Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Caucasus

151. "Russia Puts Comparatively Little Effort into Using Soft Power in the South Caucasus"

Author:
Dr. Timothy Blauvelt
Publication Date:
06-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Institution:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Abstract:
Our organization was directly involved in the program of developing the unified national university entrance exams, under contract to the World Bank as the coordinator for technical assistance, and we were working on that from 2002– 2006. So I really got to see that process from the inside, and it is a reform that has been very successful. At the start, before the Rose Revolution, corruption in university admission s was one of the central problems. Education in general was one of the institutions in society worst hit by corruption. Education then was a sort of black hole of corruption, and one of the key points of that was on the entrance end. People were paying 10 to 20,000 dollar bribes to get in to certain prestigious faculties. So the entrance exam reform was able to eradicate that entirely. What is particularly important in the app roach to that reform was that the real goal was to build capacity. We didn't come in and say “We're going to make an exam for you.” The idea was to help create a function Georgian center that would develop the expertise to make exams itself, and that has really been so successful that Georgian specialists from the National Examination Center have become sort of regional experts. We've been involve d in other projects, in Ukraine for example, where we have invited Georgians to come from the Center to provide technical assistance themselves. So the reform has been even more successful than people realize.
Political Geography:
Russia, Ukraine, Caucasus, Georgia, and South Caucasus

152. New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus

Author:
Fareed Shafee
Publication Date:
03-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Institution:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Abstract:
The article examines new trends and development in the South Caucasus. The author identifies five factors which affect the foreign policy of regional countries as well as regional powers. These factors are the Georgian-Russian war of 2008, the US-Russian “reset”, the global financial crisis, the political transformation in the countries which have undergone “color revolutions”, and the Armenian-Turkish rapprochement. The author believes that the change in the geopolitical layout of the region will turn the countries of the South Caucasus further from the West. At the same time, they are not going to be fully embraced by Russia. A balancing act between the US, EU and Russia will be most likely their policy choice.
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Ukraine, Caucasus, and Georgia

153. Foreign Policies of the States of the Caucasus: Evolution in the Post-Soviet Period

Author:
Brenda Shaffer
Publication Date:
08-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Abstract:
The article examines the development of the foreign policies and strategies of the three states of the Caucasus-Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia—in the post-Soviet period. The article claims that ideology and identity have had little impact on the alliances and foreign policy orientations adopted by the three states. Second, the three states of the Caucasus adopted fundamentally different policies toward Russia. Third, geographic factors have had significant influence on their foreign policy options. Fourth, managing the results of the secessionist conflicts has been a major goal of their foreign policy efforts and the conflicts are a useful lever of neighboring powers. Fifth, the foreign policy making capability of the three states has expanded significantly. Last, the foreign policy options of the three states have been limited by the policies of the major powers in the region.
Political Geography:
Caucasus, Soviet Union, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

154. Note From the Editor-in-Chief

Author:
Nasimi Aghayev
Publication Date:
03-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Institution:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Abstract:
Eventful few months in the Caucasus, Russia and wider Eurasia precede our Spring 2010 issue. Of course, the dramatic civic upheaval in Kyrgyzstan, the suicide bomb attacks in the Moscow metro and the victory of a more pro-Russian leader in Ukraine's presidential elections top the list.
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Caucasus, and Moscow

155. Russia and Turkish-Armenian Normalization: Competing Interests in the South Caucasus

Author:
Igor Torbakov
Publication Date:
04-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Insight Turkey
Institution:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Abstract:
Following the 2008 Georgia war, Russia reasserted itself as the main power in the Caucasus. The war shattered the old status quo and Moscow sought to make good use of the shifting geopolitical landscape to enhance its strategic footprint in the region. Russia's policy in the Caucasus has been an example of a subtle balancing act: it appeared to have encouraged Turkish-Armenian reconciliation while at the same time skillfully exploiting the suspicions that this process aroused in Azerbaijan and seeking to put an additional pressure on Georgia. Now, as Turkish-Armenian normalization seems to have hit a snag, Moscow can safely distance itself from what increasingly looks like a failure. After all, having deftly played all its “partners” off against each other, Russia appears to have secured its objective: both Armenia and Azerbaijan tend to lean more on Russia, while Turkey's relations with the two Caucasus countries has deteriorated. Moreover, Ankara's ties with Washington became frayed, too, which, from Moscow's perspective, isn't bad either.
Political Geography:
Russia, Washington, Caucasus, Moscow, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

