C<scp>hallenges for</scp> D<scp>emocratization in</scp> C<scp>entral</scp> A<scp>sia</scp>: W<scp>hat</scp> C<scp>an the</scp> U<scp>nited</scp> S<scp>tates</scp> D<scp>o</scp>?

İpek, Pınar

doi:10.1111/j.1475-4967.2007.00287.x

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…by groups with divergent interests. The US government fears that civil crises in the region would create power vacuums that could be filled by extremist Islamic groups and thus provides support to the region's authoritarian regimes ( _ Ipek, 2007b; see also Raphael & Stokes, 2014). Some voices within the US, however, assert that the US has been too focused on security relations at the expense of pushing for human rights reforms ( _ Ipek, 2007b;Nichol, 2014).…”

Section: Us Behaviour and Commercial Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The US government fears that civil crises in the region would create power vacuums that could be filled by extremist Islamic groups and thus provides support to the region's authoritarian regimes ( _ Ipek, 2007b; see also Raphael & Stokes, 2014). Some voices within the US, however, assert that the US has been too focused on security relations at the expense of pushing for human rights reforms ( _ Ipek, 2007b;Nichol, 2014). The US government has, at times, pressed for political reform and democratization e for example, in Turkmenistan and in Kazakhstan e to the extent that it has reportedly unnerved regional elites: 'Washington has come to be viewed as the greater threat to the region's nondemocratic ruling elites, who fear that they are targets for ouster' (Olcott, 2005: 331; see also Hu & Cheng, 2008).…”

Section: Us Behaviour and Commercial Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Outcomes and strategies in the ‘New Great Game’: China and the Caspian states emerge as winners

Stegen

Kusznir

2015

Journal of Eurasian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe decades-long struggle for control over oil and natural gas resources, infrastructure and influence in the Caspian region has been referred to as the 'New Great Game', with Europe, China, the US and Russia typically cited as the main combatants. We explore recent developments and aver that, if present trends continue, Europe will have access to Azerbaijan's resources, China to those of the East Caspian states, the US will stay commercially and strategically engaged, and Russia's influence will (continue to) diminish. How did this unexpected turn of events arise? We examine China's dominance and argue that the foreign policies of the US and Russia e within the region and even further abroad e have inadvertently driven the East Caspian states and China towards each other. Wary of potential maritime chokepoints in the Pacific, China feels strongly compelled to shore up resources and influence in the Caspian region. In part because of Russia's intransigence regarding the Caspian Sea's status, the East Caspian states e faced with constrained access to the West e have turned to China as an alternative market and counterbalance to Russia.

show abstract

Section: Us Behaviour and Commercial Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Us Behaviour and Commercial Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes and strategies in the ‘New Great Game’: China and the Caspian states emerge as winners

Stegen

Kusznir

2015

Journal of Eurasian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Changing security threat perceptions in Central Asia

Nourzhanov¹

2009

Australian Journal of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Changing security threat perceptions in Central Asia KIRILL NOURZHANOV +This article discusses the current process of securitisation in Central Asia and identifies its convoluted and faulty nature as a factor impeding collective security action in the region. It uses the Regional Security Complex Theory (RSCT) as an explanatory tool and posits that security discourse in */ and about */ the five former Soviet republics is dominated by geopolitical grand strategy on the one hand and by particularist concerns about lack of democracy or transnational threats on the other. Issues of conventional security involving two or more states, such as territorial disputes or resource management, are pushed aside and rarely securitised at the official level. The article outlines conceptual and institutional reasons for this bias, and argues that unless inter-state tensions are properly analysed, debated and addressed, the prospects for security and stability in the region will remain grim. Dealing with threats in Central AsiaAfter gaining independence in 1991, five former Soviet Central Asian republics formed a distinct security complex. Faced with a multitude of military, societal, environmental and transnational threats, they have rarely managed to counter them in a cooperative and efficient manner. Despite their verbal commitment to the global fight against terrorism, their recent track record in this area is also unimpressive.This article will address the question of why a cooperative security system has failed to materialise in Central Asia over the past 16 years. It will argue that the absence of a realistic and objective threat assessment process has been a major factor. Security thinking in the region has been dominated by a focus on regime survival in individual countries on the one hand, and on the forceful imposition of the global security agenda on the other. This leaves little room for dealing with long-running inter-state tensions. Without resolving border issues, territorial disputes and conflicts over natural resources at the regional level, Central Asia will not have internal peace and stability nor be able to play a useful role in the international effort to defeat terrorism.

show abstract

Azerbaijan's Foreign policy and Challenges for Energy Security

İpek¹

2009

middle east j

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Challenges for Democratization in Central Asia: What Can the United States Do?

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Outcomes and strategies in the ‘New Great Game’: China and the Caspian states emerge as winners

Outcomes and strategies in the ‘New Great Game’: China and the Caspian states emerge as winners

Changing security threat perceptions in Central Asia

Azerbaijan's Foreign policy and Challenges for Energy Security

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About