‍Central Asia and The Caucasus Journal

Abstract During the Post-Cold War era, Moscow used various tools to secure its interests in the Post-Soviet space. Although Russia's status as one of the world's great powers might have been questioned in theory and practice since the collapse of the Soviet Union, its determining role as a regional power among former Soviet republics has remained unquestionable. Authors hold that the concept of "regional hegemony" can be applied to understand Russia's relations with its neighbors. The continuity of a regional power’s hegemony despite its decline in terms of material capabilities may lead us to explore the role of non-material factors. Given the fact that Russia's material power resources have been declining to different extents and can hardly be enough to ensure the continuity of its regional hegemony, the authors investigate non-material elements and indicators of Russia's power. Using the theory of "Socialization and Hegemonic Power" which underlines the role of subjective elements in preserving hegemony, as well a descriptive – analytical research method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the following question: Why has Russia's regional hegemony survived the gradual decline of its material power resources and independent-minded policies of some post-Soviet states? The main hypothesis of the study underlines the role of cultural resources of Russia's power in forming post-Soviet elites' mindsets and supplementing military and economic elements and as a result perpetuating Russia's hegemonic status.  
 

Abstract Formation of OPEC and exploiting petroleum as pressure tool by Arabian countries for countering with Zionist Regime during early 70^th century was a prominent example of petroleum’s political significance. In order to prevent the reduction of petroleum exportation during Cold War era, the USSR tried to reduce the importance of its political dimension. Following the collapse of USSR and surmount of liberalism and occidentalization during Yeltsin era, the petroleum maintained its unpolitical nature. Still since the beginning of Putin’s presidency, especially after the ignite of the new cold war following Iraq’s occupation in 2003, Russian Federation was gradually inclined to convert petroleum from an economic instrument to a political and even security one.  The Energy Strategy of Russia for the period up to 2020 articulates that energy resources are the main instruments for driving Russia’s exterior and interior politics. Against this backdrop, the present article is trying to find out the main reason for Russia to exploit energy resources as a political instrument. Using the theoretical framework of bureaucratic decision making, the authors argue that interior bureaucratic considerations including balance of power, as well as internal conflicts in Putin’s government, are the main reasons for the mentioned question. The internal power relationship especially the core role of petroleum companies in Russia’s governmental decision making has led to the weaponization of energy.

Abstract Following the collapse of USSR, an increase of western influence in geopolitical and security areas in Russia, has been one of the effective factors in the interaction between Moscow and western countries especially the United States. Some impetuses such as enlargement of the European Union, and NATO, democracy promotion in post-soviet atmosphere and the Eastern Partnership have been effective on the formation of disagreement – cooperation paradox between west and Europe. West’s last attempt for increasing influence in post – soviet atmosphere, was Ukraine’s crisis and Crimea’s accession to Russia. This crisis highlighted the point of contrast between Russia and the west. The present literature addresses the following question: Which model has Russia taken for interacting with international system, especially west, since 2014? The authors argue that since 2014, Russia has chosen the balance of power strategy as a behavioral model to confront international system and the west. Russia’s most important features of balance of power are countering with the United States’ unilateralism; accepting US and China as main actors; hard and soft balance; as well as regionalism. Using explanatory – analytical research method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research questions.

Abstract Although west has been a main issue for many societies and states in last centuries, for Russia it has been different and very fundamental. It is nearly about five centuries that Russia has been affected by evolutions of European renaissance; sometimes in an interaction, sometimes in a contrast. Russia’s geographical, cultural and religious situations, has always experienced both fragments and concomitants with west, leading to some important results in Russia’s political life and foreign behavior. Against this backdrop, Russian administrations’ visions towards west and that vision’s impact on their internal and foreign behavior, and last but not least; the reason of Russian administrations’ special reaction towards west, and considering that as a main issue, are the questions addressed in this literature. The hypothesis of this article as that the root of Russia’s behavior towards west should be understood in its neighboring and propensity. Russia neither has been able to annex to the west, nor has been able to separate from it and go on its own way.

