Search

The Four-Day War of 2016 once again exposed the danger that the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict poses in the Caucasus. However, despite its military scale and human losses, Russia has raised only general statements from other co-chairs of the osce (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) Minsk Group, from the United States and France, and from other international actors such as the United Nations Security Council. In an attempt to stimulate debate about this lack of engagement, this paper claims that the external actors involved aim to cast silence over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict beyond the region. While this approach may serve to remove the political impact of the conflict from the international arena, it unwittingly also enhances the aggressiveness of both Armenia and Azerbaijan in the regional arena. The main aim of this paper is, then, to explain why the conflict is being silenced, how this is made possible and what the regional effects of this approach are. By drawing on the Four-Day War of 2016, the paper intends to show how the recent violence has challenged the silencing of external actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper is devoted to the general problems of development of the North Caucasus region and various aspects of its investigation. This theme was not easy for scientists and analysts at all times, and it cannot be understood in a one-dimensional measurement. In general the Caucasus has provided and continues to exert considerable influence on the formation and development of the Russian identity and this is both theoretical and practical importance for us. Therefore much attention is paid to the present situation in Russian society, its ability to meet the challenges of the times in a rapidly changing world and changes in domestic and foreign policy on its southern borders. The paper presents different approaches to analysis and different comments on them. But all Russian researchers are united in one thing - in the understanding and preservation of this unique region as an integral part of the Russian state and Russian identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explains the difficulties that have been emerging for the Southern Caucasus regarding these countries' relationship with and towards the EU. Through the deconstruction of the area's particularities and specificities, and its framing in the EU's policy to the region, this paper aims at analyzing the implications of the transition efforts and stability in the area for Europe in general, along with the different roles each of these pieces - Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia - play in the complex strategic Caucasian puzzle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the geopolitical and geostrategic policy of the EU, the US and China in the Caucasus. It says that the foreign policy of these countries in the Caucasus is different. This article includes events that occurred in the previous century. The research paper also illustrates the changing priorities of foreign policy towards the CIS countries and the Caucasus. It covers the exploration and transportation of energy resources from this region along with the national security of the CIS countries. The article also refers to quotations of world–renowned scientists, politicians and analysts who emphasize the similarities and differences in political decision– making in the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explores a shift from engagement to confrontation in Russia’s policy toward Georgia since the Rose Revolution. In addition to emphasizing power and security as explanations of Russia’s behavior, the paper focuses on considerations of honor and prestige. The latter are relational and a product of Russia’s perception of its ties with Western nations. Honor also plays a crucial role in Georgia’s attitude toward its northern neighbor, and the entire Caucasus area emerges as a battleground for symbolic attributes of power among larger states with capabilities to influence the region. The case of Russia–Georgia divide is important for demonstrating benefits and limitations of traditional foreign policy explanations and for learning possible ways to de-escalate dangerous bilateral conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Caucasus has attracted the interest of the neighboring powers in the post-Cold War era due to its geopolitical and geo-economic significance, as well as these powers’ deep-rooted affiliations with the peoples of the Caucasus. The current paper focuses on Russia’s and Turkey’s historical objectives in the region, how these objectives were met during the last 25 years and the debate behind the use of historical narratives as instruments of soft power. Both Moscow and Ankara felt the need for legitimizing their presence in the Southern Caucasus, where three new independent states were established after the Cold War. On the one hand, already since 1994, Moscow has been regarding the ex-Soviet republics as its “near abroad” protected by its “nuclear umbrella.” On the other hand, Turkey has never stopped to be a presence in the region under the cloak of soft power means. These means are based on the exploitation of Turkish or Islamic identity and the resulting relationships, being vigorously cultivated both by Ankara itself and various nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)—such as Fethullah Gülen’s Organization, which has been active until recently. The purpose of this kind of ideological construct is to strengthen Islamic and Turkish influence in the countries that are involved in the search for a new post-Soviet identity, free from the protectorate of Moscow. The correlation and blending of hard and soft power are analyzed; a number of findings are made at different levels in the context of long-term historical narratives and the desire of the participants to assert their respective geopolitical roles. The efforts of Russia and Turkey resulted in “ideological battle” around the issue of historical ties of each of the countries with the newly created states. For this reason, the core of the research is aimed at examining Russia’s and Turkey’s grand strategies with regard to the Southern Caucasus, as well as whether and how they are influenced by historical narratives. Accordingly, we are trying to examine how the rhetoric of both countries is transformed into one of the components of their power or, in other words, how it is included in the set of their strategic instruments. To this end, the author applies the multi-level theoretical analysis to the situation in the region and tries to clarify the relevant typology of historical narratives and strategic objectives of the two countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing recognition that diversity and representation matter to the intellectual health of fields and disciplines. This article takes stock of knowledge production on the Caucasus region, paying particular attention to the question of who has "voice" in academic debates on the North and South Caucasus. Through analysis of publications in, and the editorial boards of, "leading" International Relations (IR) and Area Studies journals, we examine the biographies of scholars, the topics covered, and citation levels. We demonstrate the marginality of the Caucasus within IR and limited representation for scholars educated and employed in the region within Area Studies, as well as distinct differences according to background in the topics covered. This research provides a foundation for further exploring disciplinary inequalities and their consequences in relation to the Caucasus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A conference paper about the Asian influence in Europe is presented. It talks about the Tartar influence in European Russia. The author discusses his travels through Russia and the crossing of the Caucasus Mountains into Europe. Subjects of the paper also include tribes of Jews in the mountains, the Armenian Plain, and Tartar mill-work.

