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 paper is an attempt to analyse the root causes of discord between Georgia and Russia that pertain to the politics of the North Caucasus. In the first section, an overview of the North Caucasus problem as existing since the late 1980s is given 다운로드. In the following section, the international political dimension of the Georgian-Russian squabble over the North Caucasus is analysed, followed by the domestic political and ideational factors that influence Georgian policy toward the North Caucasus 다운로드. Finally, a plausible basis for the solution of the North Caucasian problem is discussed, in the context of intensity of Georgian-Russian political disagreement 롤토체스 애드온.
Khelashvili, G. (2012). Georgia, Russia and the North Caucasus: Is Enmity What States Make of It? Center for Social Sciences, Tbilisi
The main argument of this paper is that neither the Georgian nor Russian government has changed its position in the conflict or its underlying assumptions about regional politics — this situation sets the “frozen” conflict on an unavoidable collision course over the next few years 다운로드. This danger is also due to a certain angle entertained by the current Georgian leadership in its confrontation with Russia as a response to the obvious power asymmetry between the two countries 스나이퍼 엘리트 다운로드. First, the Georgian government cautiously sought to undermine Russia’s authority in the North Caucasus. Second, Saakashvili apparently tried to re-open the rift in US-Russian relations in order to capitalize on the two great powers’ differences 다운로드. This paper examines underlying assumptions and possible implications of these two approaches.
Khelashvili, G. (2011). Georgian Perceptions of the North Caucasus and of U.S.-Russian Relations 다운로드. PONARS Eurasia Memo 148
This paper is an attempt to analyze what has underpinned Georgia ’s foreign policy consensus and how likely it is to persist in the face of mounting difficulties concerning Georgia’s international standing 스마트 메이커 다운로드. The explanation for foreign policy persistence includes the Georgian president’s grip on power, the intransigence of the Russian leadership toward improving relations with Tbilisi, a lack of practical cooperative areas in Russian-Georgian relations, and the government’s motivation to stay its course under conditions of international uncertainty 다운로드. However, the broad ideological consensus regarding Georgia’s foreign policy stance may be weakening.
Khelashvili, G 마크탈출맵. (2011). Georgia’s Foreign Policy Impasse. Is Consensus Crumbling? Ponars Eurasia Policy Memo, (187).