This article examines the shift in the balance of power in Central Asia in the context of the United States' declining global hegemonic power. The authors analyze the hegemonic struggle between China, Russia, and the U.S. in Central Asia and its influence on the middle power formation in this region. The authors argue that although Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan have high economic potentials, by certain criteria they have not achieved the status of middle powers yet. "Middlepowermanship dilemma" is formulated to explain why a hegemonic order has not been established in Central Asia and why middle powers have not emerged in the region.
Central Asia's importance in Turkish foreign policy has begun to rise since the beginning of the 2010s. Turkey determines its regional policy in the conception of the Turkic world, including Azerbaijan. With this regard, Turkey pays particular attention to the institutionalization of bilateral relations with the regional states. The most successful measure in that direction is the establishment of the Turkic Council. This integration project marks significant progress for the institutionalization of Turkey's Central Asian policy. Turkey is one of the non-regional actors affecting the Central Asian balance of power. However, it has limited influence on regional security and military affairs, which Russia dominates. Turkey is only a secondary non-regional actor in Central Asia. Therefore, it primarily structures its Central Asian policy using common historical and cultural elements. In this study, we investigate whether Turkey has a long-term project in Central Asia. For this purpose, we explore the restrictions of Turkish policy in Central Asia. After that, we compare Turkey's importance for the foreign policies of Central Asian states. Additionally, we evaluate Turkey's interest in non-Western organizations such as the Eurasian Economic Union and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to transform Turkish foreign policy priorities in recent years. Finally, we show that Turkey has a policy toward Central Asia but not a fully-fledged project for the region.
Major international players are sensing, at a political and intuitive level, possible shifts in the approaches of many African states, but it is necessary to work with their elites. So, external forces are set to fight.
The authors present a coordinate system to map the international reaction to the Ukraine crisis, with special attention to African states. Methods of cluster, correlation, and regression analyses are used to obtain an overall picture of the international reaction to the crisis over time and highlight factors that can influence the positions of states. The positions of African states cannot be easily explained by material factors but are rather the consequence of political choice. African states gravitate towards a neutral position to stay equidistant from both sides in the confrontation. Assertive attempts by the great powers to persuade African states to solidarize with their positions may prove abortive.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.