Search

Begin New Search Topic Energy Policy Political Geography United States

151. Transatlantic Energy Security and the Caspian Basin: Moving Towards a Common Agenda

Author:
Adam N. Stulberg and Hendrik Cosijn
Publication Date:
08-2002
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EastWest Institute
Abstract:
Once considered an impediment to stable development and a catalyst for a new “Great Game,” Caspian energy may play a stabilizing role in world markets and geopolitics after all. With the West's growing dependence on hydrocarbon imports, growing tensions in the Middle East, and Moscow's emergence as a major player in 21st century energy politics, the Caspian region is poised to become a focal point for cooperation between the United States, Europe, and Russia. Policymakers in Washington, Brussels, and Moscow share a common interest in preventing the Caspian Basin from lapsing into another Persian Gulf, where windfalls in oil revenues have fueled instability and extremism. They also recognize that efforts to extract and export Caspian energy must advance regional development and stability. Thus far, however, shared interests have not yielded real transatlantic partnership on Caspian energy issues. Different strategic orientations and preferred approaches for unlocking Caspian energy threaten to mar prospects for broadening and deepening transatlantic cooperation in the region. To date, the U.S., Europe, and Russia have pursued parochial interests in the Caspian Basin without much regard for each other. The time is ripe for American, European, and Russian policymakers to take stock of the burgeoning confluence of interests, mount a concerted effort to prevent backsliding, and cement a common agenda by forging a trilateral dialogue on Caspian energy issue.
Topic:
Security and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Washington, Asia, and Moscow

152. The United States, Europe, and Russia: Toward a Global Energy Security Policy

Author:
David L. Goldwyn
Publication Date:
08-2002
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
EastWest Institute
Abstract:
Together, the United States, Europe, and Russia can help to diversify the global energy supply by creating a Global Strategic Petroleum Reserve (GSPR) filled largely with oil from Russia and other states in the Caspian Basin. Such a move would mitigate U.S. and European dependence on Middle East oil and help to stabilize world oil prices. Other important beneficiaries of a GSPR would be the Asia-Pacific economies outside the OECD that currently lack strategic reserves. A GSPR offering access to China and other Asian economies would help anchor these states in an important, positive-sum arrangement that highlights shared energy security interests with Russia and the West. If managed responsibly, creating the GSPR will not antagonize OPEC countries, which themselves benefit from stable energy markets. Moreover, developing the GSPR will encourage the reform and modernization of Russian and other transition countries' energy economies and give real substance to collaboration on energy issues between Russia, the EU, and the U.S. If coupled with close collaboration on Caspian energy development, the creation of a GSPR would make U.S. and EU energy ties with Russia and its neighbors sources of substantial, long-term strength.
Topic:
Security and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Middle East, and Asia

153. Internal and External Dimensions of the Ethnic Conflict in the Caucasus (transcript)

Author:
Kazim Azimov
Publication Date:
06-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Melissa Carr: Many of you have met Kazim Azimov. He has been here since the end of April. He is in the United States on a program called the Junior Faculty Development Program, which brings faculty members from universities in countries of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to the United States to train, study, develop curriculum materials, and teach. We at Harvard are fortunate that part way through Kazim's year at the University of Hawaii, we were able to arrange for him to come join us here, in part because the University of Hawaii went on strike.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, and Asia

154. U.S. Policy on Caspian Energy Development and Exports: Mini-Case and Paradigm

Author:
Graham T. Allison and Emily Van Buskirk
Publication Date:
05-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The date is July 1, 2001. Real world history and trends occurred as they did through March 19, 2001 — except for the hypothetical departures specified in the case below. Events after March 19 that are not specified in this case are assumed to be straight - line projections of events as they stand on March 19. Assume, for example, that sporadic violence continues in the Middle East at the current level of intensity; Britain and the U.S. are nearing the end of their review of UN sanctions against Iraq, and will soon make recommendations on refocusing the sanctions to make them “smarter”; as expected, Mohammad Khatami was reelected as President of Iran on June 8 with a mandate for continued reform; the price of oil is $25/barrel; events in Chechnya and Ukraine, and negotiations over Nagorno - Karabagh will continue as before.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Britain, Russia, United States, Iraq, Ukraine, Middle East, Asia, and United Nations