The aim of this paper is to analyze the impact of political developments in Georgia since the 2012 parliamentary elections on Russo-Georgian relations. First, the authors examine the effect of changes in Georgia's politics towards the Caucasus, Russia and the Euro-Atlantic region. Second, the authors analyze the opportunities for improving Russo-Georgian relations through studying the three following aspects of this bilateral relationship: creation of common economic space between Russia, Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia; transformation of the Georgian North Caucasus Policy and its shift towards cooperation with Moscow; and implications of Georgia's Euro-Atlantic integration for the regional security. The article suggests that Russo-Georgian relations are not doomed to be strained and have the potential for improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The discussion of Iranian relations with other Caucasus states ranges from claims about Tehran's ambition for exporting its revolution to suggestions as to whether it plays a positive role in stabilizing the region. How may one identify Iran's main policy goals? What are Tehran's major means in implementing these goals? How should one explain the bilateral ties between Iran and each Caucasus state? This paper will seek to examine the foreign policy philosophy adopted by Iran's contemporary leaders in light of the options that exist with regard to the country's resource needs and ideological goals and the resulting policy directions that are chosen, especially as far as the Caucasus states are concerned. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The unresolved dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh is one of the most worrying unresolved conflicts in the Caucasus region, both because it involves two sovereign states and because the three principal regional powers—Russia, Turkey and Iran—all have a differing stance towards the issue. The ongoing conflict undermines security across the Caucasus and wider Black Sea region: it has polarized countries and their allies, and has also created a security vacuum that encourages the proliferation of trans-national security challenges. This paper assesses the impact of the conflict on security across the Caucasus region. It examines the current defense postures of Azerbaijan and Armenia, as well as the influence that the ongoing conflict has on their relations with other states throughout the region, demonstrating that the lack of a resolution not only undermines the security of those directly involved and of their neighbors, but also undermines the potential for regional co-operation, as well as economic development and stability, deterring vital investment. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Cease-fires in the Caucasus during the past five years have prevented large-scale life-threatening emergencies and created space for peace negotiations. Yet genuine conflict resolution and normalisation have proven elusive, frustrating the return of uprooted populations and constraining reconstruction. This paper reviews a series of seven strategy sessions held in Moscow and the Caucasus in late 1998 to reflect upon the performance of humanitarian agencies and stimulate greater synergies with diplomatic actors. An experiment in promoting discussion of recently conducted independent policy research throughout the north and south Caucasus, the series resulted in a fresh look at the issues in the region and at agency headquarters. The generic nature of the policy challenges gives the experience potential relevance well beyond the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The post-Cold War years have witnessed rivalries and cooperation among the players for the Caucasus and Caspian Sea natural resources. The significance of the petrochemical resources of the region was increased by the policies were played for the transportation routes and competition on them. The BTC pipeline project was one of the important alternatives of network route of natural resources of the Caspian region for the western markets in general for the region in particular. The issue became a multi-faced matter in the fields of economic, security, political and diplomatic relations of the regional countries. The paper will discuss the BTC pipeline policies of the involving players' whys and wherefores of interests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Türkiyat Mecmuasi is the property of Istanbul University, Institute of Turkish Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article focuses on the Soviet historiography of Shamil, the third and most famous and successful imam (leader) of the Muslim resistance to the Russian occupation of the North-eastern Caucasus. It talks about the developments in the Soviet Union since 1956 and analyzes the nationality policies towards other nations and towards the Muslims of the Caucasus. The Soviet's foreign policy towards the Third World, the periphery-center relationships between the Caucasus and Moscow, and the national problems and relations between the Russians and the Caucasians are discussed.

