Great and Small Games in Central Asia and the South Caucasus

Central Asia and the South Caucasus have been a playing field for great games for centuries, and especially since the rivalry between the great powers intensified in the nineteenth century. This was clearly discernible in the British-Russian rivalry prior to the First World War or in the Soviet-American competition during the Cold War. The latter period was naturally focused on Afghanistan, as other Central Asian states were part of the Soviet Union, as was the South Caucasus region. Therefore, the end of the Cold War opened up a new era in the rivalry of the great powers or great games in Central Asia and the South Caucasus, one engaging global players like the United States, Russia and China, but at the same time also the regional players, analyzed in this book.

Piotr Bajor, in his chapter entitled The Policy of the Russian Federation towards Central Asia, introduces a research question concerning the key factors determining Russia’s policy towards Central Asia. The author proposes multiple hypotheses focused on political, economic and security issues and Bajor declares an adherence to a realist theoretical framework of analysis. In the first part of the chapter, the conditions under which Russian policy toward Central Asia has developed are elaborated. Next, based on strategic governmental documents, the declared goals of the Russia Federation toward this region are presented. Subsequently, the implementation of the abovementioned aims are analyzed in reference to bilateral and multilateral relations between Russia and the states of Central Asia. Finally, the latest trends impacting the discussed issues are characterized.

Tomasz Pugacewicz in his chapter U.S. Decision-making on the Use of Drones before 9/11: A Case Study on UAVs Operating from Uzbekistan over Afghanistan, focuses on explaining five decisions taken between 2000 and 2001 regarding the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) departing from the territory of Uzbekistan for actions in the airspace of Afghanistan. Much work has been published on U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and counter-terrorism prior to the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks, but relatively few have focused directly on the abovementioned decision-making process. In order to explain this phenomenon, Pugacewicz utilizes two theories of foreign policy decision-making: the bureaucratic politics model and the advisory system framework. Those two explanatory theories were selected based on the decisional unit approach and the identified decision-makers involved in the analyzed process. The chapter is divided into four parts. In the introduction, the theoretical concepts, a literature review, and the empirical context are discussed. In the first part, actors involved in the decision-making on the mentioned issue are identified along with their preferences. In the next part, the decision-making process is reconstructed according to two foreign policy theories associated with the decisional unit composition identified. In the conclusion, the explanatory power of the applied approaches is assessed.

The research question introduced in Magdalena Kania’s chapter EU Development Assistance to Central Asia: an Interest-driven and Value-driven Hybrid refers to the motives behind the EU’s development engagement in Central Asia since 2002. Notably, the author is interested in “to what extent the EU’s development assistance is driven by the value-based approach and to what extent it remains an instrument of the realization of self-interest”. Kania’s hypothesis states that the EU should be more interested in value-driven policy as it is presenting its own identity at the international stage in terms of normative/civilian power. She also indicates a research gap in the academic literature as publications on the EU’s development assistance are focused on this phenomenon from the perspective of policy studies. As a result, the number of chapters focused on EU-recipient countries relations is limited, especially in the case of Central Asia. The chapter is divided into two parts. In the first one, theoretical international relations approaches toward development assistance are discussed (realism, the nexus between security and development, normative concepts, and the idea of the EU as normative power). In the second section, the growing relevance of Central Asia for the European Union is presented, and EU documents regarding its policy toward this region are analyzed in detail.

Central Asia and the South Caucasus had been under Russian or Soviet dominance for generations, hence to large extent this dominance shaped similar political developments, political elites and influences in tis different countries. Therefore, the external unifying factors served to a large extent as a regional identity builder. At the same time, there are many dividing factors in those sub-regions (especially discernible in the South Caucasus), and a regional identity is far from being created. Even though there are similarities between those two sub-regions, mostly connected with the development of modern states under Russian or Soviet dominances, there are distinctive features for both (Central Asia vs. the South Caucasus). Central Asia, paradoxically, may be treated as a more coherent region, with higher integrational potential, one which is actually used being more by crucial regional players, namely China and Russia. The South Caucasus, also due to its regional divisions, is definitely far from the creation of a proper regional organization. Nevertheless, regionalism and the regional level of analysis is becoming important, especially for the consideration of the great games of great powers in Central Asia and the South Caucasus (predominantly the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China, and to a lesser extent the United States).

Marcin Grabowski and Jakub Stefanowski, in their chapter Belt and Road Initiative: A Tool for Reshaping the Structure of the Central Asian System? take BRI as an instrument to reshape the Central Asian regional system in order to reinforce the Chinese position there. The authors indicate that while there is an extensive literature on BRI, the role of this initiative in changing the regional system’s structure is barely analyzed, if at all. The chapter is based on two research questions: (1) can the BRI reshape the structure of system in Central Asia at all and (2) is China capable of driving structural change in this part of the world? Two hypotheses are introduced: (1) the BRI is a crucial element in reshaping the systemic structure in Central Asia and (2) China has the capabilities and resources to gradually change the shape of the regional system. The research employs structural realism (neorealist theory) and in the result is based on the system level of analysis. The chapter is divided into three parts. In the first section, the theoretical setting (including the level of analysis problem) of the researched issues is described in detail. Next, the BRI/One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative is introduced in the broader context of its general aims, i.e. exceeding those associated only with Central Asia states. Finally, the role of BRI project in Central Asia is analyzed at the level of the regional system and in the context of the following issues: military, energy, trade, foreign direct investments flow, and regional integration setting.

