Republic of Belarus’ information sovereignty in the system of multilevel integration: hierarchy of priorities and implementation mechanisms

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Global digitalisation and information warfare have brought to the fore the task of studying issues related to ensuring information sovereignty for medium-sized states involved in various integration formats. Foreign researchers (DeNardis, Pohle, Santaniello, Lehuedé) analyse a variety of approaches to digital sovereignty, highlighting the contradictions between state control and the openness of digital space. However, this issue remains insufficiently studied in relation to multi-level integration systems. Model. The study is based on systematic analysis, a comparative method for evaluating integration formats, a structural-functional approach, and case studies. The analytical framework uses the author’s concept of an “integration matryoshka”, which adapts the theory of concentric circles of integration to the geopolitical realities of Belarus. Conclusions. The analysis showed that Belarus implements information sovereignty through a hierarchical system of international cooperation: from deep integration in the Union State to the universal format of the UN. Each level has specific capabilities and limitations. The Union State demonstrates the greatest potential for protecting information sovereignty due to ideological proximity and a high level of political trust. Research framework. The results are applicable to the analysis of the strategies of small and medium-sized states in a multipolar environment. Prospects include studying the mechanisms of coordination between levels of integration and adapting the model to changing geopolitical conditions. Practical significance. The developed model can be used by state bodies in forming a strategy for international cooperation in the field of information security and digital development. Social implications. The implementation of the proposed strategy contributes to the protection of the information space, the preservation of cultural identity, and the sustainable technological development of society. Originality. For the first time, the concept of an «integration matryoshka» is proposed as a model for systematising various formats of Belarus’ international cooperation in the field of information sovereignty. The article is intended for researchers of international relations, information security specialists, and foreign policy decision-makers.

About the authors

Denis A. Bukonkin

Belarusian State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: bukonkin@mail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9005-4907

postgraduate student, Department of Political Science, Faculty of Law

Belarus, Minsk

References

  1. Archakov V.Y. On theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the Eurasian model of legal support for international information security. Journal of International Law and International Relations. 2019. No. 3–4. Pp. 47–56. (In Rus.)
  2. Akhmedzhanova D.F. Problems of regional integration development under sanctions restrictions (based on the example of the Commonwealth of Independent States). Post-Soviet Studies. 2022. Vol. 5. No. 5. Pp. 481–491. (In Rus.). doi: 10.24412/2618-7426-2022-5-481-491.
  3. Barandova T.L. Digital transformation in the BRICS+ countries: Alliances and contradictions in the context of the emerging multipolar world order. Management Consulting. 2025. No. 1. Pp. 58–71. (In Rus.). doi: 10.22394/1726-1139-2025-1-58-71.
  4. Ivantsov A.V., Vinichenko A.T. Information sovereignty of the Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation: Main directions of ensuring and ways of improvement. Eurasian Integration: Economics, Law, Politics. 2024. No. 1. Pp. 68–77. (In Rus.)
  5. Klyukanova T.M., Vinichenko A.T., Khristinchenko K.Y. Analysis of the legislation of the EAEU countries in the field of combating cybercrime. Eurasian Integration: Economics, Law, Politics. 2024. No. 3. Pp. 83–90. (In Rus.). doi: 10.22394/2073-2929-2024-03-83-90.
  6. Lebedeva E.V. Information security of the CIS states: stages of implementation. National Security / Nota Bene. 2016. No. 4. Pp. 500–508. (In Rus.)
  7. Markevich D.S. The Union State in the context of the digital transformation of the economy. Modern Europe. 2024. No. 2. Pp. 193–202. (In Rus.). doi: 10.31857/S0201708324020165.
  8. Minkov N.S. The constitutional component of the formation of the Eurasian information space. Legal Journal. 2024. No. 3. Pp. 174–181. (In Rus.)
  9. Plakhotnikova M.A., Glukhova N.V. Formation of the information sovereignty of the state in the context of the digitalisation of the economy: technological and value components. Economics, Management, Administration: Challenges and Solutions. 2022. No. 3. Pp. 115–123. (In Rus.). doi: 10.52468/2782-4586.2022.3(10).115-123.
  10. Sashchenko N.P. Transformation of Russian identity: value dimension. Sociopolitical Sciences. 2023. Vol. 13. No. 4. Pp. 37–49. (In Rus.). doi: 10.33693/2223-0092-2023-13-4-37-48. EDN: JRBOSA
  11. Strugovets V.M. Promising directions for the CSTO’s information policy. International Life. 2011. No. 1. Pp. 138–149. (In Rus.)
  12. Tutberidze N.E. Contemporary theories of integration: The French school. Theories of European integration born in practice. Historical Research: Journal of the History Faculty of Lomonosov Moscow State University. 2019. No. 14. Pp. 198–206. (In Rus.)
  13. Frantishchik R.I. The digital neighborhood belt initiative. Journal of Belarusian State University. International Relations. 2020. No. 2. Pp. 107–113. (In Rus.)
  14. Shakel N.V., Ablameiko M.S. Cross-border transfer of personal data within the EAEU. Pravo.by. 2022. No. 6. Pp. 83–90. (In Rus.)
  15. Yakubovich S.A. The EAEU, SCO and BRICS in global geopolitics: The place and role of the Republic of Belarus. In: Political sphere. Collection of scientific works. Minsk: BSU, 2024. Pp. 49–66.
  16. DeNardis L. Non-binding norms in Internet governance: The limits of UN recommendations on information security. Global Policy. 2020. Vol. 11 (3). Pp. 345–355. (In Rus.). doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12723.
  17. Hooghe L., Marks G. Postfunctionalist theory of multilevel governance. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2020. Vol. 22. No. 4. Pp. 820–826. (In Rus.). doi: 10.1177/1369148120935303.
  18. Pohle J., Santaniello M. From multistakeholderism to digital sovereignty: Toward a new discursive order in internet governance? Policy and Internet. 2024. Vol. 16. No. 4. Pp. 673–690. (In Rus.). doi: 10.1002/poi3.426.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

Copyright (c) 2025 Yur-VAK

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).