Abstract    In the framework of geopolitical rivalries between Russian and West, Kremlin has defined it’s near abroad in the area of its strategic and vital interests. It has also used the region’s unsolved territorial disputes such as Kharabakh crisis as an instrument for stabilizing its influence in the Republics of USSR. Meanwhile the Kharabakh crisis as the most serious security issue in South Caucasus has lasted for more than two decades and the study of regional developments indicates a situation of neither war nor peace. Even the possibility of re-strengthening the dispute is still remained. Against this backdrop, the present article attempts to answer the following question: What opportunities and challenges would the strengthening of Kharabakh crisis bring along for Kremlin?  From one hand, insecurity in energy transit routes from Caspian Sea to western markets establishment of Russian forces in Kharabakh in the framework of peacekeeping operations are among the most important opportunities for Kremlin. From the other hand, the possibility of a conflict with Turkey, as Azerbaijan’s alliance, as well as West’s influence in Caucasus are among the most important challenges for Russia. Using explanatory – analytical method and geopolitics theory, the author tries to scrutinize the possibility of mentioned challenges and opportunities.  

Abstract Sino-Russian relationship has been in the stage of strategic cooperation for more than two decades. This cooperation covers different areas including economic cooperation. Trade of goods, energy transportation and foreign investment are components of Sino-Russian economic relationship. Starting from a very low level in 1990s, economic cooperation between the two countries has traversed a rising trajectory despite some fluctuations, and officials from both sides have always tried to expand this cooperation. Strategic nature of the relationship between China and Russia is emphasized by political experts and officials from both countries. Given the strategic nature of Sino-Russian relationship, our primary research question is as the following: what is the strategic significance of the economic cooperation between China and Russia, within the overall framework of their relationship? The authors firstly define the concept of strategic relationship based on the emphasized characteristics of such a relationship. Then, the strategic significance of economic cooperation between China and Russia is assessed using this definition. The hypothesis of the authors is that the economic cooperation between China and Russia lacks a high level of strategic significance.

Abstract As not confined to lands and borders, religion is a basis for transnational identity. Therefore it is assessed as a source of soft power among neighboring and coreligionist countries. During the USSR era all policies were designed in the framework of communist ideology and dictated from Moscow to other parts of the country. But after the Collapse of the Soviet Union, the internal ties were ended. However, Russia remains an influential country in near abroad. But, the absence of communism led to an ideological vacuum in Russia's relations towards its new neighbors. Therefore Christianity is one of Russia's alternatives to eliminate the mentioned vacuum. The present article tries to answer the following questions: How is the role of church assessed in Russian foreign policy? How is the effectiveness of religious diplomacy assessed in Georgia and Ukraine? Although the role of the church in Moscow's foreign policy is interpreted as a soft power, Russian religious diplomacy was used as a hard power instrument in Ukraine and Georgia, rather than serving as a soft power. This hypothesis is examined in the context of Joseph Nye's soft power theory.
 

Abstract Economic sanctions always bring along both positive and negative results for a country. The economic sanctions against Russia since 2014 caused inflation, difficulty of access to international investment markets, lower value of ruble against euro and dollar, and a delay in Russia’s path out of crisis. All these events, made Russian government support its financial and economic divisions against sanctions. The present article addresses the following question: What characteristics do the most important measures have that Russia took against sanctions? Strategic wisdom and a balanced activism are addressed as the main elements that Moscow used against sanctions. Using library and archive resources and an explanatory – analyzing method, the present literature attempts to assess Russia’s economic indexes since 2014 to 2018.

