CIAO DATE: 05/2009
Volume: 3, Issue: 1
Winter 2009
Note from the Editor-in-Chief (p. 1) (PDF)
Nasimi Aghayev
Thrassy Marketos
For reasons both of world strategy and control over natural resources, the US administration is determined to secure for itself a dominant role in Eurasia. The Eastern Caspian shore of the Central Asian states of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan is crucial to the oil and gas control flow, because which of the two major projects - the Trans-Caspian Corridor plus Nabucco pipeline, or the Prikaspiisky and South Stream pipelines - reaches the European market, will in effect determine which major power - U.S., Russia, or China - will gain geostrategic control over Eurasia. Even more seriously, it may determine a new eventual decision of Europe and the rise of a potential big continental power or a coalition of powers threatening the U.S. and the West as a whole, such as a Russian-Chinese alliance empowered enough to control Caspian Sea resources.
Robert Nalbandov
The article offers a discussion of the two logics that govern the behavior of organizational actors - the logic of appropriateness and the logic of expected consequences - by transferring them into the realm of international relations, in particular, in explaining the causes and reasoning behind third party military interventions into the domestic affairs of other states. The article provides a theoretical novelty of assessing the success of interventions not by durability of peace as their main aim, but by actual fulfillment of their interventionary goals and objective, which shall be considered when discussing the pros and cons of the two logics. By analyzing the case of the Russian interventions in Georgian starting from 1992 and ending with the recent war in South Ossetia in 2008, the author argues that the likelihood of success of interventions is higher when the two logics are merged and not separated from each other in guiding the decision-makers in their actions.
Resolving Post-Soviet "Frozen Conflicts": Is Regional Integration Helpful? (pp. 37-44) (PDF)
Mykola Kapitonenko
Regional conflicts are arguably the most disturbing heritage of the USSR. Ironically, they are gradually becoming cornerstones for a renewed foreign policy of Russia. That can have long-lasting consequences: from disrupting regional stability to a massive geopolitical change in a strategically important Black Sea/Caspian region. Regional conflicts are also penetrating the agenda of world politics. The end of pure Westphalian principles of the world order emancipated numerous unprecedented challenges, strengthened by nationalism, separatism, and non-conventional warfare. That created a challenge for political science and conflict studies, a challenge which could be compared and contrasted to the problems once posed by the Cold War. These challenges require a scientific inquiry into the nature of internal conflicts, particularly of the "frozen" ones, as well as the impact they have upon regional security arrangements and methods of conflict management. Recent developments in the Caucasus are a continuation of old problems, which are likely to remain for an undetermined period of time. Coping with those problems is one of the most important tasks not only for the foreign policies of states involved, but also for the whole system of regional security.
Diaspora Design versus Homeland Realities: Case Study of Armenian Diaspora (pp. 45-62) (PDF)
Bahar Baser, Ashok Swain
Recently the concept of "diaspora" has become a popular subject and two polarized views dominate the study on diaspora behavior: the categorization of the diaspora as good or bad, conflict or peace promoter, spoiler or peace-maker. The majority of the research on diaspora politics places emphasis on its conflict-promoting character. Researchers argue that a diaspora may even act against its homeland's interests. This paper aims to further explore this behavior of diaspora groups and try to locate the reasons behind this phenomenon. The focus is the Armenian diaspora and its policies, particularly targeting the foreign policy of the host country. Some of the critical issues are the conflict in Nagorno Karabakh and Turkey-Armenia relations, which includes the issues of "genocide" recognition, normalization of diplomatic relations and opening of the borders. With the help of theoretical frameworks, the Armenian diaspora's positions will be analyzed in this paper.
Competing Islamic Traditions in the Caucasus (pp. 63-69) (PDF)
Dobrosława Wiktor-Mach
The common dichotomized classification of Islam in the Caucasus ("traditional" versus "fundamentalist") does not take into account all major processes taking place in the region. The Sufi-Wahhabi discourse simplifies the social interactions between Muslims and suggests homogeneity of each of these categories. In this paper I would show how the term "Wahhabi" has been employed by the local community of Muslims who live in the Georgian Pankisi gorge to express their resistance towards new and radical ideas and practices. In this social conflict, Sufi brotherhoods assume the role of the defenders of traditional order, while the reformists attempt at changing not only religious but also social structures.
