History of Formation and Development of Relations between the South Caucasus States and the EU

 
PIIS086919080019380-5-1
DOI10.31857/S086919080019380-5
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Occupation: Postgraduate student
Affiliation: Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University)
Address: Moscow, Vernadsky avenue, 76
Occupation: Postgraduate student
Affiliation: Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University)
Address: Moscow, Vernadsky avenue, 76
Occupation: associate Professor - Department of world economy, Department of Economics and Finance, Deputy Dean-Faculty of international journalism, Deputy editor-in-chief
Affiliation: Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University)
Address: Moscow, Vernadsky avenue, 76
Occupation: professor, Faculty of Languages and History-Geography
Affiliation: Ankara University
Address: Turkey
Journal nameVostok. Afro-Aziatskie obshchestva: istoriia i sovremennost
EditionIssue 2
Pages51-62
Abstract

 

 

The article examines the history of the formation and development of relations between the states of the South Caucasus (Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan) with the European Union. Methods: system analysis, forecasting, comparison. In the course of the research, special attention is paid to the conditions and determinants of the formation of the European vector of development of the countries of the South Caucasus region at the turn of the 20–21 centuries. The results obtained in the course of the study led to the conclusion that in the 1990s, the European Union largely viewed the South Caucasus (Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia) through the prism of Moscow, taking into account the fact of Russia's presence in the region and its active actions. The situation changed in the 2000s, when the EU’s interests and its interaction with the region intensified, as well as after the armed conflict in Georgia, when Europe became concerned about the need to respect and strengthen security in the region. Subsequently, the security policy was supplemented with new dimensions in cooperation, namely: political, economic, humanitarian. It should be noted that today the states of the South Caucasus region are much more fragmented than ever, and the only integration projects that have taken place are related to external actors. Therefore, in order to intensify cooperation with the EU and achieve real tangible results, the South Caucasus republics should balance their foreign policy, clearly define development priorities, overcome socio-political confrontation within the country, and achieve a peaceful settlement of “frozen” conflicts.

Keywords Partnership, European Union, Agreement, Security, South Caucasus, Economy, Politics, Membership
Received15.04.2022
Publication date11.05.2022
Number of characters26483
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной
1

ВВЕДЕНИЕ

2 Южный Кавказ – это чрезвычайно сложный во многих отношениях регион, один из наиболее уязвимых и фрагментированных в мире, где накладываются друг на друга внутренние и внешние угрозы национальной безопасности. Три государства Южного Кавказа – Грузия, Армения и Азербайджан – крайне сложны по своей внутренней конфигурации. Спустя практически тридцать лет после распада СССР регион по-прежнему страдает от конфликтов, а его население перманентно находится в небезопасной обстановке. При этом следует отметить, что Армения, Азербайджан и Грузия стали членами и участниками широкого спектра различных, иногда противоположных по своему курсу организаций и союзов, однако им так и не удалось достигнуть полноценной политической и экономической интеграции в современном международном пространстве. Достаточно характерно и ярко историю становления и развития стран Южного Кавказа охарактеризовал западный историк Дж. Форсайт: «Южный Кавказ – это в определенной степени непопулярный регион. Его история в целом представляется сумбурной и сложной и по большому счету трагической, в запутанных хитросплетениях которой с некоторой уверенностью разбирается очень узкий круг специалистов-историков. Регион является, по сути, конгломератом проблемных этносов» [Forsyth, 2013, p. 341]. Справедливости ради стоит упомянут тезис Малышева о том, что Южный Кавказ (ЮК), который включает в себя территории трех суверенных государств – Азербайджанской Республики (АР), Республики Армения (РА) и Грузии, – в настоящее время испытывает на себе давление различных террористических структур. Особенно подвержены этому Азербайджан и Грузия, но некоторые проявления данного процесса можно наблюдать и в Армении [Malyshev, 2017, p. 178].
3 Сегодня Южный Кавказ стал местом противостояния трех могущественных сил мира – США, России и Европейского Союза. Летом 2004 г. Вашингтон объявил эту территорию зоной своих стратегических интересов. Вместе с тем Южный Кавказ является традиционной сферой влияния Российской Федерации, которая имеет с ним непосредственные границы. ЕС, в отличие от США и Российской федерации, выстраивает свою политику на Кавказе, уделяя внимание в большей степени социально-экономической сфере, а не военно-политической составляющей. Кроме того, один из ключевых приоритетов сотрудничества Европейского Союза с республиками Закавказья заключается в достижении стабильности в регионе, поддержке и соблюдении «европейских стандартов», касающихся обеспечения демократических свобод и гарантирования прав человека [Tulmets, 2018, p. 462].
4 В свою очередь Азербайджан, Армения и Грузия, несмотря на разные геостратегические траектории своего позиционирования, активно артикулируют выбор европейского вектора развития, что в большинстве своем связано с опытом и традициями дипломатии этих стран, а помимо этого – и духовной близостью с европейской цивилизацией [Варданян, 2010, с. 87].