Abstract The attempt to retrieve Russia's position as one of the key actors in the international arena can be considered as a major feature of Russian foreign policy after Putin's rise to power. The Kremlin's foreign policy strategy in relation to the revival of the Russian empire and the vulnerable geopolitical situation and the political isolation of the Republic of Armenia have provided the basis for further Kremlin-Yerevan cooperation and promoted relations to the level of strategic partnership. The strategic partnership and the sustained cooperation that the two countries have had after the collapse of the Soviet Union have provided the Kremlin's strategic interests in the Caucasus region.
According to the above matters, the present article aims to study the political, economic and military-security dimensions of Russian influence in the Republic of Armenia. The main question of this article refers to the interests of Russia towards unification with Armenia. Providing Russia's political and security benefits, including dismantling the Western-European political and military infrastructure (EU-NATO) from the region, along with economic interests, has been the main aim of Russia from cooperation and unity with Armenia. In this paper, it has been attempted to examine Russia's interests in unity with Armenia in a descriptive and analytical way, using the balance of threat theory offered by Stephen Walt

Abstract Geopolitical genome is the genetic map of a country’s politics which determines its behavior in state and foreign policies. States consider the genomes of other actors as their geopolitical codes. The interaction or confrontation of the states’ geopolitical codes or genomes determines the atmosphere that is in line with or against the national and regional interests. The present paper attempts to answer the following question: To what extent in foreign policy arena, the geopolitical genomes are effective? Considering Afghanistan and Russia case studies; ethnic diversification, drugs, extremism and terrorism, political instability, etc. are known as Afghanistan’s dominant geopolitical codes; and vastness of territory, extremism, and terrorism, NATO and EU expansion eastward, etc. are the ones for Russia. In order to confront the threats that are derived from Afghanistan’s genomes, Russia takes some active measures, while Afghanistan – according to its geopolitical codes- behaves reactively in its foreign policy. Using analytical – descriptive method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract Caspian region interactions with its neighborhood have an undeniable impact on world’s strategic equations. The Caspian region is historically known as the “absent present”. Being aware of Caspian region’s exclusive potentialities, the transregional actors would like to receive a regional interpretation of Caspian stand in the future of Interantional system; but still the region has not produced a strategic rhetoric for its own. How a consensus on a regional rhetoric about Caspian’s potentialities can be made using China and India’s strategic initiatives, is the main question of this article. The role of Iran in making a balance in the competition between China and India in Caspian region; as well as Iran and Russia’s capacities in boosting regionalism in Caspian region are addressed by the author. Using analytical – descriptive method; and library resources as well as interviews with experts on regional and transregional affairs, the author tries to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract Political tendencies of Soviet republics can be divided in the following categories after the collapse of the USSR: centralism and pursuing politics in line with Russia; Anti- Russian politics and western oriented approach; intermediate approach. Due to its geostrategic and geopolitical significance, Ukraine is converted to an area of conflict between Russia and the west. Why Ukraine is so important in Russia’s geopolitical vision and political security? And why Russia’s security is influenced by Ukraine? The hypothesis of this article is that in its security policymaking in post-historical era, Russia still emphasizes on two elements of ‘historical mentality” and “geopolitics”; therefore it sees a linkage between its neighboring’s geopolitical codes and its interests. That is the reason why Ukraine has a pivotal role for Russia. 

