‍Central Asia and The Caucasus Journal

Abstract The crisis can destroy both the lives of people and the legitimacy of governments that provide security and prosperity; challenged and cost a lot. Natural crises that occur all over the world; In some regions, such as Central Asia, it is more extensive and numerous.  Using the experiences of other countries has a significant effect in reducing its destructive effects. For this purpose, this research aims to identify the crisis management and benefit from the common learnings of the three countries of Iran, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan, and has done a comparative study and intends to answer the question of what are the differences and similarities in the type, history, structure and laws of crisis management in Do these countries exist? The study method is qualitative and the data collected from the crisis management documents of the selected countries have been analyzed using Max QDA software. The findings show that these countries, while having relative similarities in the type of crisis, although they differ slightly in terms of history and management structure; However, a comparative study of prevention, preparedness and facing crisis laws shows the difference in legislation, which has also led to different results in practice.

Abstract  
Central Asia has been characterized by some regional disputes and tensions including the securitization of border and territorial disputes, water and environment issues, ethnic and linguistic identities, communication corridors and energy transmission lines for more than two decades. However, it has gradually entered a new era of detente and de-securitization since a decade ago that is the transformation of an issue from an urgent political situation into a normal one. This trend has intensified in the past decade with the new generation of regional leaders and the normalization of Tajikistan-Uzbekistan relations. As a result of these developments, many issues such as water, environment, borders and crossings, communication corridors and energy transmission lines, have been gradually taken out of their past securitized situation and have entered into a normal one. The present literature addresses the question that what causes and contexts have led to the détente and de-securitization in Central Asia? In order to reply the mentioned question, the hypothesis can be put forward that "the advent of a new generation of Central Asian leaders as securitizing actors, the new discourse of new leaders and elites, the shared benefits of expanding energy transmission lines and communication and transit corridors as well as common water and environmental threats, have led to detente and de-securitization in Central Asia".  In order to evaluate the proposed hypothesis, the author attempts to provide a better understanding of the new developments taking place in Central Asia by applying the theoretical concepts and components of securitization and de-securitization as presented in Copenhagen security school.
 

Abstract The noticeable evolutions and changes, in Uzbekistan’s foreign policy particularly towards Tajikistan that occurred after the sudden death of Islam Karimov on September 2016, arouses the following questions: a) What are the causes for détente and de-securitization in Tajikistan-Uzbekistan relations? b) What ramifications does the mentioned issue bring along?In order to answer the mentioned questions, the author argues that the change in Uzbekistan’s leadership and Mirziyoyev’s effort for domestic growth and development, developing and extending energy pipelines and corridors in the region, besides leaving Karimov’scult of personality have all led to transforming Uzbekistan’s foreign policy and strengthening regional cooperation with the participation of five Central Asian states.In order to assess the literature’s hypothesis, the author addresses Tajikistan and Uzbekistan’s relations in two specific eras of securitization (1991-2016) and de-securitization (since September 2016), based on descriptive-analytical method and applying theoretical concepts and factors of (de)securitization within the Copenhagen School of security.During the first decade that encompasses a long period of Karimov’s leadership in Uzbekistan (1991-2016), many social (ethnicity, language and culture) and economic (water resources and environment) issues between the both nations were deviated from their natural and normal direction and became politicized and securitized. However, during the letter era, Uzbekistan was experiencing an evolution that was derived of two main reasons; a) a change of elites and actors in Uzbekistan,particularly Karimov and Inoyatov; b) Mirziyoyev’s taking the power. The mentioned factors changed Uzbekistan’s dominant discourse towards Tajikistan. This discourse change led to a better cooperation among the five Central Asian states in diverse areas without an involvement of external powers especially the Russian Federation and China.
 

Abstract Competitive behavior of the countries in economic area of contemporary era has led to the formation of new theoretical approaches for explaining those behaviors. In the mentioned era, economy has once again been noticed as the main motivation for world powers’ competition. Strategic relations between US and China also have the mentioned characteristic. Their competition in Tajikistan is seen as a new form of competition in international arena. Therefore the present article tries to answer the following question: What are the most important elements in competitive interaction between US and China in Tajikistan? According to the hypothesis, the most important elements in competitive interaction between the two countries are defined in two categories of economics and security. The mentioned competition has also its impact on the national interests of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 

Abstract Due to the culmination and continuation of Arab uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa, once again the question has risen whether the scope of the uprisings will extend to other parts of the world, particularly in the Central Asia and the Caucasus. Tajikistan, in this region, has far more fragile situation than others and its most significant political-security event in the past was the civil war. Since then, drug transition has posed a remarkable security threat to the country. The July 2012 events in Badakhshan, not only revived the memory of the Tajik civil war in the minds, but showed the fragility of peace in the country. Thus, the study of the roots and consequences of Badakhshan event may largely reflect the political and security prospect in Tajikistan.

Abstract Priorities and foreign policy objectives are directly functions of their internal structures such as geopolitical context, domestic needs, power and national security threats, the attitude of the ruling elite and the situation of international system's structure. Tajikistan is no exception to this general rule. A variety of factors and variable are affecting foreign policy at three levels of individual, national, and international foreign policy influence. Hence, one of the defining features of the foreign policy of Tajikistan is domestic factors and characteristics, so that understanding the nature and behavior of Tajikistan's foreign policy requires understanding of internal factors affecting this country. This paper analyzes the factors affecting the domestic and foreign policy of Tajikistan. The goal is to answer the fundamental question: “How domestic factors affect Tajikistan's foreign policy?”