By Benyamin Poghosyan, PhD, Chairman, Center for Political and Economic Strategic Studies

Regardless of the intentions of the US and the future trajectory of the new world order transformation, the democracy vs. authoritarianism vision puts small states located between Russia and Europe in a complicated situation.
As the "Unipolar Moment" started to fade away after the 2008 world financial crisis, political elites, the expert community, and academicians in the different capitals of the world launched discussions and debates about the future of the world order. There was no lack of catchy terms – post-American world, multi-polar world, no polar world, polycentric world, the rise of others – which all have one common feature; there will be many players active on the geopolitical chessboard of the globe, and the US will not be able to impose its vision on all of them. The US political establishment coined its term for the emerging world order – great power competition – which is the prevailing theme in all strategic level documents published by the Trump and Biden administrations. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 08.12.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By Benyamin Poghosyan, PhD, Chairman, Center for Political and Economic Strategic Studies

The Russian resort town of Sochi was turned into the spotlight of South Caucasus geopolitics on November 26 as Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted Armenian PM Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev for the much-anticipated trilateral meeting. The gathering was first announced by the Russian President’s Press-Secretary Dmitri Peskov to be held on November 8–12 to mark the first anniversary of the November 10, 2020, trilateral statement, which fixed the devastating defeat of Armenia in the 2020 Karabakh war. Some Armenian media leaked news about the upcoming meeting even earlier, arguing that another document violating Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh’s vital national interests was in the works. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 02.12.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By Benyamin Poghosyan, PhD, Chairman, Center for Political and Economic Strategic Studies

The developments of the last year proved that assessments according to which by taking some 8500 square km of territories in the 2020 Karabakh war, Azerbaijan will be satisfied and an era of peaceful development will be launched for Armenians, were highly exaggerated, and had little semblance to reality.
Since the end of the 2020 Karabakh war, Armenia has faced a new, harsh reality along its borders with Azerbaijan. Some in Armenia hoped that after taking back most of the territories which Baku lost during the first Karabakh war of 1992-1994, an era of regional peace would start in the South Caucasus, while Azerbaijan would agree to continue negotiations to fix the status of Nagorno Karabakh within its 1988 borders. Baku was quite quick to dampen such perceptions. Azerbaijan established an economic region of Karabakh in July 2021 and started to aggressively push forward the narrative that war had ended not only the conflict, but Nagorno Karabakh itself, and thus it was senseless to negotiate over the status of a non-existing entity. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 24.11.2021  |  Security
•  

By Yeghia TASHJIAN, Beirut-based regional analyst and researcher, columnist, "The Armenian Weekly”

“Co-opetition” was a term coined by Adam M. Brandenburger and Barry Nalebuff to describe a paradoxical strategy of cooperation among competitors, enabling them to collectively achieve mutual gains. It’s a relatively new term in international relations and used occasionally in international trade. Nevertheless, I will be using co-opetition to explain the current status of Russian-Turkish relations.
In foreign policymaking and geopolitical self-perception, Russia and Turkey resemble each other in many ways. Throughout the course of events in the Middle East and South Caucasus, as the West failed to engage with regional developments to resolve conflicts, other regional states such as Iran, Turkey and Russia filled the political vacuum. Hence, the Turkish-Russian interaction in the Middle East and beyond has been partially facilitated by the military and political withdrawal of the US and the European Union’s absence from the region. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 24.11.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By Nilufar Nodirkhonova, Head of Department Development Strategy Center

Reforms of the last five years have indeed marked a new development stage of state and society in the country. The "New Uzbekistan" concept has become a reality. Following significant changes in the country, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev ran his recent victorious election campaign based on a political platform for the coming five years titled "Strategy for the New Uzbekistan". "Over the past five years, we have gained so much experience. Our people believed in us. Now people expect us to implement new plans and programs", said Shavkat Mirziyoyev. To live up to this trust and aspirations of our people, realize their noble hopes, a Strategy of New Uzbekistan has been developed. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 16.11.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By Benyamin Poghosyan, PhD, Chairman, Center for Political and Economic Strategic Studies,