Abstract Moscow and Beijing’s cooperation in developing energy resources as well as maritime and rail transportation infrastructures in the Russian division of Arctic, is a goal for which the two countries can cooperate for their shared interests. However, the mentioned cooperation has not led to a satisfactory result except in an LNG project in Yamal Peninsula. Therefore the present article tries to answer the following question: Why Russian and China have not been able so far to achieve an advanced level of cooperation and partnership irrespective of their shared interests and goals in the Arctic?” An analysis of Russia and China’s situation and their regional and global goals indicates that governments and especially the great powers are always concerned about their share in cooperation. Using analytical – descriptive method and defensive realism theoretical framework, the paper tries to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract Political culture is a concept addressed by scholars in recent decades in an attempt to explain a society’s individuals’ political behavior and the government’s behavior toward people. Political culture is noticed in Russia for analyzing Putinism’s continuity and change in recent years. The present literature addresses the following question: How Russia’s political culture is evolved and in which situation it is at the present time. In order to answer the mentioned question, the authors argue that Russia’s political culture is a blend of its classic type and modernism and is reproduced and has been influential on political behavior in contemporary era, irrespective of important evolutions in communications and also civil institutions. Using analytical – descriptive method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract   In international relations today, dominance on oil and gas resources and their pipelines draw attention of many policy makers. Therefore those countries that possess energy – oriented policies make most of their decisions upon their energy resources. Russia also uses energy as leverage for reinstruction of its power while it exports natural gas to Europe. Facing a reduction in its military power and its political position, as well as structural economic problems, and using a pragmatist approach, Russia acknowledges its energy resources as the most important element for wining in international competitions. Therefore it tries highly to use its energy resources as a political weapon and an important leverage in its foreign policy.
The present article attempts to answer the following question: Which strategies in energy area are used by Russia and how its goals are assessed? The article argues that Russia tries to use energy as leverage in interaction with other countries so that it can gain control over energy markets and play a significant role in world’s political and geopolitical issues. 

Abstract The Syria crisis as a regional one has led the regional countries to some cooperation for resolving it. The regional countries though, concretely speaking Turkey and Russia though haveobviously taken different approaches towards this crisis. In other words, the diverse approaches of these two countries towards the Syrian crisis, has led to a noticeable conflict between them that has left its own impact in Caucasus. The present article tries to determine the dimensions of the mentioned conflict and cooperation, and also scrutinize its impact on Caucasus. The present literature addresses the following question: How the divergent measures of Russia and Turkey towards Syria crisis has left its impact on Caucasus? Using explanatory – analytical research method and library and internet resources the authors try to find an answer for the mentioned question. 

Abstract The Collapse of the bipolar international system in 1991, made NATO’s philosophy of existence face some serious challenges. Providing some new interpretation of its role such as global energy security provision, overcoming terrorist activities threats, supporting human rights and democracy as well as combating cyber attacks, NATO managed to survive in post cold war era. Russia has been in opposition to NATO’s expansion in its influence area and considers NATO’s measures in this region as a menace to its national security. Against this background, Russia is known as a potential superpower that can resist against NATO’s military and security policies in many western studies. In this regard, Russia and NATO’s relation during the post cold war era has experienced a wide evolving spectrum from partnership to competition. The present literature scrutinizes the partnership and competition trends in Russia and NATO’s relation during Putin’s governance. The following question is addressed in this article: What trend has been developed by partnership and competition between Russia and NATO? In order to find an answer for the mentioned question, the following hypothesis is being examined that with Putin’s rise to power and his attempt for revivng Russia’s lost position in international system, the competition elements between Russia and NATO were raised upward; so that their relation has reached to its lowest degree today since the collapse of the USSR. The present article is written using explanatory – analyzing research method in a constructivist theoretical framework.      

