南高加索:稳定和区域安全问题

Q2 Social Sciences Demokratizatsiya Pub Date : 2006-05-01 DOI:10.3200/DEMO.14.3.355-360
David Shahnazaryan
{"title":"南高加索:稳定和区域安全问题","authors":"David Shahnazaryan","doi":"10.3200/DEMO.14.3.355-360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: The establishment of irrevocable democracy, the rule of law, free market economic relations, and the protection of fundamental human rights have not yet assumed key significance in the South Caucasus countries. Consequently, all pressing problems of the region continue to intensify, keeping the region politically and economically unstable. Given contending geopolitical and geoeconomic interests, the region may develop into a center of clashes jeopardizing the currently manageable political instability. The focus of this article is to highlight the main threats to regional security and stability. Key words: Nagorno-Karabakh, NATO, South Caucasus Opposing Foreign Policy Vectors Division lines separating Armenia from the region became particularly pronounced in 1999, when the other Caucasus republics, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, walked out of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty (CST), declaring their intentions to instead integrate with Euro-Atlantic security structures. In 2003, the CST was reorganized into the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), formed as a counter to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the eastward expansion of European influence. Armenia is the only country in the South Caucasus whose foreign policy serves the goals of the CSTO, and Armenian authorities see it as the only international framework ensuring the country's national security. On the other hand, Georgia and Azerbaijan are striving to minimize threats to their security by seeking the development of relations with NATO. Armenia's only relations with NATO, through its Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP), have been a part of Moscow's attempt to initiate cooperation between NATO and the CSTO. Armenian authorities state that the country's defense system stems from the assumption of NATO-CSTO dialogue. It is obvious that Armenia also hopes for the implementation of a June 18, 2004, decision of the CSTO's Collective Security Council, the core of which is a structural transformation of a one-level individual partnership, effective under the frameworks of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and the Partnership for Peace program (PfP) into the format of a two-level individual-collective partnership with NATO. This is because every CSTO member country is also a member of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (CEAP), whereas Armenia is the only CSTO member developing an IPAP with NATO. There is little doubt that regional stability will be possible in the South Caucasus when the three states of the region belong to the same international security system. The harmonization, synchronization, and coordination of the foreign policy priorities of the three states can prevent the South Caucasus from developing into a hotbed of geopolitical clashes. This means that Armenia should revise its foreign policy. Armenia's IPAR however, is not sufficient, and the country should declare its intention to join NATO. While doing this, Armenia should continue to develop its place in and relationships with international and regional organizations, which in the future may take on key security functions. Under these conditions, Armenia's membership in GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) would indicate Yerevan's desire to take up a realistic foreign policy. If Armenia continues to remain isolated from the regional integration processes, the divergences in the interests of the three states will continue to deepen, and the line that separates confronting geopolitical blocs and security systems will run along Armenia's borders. Unfortunately, the authoritarian regime presently in power in Armenia has reduced its foreign policy to tighten its grip. As a result, Armenia has become the main conduit of Russian policy in the region, thus restricting its foreign policy to the bounds of the Kremlin's interests. The recent redeployment of Russian military forces and hardware from Georgia to Armenia reflects Armenia's continuing economic and political isolation, and is evidence of the growing polarization in the region. …","PeriodicalId":39667,"journal":{"name":"Demokratizatsiya","volume":"1 1","pages":"355-360"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The South Caucasus: Problems of Stability and Regional Security\",\"authors\":\"David Shahnazaryan\",\"doi\":\"10.3200/DEMO.14.3.355-360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract: The establishment of irrevocable democracy, the rule of law, free market economic relations, and the protection of fundamental human rights have not yet assumed key significance in the South Caucasus countries. Consequently, all