Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BAKU: 'Russian-Georgian War Changed Balance Of Power In South Caucas

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BAKU: 'Russian-Georgian War Changed Balance Of Power In South Caucas

    'RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN WAR CHANGED BALANCE OF POWER IN SOUTH CAUCASIA'
    Aliyah Fridman

    news.az
    May 31 2010
    Azerbaijan

    Ronald Grigor Suny News.Az interviews Ronald Grigor Suny, Charles
    Tilly Collegiate Professor of Social and Political History.

    There is an opinion that that the war between Russia and Georgia in
    2008 had a huge influence on the further developments in the South
    Caucasus. What the Russian-Georgian war changed in our region?

    The Russian-Georgian War of August 2008 changed the balance of power
    in South Caucasia. Russia essentially used the opportunity offered by
    Saakashvili's attack on South Ossetia to show that it was ready to
    use force to re-establish its dominant position in the Near Abroad,
    at least when actively threatened. The Russian military effort,
    however, was somewhat clumsy, and Moscow is well aware of its limited
    military resources and the need for reform. But what is clear is that
    no solution of either the Georgian conflicts or the Karabakh conflict
    will occur without Russian will and agreement. This does not mean that
    the South Caucasian republics cannot act and change the situation in
    a constructive way.

    Do you think that Russia is really interested in the Karabakh
    settlement?

    Armenia demonstrated that it could attempt to improve relations with
    Turkey by first gaining Russian agreement for its initiative and
    then pursuing it. Russia may have been reluctant about that move, but
    eventually came around. Russia has so many problems that it does not
    need more troubles in Caucasia. North Caucasia is its most vulnerable
    frontier, and a strategically rational Russia should move cautiously
    but deliberately to resolve some of its South Caucasian problems.

    Karabakh would be a good place to start.

    Because many actors in Armenia and Azerbaijan are content with the
    status quo, local initiative may not be forthcoming. Russian, Turkish,
    Iranian, and American efforts could push the belligerents to come to
    some agreement.

    And what about possible influence of Russian-Turkish rapprochement?

    Russia-Turkish rapprochement is good for everyone. Turkey is changing
    more rapidly than any other country in the region. Its civil society
    is opening up; the country is on a trajectory toward greater democracy;
    the government is making overtures to non-Turkish citizens, allowing a
    broad discussion of the Armenian Genocide, even demonstrations. These
    are extraordinarily positive developments, and should be encouraged
    by everyone.

    May be NATO somehow assist stability in the region?

    NATO is a dead letter in South Caucasia. It is not going to happen
    for the foreseeable future. Of course, if the Great Powers thought
    creatively, then there could be plans to bring Russia as well as
    other former Soviet countries into a new collective security structure
    under NATO.

    Iran as well is trying to play its role in the Karabakh settlement?

    Bringing Iran into the picture would be even better, though the
    Americans have a real blind spot vis-a-vis Iran. They have constructed
    it as an existential danger to peace in the Middle East, and given the
    fear of the Obama administration of criticism from the Republicans
    that they are weak and indecisive in security issues, it is hard to
    make the kind of agreements or concessions that would bring Iran into
    a larger Middle East settlement.

    And finally what do you think about regional policy of US?

    As for the United States, sadly it does not really have a coherent and
    consistent policy toward South Caucasia. First they were interested
    primarily in energy and pipelines; then they staked their hopes on
    Georgia; they always have to pay some attention to Armenia because of
    the large Armenian population in certain key states. But the USA has
    many interests in the region that do not all run in the same direction:
    placate the Armenian lobby (but don't give it too much, e.g., Genocide
    recognition); democracy building (which does not seem as much of a
    priority as stability of existing governments even though they are not
    democratic); energy and pipelines; thwarting Iranian influence; not
    antagonizing Russia. These various ambitions are hard to reconcile,
    but the Obama administration, unlike the previous administration,
    has cut back somewhat on the Busheviks' grandest plans for global
    hegemony. This opens some space for better relations with Russia and
    potential cooperation in solving the long-running conflicts in South
    Caucasia before another war in a region often forgotten by the West
    surprises the world.

    Ronald Grigor Suny is Charles Tilly Collegiate Professor of Social
    and Political History, Director, Eisenberg Institute for Historical
    Studies, The University of Michigan, Emeritus Professor of Political
    Science and History, The University of Chicago.




    From: A. Papazian
Working...
X