THE CASPIAN REGION: DEVELOPMENT RESULTS AND NEW TRENDS

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 30-38
Author(s):  
Sergey Zhiltsov
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Support ◽  
Caspian Region ◽  
Pipeline Architecture ◽  
The Caspian Sea

The Caspian region came into the focus of attention of the Caspian and non-regional states even prior to the collapse of the U.S.S.R. The increased global attention to this region was associated with the presence of proven and potential reserves of hydrocarbon resources, which increased the region’s geopolitical significance. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Caspian region found itself in the center of geopolitical rivalry. From that time on, the subject of energy acquired a new meaning in the Caspian region. Western oil and gas companies and government agencies began to demonstrate an increased interest in the hydrocarbon resources of the Caspian region. Moreover, for decades the West has maintained a close focus on the Eurasian space, in particular, on the problems associated with the production and transportation of hydrocarbon resources. The most acute geopolitical standoff occurred between Russia and the United States, which supported various pipeline projects. For Russia, the key task was to preserve its regional dominance, which had been growing over the course of several centuries. The United States supported the geopolitical turn of the new Caspian states, advocating the creation of new hydrocarbon supply routes that would bypass Russian territory. The key task for the Caspian states was to increase hydrocarbon production and provide reliable routes for their export to foreign markets. Based on these goals, the Caspian states built their own foreign policy, including intraregional policy. Thirty years later, the results of geopolitical rivalry are visible. The Caspian countries, which rely on financial resources and political support from non-regional actors, have implemented large-scale hydrocarbon export projects. The new pipeline architecture has changed the balance of power in the Caspian region, increasing the involvement of the Caspian states in the energy policy of Turkey, China, and the EU. At the same time, the regional states have managed to solve the problem of the international legal status of the Caspian Sea in a five-sided format. A new trend of the last decade has involved projects related to the construction of coastal infrastructure and expansion of shipping. The Caspian countries are growing increasingly more interested in participating in international transport projects, considering them as an important component of their foreign policy. Despite the attained agreements and solutions to key problems, competition between the Caspian states, which is greatly influenced by non-regional actors, is intensifying.

scholarly journals THE CASPIAN REGION IN MODERN POLITICS: PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL COOPERATION

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-220
Author(s):  
V.V. Pushkareva
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Caspian Region ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Reliable Mechanism

The Caspian region appears in international political terms with the USSR collapse. It includes five littoral countries - Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan, which are building cooperation with each other and with non-regional actors in the new geopolitical conditions. The formation of relations is influenced both by the common and diverse national interests of the Caspian states, and by the constant direct and indirect impact of external players: the United States, the European Union, China and Turkey. Each of them regards the Caspian region as the most important strategic space for political and economic control over Eurasia in accordance with their own interests. The interest of the world powers in strengthening their influence in the Caspian Sea is connected, firstly, with oil and gas reserves, and secondly, with the fact that the region is the center of Eurasia, where a transport transit corridor connecting Europe with various regions of Asia passes. The domestic and foreign political conditions of the Caspian region are not easy. The main problems of regional cooperation are the disunity of the region, the potential for the implementation of "color revolutions" against the background of socio-economic difficulties. The "domino effect" in development of the situation is quite real. There is no reliable mechanism to protect regional interests. The first steps to form multilateral cooperation have been taken on the basis of The Convention on the legal status of the Caspian Sea.

scholarly journals Caspian or Arctic region: that is the question…

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-437
Author(s):  
S. Y. Chernitsyna
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Caspian Region ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Oil And Gas Production ◽  
The Arctic Region

The article compares the problems of two strategically important regions for Russia — the Caspian region and the Arctic region. Despite the fact that there are some significant geographical and climate differences, the geopolitical situation in the regions is similar. There are almost identical risks in the development of these regions. Special attention is paid to the issue of ecology in the conditions of active oil and gas production. The question concerning the instruments of regulation of interstate relations is sharply raised. International cooperation is essential in addressing key issues in the regions, such as improving socio-economic conditions, energy distribution and border management. In particular, it is necessary to define a regulatory framework that would meet the new realities in the Arctic. As for the international legal status of the Caspian sea, it was settled by the adoption of the Convention following the summit in 2018. The main difference is that the Caspian region was exposed to the anthropogenic factor much earlier. The lessons learned from the work in the Caspian region can be used in the Arctic region, which can reduce some of the risks associated with the interaction of coastal countries.

OIL AND GAS FACTOR IN THE FOREIGN POLICY OF LATIN AMERICA

2019 ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
O. Tkach ◽  
V. Tsvykh ◽  
M. Khylko ◽  
O. Batrymenko ◽  
D. Nelipa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The United States ◽  
Energy Resources ◽  
Latin American Countries

