Russia and Eurasia

South Caucasus Needs More Pro-Active EU Engagement

By Zaur SHIRIYEV | 31 May 2010

The European Parliament, or EP, approved a report on May 20 on the need for a European Union strategy for the South Caucasus, which stresses the need for the union to be proactive with respect to stabilization and encourage the development of the three South Caucasus states.

The most important element of this resolution is that the EP adopts a resolution for the first time which calls on Armenia to withdraw its forces from all occupied territories of Azerbaijan and allow displaced persons to return to their homes while also preventing further conflicts caused by homelessness.

Even though the EP has no formal role in the EU’s foreign and security policy, it is a significant indicator of debates and concerns on what exactly the EU should be doing and why a more effective EU diplomacy is often impossible.

Hence, the Southern Caucasus is located at the intersecting zones of EU-regional projects and initiatives like the European Neighborhood Policy, or ENP, the Black Sea Synergy, and the most recent initiative of the Eastern Partnership.

Currently, energy security is gaining prominence on the EU agenda and it is most likely to guide the EU’s relations with South Caucasus states, especially with Azerbaijan in the coming years. In spite of the importance of the South Caucasus, significant numbers of European politicians and bureaucrats continue to underestimate the dangers stemming from local conflicts in the South Caucasus for the European Union. These threats posed by these conflicts to the energy security of Europe were demonstrated recently and fully by the Russian-Georgian war in August 2008.

Unresolved conflicts in the region are not the only challenge that the EU has to confront, but they are without doubt the key obstacles to implementing successfully any EU “strategy to assist the transformation of the South Caucasus into a region of sustainable peace, stability and prosperity and to fully use its potential to contribute to the peaceful solution of the conflicts in the region by combining its soft power with a firm approach.”

The problem with the established notion of the “frozen conflict” is that these conflicts were not reliably frozen but open to a risky “unfreezing.”

Moreover, after the 2008 war, it has to be clear that no one should rely anymore on the “frozenness” of such conflicts. With regard to the South Caucasus’s regional conflicts, the EU was not or only indirectly involved in conflict resolution and peacekeeping.

The EU’s role in this field of action was described by the International Crisis Group in 2006 as working around the conflict, not working on the conflict. With the 2008 war, the EU had to learn that in a conflict-stricken region like the South Caucasus, any external actor is finally caught up by challenges of conflict management even if it sets other priorities on his agenda toward the partner region like good governance, rule of law, economic reform and support for intra-regional integration or energy cooperation.

All of these issues from good governance to intra-regional cooperation are too connected with and hampered by the implications of unresolved regional conflicts.

It’s clear that the ENP is not a conflict prevention or settlement mechanism. However, the integration of the region into the EU’s neighborhood would require joint and tailor-made efforts at a certain stage to protect the countries of the region against numerous risks and complex mixtures of threats, most importantly to their sovereignty and territorial integrity. Responsibility toward the stability and predictability of the South Caucasus and the prosperity and security of its citizens has to be displayed both by the neighbor countries and the EU.

Obviously, the EU as a new player has been slow in building consensus within the organization on the need to commit more resources to stabilizing the situation in the South Caucasus. The deployment of the EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia in the aftermath of the August war could mark the beginning of a more active EU engagement.

However, the EU’s leverage is limited by the fact that it is in no common political view inside EU regarding to South Caucasus security problems. For peace process in the South Caucasus needs more active EU engagement. For example, in the Balkans the peace process and implementation of peace agreements has been enhanced by EU membership perspective. It is important to develop a similar strategic vision for the South Caucasus, which would make it easier for their leaders to persuade their societies on the need for compromise.

Finally, if “sustainable peace, stability and prosperity” are the union’s strategic goals in the region, conflict management and resolution strategy needs to inform the formulation and implementation of any EU policy vis-à-vis the region, and all policies need to be assessed in their impact on the region’s conflicts.


* Zaur Shiriyev is a foreign policy analyst based in Azerbaijan.


Hurriyet DailyNews

About the author / 


Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

jga bookreview


jga bookreview

jga bookreview

jga bookreview

jga bookreview

jga bookreview

jga bookreview

jga bookreview


  • The inherent dangers of secrecy in the US foreign policy

    Since the Vietnam War, officials of the United States have increasingly abused the essential democratic safeguards of accountability and an informed citizenry in apparent attempts to protect themselves from being held accountable for their actions. They use secrecy and disinformation to prevent the American people from obtaining the information they need to evaluate their government’s…

  • 18th Issue of Political Reflection Magazine is Out Now!

    Vol. V | No. I – January-February-March 2019 To Download the Magazine Click Here… CONTENTS 05-06…..World News by Furkan Sahin 09-14…..The Ideological Potential of Climate Change: (Post) Politics in the Age of Global Warming by Miguel Angel Zhan Dai 15-18…..Yemen Civil War: A Conflict That Has Never Ended by Dr. I. Aytac Kadioglu 21-25…..NATO: The Shifting Sands of an Alliance by…

  • CESRAN International Named again amongst the Top Think Tanks in the World

    CESRAN International is pleased to announce that it has been named again amongst the world’s best think tanks. The 2018 Global Go To Think Tank Index ranked CESRAN International 141st among the World’s “Top Think Tanks in Western Europe” 76th among the World’s “Top Environment Policy Think Tanks” 152nd among the World’s “Top Foreign Policy…

  • New Issue is Out Now!

    Vol. IV | No. V – October-November-December 2018 To Download the Magazine Click Here… CONTENTS 04-06…..World News by Furkan Sahin  08-20…..Terrorism in Syria and Beyond: An Interview with Prof. Alain Gabon by Dr. Rahman Dag 22-24…..Erdogan’s Best Shot is Still in the West by Dr. Murat Ulgul 26-30…..Raqqa vs Kobani – Terrorism vs Revolution by Dr. Rahman Dag 32-34…..Future of…

  • Domestic Politics and the Design of International Institutions

    Abstract Scholars are increasing focused on how and why states design international institutions. International relations theories have historically guided research on these institutions, but have not provided adequate insights into the theoretical bases for their design. Rationalists’ theories of domestic politics offer an alternative approach to understanding institutional design. This study utilizes the positive theory…