Number of results to display per page
Search Results
12. Baku Parade Whispers Geopolitical Complexities in the South Caucasus
- Author:
- Rahim Rahimov
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan attended a military parade in the Azerbaijani capital of Baku on December 10 to celebrate Azerbaijan’s victory over Armenia in the war over the Karabakh region that ended with the Russia-brokered armistice on November 9-10. The Russian historian, Andrey Zubov, describes the Baku parade as an occasion “rather to celebrate the birth of a new geopolitical alliance than the victory over Armenia”1 . Following the parade, Russia imposed a ban on tomato imports from Azerbaijan in its flagship manner and Russian peacekeepers attempted to do something around the town of Shusha in Karabakh resembling what they have done in Georgia: “borderization”. Azerbaijani state TV, other media outlets and public figures widely and explicitly condemned such behavior of the Russian peacekeepers as a jealous response to the parade demonstration of Armenia’s Russian-made weapons and military equipment captured by the Azerbaijani armed forces or destroyed using Turkish-made Bayraktar drones . Erdogan and the Azerbaijani President, Ilham Aliyev, watched Turkish soldiers march alongside with Azerbaijanis on the central streets of Baku to the joy of local residents who took to the streets despite the COVID-19 related restrictions in order to salute them. This scene shows a major Russian weakness vis-àvis Turkey in Azerbaijan. Unlike Moscow, whose perception in Azerbaijan is controversial, Ankara enjoys nation-wide support. Recently leaked Russian secret files reveal that it is much more difficult for Moscow to develop proRussian civil society organizations and soft power instruments in Azerbaijan than even in staunchly pro-Western Georgia.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, and Conflict
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Iran, Turkey, France, Georgia, and South Caucasus
13. The Montreux Convention and Its Importance for Georgia
- Author:
- Zurab Batiashvili
- Publication Date:
- 01-2021
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- The Montreux Convention signed on July 20, 1936 strictly regulates the presence of naval warships of non-Black Sea nations (including the United States) in the Black Sea, limiting their aggregate tonnage (thereby limiting their number), their maximum period of stay within the Black Sea and so on. Such a regime creates a problem of access by Western powers to the Black Sea which negatively influences Georgia’s security environment. However, much has changed in the Black Sea after the Convention was signed – the Second World War took place, the Cold War was concluded, the Soviet Union collapsed and new states arose in its place – Russia, Ukraine and Georgia while Romania and Bulgaria became member states of NATO, Russia annexed Crimea, Turkey distanced itself from the West and so forth. In such conditions, a document signed in the 1930s remains a militarypolitical anachronism, unable to address new requirements and realities. That said, the issue of reviewing it remains problematic as it depends on numerous factors.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, History, Military Affairs, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, and Georgia
14. Beyond Borders: Middle East in Empire, Diaspora, and Global Transitions (Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy, Spring 2021)
- Author:
- Reilly Barry
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy
- Institution:
- The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The Middle East saw its share of globe-altering events in the last year. While JMEPP seeks to offer original analysis beyond the headlines, almost all major contemporary regional developments have been addressed in the present edition. The list, of course, is not exhaustive, but includes the Abraham Accords and increasing international marginalization of Palestinians, the renewed fighting over Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan, continued protests amidst crises and weakening state institutions in Lebanon, and the rise of Turkey’s aggressive imperial foreign policy, to name a few. While there are major global transitions afoot as relates to the region, there is also a lack of transition— sadly, the 10-year anniversary of the Syrian revolution marks little change for those living under the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad. Likewise, the humanitarian crisis in Yemen persists. The edition discusses what may become of newly inaugurated President Biden’s policies toward the region, including the challenge of renegotiating the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. And finally, the edition would be remiss to not address how Covid-19 has impacted the region.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Politics, Diaspora, Refugees, Social Media, Alliance, Conflict, Protests, Peace, Houthis, COVID-19, and Polarization
- Political Geography:
- Iraq, Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, Israel, Yemen, Palestine, Georgia, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, United States of America, and Nagorno-Karabakh
15. Russia’s view of Georgia: a NATO proxy yet again?
- Author:
- Julie Wilhelmsen
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- After the crises in Ukraine, and despite the Georgian government’s allegedly more pragmatic attitude towards Russia, official statements from Moscow increasingly project Georgia as hostile. This may be the result of the Kremlin stepping up a propaganda campaign to put pressure on Georgia, but it is also linked to growing perceptions of Georgia as becoming an agent of NATO. Moreover, Russia’s increasingly insistent rhetorical and practical support for the independent status of the two Georgian breakaway republics, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, is still framed with reference to Kosovo as a tit-for-tat in a conflict with the West. In parallel with this hardening in Russian views, there is hardly any diplomatic contact between Russia and Georgia. The regional multilateral frameworks have become dysfunctional, obstructed by polarization. Further Georgian NATO integration could entail an increasing risk of war, unless frank discussions and engagement with Russia can be promoted.