This article analyses the steps taken by the Russian government, with the aid of a powerful local clan, the so-called Kadyrovtsy, to subdue the Chechen insurgency. It highlights the strategy used by Russia, under whose patronage former anti-Russian guerrilla fighters were transformed into paramilitary allies of the Russian government; later these former insurgents were incorporated into the regular Russian army and other state security forces. The article also identifies problems that are connected with the activities of the Kadyrovtsy in Chechnya and Russia, and the spillover into the diaspora; it also contextualises the issues faced by the contemporary Chechen ruling clan and the geopolitics of the Caucasus within the research framework of paramilitarism and counterinsurgency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the issue of Common Foreign and Security Policy alignment—a procedure by which governments from the European Union's neighbourhood may support previously adopted Common Foreign and Security Policy documents. It provides a comparative theory test of Common Foreign and Security Policy alignment in Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. In doing so it seeks to elucidate why they engage in alignment as well as how cross-country and cross-issue variance can be theorised. After reviewing the explanatory potential of power-based and sociological institutionalist theory, domestic variables are assessed. The essay shows that, contrary to frequently expressed assumptions, convergence is even possible in less institutionalised high politics fields. But it emphasises that it is largely conditioned by domestic institutional configurations, the preferences of individual or collective actors and overall state gains. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The recent geopolitical events, and primarily those unfolding along the West-Russia trajectory, have dramatically changed the forecast of how long the EU can continue using Russian energy resources. The European countries wish to slowly free themselves from their energy dependence on Russia and make new adjustments to the conceptual approaches to this problem. In particular, the EU has been actively fortifying its position in the Black Sea- Caspian Region by dividing it into two key strategic components-the Southern Caucasus and the Caspian. The Eastern Partnership Program, which extends to Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Armenia, and Belarus, has implied close cooperation between these post-Soviet countries and the EU at all levels from the very beginning. The Europeans find these countries easier to understand in historical and cultural terms than the Central Asian countries. The energy-rich countries (Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Iran) and countries with considerable transit capacities (Turkey and Georgia) have found themselves in the epicenter of the European establishment's attention. At the beginning of 2014, several important new projects for the South Caucasian Region were articulated (Nabucco, Nabucco West, TAP, Shah Deniz-2, and others). The EU is now faced with making an urgent choice between its former dependence on Russia or undertaking gradual modernization by finding new energy partners. In this respect, the most radical part of European society is willing to engage in any economically promising cooperation (in the form of low energy prices), as long as it is not with Russia or the U.S. The rest of society holds a more moderate position in favor of diversifying suppliers; it is not against either Russian energy resources or American shale gas, but is also considering alternative energy sources. It should be noted that, on the whole, the EU inclines more toward the second scenario. However, after making its South Caucasian choice, the EU is not rushing to invest huge sums in the implementation of the energy projects that, as already noted, are being actively discussed by some countries of the region. Moreover, the American factor continues to play an important role: the U.S. is striving to squeeze Russia out of the European energy zone. In so doing, it is clearly striving to monopolize the European regional gas market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkish foreign policy has experienced massive alterations after the end of Cold War. This has been most evident in Turkey's relations with Turkic nations in Central Asia and the Caucasus, all of which gained independence from the USSR. This article aims to provide a thorough analysis on this issue. First, the article explores the ethnicity concept and applies it to the relations between Turkey and Turkic nations. Then, it examines Turkey's relations with other regional and international powers, namely Russia, the USA, and Iran, through the lenses of Central Asia and the Caucasia. Finally, the article questions the often monolithic view of Turkic nations in the eyes of the Turkish public and delves into the rich yet diverse bilateral relations between Turkey and each Turkic state. To this end, it analyzes Turkey's political, economic, and cultural ties with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Carefully going over all of these subjects, the article intends to illustrate the multifaceted nature of Turkey's relations with Turkic nations and the prospects and obstacles ahead. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

