Introduction. In the processes of nation building and integration, it is particularly important to increase the consolidation potential of emerging communities through identity politics. The totality of challenges, threats and risks determines the need for a balanced combination of its dimensions, taking into account national and common interests of countries. In the post-Soviet space, the Union State of Belarus and Russia acts as a platform for dialogue. The aim of the study is to outline the contours of the construct of supranational identity within the framework of the Union State and to define the degree of its conjugation with the category of “national identityˮ in the discursive practices of the political leadership of Russia and Belarus. Materials and Methods. The study is based on official documents representing the specifics of interpretation of identity politics by the presidents of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, as well as on materials associated with the functioning of the Union State. Content analysis, the comparative method, and scenario analysis were employed when examining the documents. Results. The research and expert assessments of the internal and external dimensions of the identity politics of the member states, as well as the basic and derived categories of the official discourse have been analyzed; the constants and dominants, similarities and differences in the stands of Russia and Belarus have been revealed. It has also been demonstrated that there has been no fundamental contradiction in their understanding of the priorities of nation and Union building. At the same time, disagreements on a number of topical issues have been identified. The leitmotif of the official discourse is giving absolute priority to sovereignty, which has an ambiguous effect on the course of the integration of Russia and Belarus. Discussion and Conclusion. The conducted study has confirmed the hypothesis that identity politics is multilevel for the states involved in integration-oriented interaction; at the current stage, it remains complex and incomplete. The states demonstrate prevalence of the internal dimension of identity politics and “restrictiveˮ perception of its external dimension, which affects the prospects for promoting the construct of “dualˮ identity. At the same time, the Union State remains an essential integration format for Russia from the geopolitical and civilizational perspective. The approach proposed by the authors and the results obtained, which articulate the correlation of tasks in terms of nation building and integration policy, may help to improve the efficiency of political governance.
Read full abstract