156. Turkish-Armenian Protocols: An Azerbaijani Perspective

Author:
Elhan Mehtiyev
Publication Date:
04-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Insight Turkey
Institution:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Abstract:
This commentary addresses Azerbaijan's position prior to and in the aftermath of the Turkish-Armenian Protocols signed in October 2009. It critically analyzes Azerbaijan's reactions to the Protocols, Turkey's diplomatic initiatives, and its perception of Turkey's position in this process. By signing the protocols, Turkey did nothing in practice against Azerbaijani interests except to reiterate the interdependence between any Turkish-Armenian rapprochement and Armenia's move on the NK settlement. The commentary argues that the inexperienced Azerbaijani administration failed to manage Azerbaijani society's reactions to Turkey's signing of protocols with Armenia. It also discusses the consequences of a possible opening of Turkish-Armenian border for Azerbaijan and the region, and concludes that the way out of the frozen conflicts is contained in Turkey's proposal for a Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform.
Political Geography:
Turkey, Caucasus, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

157. Polyphonic Country: A Peace Zone in Georgia and South Caucasus

Author:
Irakli Zurab Kakabadze
Publication Date:
12-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Judith Reppy Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies
Abstract:
Since the breakup of the Soviet Union the South Caucasus region has been plagued with ethnic conflicts—some of them remnants from Soviet times. Armenia and Azerbaijan are in- volved in a lengthy confrontation over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh, and Georgia struggles with Russia over the two separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. These conflicts have caused multiple military confrontations between different parties and are still unresolved even today. In June 1997 Johan Galtung, founder of Peace Research Institute of Oslo (PRIO), vis- ited three South Caucasian countries in his tour to promote the “Transcend Method” of conflict transformation and to conduct collaborative workshops with the students of Tbilisi State Univer- sity, Georgia; Yerevan State University, Armenia; and Khazar University, Azerbaijan. He held a large meeting with civil society representatives at the Caucasian Institute for Peace and Demo- cratic Development (CIPDD) in Tbilisi. It was at that roundtable discussion, chaired by CIPDD director Dr. Ghia Nodia, that Galtung proposed creating a Peace Zone and a new international airport at the border area between Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia—namely at the Red Bridge area, one of the centers for regional trade for the last fifty years of the 20th century. Dr. Galtung has suggested that creating a Peace Zone in the South Caucasus was the only viable alternative to the continuous state of war and ethnic conflict. Three years later, Ambassador John W. McDonald, Chairman and CEO of the Institute for Multi Track Diplomacy, attended a conference in Tbilisi, Georgia organized by the Georgia- America Business Development Council. At the conference, Ambassador McDonald also sug- gested creating a Peace Zone in Georgia, around the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, as a way of protecting Western energy interests through peace-building and economic development. Throughout the following nine years Ambassador McDonald continued to work with different Georgian governments on the formation of Peace Zones in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In 2003 the Vice-Speaker of the Georgian Parliament, Vakhtang Rcheulishvili, came to Washington, DC to support the idea of Peace Zones in conflict regions. He met various U.S. officials like Senator Tom Harkin, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, and Matthew Bryza of the National Security Coun- cil at the White House. In 2004 the new Prime Minister of Georgia, Zurab Zhvania, endorsed Ambassador McDonald’s plan for Peace Zones in conflict regions. State Minister Bendukidze and former Minister of Conflict Resolution Khaindrava were also very much supportive of this plan. After the Rose Revolution, when nonviolent protests brought down the corrupt government of Eduard Shevardnadze in November 2003, the idea of Peace Zones became a grassroots con- cept popular with certain segments of civil society and university students in Georgia. Proposals for establishing Peace Zones faced a setback when the militaristic policies of Georgian, Russian, and separatist governments led to renewed violence, and in August 2008, a full war between different parties in South Ossetia. They still remain however, one of the most promising means of breaking the cycle of violence in the South Caucasus. The purpose of this paper is to present the case for a Peace Zone in Georgia.
Topic:
Civil Society, Diplomacy, Ethnic Conflict, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Caucasus, Eastern Europe, Soviet Union, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