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, NATO, and Proxy War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Eurasia, and Georgia
16. Some Considerations on the Election of the BSEC Secretary General: The Georgian Perspective
- Author:
- Valeri Chechelashvili
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- Multilateral diplomacy is an effective leverage to advance the foreign policy interests of a state in the network of international relations. This, similarly, applies to the regional level. Therefore, the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), despite the mostly justified criticism addressed towards it, in this sense remains in the focus of the attention of its member states.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Regional Integration, and Economic Cooperation
- Political Geography:
- Caucasus, Georgia, and Black Sea
17. Hybrid Threats in EaP Countries: Building a Common Response
- Author:
- Kakha Gogolashvili, Valeriu Pasa, Mikayel Hovhannisyan, Viktor Ohiienko, and Julya Sahakyan
- Publication Date:
- 01-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Georgian Foundation for Strategic International Studies -GFSIS
- Abstract:
- Four non-governmental organisations from Georgia, Moldova, Armenia and Ukraine conducted a joint study assessing hybrid threats that the EaP countries are currently facing. The project aimed to study the hybrid threats which affect Eastern Partnership states and elaborate recommendations to actively engage civil society in countering them. The project envisaged the creation of a team of experts from Georgia, Moldova, Armenia and Ukraine, which would travel to the capital cities of the mentioned states and meet all relevant stakeholders from government, parliament and civil society. The meetings resulted in the collection of all necessary information, opinions and ideas on the state of institutional and legal measures taken in the countries on countering existing hybrid threats. The team of experts also undertook desk research based on accessible open sources and interviews conducted with different stakeholders, among them government officials, experts and civil society organizations. The research and study visits provided the ground for four country reviews to be written by the experts. Their reports have been integrated mutatis mutandis into the present policy paper, followed by a comparative analysis of threats and institutional responses, similarities and distinctions in the policies of the four mentioned countries. The paper also explores the role and areas of potential engagement of civil society. To effectively counter the hybrid threats, a joining of efforts of official bodies and non-state actors is required. It also needs reinforced international cooperation on a government and civil society level. The paper recommends the governments establish active cooperation among and with the EU countries with the aim of analyzing, exchanging knowledge and countering jointly, where appropriate, hybrid threats. The cooperation should target the development of an appropriate legal environment and adequate institutional capacity. Civil society itself should become more organized and consolidated. The paper advises the EaP CSF to conduct work on consolidating the efforts of civil society in the direction of strengthening the resilience of EaP countries, especially in countering attacks aiming to discredit and weaken the Europeanisation of the mentioned countries. It was advised that the EaP CSF contribute to facilitating the capacity building of civil society organizations so as to help them to actively engage in countering hybrid threats. Despite the existing differences between EaP partner states as regards their foreign policy priorities and geopolitical orientation or trade arrangement, all of them seek closer cooperation with the European Union, peaceful co-existence, and the chance to develop efficient economic ties within the wider region. Continuation of Europeanisation and interaction with EU institutions, supporting democratic transformation, economic and regulatory convergence, social cohesion and human capital development, institutional and state build up, has become irreversible thanks to the success of the EaP. The sources of the new hybrid threats predominantly aim at discrediting and weakening the motivation of the EaP partner states to further integrate with the EU. Indeed, EaP partner states understand the importance of this cooperation and are interested in countering, jointly where possible, any adverse action or attempt to disengage them from that process. Based on the results of the study, we propose a set of recommendations for the governments of EaP states, EU and NATO institutions and their member states.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Civil Society, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and Partnerships
- Political Geography:
- Eurasia, Ukraine, Caucasus, Moldova, Armenia, and Georgia
18. Journal of Advanced Military Studies: Superpowers
- Author:
- Ed Erickson, Christian H. Heller, T. J. Linzy, Mallory Needleman, Michael Auten, Anthony N. Celso, Keith D. Dickson, Jamie Shea, Ivan Falasca, Steven A. Yeadon, Joshua Tallis, and Ian Klaus
- Publication Date:
- 09-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Advanced Military Studies
