EXTERNAL ACTORS IN CENTRAL ASIA: MULTILATERAL COOPERATION MECHANISMS

Q3 Social Sciences Central Asia and the Caucasus Pub Date : 2021-09-27 DOI:10.37178/ca-c.21.3.02
S. Zhiltsov
{"title":"EXTERNAL ACTORS IN CENTRAL ASIA: MULTILATERAL COOPERATION MECHANISMS","authors":"S. Zhiltsov","doi":"10.37178/ca-c.21.3.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The highly favorable geographic location and rich natural resources are the main attractions of post-Soviet Central Asia. After the disintegration of the U.S.S.R, it became clear that different actors operated differently in this strategically important region. This area occupied different places in their strategies, and their goals were realized using different instruments. Regional disunity (Central Asian states then failed to tune up multilateral cooperation) brought grist to the mill of extra-regional players. Mutual political claims and personal ambitions of the regional leaders made it hard or even impossible to initiate common regional projects. Local contradictions in the water and energy sphere became a serious obstacle on the road towards political interaction when dealing with regional problems, environmental protection being one of them. In short, at that time, Central Asian countries did not yet master the art of pushing aside disagreements and problems for the sake of positive actions. Extra-regional actors capitalized on this fact without reservations. The U.S., the EU, Russia, China, India, Japan, and Turkey proceeded from their long-term interests when they tried to impose their political agenda on the local states and draw them into the sphere of their economic interests. Apparently, they preferred bilateral agreements with each of the Central Asian states, since their importance for each of the external players depended on their economic development, geopolitical significance and natural resources that they possessed. In recent years, the extra-regional states have revised and readjusted their Central Asian politics. Today, they prefer multilateral relations; in some cases, this format has been used for a long time, while other extra-regional countries have only recently employed the “5 + an extra-regional actor” format. Turkey and Japan are two leaders in this respect: they were the first to suggest this format, and others followed suit. Many countries limit their multilateral formats to the foreign minister level and, therefore, to declarations and joint statements. Regional states prefer this format, which allows them to balance out external players and address their own problems. Predictably, Central Asian countries are ready to be involved in multilateral formats.","PeriodicalId":53489,"journal":{"name":"Central Asia and the Caucasus","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central Asia and the Caucasus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37178/ca-c.21.3.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The highly favorable geographic location and rich natural resources are the main attractions of post-Soviet Central Asia. After the disintegration of the U.S.S.R, it became clear that different actors operated differently in this strategically important region. This area occupied different places in their strategies, and their goals were realized using different instruments. Regional disunity (Central Asian states then failed to tune up multilateral cooperation) brought grist to the mill of extra-regional players. Mutual political claims and personal ambitions of the regional leaders made it hard or even impossible to initiate common regional projects. Local contradictions in the water and energy sphere became a serious obstacle on the road towards political interaction when dealing with regional problems, environmental protection being one of them. In short, at that time, Central Asian countries did not yet master the art of pushing aside disagreements and problems for the sake of positive actions. Extra-regional actors capitalized on this fact without reservations. The U.S., the EU, Russia, China, India, Japan, and Turkey proceeded from their long-term interests when they tried to impose their political agenda on the local states and draw them into the sphere of their economic interests. Apparently, they preferred bilateral agreements with each of the Central Asian states, since their importance for each of the external players depended on their economic development, geopolitical significance and natural resources that they possessed. In recent years, the extra-regional states have revised and readjusted their Central Asian politics. Today, they prefer multilateral relations; in some cases, this format has been used for a long time, while other extra-regional countries have only recently employed the “5 + an extra-regional actor” format. Turkey and Japan are two leaders in this respect: they were the first to suggest this format, and others followed suit. Many countries limit their multilateral formats to the foreign minister level and, therefore, to declarations and joint statements. Regional states prefer this format, which allows them to balance out external players and address their own problems. Predictably, Central Asian countries are ready to be involved in multilateral formats.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中亚的外部行为者:多边合作机制
优越的地理位置和丰富的自然资源是后苏联中亚的主要吸引力。在苏联解体后,很明显,不同的参与者在这一具有重要战略意义的地区采取了不同的行动。这一领域在他们的战略中占据了不同的位置,他们的目标是通过不同的手段实现的。地区不统一(中亚国家当时未能协调多边合作)给地区外的参与者带来了机遇。区域领导人的相互政治要求和个人野心使得很难甚至不可能启动共同的区域项目。在处理区域问题时,水和能源领域的地方矛盾成为政治互动道路上的严重障碍,环境保护就是其中之一。总之,当时中亚国家还没有掌握搁置分歧和问题、采取积极行动的艺术。区域外行为者毫无保留地利用了这一事实。美国、欧盟、俄罗斯、中国、印度、日本和土耳其从他们的长期利益出发,试图将他们的政治议程强加给当地国家,并将它们拉入他们的经济利益范围。显然,他们更喜欢与每个中亚国家签订双边协议,因为它们对每个外部参与者的重要性取决于它们的经济发展、地缘政治意义和它们拥有的自然资源。近年来,域外国家对中亚政策进行了调整和调整。今天,他们更喜欢多边关系;在某些情况下,这种格式已经使用了很长时间,而其他区域外国家只是最近才采用“5 +一个区域外行动者”格式。土耳其和日本是这方面的两个领导者:他们首先提出了这种形式,其他国家也纷纷效仿。许多国家将其多边形式限制在外交部长级别,因此仅限于声明和联合声明。地区国家更喜欢这种模式,因为这种模式使它们能够平衡外部参与者并解决自己的问题。可以预见,中亚国家已经做好了参与多边形式的准备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Central Asia and the Caucasus
Central Asia and the Caucasus Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Pakistan's Trade Opportunities and Challenges with CARs: Metaphor Used by the US as a Lethal Weapon of Mass Destruction against the Other for Pursuing Ulterior Motives Prohibition on Opium Poppy Cultivation in Afghanistan: Geo-Politics of Afghanistan under Taliban Regime: Pakistan and Central Asian Republics: Cooperation and Opportunities -Trade and Energy corridors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1