158. Turkey-Armenia Dialogue Series: Assessing the Rapprochement Process

Author:
Alexander Iskandaryan, Aybars Görgülü, David Barchard, and Sergey Minasyan
Publication Date:
10-2010
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV)
Abstract:
After unimaginable steps in recent years, Turkish-Armenian relations have reached a point where full diplomatic relations could be established and the land border between the two countries could be opened. However seven months on from the signing of the historic protocols in Zurich, the process has stalled. TESEV Foreign Policy Program and Caucasus Institute’s new report “Assessing the Rapprochement Process” attempts to analyse progress to this point, identify why the process has stalled and offers recommendations aimed at solving the current impasse. Working in a collaborative fashion, the authors from both organisations identified the following areas where progress can be made: The ratification process must continue. Momentum is fickle and letting the protocols sit and fester is in no one’s interest. Rapprochement is a two pronged process: one involves the technical normalisation of relations and the other is reconciliation between the two societies. Both are extremely important and require both states and society to play a significant and active role. The media in both Turkey and Armenia has a responsibility to create an atmosphere conducive to rapprochement. Unbiased, positive and accurate reporting is far more favourable than the existing sensationalism common on both sides of the border.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Turkey, Caucasus, Middle East, and Armenia

159. Turkey and Armenia: Opening Minds, Opening Borders

Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
Turkey and Armenia are close to settling a dispute that has long roiled Caucasus politics, isolated Armenia and cast a shadow over Turkey's European Union (EU) ambition. For a decade and a half, relations have been poisoned by disagreement about issues including how to address a common past and compensate for crimes, territorial disputes, distrust bred in Soviet times and Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani land. But recently, progressively intense official engagement, civil society interaction and public opinion change have transformed the relationship, bringing both sides to the brink of an historic agreement to open borders, establish diplomatic ties and begin joint work on reconciliation. They should seize this opportunity to normalise. The politicised debate whether to recognise as genocide the destruction of much of the Ottoman Armenian population and the stalemated Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh should not halt momentum. The U.S., EU, Russia and others should maintain support for reconciliation and avoid harming it with statements about history at a critical and promising time.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, Genocide, Regional Cooperation, and Treaties and Agreements
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Turkey, Caucasus, Asia, Soviet Union, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

160. Note from the Editor-in-Chief

Author:
Nasimi Aghayev
Publication Date:
01-2009
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Institution:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Abstract:
I am very happy to present the Winter 2009 issue of the Caucasian Review of International Affairs (CRIA). Since our last issue in Autumn 2008, the war in Georgia has receded from the media's attention, but its implications are only beginning to be seriously addressed by the academic community. The CRIA aims to be at the forefront of this ongoing assessment, and in this context we have a number of papers which touch upon the war and its effects upon the region, as well as a theoretical assessment of the Russian intervention. We also present two contrasting Comments on Kosovo's declaration of independence and its implications for the South Caucasus. We are also proud to present additional papers on the Armenian diaspora, Georgia's national competitiveness in a globalised world, energy geo-politics in the Caspian basin, competing Islamic traditions in the Caucasus, external powers' influence upon the reform and political elites in Kyrgyzstan, as well as two topical book reviews and an interview with Dr. Martin Malek from the National Defence Academy of Austria. I would like to thank all of our authors for their time and their insightful work.
Political Geography:
Russia, Caucasus, Kyrgyzstan, Kosovo, and Georgia