155. Negotiations on Nagorno-Karabagh: Where Do We Go From Here? (Summary and Transcript Publication, with Photographs)

Author:
Brenda Shaffer, Carey Cavanaugh, Hamlet Isaxanli, and Ronald Suny
Publication Date:
04-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
From April 3 - 7, 2001 the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe convened negotiations in Key West, Florida, aimed at achieving a peace settlement for the Nagorno - Karabagh conflict. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell opened this set of talks between Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and Armenian President Robert Kocharian, each of whom met separately with Secretary Powell in Florida and, subsequently, in Washington D.C. with President Bush. The United States, France and Russia were the mediators at the negotiations, as co - chairs of the OSCE “Minsk Group” (which includes 13 countries) established in 1992 as part of an effort to end the conflict. The chief negotiator on the U.S. side at Key West was Ambassador Carey Cavanaugh, who is the State Department's Special Negotiator for the conflict on a constant basis. The negotiations were held in proximity format, meaning that the facilitators held separate talks with each of the heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, Washington, Asia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Florida

156. Sea of Instability: Caspian Politics and Pipelines (Event Summary)

Author:
Thomas Goltz
Publication Date:
04-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Journalist Thomas Goltz gave a seminar on April 10 entitled, "Sea of Instability: Caspian Politics and Pipelines," and jointly sponsored by the Caspian Studies Program and the Davis Center for Russian Studies. Goltz provided his own unique perspective on the Caspian Region and its complex geo-political situation. He did this by means of a twenty-minute video presentation entitled "Oil Odyssey 2000" (of the epic delivery of the first barrel of oil, via the planned route of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, on three-wheeled motorcycle) and a subsequent talk on the events that took place following the trip. Video summary: The documentary (needs to be seen to be believed) candidly charts the events surrounding the attempt to transport the first barrel of "Caspian crude" from Baku to Ceyhan. The video follows 26 intrepid travelers as they wind their way (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey) through the Caucasus on wheels. While the group has its fair share of misfortune (breakdowns, border crossing issues and even an unfortunate accident), the film clearly shows how the people along the way are very excited by the prospects of the pipeline — almost every stop looked like a party! A public relations coup de grace for everyone involved, Oil Odyssey manages to cover the Caucasus — from the larger-than-life leaders to the everyman to the ex-patriots (and shows how they are all willing to jump through hoops in the name of crude!) — in its imagined mystery and hardened reality. Seminar presentation: In a brief follow-up to the video, Goltz added that partially as a result of delivering the first symbolic barrel of Caspian crude: the Turkish oil establishment became more serious about the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline; a Sponsors' Group put down approximately $25 million to fund the basic engineering studies for the pipeline (engineers are currently mapping and examining the route), which will conclude in May/June. Support for the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline has been building among the oil companies. One year ago, Goltz reminded, the Clinton administration was repeatedly sending delegations to England to lure John Brown (of BP Amoco) into sponsoring Baku-Ceyhan project. This year, the roles have been reversed, with John Brown sending delegations to Washington to convince the new U.S. administration not to change official policy on the pipeline or the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (which might open up a new route for Caspian oil). Goltz noted other factors that have increased the lure of Baku-Ceyhan, including significant finds of natural gas at the Shah Deniz oil fields, raising the possibility of the construction of a parallel pipeline (without extra engineering cost) and the discovery of "historic levels" of hydrocarbon levels in the Kazakh section of the Caspian sea (Kashagan). This, followed by the unexpected announcement by Nursultan Nazarbayev (President of Kazakhstan) to commit a significant portion of the oil from this field to the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, has also raised interest. Rumor also has it that there is a split between the Russian Federation and the Russian oil oligarchs operating in the Caspian, who might want BTC as an option for exporting their product. Goltz identified both regional and local security as important concerns both in policy towards the pipeline and in the region on the whole. On a regional level, there are the continuing Caucasus conflicts (in Ossetia and Abkhazia, for example). On the local level, there are the drastically reduced social conditions outside of the capital cities. Goltz notes that the rural/urban dichotomy in the Caucasus is perhaps more pronounced now than ever before, citing Yerevan as the most extreme example. Goltz noted that the current debate on Armenia is focused on when it will go from a dying state to a dead one — in other words, when there is no one left, because of massive emigration. Goltz also pointed to the Russian Federation's decision to impose the visa regime upon Georgia as a potential catalyst for regional change. He theorizes that the estimated 500,000+ Georgians will now de facto become loyal towards the Russian state as it is providing them with the means to live. The same process of out-migration is occurring