An interview with Turkish periodical editor D. Nigar Göksel and Russian historian Dr. Sergey Markedonov on the complexities of Caucasus. Göksel describes Turkey's relations with countries in the region and cites ways to break the stalemate in Turkey-Armenia relations. Markedonov discusses Russia's relations with several countries in the region, as well as major Russian initiatives for better cooperation in the Caucasus.

Since the early 1990s, Turkey and Russia's strategic outlooks have gradually been converging. The two countries have incrementally shed their mutual apprehensions and started a comprehensive and multifaceted cooperation. Turkish-Russian interaction in the Middle East, Caucasus, and Mediterranean reveals that there might be limits to the future expansion of their partnership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article investigates, through a comparative analysis, the different mechanisms of influence that the EU and Russia are projecting in their shared neighborhood in shaping domestic politics. It focuses on the economic and energy sectors in order to analyze two relevant policies for contrasting EU and Russia's influence in the case of the Southern Caucasus. Contrary to commonly held opinions, Russian influence is receding in both areas and is a dominant external actor only in Armenia. In contrast, the EU is slowly increasing its presence in the economic area and has become a key player in the energy sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When there are serious problems among countries, such as lack of diplomatic relations or closed borders, there are mainly two options to normalize their relations: Either, first at least solving the major problems and then normalizing relations or the opposite which is normalizing relations first and then trying to solve the problems in the course of time. A radical move would be, while the problems and conflicts remain, starting a process of integration and waiting for the problems to vanish by themselves. Two neighboring states, Turkey and Armenia, have a few in quantity but big in quality problems which are very far from being solved even in the remote future. On the other hand, the European Union project successfully eliminated the problem of bloody wars, though having problems about its raison d'être at the moment. If a number of enemies on the European continent accomplished to come together to start a clean page, why not the ones in the Caucasus region would achieve a similar one? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the little known history of political collaboration between Caucasian national groups and Japan directed against the Soviet Union in the 1930s. The collaboration, begun at the time of the 1904-1905 Russo-Japanese War, resumed in the 1920s and continued through World War II. The Caucasian groups (Haidar Bammat's 'Caucasus Group' in particular) and Japan worked together to pursue their common goal of dismembering the Soviet Union. Their anti-Soviet subversion was real yet achieved few results in the face of extraordinary Soviet security. Nevertheless, Stalin took no chances and terrorised anyone suspected of any possible link to the subversive activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The scale of the recent Caucasus crisis cannot be compared with that of other armed conflicts in the post-Soviet space or former Yugoslavia, not to mention the conflicts of the Cold War period. Triggered by regional developments, it is essentially the outcome of a clash of security interests between Russia and the US/NATO. One of the main conclusions that should be drawn by the West from the Caucasus experience is that security in Wider Europe cannot be achieved contrary to Russia's interests. The lesson for Russia is that it should learn to actively create collective positions within the scope of international cooperation, because no single country can throw down a challenge to the whole world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers a new perspective of the regional dimensions and historical, political and economic legacies of the Caucasus. The Caucasus is composed of three regions: the Central Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia), the North Caucasus (some southern autonomous republics of Russia), and the South Caucasus (some northern provinces of Iran and Turkey). Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey are one 'team' in the implementation of regional projects for the development of transportation networks, while Armenia, Iran and Russia are in principle opposed to these projects. Further activation of the cooperation of the United States and the European Union in the Caucasus is, therefore, very important in obtaining as many alternative sources of oil and natural gas as possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The enlargement of the EU eastwards and the development of the European Neighbourhood Policy has meant the EU developing explicit interests in the former Soviet states. In this there is the potential for tension with Russia in a shared neighbourhood. In particular, with the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU in 2007 the EU has become a Black Sea power and launched its 'Black Sea Synergy'. This article examines the extent of EU and Russian engagement in the area of the Black Sea and explores the ways in which the EU may engage Russia in this latest shared neighbourhood. In particular, the article examines how far the regional dimension of the Northern Dimension in the Baltic area may be appropriate here. The article goes on to examine the ways in which the overall context of EU-Russia relations effects cooperation in this area. It concludes that while the tenor of the relationship may have changed in the light of greater Russian assertiveness, the basis for close cooperation remains one of pragmatism and mutual economic self-interest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various problems concerning Georgian–Iranian relations during the 19th century are discussed in this article. Georgia's incorporation into the Russian empire at the beginning of the century inevitably meant curtailing the sphere of influence of Iran over east Georgia, but even under these circumstances the relations between the two countries were not severed. After considering the historical background and the climate that took shape during the new phase in Georgian–Iranian relations, we turn to economic relations. In the nineteenth century, Georgia and its capital gradually became a transit route for Iranian goods entering Russia and Europe, and vice versa. The social life and the cultural activities of the Iranian community of Tbilisi are discussed in the final section of the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article evaluates the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), which involves primarily developing countries in Eastern Europe that are beyond the areas covered by the European Union (EU), who are looking to someday become part of the E.U. According to the article since the EU agreed on the ENP, relations with Ukraine, Moldova and the Caucasus have extended European perspective. It is suggested that the most important benefit to come from the ENP is the related agenda-setting connecting with it. The article offers several of the shortcomings involved in the ENP as well.

