The Challenges Of Small States Of The South Caucasus In The Post-Cold-War Period
By ArmanNavasardian
nt.am - 12/1/2016
Chairman, Department of World Politics and International Relations,Russian-Armenian (Slavonic) University, and Ambassador Extraordinaryand Plenipotentiary
For millennia the Caucasus was a place where active trade and culturalties were developed, diplomatic agreements were reached and militaryalliances were forged and dissolved. The Caucasus used to be a crucialpart of the Great Silk Road, through which Europe was connected toCentral and Western Asia. The trade route passing through SouthCaucasus, including Armenia was known since the times of Homer andGolden Fleece [1, p. 290]. Hence, since ages ago peoples and statesnot only fell out and warred with each other, but also were rationalenough to cooperate in politics, trade and culture, thus paving theway for cooperation and integration for the coming generations.
However, the Transcaucasian nations' imperative to participate in theworld politics and establishment of a new world order encounters some unsurmountable obstacles, because the region is tangled in political,economic, ideological, cultural and ethnic discords and conflicts,where "problematic socioeconomic, ethno-territorial, religious,geopolitical and other interests intertwine"[2, Ñ~A. 8].
After the collapse of the USSR the post-Cold War tectonic shiftsengulfed also the South Caucasus, which stopped being just a sphere ofRussian influence. New players appeared in the region: the US, EU,Turkey, Iran, and China. Also South Caucasus started to be viewed as apart of the Greater Middle East, with all that it entails.
Consequently, big political games and combinations unfold, whichthreaten to turn the region into an epicenter of clash between thosestruggling for Caucasus, first of all the Atlantic and Eurasianinterests. The balance of power between these two blocs is subject tochange. By the end of the last century Russian positions significantlyweakened here, while the US boosted its Caucasian policy vector.
However, decisive and tough actions by V. Putin gradually change therealities. Russia "returns" to Caucasus. "The peaceful end of the ColdWar, culminating in the fragmentation of the Soviet Union, signaledthe final step in the rapid ascendance of the United States as thefirst truly global superpower. That internationally dominant power,together with its politically motivated and economically dynamicpartner, the European Union, appeared capable not only of reviving theWest's global preeminence, but also of defining for itself aconstructive global role. Twenty years later, few expect the EuropeanUnion to emerge soon as a politically serious global player whileAmerica's preeminent global status seems tenuous." [3, Ñ~A. 14] This ishow pessimistic is the political future of European Union and theUnites States seen by Zbigniew Brzezinski, one of the most prominentpolitical analysts of the time, who has been a staunch supporter ofWestern values and interests all his life. However, the weakening
positions of the USA by no means suggest decreased interest in SouthCaucasus, which is "located on the crossroads of "political storms"from East and West, North and South. The newly established states ofthe region slowly turn from objects into subjects of internationallaw. The Caucasus will remain for long in the focus of importantinterests of the classic hegemon states of the region: Russia, Turkeyand Iran" [4, Ñ~A. 13].
In the context of global changes in international relations, the threeSouth Caucasus republics do not have uniform stances. Armenia is thestrategic partner of Russia and member of EAEU, and develops parallelbilateral relations with Iran, USA and EU. After theTurkish-Azerbaijani political honeymoon, Baku attempts to find balancebetween Ankara and Moscow, keeping also in mind oil interests of theUK and USA. Georgia positions itself as a supporter of Americanvalues, generally conducting anti-Russian policies.
In the last twenty years the ongoing geopolitical and geostrategictransformations in the Caucasus has been fundamentally changing thepolitical image of Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan as new subjects ofinternational law, and the relevant foreign policy practices. Twocritical circumstances prevent them from becoming full-fledged membersof the international community and participating in the process of new
world order formation. These are: (a) East-West struggle; and (b)ethnic and interstate conflicts. Generally, the Caucasus along withthe Balkans are considered sources of threat to the internationalsecurity. In the Caucasus as a whole, "there are over 50 smolderingethno-political conflicts, many of which are international... ethnicdifferences can be used by certain political forces (includinginternational ones) and political leaders, when purely politicalnature is attributed to them" [5, Ñ~A. 222]. In addition to overtconflicts between Georgians, Abkhazians, Ossetians, Armenians andAzeri, there are covert animosities between ethic majorities of theSouth Caucasus states and minority Armenians of Javakhk (Georgia),Talyshis and Lezgians (Azerbaijan). The no war, no peace situation inArmenian-Azerbaijani relations, absence of diplomatic relations andunresolved issues between Armenia and Turkey, as well as geopoliticalambitions of Ankara maintain a cold war status and push them away fromthe framework of world politics.
