Abstract:

This paper examines how Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has affected the Kremlin’s influence in Central Asia and the South Caucasus regions. Russia’s invasion has challenged the traditional multi-vectoral foreign policy pursued by some Central Asian and South Caucasian states as they come under pressure to take sides. Russia’s difficulties have created an opportunity for rival actors to fill a rapidly developing vacuum resulting from the diminution of Russian influence. This is particularly noticeable in the case of China but is also evident with Turkey which is seeking an enhanced position in Central Asia and has intensified economic, security and defence cooperation with the regions’ regimes. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has cooled debates with Central Asian countries about joining Kremlin-sponsored organisations, such as the Eurasian Economic Union, which Putin hopes to establish as a rival to the EU.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has substantially altered Russia’s standing in the South Caucasus. It has been transformed from a unipolar region, with Russia dominating, to a more complex bipolar region with the Kremlin having to share influence with Turkey. The 2020 war between Armenian and Azerbaijani forces in Karabakh and the surrounding region provided the Kremlin with an opportunity to extend its influence and military presence in the region. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine tilted the balance further in Azerbaijan’s favour. Russia has had no choice but to acknowledge Turkey’s transformation from peripheral player to regional peer and rival pole of influence. The complex manoeuvrings of the Georgian government since the invasion will also be analysed as will the significance of the EU Commission decision in November 2023 to accept the country as a candidate for EU membership. Finally, Russia’s establishment of a naval base in Abkhazia as a response to setbacks in Crimea will be examined.

Abstract:

This paper examines the evolving logistics and trade strategies of Central Asian countries as they navigate the challenges of geopolitical dependencies and seek to diversify their economic and trade routes beyond traditional reliance on Russia. Amidst the shifting dynamics of global power and trade, these nations are pioneering alternative pathways to enhance their strategic autonomy, market access, and regional influence. Utilizing the theoretical lens of the English School, particularly through Filippo Costa Buranelli's concept of the dovetail effect, this study explores how Central Asian states are engaging in a balance of participation in various international platforms and agreements to subtly shift the regional power equilibrium and foster increased interdependence.

Central Asian countries are actively developing logistics and trade routes in four key directions: southward through Afghanistan with access to Pakistan; southwestward utilizing Iranian ports; westward towards Europe through Turkey or the Black Sea; and eastward in cooperation with China to tap into Asian markets. This multifaceted approach is facilitated through platforms such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), consultative meetings of Central Asian leaders, and bilateral negotiations, all aimed at creating a robust legal framework to support these initiatives.

The strategic importance of these endeavors is twofold. Firstly, by diversifying their logistics and trade routes, Central Asian countries aim to open up new markets for themselves and, secondly, to create conduits for larger international actors to develop cooperation through the region. This approach not only enhances their economic prospects but also positions them as intermediaries in trade networks, thereby increasing their leverage and regional significance.

Through case studies and analysis of key agreements, such as Kazakhstan's involvement in the EAEU and the development of transport corridors with the Organisation of Turkic States, this paper delineates how these nations utilize international cooperation to their advantage. The establishment of simplified customs corridors, agreements on international combined transport, and the development of modern logistics services are highlighted as pivotal steps towards achieving these strategic objectives.

By applying Costa Buranelli's dovetail effect, this research provides a novel perspective on how these countries leverage their geographical and strategic positions to navigate between major powers, enhance their autonomy, and play a more significant role in international affairs. This study not only sheds light on the complex dynamics of regional politics and trade but also underscores the importance of theoretical frameworks in understanding the subtleties of state behavior on the international stage.

Abstract:

Discourses are inadvertently placed in the context of related practices and political leaders’ language of security reflects not only their thinking about issues of security, but it also reflects linkages to policies. Political rhetoric echoes sensibilities to the extant or past experience of threats, and on the other hand it affects policies which may aggravate likelihoods of insecurities.

The studies of political rhetoric in the post-soviet space are sparse. Among few studies is the study of New Year presidential speeches where the sense of “others” was invoked (Karaliova, 2016), danger discourses in Uzbekistan’s and Kyrgyzstan’s media (Megoran 2005). These countries were developing their statehood when notions of security were informed not only by experience of the cold war (Buzan, Wæver and De Wilde1998) though some countries in the region, like Kazakhstan, bore the nuclear legacy of preceding state (the republic had nuclear test sites). Speeches on security related issues have been studied as issues of difference of languages of counter-terrorism (McDonald et al 2013), as a way to understand rhetoric about refugees (Baker\ et al 2008), or when a country’s security is viewed as statist, exclusionary and militarized (McDonald, 2005).

This paper contributes to the field by discussing security-related political discourses in the post-Soviet Central Asia and compares official rhetoric of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan before and after the start of war in Ukraine using content analysis of major presidential speeches (using QDA Miner for quantitative and qualitative analysis). Analysis shows a significant variation in rhetorical prominence of different security issues and actors in the post-Soviet period before the war in Ukraine and after the start of the war. Before the war (analysis encompasses more than two decades of database of speeches) relative insignificance of most security issues for Uzbekistan conformed to its overall isolationist policies, while the general modernization frame of Kazakhstan prompted highest security-related references in its presidential speeches. Kyrgyzstan, as a relatively smaller country, falls in between. The peace and security discourse after the start of the war has started to change slightly to reflect also changing dynamics in the leadership of two of these three countries (Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan) and shows the precarious state of multi-vectoral foreign policy agenda in this period.