THE CAUCASUS IN THE POST-COLD WAR ERA: FROM THE SOVIET REPUBLICS TO A CRUCIAL BUFFER ZONE
Abstract
The Caucasus has been a focal point of interest for neighboring powers in the post-Cold War era, driven by its geopolitical and geo-economic significance and the deep-rooted affiliations these powers have with the region's peoples. This paper examines Russia’s and Turkey’s historical objectives in the Caucasus, their fulfillment over the past 25 years, and the use of historical narratives as tools of soft power.
Since 1994, Russia has viewed the former Soviet republics as part of its “near abroad,” secured under its “nuclear umbrella.” Conversely, Turkey has maintained a presence in the region through soft power strategies. These strategies leverage Turkish and Islamic identity and relationships, which have been actively promoted by both the Turkish government and various NGOs, including the now-defunct Fethullah Gülen’s Organization. The aim of these efforts is to bolster Islamic and Turkish influence in countries seeking a new post-Soviet identity, independent of Moscow’s influence.
The paper analyzes the interplay between hard and soft power in this context, focusing on the long-term historical narratives and the participants' aspirations to assert their geopolitical roles. It explores the “ideological battle” over historical ties each country has with the newly independent states. The core of the research centers on Russia’s and Turkey’s grand strategies regarding the Southern Caucasus and how these strategies are shaped by historical narratives.
The study investigates how the rhetoric of both Russia and Turkey has become a component of their strategic instruments. By applying multi-level theoretical analysis, the paper aims to clarify the typology of historical narratives and the strategic objectives of these two countries in the region.
Downloads
References
Van Evera, St. (1997). *Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science*. Cornell University Press, New York, p. 64.
Brzezinski, Zb. (1998). *The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives*. Basic Books, New York.
Mackinder, H. (1919). *Democratic Ideals and Reality: A Study in the Politics of Reconstruction*. Henry Holt and Company, New York, p. 104.
Van Evera, St. (1997). *Op. cit.*, pp. 77-88.
Aydin, M. (2004). “Foucault’s Pendulum: Turkey in Central Asia and the Caucasus.” *Turkish Studies*, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 3.
Wight, M. (1978). *Power Politics*. Leicester University Press and the Royal Institute of International Affairs, London, p. 160.
Wight, M. (1978). *Op. cit.*
Nassibli, N. (2004). “Azerbaijan: Policy Priorities towards the Caspian Sea,” in: *The Caspian: Politics, Energy and Security*, ed. by Sh. Akiner, Routledge Curzon, London, p. 141.
Torbakov, I. (2007). “Making Sense of the Current Phase of Turkish-Russian Relations.” *The Jamestown Foundation*, Occasional Paper, October, p. 12.
Nassibli, N. (2004). *Op. cit.*
Hale, W. (2003). *Turkish Foreign Policy: 1774-2000*. Frank Cass, London, pp. 193-194.
Fuller, G., & Lesser, I. (1993). *Turkey’s New Geopolitics: From the Balkans to Western China*. Westview Press, Oxford, pp. 73-74.
Hale, W. (2003). *Op. cit.*, p. 194.
Aras, B. (2000). “Turkey’s Policy in the Former Soviet South: Assets and Options.” *Turkish Studies*, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 50.
Olcott, M.B. (2005). *Central Asia’s Second Chance*. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, p. 73.
Katik, M. (2016). “Turkic Summit to Explore Commonwealth Possibility.” *Eurasianet*, 16 March. Available at: [http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav111506.shtml](http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/eav111506.shtml).
Kirisçi, K. (1995). “New Patterns of Turkish Foreign Policy Behavior,” in: *Turkey: Political, Social and Economic Challenges in the 1990s*, ed. by Ç. Balım et al., Brill, New York, p. 16.
Swietochowski, T. (1994). “Azerbaijan’s Triangular Relationship: The Land between Russia, Turkey and Iran,” in: *The New Geopolitics of Central Asia and its Borderlands*, ed. by A. Banuazizi, M. Weiner, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, p. 127.
Swietochowski, T. (1994). *Op. cit.*
Turan, G., Turan, İ., & Bal, İ. (2004). “Turkey’s Relations with the Turkic Republics,” in: *Turkish Foreign Policy in Post-Cold War Era*, ed. by İ. Bal, Brown Walker Press, Boca Raton, p. 306.
Malik, H. (1994). “New Relationships between Central and Southwest Asia and Pakistan’s Regional Politics,” in: *Central Asia: Its Strategic Importance and Future Prospects*, ed. by H. Malik, Macmillan Press, London, p. 268.
Malik, H. (1994). *Op. cit.*
Kapanadze, S. (2015). “Russia’s Soft Power in Georgia—A Carnivorous Plant in Action,” in: *The Different Faces of ‘Soft Power’: The Baltic States and Eastern Neighborhood between Russia and the EU*, ed. by T. Rostoks, A. Spruds, Latvian Institute of International Affairs, Riga, p. 175.
Balcı, A. (2009). “The Alliance of Civilizations: The Poverty of the Clash/Alliance Dichotomy?” *Insight Turkey*, Vol. 11, No. 3, p. 98.
Yanushi, W., & McConnell, D.L. (Eds.). (2008). *Soft Power Superpowers: Cultural and National Assets of Japan and the United States*. M.E. Sharpe, New York, p. xvii.
Handel, M. (1990). *Weak States in the International System*. Frank Cass, London, pp. 132-133.
Cross, Sh. (2001). “Russia and NATO toward the 21st Century: Conflicts and Peacekeeping in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo.” *NATO Academic Affairs 1999-2001*, NATO-EAPC Research Fellowship Award Final Report, August, pp. 10-11.
Landau, J.M. (1981). *Pan-Turkism: From Irredentism to Cooperation*. Hurst & Company, London, p. 43.
Landau, J.M. (1981). *Op. cit.*, p. 1.
Waltz, K. (1979). *Theory of International Politics*. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, p. 191.
Mackinder, H. (1919). *Op. cit.*
Spykman, N.J. (1944). *The Geography of Peace*. Brace & Company, Harcourt.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