pressing problems of the region continue to intensify, keeping the region politically and economically unstable. Given contending geopolitical and geoeconomic interests, the region may develop into a center of clashes jeopardizing the currently manageable political instability. The focus of this article is to highlight the main threats to regional security and stability. Key words: Nagorno-Karabakh, NATO, South Caucasus Opposing Foreign Policy Vectors Division lines separating Armenia from the region became particularly pronounced in 1999, when the other Caucasus republics, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, walked out of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty (CST), declaring their intentions to instead integrate with Euro-Atlantic security structures. In 2003, the CST was reorganized into the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), formed as a counter to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the eastward expansion of European influence. Armenia is the only country in the South Caucasus whose foreign policy serves the goals of the CSTO, and Armenian authorities see it as the only international framework ensuring the country's national security. On the other hand, Georgia and Azerbaijan are striving to minimize threats to their security by seeking the development of relations with NATO. Armenia's only relations with NATO, through its Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP), have been a part of Moscow's attempt to initiate cooperation between NATO and the CSTO. Armenian authorities state that the country's defense system stems from the assumption of NATO-CSTO dialogue. It is obvious that Armenia also hopes for the implementation of a June 18, 2004, decision of the CSTO's Collective Security Council, the core of which is a structural transformation of a one-level individual partnership, effective under the frameworks of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and the Partnership for Peace program (PfP) into the format of a two-level individual-collective partnership with NATO. This is because every CSTO member country is also a member of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (CEAP), whereas Armenia is the only CSTO member developing an IPAP with NATO. There is little doubt that regional stability will be possible in the South Caucasus when the three states of the region belong to the same international security system. The harmonization, synchronization, and coordination of the foreign policy priorities of the three states can prevent the South Caucasus from developing into a hotbed of geopolitical clashes. This means that Armenia should revise its foreign policy. Armenia's IPAR however, is not sufficient, and the country should declare its intention to join NATO. While doing this, Armenia should continue to develop its place in and relationships with international and regional organizations, which in the future may take on key security functions. Under these conditions, Armenia's membership in GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) would indicate Yerevan's desire to take up a realistic foreign policy. If Armenia continues to remain isolated from the regional integration processes, the divergences in the interests of the three states will continue to deepen, and the line that separates confronting geopolitical blocs and security systems will run along Armenia's borders. Unfortunately, the authoritarian regime presently in power in Armenia has reduced its foreign policy to tighten its grip. As a result, Armenia has become the main conduit of Russian policy in the region, thus restricting its foreign policy to the bounds of the Kremlin's interests. The recent redeployment of Russian military forces and hardware from Georgia to Armenia reflects Armenia's continuing economic and political isolation, and is evidence of the growing polarization in the region. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":39667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Demokratizatsiya\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"355-360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Demokratizatsiya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3200/DEMO.14.3.355-360\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Demokratizatsiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3200/DEMO.14.3.355-360","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: 2

摘要