Abstract After the cold war and collapse of the Soviet Union, the international order faced drastic changes and the United States managed to establish its desired unipolar structure and hegemonic order due to its superiority in ideological, economic, political and military arenas. Notwithstanding, China’s economic growth and Russia’s reviving influence in regional and international evolutions, have lead to a change in international order and development of a unipolar-multipolar system that may increase either integration or conflicts between the actors. The following research question guides this study: What are the most influential factors for integration and conflict between Russia and China in post cold war era? The article’s hypotheses is that A) The following factors would lead to an integration between Russia and China: economic, political and security cooperation in the framework of BRICS and SCO, a cyber war with the United States, the worry of US and NATO’s presence in their borders’ periphery, common interests in Central Asia, common threats in regional crises (such as Syria and North Korea), and the worry of the   extremism expansion into their territories. B) Issues such as lack of confidence in mutual relations, increase of Chinese population in Russia, competition for energy resources in Central Asia, inability in building a defensive alliance between the two countries, would lead to a conflict between Russia and China. Using explanatory – analyzing research method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract Russia’s position in international equations is one of the influential elements in global issues. Kremlin’s foreign policy approach towards it’s near abroad and their method of reply is not only determining the security, economic and political environment in the region, but is also effective on international relations and the balance of power. Kremlin considers the international order as multipolar and therefore attempts to make Russia one of the poles in international system, so that Russia could make a strategic balance against the United States. The authors attempt to find an answer to the question that which preference in Russia’s foreign policy is upon its geopolitical connection to Central Asia? The following hypothesis guides this study: Energy oriented geopolitical connection is no longer causing a special asset in Russia’s foreign policy, due to strengthening Russia and China’s competition, uneven policies of Central Asian countries and the prioritizing of bilateral approach instead of regionalism. Therefore Russia is gradually missing its economic and energy position, although still maintaining its security and political situation in the region. Using explanatory – analyzing research method and the rational choice theory by Green and Shapiro, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract   Security vision of Russia’s Neo – Eurasianists towards its near abroad has been suspicious about West and has fully attempted to combat and reduce western influence in regional security structure, especially since Putin’s retaking office (and also in latest period of Medvedev office). Against this background, the core of the mentioned discourse has been upon building institutions and structures that were to attract regional cooperation for competing western security structures, especially NATO in Russia’s near abroad. Using regional security complex theory, the present literature attempts to explain Russian behavior in its near abroad. Considering the importance and the position of the mentioned theory in explanation of security evolutions after the cold war, the present article tries to answer the following question:  What security relation is chosen as desired for Russia towards it’s near abroad? The hypothesis is that Russia attempts to pioneer a regional security complex in its near abroad so that it would attract regional countries to its desired economic, security provisions and institutions and therefore to prevent the influence of trans-regional actors and organizations. Using explanatory – analyzing research method and library resources the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research question.

Abstract “Iran nuclear deal” and the “P5+1” countries is of the important political events in the regional and even international levels, which can overshadow and affect Iran's relations with many governments. This event which in the context has been mentioned as "Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA), is a «historical agreement», which has sparked the reaction of many countries, particularly great powers of the international system. Therefore, with consideration to the presence of Russia in Iran's nuclear program and its special role as one of the five permanent members of the “UN Security Council” on how to advance the case, this article studies the policies and orientations of Russia against “Iran Nuclear Deal” and the “P5 + 1” countries, and tries to discuss the practical dimensions of the foreign policy orientation of this country. The main question of this article is: What approach has Russia taken towards “Iran Nuclear deal” and how its orientation has been during the “post-Nuclear Deal” (Post-JCPOA) with respect to Iran? Also this hypothesis is raised that, meanwhile; Russia has a positive attitude towards “Nuclear Agreement ”in order to maintain its economic and political interests and status, both in Iran and the regional as well as international arenas, it has developed a bilateral and multilateral cooperation with Iran in various aspects with a pragmatic and cautious approach. To study the mentioned idea, first, the theoretical foundations related to foreign policy orientation of the governments and the Economic sanctions are discussed, and then Russia's policy towards "Nuclear Deal" and the factors affecting its formation will be analyzed. The method of research in this article is descriptive-analytical and it was written through using library resources and Cyberspace.

Abstract According to Russia's membership in the “UN Security Council”, nuclear power, proximity and involvement in a wide arena of the world’s geography (Japan, China, Central Asia, the Middle East, the Black Sea, East Europe to the Baltic region), as well as the possibility of military support and reinforcement of different groups and governments; the influence of Russia’s remoteness and proximity in various parts of the world, especially in the “South Caucasus”, is still undeniable. A series of security and strategic interests (in relation to Armenia and Georgia), as well as economic interests (mainly relevant to Azerbaijan) have made “South Caucasus” important for Russia; thus, in expanding the relations, “Eurasia region” has been the priority of the country in all foreign policy documents until 2016. The main objective of this article is, to respond to this question: How Russia has turned into a security activist in the “South Caucasus”? The hypothesis, which is raised in response to this main question, is as follows: A series of strategic, security, military, economic and energy resources have turned Russia into a security activist in the South Caucasus. In this article, it is tried to answer to the main question through studying Russia’s foreign policy documents and then different approaches of the country; as well as studying its interests in various fields by a descriptive – explanatory method.