Alessia Chiriatti’s chapter on Georgia, South Caucasus Equilibrium and the Turkish Role. How do Non-state Actors Act and React? is focused on understanding the ability of non-state actors to by-pass and influence the foreign policy of the central government and their power to act as an alternative structure to the state in the conflict resolution process. In the chapter, the following research questions are formulated: how do non-state actors work at the regional level?; how do mentioned actors affect governmental institutions?; what is Turkey’s role in South Caucasian security in the context of this state’s struggle to become the leading power in this region? The concept of the Regional Security Complexes developed by Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver is declared as a theoretical perspective behind the research design. Additionally, the literature on “shadow regionalism” and “diffuse regionhood” is utilized. The chapter is divided into two parts. Firstly, the regional security environment in the South Caucasus is characterized, based on a case study of Georgia with a particular emphasis on Abkhazia and South Ossetian separatism and the transnational non-state actors (trafficking drugs, arms and humans) involved in it. Next, Turkey’s role in the Caucasian security environment is elaborated based on this state’s proactive foreign policy in this region.

Great power politics and great games in Central Asia and the South Caucasus depend to a large extent on the region itself, a region composed of groups of states with interesting mechanisms that have shaped their socio-political and economic systems in reference to a set of cultural and historical factors, as well as Soviet or communist heritage, frequently resulting in non-democratic systems. Understanding those mechanisms and ways of influencing them seems to be crucial for conducting efficient and effective policies in the region. It is similarly important for researchers to explore and explain the region, its structure and mechanisms driving basic units of regional and international systems, namely nation states. Therefore, a set of three chapters explaining clan politics, nationalism and media politics in this region has been prepared.

The research question introduced by Paulina Niechciał in her chapter Patterns of Nationalism and National Identity Construction in Central Asian Republics concerns the leading patterns of the local nation-building programs in the states of post-Cold War Central Asia as employed by their primary constructors. The author proposes a hypothesis assuming that the current nation-building process in this part of the world closely resembles the one developed during the Soviet period. Niechciał points out that, while there are many single cases and comparative studies on nationalism in Central Asia, this region is still an attractive research field. Social constructivism is chosen in the chapter as the employed theoretical framework and the chapter is divided into two parts. In the first, the nation-building process in Soviet Central Asia is described. In the second section, the same mechanism is analyzed but after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The scholar decided to limit the scope of her research to two cases: Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

Rafał Kuś, in his chapter entitled Between Public Service and Serving the State. The Role of the Media in the Political System of Kazakhstan introduces the research question of whether Kazakhstan’s media system is an effective tool of government’s policy. The author hypothesizes that, due to the politicization of the aforementioned media, Kazakh means of communication have such potential and are effectively used by the authorities in their undertakings. Kuś identifies a research gap, since most studies on Kazakhstan’s media environment are descriptive, and there is a lack of studies employing theoretical frameworks developed in media studies. The author argues that the studied mechanism could be associated with constructivism in International Relations. The chapter is divided into four parts. Firstly, the main components of classification developed by Daniel C. Hallin and Paolo Mancini are presented. Next, two sections discuss the mentioned theoretical framework in the context of Kazakhstan (the media and the political context). Finally, Kazakh government media strategies are analyzed in the context of the domestic and foreign policies adopted by the state.

In the Conclusion, we present the main takeaways from the individual chapters and discuss some general remarks based on the whole volume. The volume brings different dimensions which are crucial for an understanding of the contemporary Central Asia and South Caucasus, without having the ambition to cover all of the issues, but definitely those most important, especially at the international level (especially great powers) and regional level (with selected organizations), as well as chosen case studies at the domestic level. It certainly constitutes an excellent starting point for further research in each of those dimensions.

The structure of the volume corresponds with the difficult task of supplying a comprehensive introduction to the current problems in Central Asia and the South Caucasus, both at the international, (intra-)regional, and domestic levels. The editors decided to distinguish the above parts, even though they understand the fact that those levels and their different dimensions certainly overlap and influence on another in the real world.

***

The publication of this volume would not have been possible without the support of the many people involved in it. In the first instance, we would like to express our gratitude toward the authors of the chapters, since without their commitment to the implementation of the comments from reviewers and editors alike, and especially their patience regarding the time-consuming organizational challenges faced by the project, this book would never have come to fruition. Secondly, we are grateful to our editors from Peter Lang for their unfailing organizational support. Additionally, the organizational and financial support from the Jagiellonian University’s Faculty of International and Political Studies is greatly appreciated, especially from its consecutive Deans and staff member Małgorzata Jasek. Finally, we owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to our wives as, without their constant support and consideration, the delivery of this volume would have been impossible.