Redefining Armenian National Security

Q2 Social Sciences Demokratizatsiya Pub Date : 2006-03-01 DOI:10.3200/DEMO.14.2.223-234
Richard Giragosian
{"title":"Redefining Armenian National Security","authors":"Richard Giragosian","doi":"10.3200/DEMO.14.2.223-234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As a region, the South Caucasus has traditionally been viewed as a prisoner to its geography, with its position as an East-West crossroads tending to also serve as an arena for competition among more powerful neighbors. For much of the past two centuries, this vulnerability was exacerbated by the competing interests of the dominant regional powers of Russia, Turkey, and Iran. Since the onset of independence in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the South Caucasus has also been seen as a hostage to history, with a particularly savage record of ethnic violence and outright conflict. It is this historical legacy that is most significant, however, as the region's infant states struggle with the challenges of independence and statehood.For the three states of the South Caucasus-Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia-there is an underlying set of shared challenges, ranging from the imperatives of economic and political reform to the impediments from a legacy of seven decades of Soviet rule. As each of these three infant states have adapted their own unique strategies for strengthening their sovereignty and statehood, the region has become increasingly marked by a deepening and diverging divide. Within this context, each state has followed a different trajectory that offers as much peril as promise for regional security. But of the three states in the region, it is Armenia that is in the weakest position, and perhaps most importantly, is the most unprepared to adapt to the dynamic shifts in regional security.For landlocked and energy-dependent Armenia, the disruption of traditional trade and energy links was the most serious and devastating development. By imposing a trade and transport blockade on Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Turkey compounded Armenia's economic vulnerability and isolation. It further excluded Armenia from participating in nearly all projects to promote regional integration and development, most notably the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline.Unlike its neighbors, the past fifteen years of Armenian independence have largely been marked by a comparative degree of internal unity and stability. Although there has been an absence of civil war or internal strife, external conflict and militant nationalism have, nevertheless, come to define Armenian national security. The core issue of Armenian national security since independence has been the unresolved conflict with neighboring Azerbaijan over the Armenian-populated enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. The Karabakh issue has impacted a wide range of Armenian policies, from the economic to the political. It has also influenced broader geopolitics by triggering a profound disruption of regional trade and energy links and altering Russian, Turkish, United States, and even Iranian strategies in the region. But what is needed now is a redefinition of Armenia's concept of national security. That redefinition necessitates an ability to go beyond the rigid confines of the Karabakh conflict, which continues to determine and dominate the parameters of Armenian national security.Trends in Armenian InsecurityIn terms of national security, Armenia's case represents an interesting paradox. Despite a comparatively longer and more peaceful record of democracy, an outwardly stronger state, and a dominant but stable military, there is a surprising degree of insecurity in Armenia today. Most surprising, there is an inverse relationship between the strengthening Armenian state and the country's mounting insecurity. In this sense, Armenia is not alone, as recent events in other post-Soviet states, such as Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan, have demonstrated the destabilizing effects of measures focused on state security at the expense of societal stability.The roots of this Armenian insecurity can be traced to three specific trends, manifested in the military, political, and economic spheres. These trends are also interrelated, with a linkage that has only exacerbated the structural deficiencies in the process of Armenian statebuilding. …","PeriodicalId":39667,"journal":{"name":"Demokratizatsiya","volume":"12 1","pages":"223-234"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Demokratizatsiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3200/DEMO.14.2.223-234","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

As a region, the South Caucasus has traditionally been viewed as a prisoner to its geography, with its position as an East-West crossroads tending to also serve as an arena for competition among more powerful neighbors. For much of the past two centuries, this vulnerability was exacerbated by the competing interests of the dominant regional powers of Russia, Turkey, and Iran. Since the onset of independence in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the South Caucasus has also been seen as a hostage to history, with a particularly savage record of ethnic violence and outright conflict. It is this historical legacy that is most significant, however, as the region's infant states struggle with the challenges of independence and statehood.For the three states of the South Caucasus-Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia-there is an underlying set of shared challenges, ranging from the imperatives of economic and political reform to the