摘要:在南高加索国家,建立不可撤销的民主、法治、自由市场经济关系和保护基本人权尚未具有关键意义。因此,该区域的所有紧迫问题继续加剧,使该区域在政治和经济上不稳定。鉴于地缘政治和地缘经济利益的争夺,该地区可能发展成为冲突中心,危及目前可控的政治不稳定。本文的重点是强调对区域安全与稳定的主要威胁。1999年,当其他高加索共和国阿塞拜疆和格鲁吉亚退出俄罗斯主导的《集体安全条约》(CST),宣布有意加入欧洲-大西洋安全架构时,亚美尼亚与该地区的分界线变得尤为明显。2003年,CST重组为集体安全条约组织(CSTO),以对抗北大西洋公约组织(NATO)和欧洲影响力的东扩。亚美尼亚是南高加索地区唯一一个外交政策为集体安全条约组织目标服务的国家,亚美尼亚当局将其视为确保该国国家安全的唯一国际框架。另一方面,格鲁吉亚和阿塞拜疆正设法发展与北约的关系,尽量减少对其安全的威胁。亚美尼亚与北约的唯一关系是通过其个别伙伴关系行动计划,这是莫斯科试图发起北约与集体安全条约组织之间合作的一部分。亚美尼亚当局说,该国的防御系统源于北约-集体安全条约组织对话的假设。显然,亚美尼亚也希望执行集体安全条约组织集体安全理事会2004年6月18日的决定,该决定的核心是在欧洲-大西洋伙伴关系理事会(EAPC)和和平伙伴关系计划(PfP)框架下有效的一级个人伙伴关系的结构转变为与北约的两级个人-集体伙伴关系的形式。这是因为集体安全条约组织的每一个成员国也是欧洲-大西洋伙伴关系理事会(CEAP)的成员,而亚美尼亚是唯一一个与北约共同制定国际行动计划的集体安全条约组织成员国。毫无疑问,当南高加索地区的三个国家属于同一国际安全体系时,该地区的稳定将是可能的。三国外交政策重点的协调、同步和协调可以防止南高加索地区发展成为地缘政治冲突的温床。这意味着亚美尼亚应该修改其外交政策。然而,亚美尼亚的IPAR是不够的,该国应该宣布加入北约的意图。在这样做的同时,亚美尼亚应继续发展其在国际和区域组织中的地位和与这些组织的关系,这些组织将来可能承担关键的安全职能。在这些条件下,亚美尼亚加入古阿姆集团(格鲁吉亚、乌克兰、阿塞拜疆和摩尔多瓦)将表明埃里温愿意采取现实的外交政策。如果亚美尼亚继续孤立于区域一体化进程之外,这三个国家在利益上的分歧将继续加深,分隔地缘政治集团和安全体系的界线将沿着亚美尼亚的边界延伸。不幸的是,亚美尼亚目前掌权的独裁政权减少了其外交政策,以加强其控制。结果,亚美尼亚成为俄罗斯在该地区政策的主要渠道,从而将其外交政策限制在克里姆林宫利益的范围内。最近俄罗斯将军事力量和硬件从格鲁吉亚重新部署到亚美尼亚,这反映出亚美尼亚在经济和政治上继续处于孤立状态,是该地区日益两极分化的证据。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The South Caucasus: Problems of Stability and Regional Security
Abstract: The establishment of irrevocable democracy, the rule of law, free market economic relations, and the protection of fundamental human rights have not yet assumed key significance in the South Caucasus countries. Consequently, all pressing problems of the region continue to intensify, keeping the region politically and economically unstable. Given contending geopolitical and geoeconomic interests, the region may develop into a center of clashes jeopardizing the currently manageable political instability. The focus of this article is to highlight the main threats to regional security and stability. Key words: Nagorno-Karabakh, NATO, South Caucasus Opposing Foreign Policy Vectors Division lines separating Armenia from the region became particularly pronounced in 1999, when the other Caucasus republics, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, walked out of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty (CST), declaring their intentions to instead integrate with Euro-Atlantic security structures. In 2003, the CST was reorganized into the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), formed as a counter to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the eastward expansion of European influence. Armenia is the only country in the South Caucasus whose foreign policy serves the goals of the CSTO, and Armenian authorities see it as the only international framework ensuring the country's national security. On the other hand, Georgia and Azerbaijan are striving to minimize threats to their security by seeking the development of relations with NATO. Armenia's only relations with NATO, through its Individual Partnership Action Plan (IPAP), have been a part of Moscow's attempt to initiate cooperation between NATO and the CSTO. Armenian authorities state that the country's defense system stems from the assumption of NATO-CSTO dialogue. It is obvious that Armenia also hopes for the implementation of a June 18, 2004, decision of the CSTO's Collective Security Council, the core of which is a structural transformation of a one-level individual partnership, effective under the frameworks of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and the Partnership for Peace program (PfP) into the format of a two-level individual-collective partnership with NATO. This is because every CSTO member country is also a member of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (CEAP), whereas Armenia is the only CSTO member developing an IPAP with NATO. There is little doubt that regional stability will be possible in the South Caucasus when the three states of the region belong to the same international security system. The harmonization, synchronization, and coordination of the foreign policy priorities of the three states can prevent the South Caucasus from developing into a hotbed of geopolitical clashes. This means that Armenia should revise its foreign policy. Armenia's IPAR however, is not sufficient, and the country should declare its intention to join NATO. While doing this, Armenia should continue to develop its place in and relationships with international and regional organizations, which in the future may take on key security functions. Under these conditions, Armenia's membership in GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) would indicate Yerevan's desire to take up a realistic foreign policy. If Armenia continues to remain isolated from the regional integration processes, the divergences in the interests of the three states will continue to deepen, and the line that separates confronting geopolitical blocs and security systems will run along Armenia's borders. Unfortunately, the authoritarian regime presently in power in Armenia has reduced its foreign policy to tighten its grip. As a result, Armenia has become the main conduit of Russian policy in the region, thus restricting its foreign policy to the bounds of the Kremlin's interests. The recent redeployment of Russian military forces and hardware from Georgia to Armenia reflects Armenia's continuing economic and political isolation, and is evidence of the growing polarization in the region. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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