On November 10, 2021, the South Caucasus will mark the first anniversary of the tripartite Russia – Armenia – Azerbaijan statement, which ended the 2020 Karabakh war. During the last year, the experts, representatives of civil society, and journalists hotly debated the outcomes of the war and the implications of the trilateral statement. Who benefited more from the war – Russia, Turkey, or Azerbaijan? Has the Karabakh conflict been solved or thrown into the dustbin of history, or will the region face new rounds of negotiations and the possible resumption of hostilities? What is the future of Armenia – Azerbaijan and Armenia – Turkey relations? There are no easy answers to all these questions. However, one thing is clear – a year after the 2020 Karabakh war, the South Caucasus is still in the midst of geopolitical transformation, with regional powers vying for influence. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 16.11.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By Yeghia TASHJIAN, Beirut-based regional analyst and researcher, columnist, "The Armenian Weekly”

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union 30 years ago, Iran has patiently and cautiously followed developments in the South Caucasus. Tehran’s main strategic objective has been to prevent US-Israeli penetration in the region, and it has viewed the Russian political and military presence in the region, particularly in Armenia, as a buffer zone against Western and even Turkish expansionist activities. When Turkey started to follow an independent foreign policy and came to terms with sharing power in the region with Russia, Iranian policymakers thought that Turkey—by cooperating with Russia—would reduce western influence in the region and give up its Pan-Turkic and neo-Ottoman claims. However, Iran was mistaken. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 09.11.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By Benyamin Poghosyan, PhD, Chairman, Center for Political and Economic Strategic Studies

The "corridors war", currently being hotly debated among experts, pundits, and policy-making circles in the South Caucasus, is largely based on wishful thinking rather than hard facts. In reality the options are rather limited.
Since the end of the 2020 Karabakh war, the theme of competing corridors in the South Caucasus has established itself as one of the primary topics for discussion and debate among experts, pundits, and policymaking circles. Almost daily, Azerbaijan and Turkey speak about the necessity to open the so-called "Zangezur corridor," arguing that it will significantly boost the regional economy. According to Baku and Ankara, the opening of the corridor is envisaged under the terms of the November 10, 2020, trilateral statement, even though the document itself speaks about only one corridor – Lachin. Under the term “corridor”, Azerbaijan envisages an arrangement which will allow Azerbaijani vehicles and trains to cross the Armenia – Azerbaijan border, pass via the Syunik province of Armenia and then enter the Nakhijevan Autonomous Republic (an Azerbaijani exclave), without any border, passport, and customs control implemented by the Armenian side. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 09.11.2021  |  External Relations
•  

By G.R. Malikova, Doctor of Legal Sciences, Professor at The Academy of the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Uzbekistan

The rule of law is ensured in a democratic society through a fair, impartial and effective administration of justice. This type of administration of justice requires independent and impartial judges and prosecutors who ensure the preservation of individual rights and freedoms as well as the maintenance of public order. Regardless of how different prosecutors’ systems are in different countries, they all have one element in common. Prosecutors must make decisions independently and carry out their responsibilities free of outside pressure or intervention, while adhering to the principles of separation of powers and accountability. As the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Sh. Mirziyoyev rightly noted: “Our people can endure any difficulties, but they will not tolerate injustice”. In this regard, the essence of the mission for prosecutors is to ensure social justice and the rule of law. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 04.11.2021  |  Security
•  

By Gulnoza Ismailova, Doctor of Law Sciences (Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches),
Vice-rector for Science and Innovation at the University of World Economy and Diplomacy and Member of the Central Election Commission.

Citizens of the Republic of Uzbekistan have the right to participate in public affairs, including in the activities of civil society, and through their right to freedom of association to form and join civil society organizations. Such organizations play a crucial role in democratic development due to their ability to represent public interests. It is civil society that is the main beneficiary of a democratic order, an effectively functioning socio-political and socio-economic system as a whole. I. Kant considered the formation of civil society as a compromise between the freedom of an individual citizen and the freedom of others. Thus, human rights and freedoms do not depend on the state, but on society and the institutions that refer to it. Thus, in the theory of I. Kant, the actors of civil society are social groups and social and public institutions (family, school, neighborhood communities, associations, communities, etc.), which provide an opportunity to realize inalienable human rights. READ MORE

• EGF Editor  |  Published on EGF: 28.10.2021
•