impediments from a legacy of seven decades of Soviet rule. As each of these three infant states have adapted their own unique strategies for strengthening their sovereignty and statehood, the region has become increasingly marked by a deepening and diverging divide. Within this context, each state has followed a different trajectory that offers as much peril as promise for regional security. But of the three states in the region, it is Armenia that is in the weakest position, and perhaps most importantly, is the most unprepared to adapt to the dynamic shifts in regional security.For landlocked and energy-dependent Armenia, the disruption of traditional trade and energy links was the most serious and devastating development. By imposing a trade and transport blockade on Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan and Turkey compounded Armenia's economic vulnerability and isolation. It further excluded Armenia from participating in nearly all projects to promote regional integration and development, most notably the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline.Unlike its neighbors, the past fifteen years of Armenian independence have largely been marked by a comparative degree of internal unity and stability. Although there has been an absence of civil war or internal strife, external conflict and militant nationalism have, nevertheless, come to define Armenian national security. The core issue of Armenian national security since independence has been the unresolved conflict with neighboring Azerbaijan over the Armenian-populated enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. The Karabakh issue has impacted a wide range of Armenian policies, from the economic to the political. It has also influenced broader geopolitics by triggering a profound disruption of regional trade and energy links and altering Russian, Turkish, United States, and even Iranian strategies in the region. But what is needed now is a redefinition of Armenia's concept of national security. That redefinition necessitates an ability to go beyond the rigid confines of the Karabakh conflict, which continues to determine and dominate the parameters of Armenian national security.Trends in Armenian InsecurityIn terms of national security, Armenia's case represents an interesting paradox. Despite a comparatively longer and more peaceful record of democracy, an outwardly stronger state, and a dominant but stable military, there is a surprising degree of insecurity in Armenia today. Most surprising, there is an inverse relationship between the strengthening Armenian state and the country's mounting insecurity. In this sense, Armenia is not alone, as recent events in other post-Soviet states, such as Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan, have demonstrated the destabilizing effects of measures focused on state security at the expense of societal stability.The roots of this Armenian insecurity can be traced to three specific trends, manifested in the military, political, and economic spheres. These trends are also interrelated, with a linkage that has only exacerbated the structural deficiencies in the process of Armenian statebuilding. …
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
重新定义亚美尼亚国家安全
作为一个地区,南高加索传统上被视为其地理位置的囚徒,其作为东西方十字路口的位置也倾向于成为更强大的邻国之间竞争的舞台。在过去两个世纪的大部分时间里,俄罗斯、土耳其和伊朗等占主导地位的地区大国的利益竞争加剧了这种脆弱性。自苏联解体后独立以来,南高加索地区也被视为历史的人质,有着种族暴力和直接冲突的特别野蛮的记录。然而,正是这一历史遗产最为重要,因为该地区的新生国家正在努力应对独立和建国的挑战。对于南高加索的三个国家——亚美尼亚、阿塞拜疆和格鲁吉亚来说,它们面临着一系列潜在的共同挑战,从迫切需要的经济和政治改革,到70年苏联统治遗留下来的障碍。由于这三个新生国家都采用了自己独特的战略来加强主权和国家地位,该地区的分歧日益加深和分化。在这种背景下,每个国家都走上了不同的道路,给地区安全带来的危险与希望一样多。但在该地区的三个国家中,亚美尼亚处于最弱的地位,也许最重要的是,它最没有准备好适应地区安全的动态变化。对于内陆和依赖能源的亚美尼亚来说,传统贸易和能源联系的中断是最严重和最具破坏性的发展。阿塞拜疆和土耳其对亚美尼亚和纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫实行贸易和运输封锁,使亚美尼亚的经济更加脆弱和孤立。它还禁止亚美尼亚参加几乎所有促进区域一体化和发展的项目,最明显的是巴库-第比利斯-杰伊汉石油管道。与邻国不同的是,过去15年的亚美尼亚独立在很大程度上是以相对程度的内部团结和稳定为标志的。虽然没有内战或内乱,但外部冲突和激进的民族主义已成为亚美尼亚国家安全的特征。自独立以来,亚美尼亚国家安全的核心问题一直是与邻国阿塞拜疆在亚美尼亚人居住的纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫飞地问题上悬而未决的冲突。卡拉巴赫问题影响了亚美尼亚从经济到政治的广泛政策。它还引发了对区域贸易和能源联系的深刻破坏,并改变了俄罗斯、土耳其、美国甚至伊朗在该地区的战略,从而影响了更广泛的地缘政治。但现在需要的是重新定义亚美尼亚的国家安全概念。重新定义需要有能力超越卡拉巴赫冲突的严格限制,该冲突继续决定和主导亚美尼亚国家安全的参数。就国家安全而言,亚美尼亚的情况代表了一个有趣的悖论。尽管亚美尼亚有着相对长久和和平的民主历史,一个表面上更强大的国家,以及一支占主导地位但稳定的军队,但今天的不安全程度令人惊讶。最令人惊讶的是,强大的亚美尼亚国家与该国日益加剧的不安全之间存在反比关系。从这个意义上说,亚美尼亚并不孤单,因为最近在乌兹别克斯坦和阿塞拜疆等其他后苏联国家发生的事件表明,以牺牲社会稳定为代价,以国家安全为重点的措施造成了不稳定的影响。亚美尼亚这种不安全的根源可以追溯到军事、政治和经济领域中表现出来的三种具体趋势。这些趋势也是相互关联的,它们之间的联系只会加剧亚美尼亚国家建设过程中的结构性缺陷。…
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
Demokratizatsiya
Demokratizatsiya Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Occupying a unique niche among literary journals, ANQ is filled with short, incisive research-based articles about the literature of the English-speaking world and the language of literature. Contributors unravel obscure allusions, explain sources and analogues, and supply variant manuscript readings. Also included are Old English word studies, textual emendations, and rare correspondence from neglected archives. The journal is an essential source for professors and students, as well as archivists, bibliographers, biographers, editors, lexicographers, and textual scholars. With subjects from Chaucer and Milton to Fitzgerald and Welty, ANQ delves into the heart of literature.
期刊最新文献
Authoritarian Modernization in Russia The Rise and Decline of Electoral Authoritarianism in Russia Struggling for Citizenship: Civic participation and the State in Russia Meddling with Justice: Competitive Politics, Impunity, and Distrusted Courts in Post-Orange Ukraine The Molotov-Ribbentrop Commission and Claims of Post-Soviet Secessionist Territories to Sovereignty
×
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