Russia and Eurasia

The South Caucasus: A common future?

0 5
By Zaur Shiriyev | 29 April 2010

 

Religious leaders from Armenia and Azerbaijan made a call in Baku for a peaceful resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The head of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Catholicos Garegin II, stated that problems between states should be solved in accordance with international law and the rights of the nations and emphasized his faith in the common future of the South Caucasus.

Clearly, the current situation in the region – the “frozen” Turkish-Armenian rapprochement, Russia’s decision on the acceptance of independence of Georgian rebel regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, since 2008, the Armenian occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh and, more dramatically, Washington’s “double-standards” toward Azerbaijan – raises a crucial question: “Is there a common future for the south Caucasus states?”

Obviously, the region’s current political systems and practices emerged in the turmoil of a collapsing superpower and have been deeply affected by this. Furthermore, if in the Baltic countries, home to another troika of former Soviet republics, the history, proximity to friendly neighbor nations and the generally accepted notion of European identity helped to mitigate the negative consequences of the post-Soviet transition to sustainable independence, the externalities in the south Caucasus acted to make the transition significantly harder.

Contrary to some existing stereotypes, there seems to be little that inherently divides the peoples of the south Caucasus. Even if the most recent historic example of integration was the short-lived “Trans-Caucasian Federation” of 1917-18, it is, at least, a symbolic recognition of the regional identity and an attempt to establish and maintain a separate regional political entity. Especially, the Caucasus gathering under one roof, the formulas concerning economic or political integration have been raised. The formulas of The Common House of Caucasus, United States of Caucasus, the Caucasus Stability Pact, etc. are intended to put an end to the main source of the fragmented structure of instability in the region.

The contemporary example of strong regional partnership between Azerbaijan and Georgia, two nations with very different dominant ethnic and religious groups, shows that not only a cooperative arrangement within the south Caucasus is possible, but also that it is, clearly, in the interest of its participants. Moreover, the Azerbaijani-Georgian cooperation has had a strong impact on the wider region, among other things, the largest infrastructure project, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, or BTC, pipeline, and by having served as the core for the GUAM, the Organization for Democracy and Economic Development.

Such cooperation is not based on history, but rather on the ability of both Baku and Tbilisi to overcome existing obstacles for a vision of a common future of the Caucasus. For the south Caucasus’ common future to be fully realized, however, Armenia must be a part.

Presently, Armenia stands largely separate from its two Caucasian neighbors and, unable to develop relations with Turkey, generally, acts more as an observer rather than a participant in the emerging partnerships in the region. It seems that if Azerbaijan and Georgia are fixated on the regional future, the Armenian thinking is still preoccupied by its past. Thus, not much room is left for thinking about the present; perhaps, a common trend for transitional periods.

As the regional projects expand and develop further, Armenian non-participation increasingly turns into a limitation for integration in the south Caucasus as a whole and destructive isolation for Armenia itself. Should the current tendency of entrenching positions both in Baku and Yerevan continue, with time it might be even more difficult to bridge the differences and help Armenia to become a fully integrated member of the south Caucasus region.

Comprehensive integration in the south Caucasus, thus, can be achieved through the formulation and acceptance of a common political identity based on the interests of the Caucasian states and their citizens.

However imperfect, Azerbaijani-Georgian relations provide evidence for the feasibility of such integration and a model of recognition through the accommodation of both the interests of the individual states and of the entire region.

Another important element of the partnership between Baku and Tbilisi is the ability to overcome mutual historic and more recent emotional grievances as well as an understanding that all unresolved issues could be addressed through bilateral negotiations. Arguably, only such accommodation can serve as the basis for sustainable regional identity. One psychological factor that seems to underpin any such identity is the appreciation of the Caucasus being a common neighborhood for all of its citizens. Without an appreciation of this commonality, a regional cooperative arrangement is not likely to be effective.

Finally, the recent developments in the region since the events of 9/11 and particularly since the August 2008 conflict between Russian and Georgian forces have demonstrated once again that the geopolitical realignment of the region has not yet ended and the rivalry of outsiders over the region’s future still continues.

 

 


Zaur Shiriyev is a foreign policy analyst based in Azerbaijan. He can be reached at zaur.shiriyev@gmail.com.

 


Hurriyet DailyNews

About the author / 

CESRAN Int.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

CESRAN Blog

  • 24th Issue is Online Now!

    Vol. VI | No. III – July-August-September 2020 To Download the Magazine Click Here… CONTENTS 05-14….. World News by Ebru Birinci 17-24….. Preparedness for an Uncertain Future “The Only Thing We Have to Fear is Fear Itself” by Professor Mark Meirowitz 25-39….. EU LAW vs UK LAW The Primacy of EU Law over National Law:…

  • IEPAS2020 is Going Virtual!

    Dear Friends and Colleagues, IEPAS2020 is Going Virtual! Due to the COVID19 pandemic, we are holding our entire conference virtually by streaming all of the live sessions. You may participate in all of our virtual networking events. In case of missing a session, you may get full access to the replays of every session since all…

  • The 13th issue of JCTS (Journal of Conflict Transformation & Security) is out now…

    The 13th issue of JCTS (Journal of Conflict Transformation & Security) is out now… Vol. 8 | No. 1 | 2020 Click here to Download the Entire Issue   TABLE OF CONTENTS Editor’s Note By David Curran Introduction By Nergis Canefe Research Articles Statelessness as a Permanent State: Challenges to the Human Security Paradigm By…

  • The 19th Issue of The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development is Out Now!

    The 19th issue of the rest: journal of politics and development is out now. Download the issue here… TABLE OF CONTENTS Research Articles Turkish AK Parti’s Posture towards the 2003 War in Iraq: The Impact of Religion amid Security Concerns By Alberto Gasparetto Nigeria and the Great Powers: The Impacts of the Boko Haram Terrorism on…

  • 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 2019 Global Go To Think Tank Index ranked CESRAN International 141st among the World’s “Top Think Tanks in Western Europe” 75th among the World’s “Top Environment Policy Think Tanks” 153rd among the World’s “Top Foreign Policy…

  • THE 18TH ISSUE OF THE REST: JOURNAL OF POLITICS AND DEVELOPMENT IS OUT NOW.

    The 18th issue of the rest: journal of politics and development is out now. Download the issue here… TABLE OF CONTENTS Research Articles The Foreign Policy Decision Making Approaches and Their Applications Case Study: Bush, Obama and Trump’s Decision Making towards Afghanistan and the Region By Sharifullah Dorani Evaluating the Explanatory Power of Social Identity Theory,…

Newsletter