- Institution:
- Marine Corps University Press, National Defense University
- Abstract:
- There are a variety of reasons to study geopolitical rivalries, and analysts, officers, and politicians are rediscovering such reasons amid the tensions of the last several years. The best reason to study geopolitical rivalries is the simplest: our need to better understand how power works globally. Power not only recurs in human and state affairs but it is also at their very core. Today’s new lexicon—superpower, hyperpower, and great power—is only another reminder of the reality of the various ways that power manifests itself. Power protects and preserves, but a polity without it may be lost within mere decades. Keith D. Dickson’s article in this issue of MCU Journal, “The Challenge of the Sole Superpower in the Postmodern World Order,” illuminates how fuzzy some readers may be in their understanding of this problem; his article on postmodernism calls us to the labor of understanding and reasoning through the hard realities. Ed Erickson’s survey of modern power is replete with cases in which a grand state simply fell, as from a pedestal in a crash upon a stone floor. Modern Japan, always richly talented, rose suddenly as a world actor in the late nineteenth century, but the Japanese Empire fell much more quickly in the mid-twentieth century. A state’s power—or lack thereof—is an unforgiving reality. This issue of MCU Journal, with its focus on rivalries and competition between states, is refreshingly broad in its selection of factors—from competing for or generating power. Dr. Erickson recalls that Alfred Thayer Mahan settled on six conditions for sea power, all still vital. Other authors writing for this issue emphasize, by turns, sea power (Steven Yeadon, Joshua Tallis, and Ian Klaus); cyberpower (Jamie Shea); alliances (T. J. Linzy and Ivan Falasca); information (Dickson); and proxies (Michael Auten, Anthony N. Celso, and others).
- Topic:
- Security, Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, NATO, Islam, Terrorism, War, History, Power Politics, Military Affairs, European Union, Seapower, Cities, Ottoman Empire, Hybrid Warfare, Cyberspace, Soviet Union, and Safavid Empire
- Political Geography:
- Britain, Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Middle East, Lithuania, Georgia, North Africa, Syria, North America, and United States of America
19. Georgia’s political brand in the European Union: building the political product and the political brand
- Author:
- Katarzyna Skiert-Andrzejuk
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
- Institution:
- Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
- Abstract:
- We live in a world full of brands, where the names, symbols, and logos of big corporations, such as McDonald’s, Adidas, and Coca-Cola are extremely recognizable. Nowadays, in the era of globalization, the product development and marketing strategies that were the domain of private companies and corporations are being taken over by the public sector. This unusual exchange of roles causes the state to enter the branding space, and to create an offer that includes the goods and services of national businesses, government, and non-governmental organizations, and also to create a brand. The brand of a state consists of three equal components: a national brand, country brand, and political brand. Georgia is a “model democratic state” in the South Caucasus, which cooperates consistently with the European Union. The multi-level specificity of this state and the implemented model of systemic transformation, directed the foreign policy and created the state brand towards the West. The aim of the paper is to present the construction of one of the components of a state brand, the political brand, and to analyze the strategy of political branding in Georgia’s foreign policy created towards the European Union. The author will answer the question of how the political, and economic institutions of Georgia are building the political brand.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, European Union, Partnerships, Business, and State
- Political Geography:
- Eurasia, Caucasus, and Georgia
20. Political Relations Between Turkey and Georgia in the Post-Soviet Era
- Author:
- Fatih Mehmet Sayin and Murat Doğan
- Publication Date:
- 10-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- Georgia and Turkey have become important partners in the Caucasus region after the independence of Georgia in 1991. Two countries preferred to follow pro-West policies in their foreign policy against the Russian factor. They have geopolitical importance and geostrategic location for Russia throughout history. This article analyzes the foreign policies of Georgia and Turkey and examines the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Crude Oil Pipeline as a common foreign policy between them. The paper found out that this kind of project between Georgia and Turkey would make them important actors rising from the regional level to the global level in the future.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Oil, History, Bilateral Relations, and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Turkey, Caucasus, Georgia, and Mediterranean
- « Previous
- Next »
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4