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 507

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Ajvazjan A.S. Discourse on Belonging to Europe in the Political Dia-logue between the EU and the Countries of the South Caucasus. Moscow Univer-sity Bulletin. Series 25: International Relations and World Politics. 2018. Vol. 10. No. 2. Pp. 125–144 (in Russian).

2. Burov A.A. The State of Modern Politi-cal Integration Processes in the South Caucasus. Journal of Scientific Publications of Graduate Students and Doctoral Students. 2008. No. 7(25). Pp. 47–51 (in Rus-sian).

3. Vardanjan A.R. Energy and Transit Potential of the South Caucasus and Energy Security of Europe. Peace and Politics. 2010. No. 1(40). Pp. 84–89 (in Russian).

4. Gadzhiev K.S. Geopolitics of the Caucasus. Moscow: Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija, 2001 (in Russian).

5. Golotvina Ju.N. Eastern Partnership as a Mechanism for Expanding the EU's Sphere of Influence. Panorama. 2015. Vol. 20. Pp. 25–30 (in Russian).

6. Golubov O. Nagorno-Karabakh: EU urges Baku and Yerevan to Negotiate, 29 September 2020. https://p.dw.com/p/3j47j (accessed: 12.10.2021).

7. Degoev V.V. So as not to be Lost One by One. Caucasus and Greater Europe: Realities Against Temptations. Friendship of Nations. 2005. No. 3. Pp. 183–189 (in Russian).

8. Dzigua N.V. Prospects for the Development of Georgia as a State Performing the Function of a Transit Corridor. Power and Society (History, Theory, Practice). 2009. No. 1. Pp. 104–120 (in Russian).

9. Ivanov S.M. South Caucasus in regional geopolitics. Diplomatic Service. 2019. No. 2. Pp. 41–52 (in Russian).

10. On approval of the “Concept of National Security of Georgia”. https://www.matsne.gov.ge/ka/document/view/43156?publication=0 (accessed: 25.10.2020).

11. Papojan A.R. Political and Economic Cooperation Between Armenia and the European Union. News of the Ural Federal University. Series 3: Social Sciences. 2016. Vol. 11. No. 2(152). Pp. 115–124 (in Russian).

12. Pylin A.G. Azerbajdzhane Renewal of Economic Policy in Azerbaijan. World of Changes. 2017. No. 1. Pp. 27–43 (in Russian).

13. Savchuk T. Nagorno-Karabakh: Conflict in 10 Answers], 30 September 2020. https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/30864543.html (accessed 12.10.2021).

14. Skvorcova N., Abazov D. Conflict of Interests in the South Caucasus. Post-Soviet Studies. 2020. Vol. 3. No. 2. Pp. 181–188 (in Russian).

15. Sogomonjan V. Forces Interested in Regional Integration and the Formation of a New World Order in the South Caucasus. Central Asia and the Caucasus. 2007. No. 1(49). P. 7–14 (in Russian).

16. Fel'dman D. South Caucasus on the way to Europe: Human Dimension of Distance. Power. 2006. No. 8. P. 69–72 (in Russian).

17. Hugaev T.G. EU Policy in South Transcaucasia: Security Aspects. Questions of National and Federal relations. 2019. Vol. 9. No. 7. Pp. 1046–1052 (in Russian).