This article considers the benefits of the recently developed concept of ‘soft power’ in understanding Russia's foreign policy. It argues that claims that Moscow is exercising a form of soft power imperialism in the former Soviet region cannot be fully supported by the existing evidence. To differentiate between the imperialist and stabilising objectives of Russian foreign policy the article analyses the Russian domestic discourse on exploiting soft power in foreign policy. It then compares the views of different schools of thought with Vladimir Putin's philosophy and foreign policy record. Finally, it selects for closer investigation Russia's policy in the Caucasus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

11 September 2001 elevated the importance of the South Caucasus and Central Asia in US global strategy. The Central Asian republics proved crucial bases for military and intelligence operations. The South Caucasus, in turn, provided the only realistic air corridor for the deployment of Europe-based US forces to Afghan territory. As its Central Asian footprint grows, Washington must consider the interests of key Eurasian powers and demonstrate a sustained economic and political commitment to the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the impact of the transportation of Caspian oil on regional security and stability. Factors that will allegedly change the overall environment of the region and affect regional stability; Overview of the political situation in the South Caucasus region; Main trends of U.S. involvement in the region.

In nineteenth-century Russia, the Caucasus was a large region composed of various territories and ethnic and religious groups. This region included Circassia, Mingrelia, Georgia, a part of Armenia, the ancient Media, Daghestan and the territories of Suanctians, Ossetians, Abkhazians, Karakalpaks and other mountaineer nations. In this study, focusing mainly on the nineteenth century, and how Russians occupied the Caucasus because the way Russians occupied and controlled the Caucasus had great impact on relations between them and the Caucasians. As Edward Allworth writes, Russian conquest, forced migrations and other brutal measures that the Russians used for their conquest of the Caucasus "inflicted scars upon the relationships between the invaders and invaded."

Focuses on the reassessment of the regional politics and international relations in the Caucasus and Central Asia, following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the U.S. Levels of analyzing the impact of the terrorist attacks; Characterization of the attitude of citizens toward the international community; Republics in south Caucus that will be affected by the changes in the U.S. foreign relations with Iran and Russia.

Discusses the significance of long-term stability of Caucasus to regional and international security. Arrangements done to ensure that the former Soviet republics will not develop security relations with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; Impact of the collapse of the Soviet Union on the countries of the Caucasus; Overview of cooperation and conflict in Caucasus.

Comments on how North Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO) intervention in the Kosovo War in Serbia and in Yugoslavian War in 1999 will affect the Caucasus and Central Asia in the next century. Impact of left-wing advocates of NATO intervention; Role of Yugoslavia in the New World Order; Discussion on imperialism in Yugoslavia, sources of energy and reserves; Political histories of global colonialism.

Copyright of UNISCI Discussion Papers is the property of Unidad de Investigaciones Sobre Seguridad y Cooperacion International (UNISCI) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)