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).
Alexander Cooley and Lincoln Mitchell argue in this article that two flawed principles guided recent U.S. policy towards Georgia that failed to anticipate the 2008 conflict and prevent its escalation 다운로드. First, the United States supported the Saakashvili government, rather than promoting broader Georgian democratic development. Second, the United States backed reuniting Georgia’s territorial integrity, rather than acting as an honest broker to resolve the frozen conflicts with South Ossetia and Abkhazia 삼성 fn 메신저 다운로드. Over time, the strong personalized ties that developed between Washington and Tbilisi transformed the Georgian regime’s domestic policies and priorities into official U.S 다운로드. policies and goals, leading to an unhealthy capture of U.S. foreign policy by Tbilisi.
Cooley, A., & Mitchell, L. A. (2009). No way to treat our friends: recasting recent US–Georgian relations 다운로드. The Washington Quarterly, 32(1), 27-41.
Omelicheva, M. Y. (2010). Between commitment and pragmatism: assessing international influence on human rights practices in Georgia. Journal of Human Rights, 9(4), 445-466 소주한잔 다운로드.
The findings of this study indicate that Georgia’s reference groups, particularly the United States, contributed to its backsliding on human rights by (1) supporting the Georgian government in its goal of rebuilding the state prior to democratizing it and strengthening respect for human rights; (2) redirecting financial and other assistance from democracy promotion to state-building projects; and (3) providing the Georgian government with flattering, yet, misleading feedback concerning the republic’s accomplishments in the area of human rights fez download.