One of the effects produces by the collapse of the Soviet Union wasemergence of polities in the Caucasus that declared sovereignty andwere even able to uphold it during the conflicts. However, they werenot recognized internationally, but just by a few members of the UN.
These are Abkhazia, South Ossetia, NagornoKarabakh Republic andTransnistria Moldavian Republic. Also, in 1990s there were severalfailed attempts to gain and institutionalize independence throughmilitary actions. The most vivid example of this was Chechen Republic of Ichkeria [6]. Some other authors believe Russia disregarded thesedevelopments as something like an unfinished reality. "They did notbecome fully independent... the Russians called neighboring states "near-abroad" and treated them as prodigal sons, rather thanindependent nations" [7, Ñ~A. 363].
Implementation of the program of Centre for European Policy Studies,in our opinion, may help ease the political tensions in the region,contribute to the process of establishing normal relations between thestates and joining the family of civilized nations. Below are some profits components:
1. Solving the issue of the right to self-determination (Abkhazia,South Ossetia, NagornoKarabakh) based on peculiarities of each caseand expression of free will by populations of each ethno-territorialpolity. Congresses representing each polity are to be established thatwill have an authority to adopt laws and would protect political,cultural, and religious rights of the polity.
2. Bilateral and multilateral regional cooperation, particularly inthe frameworks of the EU and CIS. The three independent nations of theSouth Caucasus (plus Nakhichevan territory) should be able toparticipate in this cooperation as separate entities. However, it istoo early to conceive of establishing such relations in the form ofregional structures. South Caucasus, as a strategic area, cannotremain isolated from global processes, and hence, the states of theregion, as well as regional organizations are under the imperative toestablish balanced cooperation. The cooperation has to be at thelevels of both political institutions and civic non-governmentorganizations.
3. The historical experience tells that ethnic problems hinderregional cooperation. This is a serious challenge that peoples ofSouth Caucasus need to overcome, if they strive to build alternativesocieties, because societies based on these values are more capable ofregulating ethnic discord between the peoples.
4. Finally, the system of regional security should be able to respondto the needs of the South Caucasus peoples, with consideration of thehistorical experience of conflicts and geopolitical counteractionsbetween the larger powers. The geopolitical competition between Russiaand the Western superpowers, Russia and Turkey, and theArmenian-Turkish conflict are the striking realities of thishistorical experience. The main elements of the South Caucasussecurity system must be capable of countering such clashes andensuring the peoples' security. Yet the complexity of the existingproblems prevents creation of a common security system. Each state inSouth Caucasus takes care of its own security and in the foreseeable
future it is hard to change this situation. Nonetheless, the onlymeans to protect the population of the region from devastating clashesis to maintain the common neutrality of the states [8].
September, 2015
References and Literature
1. Seymour T.D., The Life in the Homeric Age. N.Y. 2000.
2. К.С. Гаджиев, ГеополитикаКавказа, изд. Международныеотношения, М., 2003.
3. ЗбигневБжезинский, Стратегическийвзгляд. Америкаиглобальныйкризис, изд. АСТ, М., 2013.
4. ГеополитикаКаспийскогорегиона, М., изд. «Международныеотношения», 2003.
5. Внешняяполитика: вопросытеорииипрактики, изд. Университет, М., 2009.
6. СергейМаркедонов, АналитическиедокладыИнститутаКавказа, N 5, январь 2012.
7. ДжеймсФ. Данниген, ОстинБэй, Горячиеточки XXI века, из. ЭМСКО, М., 2014.
8. ԱնդրանիկՊետրոսյան, ՀարավայինԿովկասնուԵվրոպականքաղաքականհետազոտություններիկենտրոնականծրագիրը, Քննականվերլուծություն, Երևան, 2013:
- See more at:
Articles and Analyses
News from Armenia and Diaspora - NoyanTapan