Globalization and National Competitiveness of Georgia (pp.70-85) (PDF)
George Ivaniashvili-Orbeliani
Despite the fact that a national competitiveness is substantially linked to globalization, only a few studies have linked these two subjects from the perspective of developing countries, which presents complex challenges to policy makers and researchers. I argue that Porter's Diamond Model is basically relevant for economically strong industrialized countries and is less applicable for developing economies. The contention is that driving forces of globalization (FDI, transnational companies and Bretton Woods Institutes) have different implications on national competitiveness according to internal capacities and external opportunities. The paper makes a critical analysis of existing theoretical aspects of national competitiveness. It also clarifies the framework of National Innovation System, which has been successfully used in OECD countries and more recently is becoming the focus of increased attention from developing nations. Attention is concentrated on defining the aspects of Georgia's competitiveness, evaluating the country's economic performance, and suggesting practical recommendations for reforms and development.
External Powers' Influence upon the Reform and Political Elites in Present Kyrgyzstan (pp. 86-97) (PDF)
Irina Morozova
Formerly perceived as an ‘island of democracy', Kyrgyzstan is now characterised as a ‘failed state'. After the March 2005 revolutionary upheaval, President K. Bakiev has been searching for a way to consolidate the ruling elite. What was the impact of external powers and international policies upon the last four years' socio-political transformation in the country? How were the images of Kyrgyzstan constructed and manipulated from within and outside? Based upon field interviews, open sources and statistics, this research focuses on the influences of Russia, China, the USA and EU, as well as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan on Kyrgyz political elites' development after March 2005. Against the background of multi-dimensional and quite open foreign policy, economic integration and social networks in Kyrgyzstan developed in closer co-operation with Russia and Kazakhstan.
The End of the Frozen Cold War? (pp.98-102) (PDF)
Vladimer Papava
After the Russian incursion into Georgia many analysts ask questions of whether or not the world is standing on the verge of a new Cold War. Almost no one is asking a question of what if the 20th century Cold War was never finished but, rather, was just "frozen" and what we are witnessing now is the process of melting. To the extent that on both sides of the Cold War are the same countries as in the last century, and the reasons and driving forces of the conflict - as well as the Kremlin's action style - have never changed, one may conclude that what we see now is not a new Cold War but, rather, the resumption of the old Cold War. it is quite probable that the old story may happen again and the West's softness towards Russia may lead to the "refreezing" of the Cold War and the sacrifice of Georgia for an imaginary peace in Europe and the whole world.
Dominik Tolksdorf
When it recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia in August 2008, Russia implicitly referred to the independence of the Republic of Kosovo, which was recognized by most of the EU member states and by a total of 54 states of the 192 UN member states by January 2009. But is it really feasible to compare the two cases with each other? What arguments has "the West" used in order to justify the recognition of Kosovo? What legal arguments are there to justify the Russian position? This paper will take a closer look at the argumentation on both sides of the debate before it will analyse the reasons for the fact that a large number of states have so far rejected the idea of acknowledging Kosovo, South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The paper will conclude that for specific reasons, it is difficult to argue that the recognition of Kosovo's independence set a clear precedent for the two breakaway provinces of Georgia. However, Kosovo might have set a precedent for more reasonable cases, which explains much better why the process of Kosovo's recognition has come to a standstill. This is no good news for the government in Prishtina, which needs further recognition in order to become a member of various international organisations.
The Kosovo Precedent - Directly Applicable to Abkhazia and South Ossetia (pp.108-110) (PDF)
Sebastian Schaeffer
The declaration of independence of the Republic of Kosovo on 17 February 2008 led to different reactions in the international community. The United States of America was first to do so among the current 53 states that recognise Kosovo, while the Russian Federation and of course Serbia remain in strong opposition. Whether one supports the independence of Kosovo or not, it is undoubted that the declaration of independence had an impact on the Caucasus. What is also clear is that both the United States of America and the Russian Federation have a selective approach towards the recognition of states. While the USA recognises Kosovo and considers Abkhazia and South Ossetia as being part of the Georgian territory, Russia holds it the other way round. I will argue that the independence of Kosovo, as well as the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, are both as legitimate or illegitimate since all three entities had a certain degree of autonomy during the Soviet era. In all three entities the titular nation makes up a majority of the population, although the Kosovo Albanians in Kosovo surpass the Ossetians in South Ossetia and especially the Abkhazians in Abkhazia by far.[1] Furthermore, Kosovo as well as South Ossetia and Abkhazia had a de-facto regime since the beginning of the 1990s. Territory, nation and government mark the three elements of Georg Jellineks theory of a state. In conclusion I will argue that the United States and the Russian Federation should give up their selective approach and agree on a common position, otherwise the Kosovo precedent will not only have an impact on the conflicts in the Caucasus but also for many other frozen conflicts in the region and the world.
Jan Kuenzl
("Ali and Nino" by Kurban Said) (pp.113-116) (PDF)
Nurangiz Khodzharova