This article examines an understudied topic: after imperial political sovereignty has ended, how does the empire's infrastructural power physically disintegrate along national lines. By tracing the breakup of the Soviet military establishment from 1992 to 1993, this article shows that physical dissolution is a multifaceted process that cannot be equated with political termination of an empire. Drawing on the Russian military newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda over 1992 and 1993, I identify three ways by which successor states exited the Soviet military system: (1) quitting, withdrawing from the Soviet military and establishing a national military from scratch; (2) partitioning, seizing the Soviet military's manpower and assets to establish a national military; (3) staying, maintaining a unified federative military opposed to the idea of developing national militaries. The tracing of these three paths shows that this trifurcation stemmed from the complicated combination of four factors of successor states: the existing capacity to maintain a national military, the security situation at the moment of independence, the expected availability of foreign aids, and the professional backgrounds of nationalist elites. This article concludes that physical disintegration is a process largely distinct from the political termination of empire, and therefore, ought to be carved out as a research area of empire study.

中文翻译：

---

帝国之后：苏联军事体系的瓦解

本文探讨了一个尚未被充分研究的话题：帝国政治主权结束后，帝国的基础设施力量如何沿国家线实际瓦解。通过追溯1992年至1993年苏联军事机构的解体，本文表明，人身解散是一个多方面的过程，不能等同于帝国的政治终止。借助1992年和1993年俄罗斯军事报纸Krasnaya Zvezda，我确定了继承国退出苏联军事体系的三种方式：（1）退出，退出苏联军队并从头开始建立国家军队；（二）分割，抢占苏军的人力和财力，建立国民军；（3）留下来，维持反对发展国民军思想的统一联邦军。对这三个路径的追踪表明，这种三叉戟的产生源于继承国四个因素的复杂组合：维持国家军力的现有能力，独立之时的安全状况，预期的外国援助和专业人才民族主义精英的背景。本文的结论是，物质解体是一个与帝国政治终结大不相同的过程，因此，应将其分解为帝国研究的研究领域。独立时的安全局势，预期的外援供应情况以及民族主义精英的专业背景。本文的结论是，物质解体是一个与帝国政治终结大不相同的过程，因此，应将其分解为帝国研究的研究领域。独立时的安全局势，预期的外援供应情况以及民族主义精英的专业背景。本文的结论是，物质解体是一个与帝国政治终结大不相同的过程，因此，应将其分解为帝国研究的研究领域。