18. Chizh A. Ten Years of Eastern Partnership: Experience and Prospects. Central Asia and the Caucasus. 2020. Vol. 23. No. 2. Pp. 7–18 (in Russian).

19. Shabanov M. Geopolitical Features of the South Caucasus and the Interests of World Powers. Successes of Modern Science and Education. 2015. No. 5. Pp. 138–142 (in Russian).

20. Shturba E.V. Territorial Enclaves of the Former USSR in the Context of the National Security of Modern Russia. Historical and Socio-Educational Thought. 2016. Vol. 8. No. 2–1. Pp. 26–38 (in Russian).

21. Babayan N.A. Global Trend EU‐style: Democracy Promotion in 'Fragile' and Conflict‐Affected South Caucasus. Global Policy. 2016. Vol. 7. Issue. 2. Pp. 217–226.

22. Ferrero-Waldner B. European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy. Forum Bled, Slovenia, 28 August 2006. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_06_477 (ac-cessed: 25.10.2020).

23. Delcour L. Lost in Transition: The Liberal International Order in Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus. The International Spectator. 2018. Vol. 53. No. 1. Pp. 109–121.

24. De Waal T. The Caucasus: An Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.

25. Gils van E. Azerbaijan and the European Union. New York: Routledge, 2019.

26. Ferreira-Pereira L., Smith M. The European Union's Strategic Partnerships: Global Diplomacy in a Contested World. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.

27. Forsyth J. The Caucasus: A History. New York: Cambridge University Press., 2013.

28. Gugushvili A. Self-interest, Perceptions of Transition and Welfare Prefer-ences in the New Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus. Europe-Asia Studies. 2015. Vol. 67. No. 5. Pp. 718–746.

29. Lewington R. Keeping the Peace in the South Caucasus: the EU Monitoring Mission in Georgia. Asian Affairs. 2013. Vol. 44. No. 1. Pp. 51–69.

30. Lynch D. The Security Dimension of the European Neighbourhood Policy. The International Spectator. 2005. 1, January-March. Pp. 33–43.

31. Malyshev D.V. Terrorist Threats Coming from the Post-Soviet Central Asia and the Caucasus. Current Problems of Europe. 2017. No. 4. Pp. 163–187.

32. Markedonov S.M. The Caucasus Region: From Periphery to the Focal Point of International Affairs. Current Problems of Europe. 2010. No. 3. Pр. 100–122.

33. National Statistics Office of Georgia. https://www.geostat.ge/en/modules/categories/585/geostat-100-years (accessed 22.10.2020).

34. National Statistical Office of the Republic of Armenia, “Supply-Use Table, 2005”.

35. Nixey J. The South Caucasus: Drama on Three Stages. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/Research/Americas/us0510_nixey.pdf (accessed 19.09.2020).

36. Pipia I. Annotation of Whole-Plastid Genomes of Wild Grapes (Vitis vi-nifera subsp. sylvestris) from the South Caucasus, Europe and the Mediterranean Basin. Acta horticulturae. 2019. No. 1248. Pp. 235–240.

37. President Saakashvili's Inauguration Speech, 25 January 2004. http://www.civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=26694 (accessed: 11.09.2020).

38. Sieglinde G. The European Neighbourhood Policy in a Comparative Per-spective: Models, Challenges, Lessons. Abingdon; New York: Routledge, 2016.

39. Simão L. The EU's Neighbourhood Policy towards the South Caucasus: ex-panding the European Security Community. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.

40. Tulmets E. Introduction: Competing Conditionalities? Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus between the European Union and Russia. European Politics and Society. 2018. Vol. 19. Issue. 4. Pp. 451–470.

41. Vasilyan S. “Moral Power” of the European Union in the South Caucasus. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.

42. Vieira A. The European Union's ‘Potential We’ between Acceptance and Contestation: Assessing the Positioning of Six Eastern Partnership Countries. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies. 2021. Vol. 59. Issue 2. Pp. 297–315.

43. Weinar A. Look at Migrations in the Post-Soviet Space - the Case of Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and Russian Federation. International migration. 2014. Vol 52. No 5, pp. 47–51.

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up