Chapter Nineteen. Conflict Resolution In The South Caucasus

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Hille
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
The South ◽  
South Caucasus

Security and democratisation: the case of the South Caucasus1

2018 ◽  
pp. 195-209
Author(s):  
Kevork Oskanian ◽  
Derek Averre
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Democratic Governance ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
European Perspective ◽  
The South ◽  
South Caucasus ◽  
Additional Insight ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Insight Into

Kevork Oskanian and Derek Averre explore the relationship between security and democracy in the promotion of the EU’s norms and interests. Their case study of the countries of the South Caucasus – Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia - provides a useful additional insight into neighbourhood countries which do manifest a European perspective but with different degrees of intensity. In the context of discussing the relevance of Democratic Peace Theory and the EU’s perception that conflict resolution and security on its borders are best resolved through democratic governance, their chapter raises the question as to whether conflict is actually more likely when democratisation is incomplete and when there are variations between neighbouring countries between authoritarian systems and near-democracies. This seems to apply to conflicts in the South Caucasus, including the Russo-Georgia war, and indicates a clear limit to EU-isation as a means of ensuring stability and security on the EU’s borders.

Deconstructing positionality in conflict resolution: Reflections from first-person action research in Pakistan and the South Caucasus

2020 ◽  
pp. 147675032096080
Author(s):  
Alexander Cromwell ◽  
Margarita Tadevosyan
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
First Person ◽  
Constructive Approach ◽  
The South ◽  
South Caucasus ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Conflict Settings

This article explores the role of first-person action research in uncovering how positionality influences conflict resolution practice. Specifically, it examines the experiences of two scholar-practitioners conducting first-person action research in different conflict/post-conflict settings. The case studies include first-person action research on encounter programs with Pakistani youth and first-person action research examining peacebuilding engagement in the South Caucasus. We highlight the significant challenge posed by positionality for scholar-practitioners in our practice and research, particularly as members of one of the conflict parties, and present first-person action research as a constructive approach to enhance self-reflexivity and improve our practices. We argue that first-person action research highlights the fluidity of positionality and the value of building insider relationships to enhance conflict resolution practice. Concurrently, this research approach illuminates challenges resulting from insider identities because of assumed agreement. Thus, first-person action research is useful for improving conflict resolution practice because it highlights the various benefits and drawbacks of practitioners’ positionalities.

Conclusion

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehran Kamrava
Keyword(s):  
Soft Power ◽  
The South ◽  
South Caucasus ◽  
Caucasus Region ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Middle Powers

As middle powers with regional aspirations, Iran and Turkey see the South Caucasus region as an ideal arena for expanding their reach and influence. As post-sanctions Iran finds greater space for diplomacy and trade, the ensuing competition between the two neighboring countries is likely to intensify in the coming years. For both states, trade and soft power are the most viable tools for expanding their influence. In the long run, the competition in trade is only likely to benefit the three states of the South Caucasus. But it is also likely to keep the multiple conflicts that have ravaged the region over the last several decades — especially between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Russia and Georgia, and even the historic animosity between Turkey and Armenia — frozen and without a solution in sight.

Pipeline Politics in Iran, Turkey, and the South Caucasus

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmood Monshipouri
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Complex Dynamics ◽  
The South ◽  
South Caucasus ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Caucasus Region ◽  
Territorial Conflicts

The relationship between Iran, Turkey and the South Caucasus states have been influenced by an array of geopolitical, strategic, cultural, and economic factors. The competition between Iran and Turkey and their roles in the South Caucasus are best defined by traditional balance-of-power relations and the broader context of the post-Soviet era. This chapter unpacks the complex dynamics of pipeline politics in the South Caucasus region by underlying the need to understand the “Great Power Game” involving geostrategic and geo-economic interests of local governments, regional actors, global powers, and international oil companies. The larger focus turns on underscoring the importance of the region’s large oil and gas reserves; its land connection between the Caspian Sea, South Caucasus, and Europe; and its long-standing territorial conflicts in the post-Soviet era. Iran and Turkey have fought for influence in the South Caucasus while maintaining relatively good bilateral relationships in the region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document