Abstract After the collapse of Soviet Union, South Caucasus has been the ground of different kinds of threats and security challenges. The most important security challenges in South Caucasus include ethnic and territorial conflicts, political instability, lack of economic and social development, transnational threats, organized crime, and finally the competition of regional and trans-regional powers. The existence of these challenges has provided a security complexity in Caucasus and has prevented the establishment of stability and peace in this region. The main question in this study is: How can we employ the main components of the security complex including polarity, social construct, state's nature, boundary and anarchy in south Caucasus? Assumption is that the components of regional security complex can be applied in south Caucasus because of its security interdependence; this region would be considered independence from Russia regional security complex.  The Firstly, an attempt has been made to assess the genealogy of the security complex theory. Then, a survey has been done to see whether this complex is a sub complex of Russia security complex or it is an independent one, using the framework of boundaries concept. Finally, the components of security complex theory are applied in South Caucasus using an "Explanation and Positivism" methodology.

Abstract South Caucasus is one of the regions in the world which faces with numerous challenges considering the security area and after two decades of the collapse of the Soviet Union, it has not reached the political and economic integration yet. In this region, there is a kind of cooperation and rivalry among Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia and also among these countries with external players. These three countries have pursued different and sometimes contradictory paths and participated in different organizations, programs, agreements and coalitions. The EU and Russian Federation are two important actors in the South Caucasus. Framing the European Neighborhood Policy and Eastern Partnership, the EU has sought to play a more highlighted role in the region. The Russia-Georgia war in 2008 and the EU's intervention especially the French government's initiative led to Brussels' pronounced role. Considering the South Caucasus as its near abroad, Russia with formulating mechanisms such as the Eurasian Economic Union tries to counter the influence of NATO and the EU's in the region. In this article, the factors influencing on the EU-Russia's differences in the South Caucasus will be studied. The hypothesis will be as "differences in perception of security, securing energy security, a bid to establish sphere of influence and economic benefits have led to Brussels- Russia's differences and disputes. The research approach used in this article is analytic-descriptive.  

Abstract With increasing economic dependence of world on hydrocarbon energy resources, and ongoing tensions in the Middle East and the emergence of Russia as a major player in the global energy market; the resources of oil and gas in Central Asia and their transportation routes to consumer markets have been greatly considered by the great industrial powers. There have been decades of long struggles over controlling natural oil and gas resources and infrastructures, and influence of central Asia that has been called "the new great game" between Europe, China, Russia and America, and each of these powers were trying to outpace each other in order to obtain more influence in the region. In the years of the Soviet Union collapse and the discovery of huge reserves of oil and gas in Central Asia, the competition between the great powers has been intensified. On the one hand, the Russians by confining all the exporting routes of their land have tended to maintain their traditional influence and control over the newly independent states. On the other hand, the United States has entered in the region as a serious competitor, and as a fan of the paths that will lead to its own long-term goals and geopolitical interests. Also, China with its strong incentives to be present in Central Asia and to challenge the hegemonic policies of America and also to achieve the regional energy resources and huge market has entered in this competition. Although Russia is the major power in Central Asia's resources, the presence of new players such as America, and especially China and the efforts of the Republic of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to find alternative ways to transport oil and gas have faced the Russian interests with some challenges in the region. Accordingly, the authors of this article ask this question: who is going to win the power game of having control over Central Asia's resources? Our hypothesis is that due to China's economic growth and the need of this country to the huge oil and gas resources as well as the development of Beijing's relationships with Central Asian neighbors; in the future China will be the main power in the region.