison R. The Fragmented State. The Political Geography of Power, Oxford, 1983, 315 p.

18. Pegg S. International Society and the De Facto State, Aldershot, Ashgate Publishers, 1988, 308 p.

19. Popov F.A. Droblenie politicheskogo prostranstva mira: osnovnye formy i sovremennye tendentsii [The fragmentation of political space: basic forms and modern trends], Regional'nye issledovaniya, 2015, no. 2, p. 64-73. (In Russian)

20. Popov F.A. Geografiya setsessionizma v sovremennom mire [Geography of secessionism in the modern world], Moscow, Novyi khronograf Publ., 2012, 672 p. (In Russian)

21. Rokkan S. Geography, religion, and social class: Crosscutting cleavages in Norwegian politics. Party systems and voter alignments, S.M. Lipset, S. Rokkan (eds.), New York, 1967, 554 p.

22. Ross E.A. The Principles of Sociology. New York, The Century Co, 1920, 708 р.

23. Sebentsov A.B., Kolosov V.A. Fenomen nekontroliruemykh territorii v sovremennom mire [The phenomenon of uncontrolled territories in the modern world], Polis, 2012, no. 2, p. 31-46. (In Russian)

24. Simmel G. Conflict and the web of group-affiliations, Glencoe, Illinois, The Free Press, 1955. 195 p.

25. Sorens J. Mineral production, territory, and ethnic rebellion: The role of rebel constituencies, Journal of Peace Research, 2011, vol. 48, no. 5, p. 571-585.

26. Treivish A.I. Tsentr, periferiya i fasad kak dopolnyayushchie ponyatiya geostranovedeniya [Center, periphery, and facade as complementary concepts of country research], Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskaya geografiya, Vestnik Assotsiatsii rossiiskikh geografov-obshchestvovedov (ARGO), 2016, no. 5, p. 4-16. (In Russian)

27. Voronina T.V. Integratsiya i dezintegratsiya kak proyavlenie vnutrennikh protivorechii integratsionnoi sistemy [Integration and disintegration as a manifestation of internal contradictions of the integration system], Prostranstvo ekonomiki, 2013, no. 1-2, p. 119-123. (In Russian)

28. Wheare K.C. Modern constitutions, London, Oxford University Press, 1966, 150 p.

29. Zayats D.V. Territorial'nye konflikty na sovremennoi politicheskoi karte mira: ochagi i riski separatizma [Territorial conflicts on the modern political map of the world: areas and risks of separatism], Ph.D. Thesis in Geography, Moscow, 1999, p. 29-57. (In Russian)

30. Fragile State Index. The Fund for Peace, URL: https://fragilestatesindex.org (access date 19.05.2021).