in Azerbaijan, where an entire generation of youth has left the provincial cities for Russia to try and make a living. According to Goltz, the oil companies are picking up the "social slack" in an attempt to compensate for this phenomenon. They are providing services (schools, wells, drinking water, etc.) in what Goltz terms "enlightened self-interest" — as they do not want to see a revolution on their hands. Q A Session: In response to a question about where the final pipeline will actually end up (i.e. is there a chance it will go through Armenia because of the Bush administration's design), Goltz recalled the initial stages of the Baku-Ceyhan project in 1992, when Armenia was prepared to drop the issue of "genocide" under the Ottoman Empire to have the pipeline go through its territory. Even though that didn't happen, Goltz pointed out that Turkish and Armenian officials do have some sort of a dialogue, and that the U.S is indeed promoting the dialogue heavily. Even though he views this exchange as positive, Goltz expressed no real hope for an impending resolution. Goltz expressed doubt that the pipeline might be moved, as logistically so much has already been done to get the project to its current engineering phase that drastic changes would ultimately reshape the entire endeavor. Goltz explained BP's turnaround on Baku-Ceyhan as being simply a matter of the number crunchers in London deciding that the Caspian region will play a serious role in BP's future (as it views itself over the next two decades). When asked if the Armenian route is purely geographically better, Goltz answered that of course the easiest route would be across Karabagh and Armenia — every inch you shorten the pipeline, the more money you save (cutting out swaths of pipeline). However, we can't simply eliminate all of the politics surrounding the situation that prevent this scenario from taking place. Goltz noted that there is a general need to separate U.S. policy from that of the mega-nationals (oil companies). He hinted that there is more enthusiasm on the part of oil companies right now, and not the U.S. government. And if the Russian Federation had been able to get their act together in the late 80s / early 90s and hadn't broken contracts and deals made on Siberia, the oil companies wouldn't have traveled down to Baku in the first place. Of course now corruption in Azerbaijan is forcing some companies to reconsider their position. While Iran would be geographically easier (to transport oil) than even Armenia, there remains the issue of which Iran are you dealing with (there are many levels). It is far easier to work in Azerbaijan, where once you have Aliyev's support, anything will get done. When the topic of presidential succession arose, Goltz mentioned that Ilham (President Aliyev's son) has not mentioned anything about running for presidential office in 2003. In fact, Goltz offered that the most likely scenario would involve someone else assuming office first, so that this person could make all the mistakes and then Ilham could come to the 'rescue'. Goltz also discounted the "certain chaos" that will supposedly occur after Aliyev is gone. Instead he feels there will be a credible succession, most likely led by someone who is studying abroad and interacting with the West. n response to a question regarding apparent discrepancies in statements make by President Aliyev and his son on issues as Armenia and Russia, Goltz offered the point that Azerbaijan is essentially a friendless state. It has to keep as many balls up in the air as possible — leading the Mr. Aliyevs to say whatever is necessary to keep other nations involved and interested in Azerbaijan. Things such as Section 907 and the embargo of Armenia, both of which prevent the U.S. and the E.U., respectively, from becoming true friends of Azerbaijan, bolster this position. Goltz dismissed the idea that underground movements in Azerbaijan will rise up to lead the large refugee population to recapture Armenian-occupied territory. In his opinion, while the refugee population wants its land back, it also simply wants peace. Goltz feels that Aliyev successfully neutered much of the pro-war opposition by having the three current peace proposals translated into Azeri, published in the newspapers and forcing his opponents in parliament to debate the possibilities. Unfortunately, the Azeri government has ignored the refugees, both financially and socially. The refugees are an uprooted and socially displaced group that lacks ties to formal Azerbaijan — this is one of the reasons why there are so many young men leaving for Russia to find work. At the same time, however, the only people talking about war are power-thirsty politicians from Baku who have never been to the regions and are not in touch with current refugee sentiments. Refugees are more concerned with living day-to-day than they are with mounting an armed attack on occupied territory. When asked about the refugee population's thoughts on the possibility of resettlement, Goltz agreed that the people are, by necessity, settling down. As each year passes, they take more steps towards solidifying their current living situation simply as a means of survival. Of course, in all refugee situations, governments are reluctant to endorse permanent settlement as it means forsaking their occupied territory. There is a strong resentment towards the U.S. — as it has been involved in many of the processes (democratization, etc.) that have changed Azerbaijan significantly from its former communist self, yet there have been no obvious improvements in the average person's living situation. The people are becoming frustrated with the "let's wait a little while longer" approach, as there has been no sign of trickle-down from oil investments and foreign aid.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Democratization, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, and Asia

