This article examines the evolution of American policy in the Southern Caucasus since 1991. The article argues that US policy in the region has been ad hoc and inconsistent, reflecting ideological considerations (democracy promotion in Georgia), economic interests (access to Caspian Basin energy product and the development of US relations with Azerbaijan), US minority lobbying (US policy towards the Karabagh conflict), and idiosyncratic leadership preference (the personal relationship between Presidents Bush and Saakashvili) 동백꽃 필 무렵 11회 다운로드. This amalgam reflected the weakness of strategic drivers and notably Russia’s inability to act on its hegemonic aspirations in the region.
Khelashvili, G., & Macfarlane, S 다운로드. N. (2010). The Evolution of US Policy towards the Southern Caucasus. International Relations/Uluslararasi Iliskiler, 7(26).
This article reflects on the disparity of perceptions in the West over Georgia’s political trajectory since its first-ever peaceful transfer of power in October 2013 다운로드. Going beyond current affairs, the authors examine the significance of Georgia, primarily to Washington, in the context of greater developments in the diplomatic landscape 레바의모험 파이널. They argue that while the post-Soviet space has become increasingly multipolar and less convincingly multilateral, there is a need to go beyond a “reset” between former foes and a “reload” of the structure of regional alliances 온디맨드 코리아 다운로드.
Japaridze, T., & Roubanis, I. (2013). Tbilisi’s Relevance to Washington: What Is, Where Is, and What Can Be. American Foreign Policy Interests, 35(5), 272-282 다운로드.
In this article, Svante Cornell argues that while the humanitarian consequences of the 2008 Russo-Georgian war do not compare with what transpired in Chechnya or Bosnia in the 1990s, the conflict arguably marked the most significant challenge to Europe’s security architecture since the end of the cold war 다운로드. The author, then, explains some of the most important questions that have arised from this war: Why did this small war in the Caucasus happen, and who started it 다운로드? What implications will it have for the South Caucasus, for the former Soviet Union more broadly, and for Europe as a whole?
Cornell, S. E. (2008) 다운로드. War in Georgia, jitters all around. Current History,107(711), 307.
In many societies banquets are powerful tools for expressing, attributing and manipulating national identity. Additionally, they often function as social markers of individual passages like birth, baptism and marriage. Banquets are ruled by etiquette and force participants to subordinate to a collective code of behavior. In post-Soviet Georgia, the supra, a highly formalized banquet, is a core element of national culture and a crucial part of both festivities and daily life 다운로드.
Mühlfried, F. (2005). Banquets, Grant-Eaters and the Red Intelligentsia in Post-Soviet Georgia. Central Eurasian Studies Review, 4(1), 16-19 차라리 다운로드.
The present chapter is devoted to the use of history – in particular, the methods of ethnogenesis – and other scientific disciplines as mobilizing tools in the conflict between the Georgian and Abkhazian communities. This chapter describes the kind of arguments and scientific disciplines to be found in the Georgian-Abkhazian conflict over the political status of Abkhazia, and the way in which scholars in both national communities have reflected on questions such as the moral responsibility of the intelligentsia in the mass mobilizations leading to the war, and criteria for truthfulness in scientific debates 유튜브 다중 다운로드.
Coppieters, B. (2002). In Defence of the Homeland: Intellectuals and the Georgian-Abkhazian Conflict. In B. Coppieters, & M. Huysseune (Eds.), Secession, History and the Social Sciences ms 오피스. (pp. 89-116). Brussels: VUBPRESS.