157. From B2B to G2G: Re-engineering the Canada-United States Relationship

Author:
Christopher Sands
Publication Date:
01-2001
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The new century is marked by a transformation in the economy that is changing the environment in which the United States makes policy regarding Canada, which is already a complex and diffuse process. First: what is new about the new economy? Second, how does the U.S. approach Canada in its policy processes. Third, how does Canada attempt to manage its relations with the United States? Fourth, how can business models help both countries to improve relations?
Topic:
Energy Policy and Environment
Political Geography:
United States, Germany, and North America

158. Rough Waters in the South China Sea: Navigation Issues and Confidence-Building Measures

Author:
Ji Guoxing
Publication Date:
08-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
In the wake of a collision between a U.S. spy plane and a Chinese jet fighter off the coast of Hainan in April 2001, verbal skirmishing between the United States and China revealed sharply different conceptions of jurisdictional and navigational principles. These differences persist and will likely be the cause of future conflicts; they have already caused strife among countries ringing the South China Sea. Central to these conflicts are the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) that extend 200 nm into the sea from coastal nations' baselines. Created by the UN Law of the Sea Convention, these zones attempt to accommodate coastal states' interest in controlling offshore resources and maritime powers' interests in maintaining freedom of navigation. But ambiguities in the Convention's language combined with coastal states' proliferating EEZ claims have created a tinderbox. The situation will remain volatile as long as the focus remains on jurisdictional disputes. But confidence-building efforts aimed more narrowly on practical navigation issues and managing “incidents at sea” offer a starting point for first bilateral and then multilateral agreements. In the wake of a collision between a U.S. spy plane and a Chinese jet fighter off the coast of Hainan in April 2001, verbal skirmishing between the United States and China revealed sharply different conceptions of jurisdictional and navigational principles. These differences persist and will likely be the cause of future conflicts; they have already caused strife among countries ringing the South China Sea. Central to these conflicts are the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) that extend 200 nm into the sea from coastal nations' baselines. Created by the UN Law of the Sea Convention, these zones attempt to accommodate coastal states' interest in controlling offshore resources and maritime powers' interests in maintaining freedom of navigation. But ambiguities in the Convention's language combined with coastal states' proliferating EEZ claims have created a tinderbox. The situation will remain volatile as long as the focus remains on jurisdictional disputes. But confidence-building efforts aimed more narrowly on practical navigation issues and managing “incidents at sea” offer a starting point for first bilateral and then multilateral agreements.
Topic:
Security, Energy Policy, and International Law
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, and China

159. Turkey And The Bush Administration: The Question Marks

Author:
Alan Makovsky
Publication Date:
03-2001
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Turkey's economic crisis is naturally the leading issue in bilateral U.S.-Turkish relations, and it is almost certainly topping the agenda of today's meetings of Foreign Minister Ismail Cem with Vice President Richard Cheney and other senior officials. Of course, these meetings pose the difficult question of how much Washington should do, if anything, to bail out its strategically vital ally. But this is only one of several uncertainties characterizing U.S.-Turkish relations in the early days of the Bush administration. Because so much of Turkey's importance to the United States derives from its critical strategic location, bilateral relations are greatly affected by U.S. policies toward other states in Turkey's region. Of most concern to Turkey will be the evolution of Bush administration policy toward Iraq, Iran, and Russia, and also toward Europe's nascent bid to develop an autonomous security capacity.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Defense Policy, Economics, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Iraq, Europe, Iran, Washington, Turkey, and Middle East

160. The Great Game, Round 2: Washington's Misguided Support for the Baku-Ceyhan Oil Pipeline

Author:
Stanley Kober
Publication Date:
10-2000
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
One of the top foreign policy priorities of the Clinton administration during the last few years has been strong support for building a pipeline to transport oil from Baku, Azerbaijan, to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. The administration has argued that this pipeline, bypassing other routes going through Russia and Iran, would be the best way for the economically struggling countries of Central Asia to get their energy exports to market, thereby underpinning their newly won independence. Washington also stresses the supposed benefit of having the pipeline run through the territory of a NATO ally, Turkey.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, NATO, and Energy Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Washington, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Baku