Formulation of the problem. The authors analyze the current state and prospects for the development of the oil and gas complex and their role in the foreign policy of the Latin American states, policies of the use of oil and gas resources as a tool for enhancing influence in the region, as well as the functioning of multilateral oil supply agreements. The possibilities of realization of joint energy projects in Latin America are analyzed. The presence of oil and gas in the region has always been used as a political tool. The United States' reliance on Middle Eastern oil and the carbon emissions produced by the surging demand for fossil fuels in Asia tend to dominate discussions about the role of energy in U.S. foreign policy. But in recent years, the energy relationship between the United States and Latin America has perhaps become more important than other issues, as the largest share of the United States international trade and investment in the energy sector has occurred within the Western Hemisphere. Purpose of the researchis to study the role of the oil and gas complex in the foreign policy of Latin American countries. The oil and gas complex plays an important role in the foreign policy of Latin American countries. The Latin American energy market is quite attractive to transnational energy companies due to the huge volumes of cheap energy resources, the consumer market with growing energy demand. The energy markets of the Americas are deeply integrated. Despite the shale boom, which led to a sharp increase in U.S. oil production and a drop in imports, the United States still relies on Latin America for more than 30 percent of the oil it buys from abroad. The gas and gas complex part of the geological section is characterized by a similar lithological composition and the underlying rocks, containing oil and gas in industrial volumes. Research methods: The following research methods were used to address the issues set in the article: general scientific methods – descriptive, hermeneutic-political, systemic, structural-functional, comparative, institutional-comparative; general logical methods – empirical, statistical, prognostic modeling and analysis; special methods of political science. The preference was given to the method of political-system analysis, by which the common and distinctive characteristics of the basic components of immigration policy strategies were identified, reflecting existing political, public, information and other challenges for international relations and global development. The article of analysis. Latin America, a growing importer of U.S. natural gas and the largest market for U.S., makes refined petroleum products, such as gasoline. American oil companies and utilities are big investors in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and Venezuela, helping to develop the energy resources of all those countries. In Brazil, the United States direct investment in oil and gas extraction reached $2,4 billion in 2015; in Mexico, the figure was $420 million. Washington's financing and technical cooperation programs have further helped the development of new energy resources in the region. U.S. institutions and funds back up clean energy investments and provide regulatory and technical guidance to tap the region's shale fields.

scholarly journals The United States - China Rivalry and the BRI

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-303
Author(s):  
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
American Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Think Tank ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
Scholarly Publications ◽  
Belt And Road

The article describes the United States - China rivalry and Chinas Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) through a fine-grained review of primary materials such as major US policy documents and speeches by and media interviews with key American foreign policy decisionmakers, as well as the selective use of secondary materials such as think tank studies and articles in scholarly publications. It shows that the BRI has fueled the bilateral rivalry since its birth in 2013 and that the rivalry, in turn, has affected US views about the BRI. Under President Barack Obama, the US took a muted stance towards the BRI, expressing modestly cooperative sentiments regarding it. In contrast, under President Donald Trump, Washingtons posture towards the BRI dramatically changed with his administration frequently denigrating the BRI, raising it in major security and foreign policy documents, initiating competing development schemes such as the BUILD Act, and building closer cooperation with allies against Chinas venture. Despite its angst about the BRI, however, the Trump administration never launched any large-scale countermeasures. This article contributes to clarifying the situation by correcting some factual errors in past analyses and updating the general understanding about the Trump administrations response. It systematically contemplates how internal and external economic, political, and ideational factors affected the Obama and Trump administrations responses to the BRI, demonstrating that such factors shaped or shifted US policy or bounded its form and intensity. These factors, being similar to those stressed by neoclassical realists who emphasize the role of leaders as interpreters within limits of the external environment and responders to it subject to various domestic constraints, provide a foundation which is used to speculate about the USs probable response to the BRI under President Joseph Biden, Jr.

scholarly journals US - Azerbaijan Relations in Caspian region (90s of the XX century)

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-296
Author(s):  
E. A. Markova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Decisive Role ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
The Us

The collapse of the USSR resulted for Azerbaijan to pursue an independent foreign policy. Azerbaijan focused on establishing and furthering relations with Western states, primarily, with the United States. Official Baku considered the United States as an important partner to provide support for the economic development and production of hydrocarbon resources. On the other side, the United States also increased its focus on Azerbaijan due to the favorable geographical position of the Caspian state and the pro-Western attitude of its political elite. The US counted on taking advantage of Azerbaijan to change the flow of oil, which was supposed to be produced in the future. The United States played a decisive role in expanding Azerbaijan's cooperation with Western oil companies, which headed for the shores of the Caspian Sea. As a result, the Azerbaijani-American cooperation in the 90s of the XX century led Baku to chose the western direction in exporting its hydrocarbon resources as the principal one. In addition, under the US influence, Azerbaijan took a tough position on the international legal status of the Caspian Sea. Cooperation between the United States and Azerbaijan has had a great impact on the situation in the region, relations with Russia and the other Caspian states.

scholarly journals Refugees from the Baltic states in the camps of Central and Western Europe in the context of the American «non-recognition policy» in the second half of the 1940’s

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-87
Author(s):  
Volodymur Yushkevych
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
Displaced Persons ◽  
Baltic States ◽  
The Us ◽  
American Diplomacy ◽  
Post War ◽  
The Baltic

The article covers one of the problematic aspects of US-Soviet relations in the first post-war years - the issue of «the controversial refugees», appeared due to non-recognition by the United States of Soviet annexation of the Baltic States and the conduct of forced repatriation by the USSR. American diplomacy during the presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt adhered to the «non-recognition policy», concluded in the Stimson Doctrine (January 7, 1932) and the Welles Declaration (July 23, 1940). However, declared foreign policy acts did not lead to a decrease of the level of official relations with the aggressor state. At the same time, the official Washington did not consider the Balts as citizens of the USSR and retained the diplomatic missions of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia in the United States. Under the administration of President Harry Truman, the course of non-recognition of the «voluntary entry of the three Baltic republics into the USSR» continued.It was researched that after the end of the Second World War, refugees and displaced persons from the Baltic-occupied Soviet Union were located in Austria, Italy, France and Switzerland. The large contingent was within the limits of the American occupation zone in Germany, the vast majority were immigrants from Lithuania. The attention was paid to the factors that led to the mass exodus of Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians from 1943 to 1944. It is outlined the special place of American diaspora civic organizations in collecting of financial assistance and coordination of their activities with the US State Department. It is also defined the role of representatives of the Catholic and Protestant national churches.The researched paper contains an analysis of correspondence between the leaders of the American diplomatic missions of Lithuania (Povilas Žadeikis), Latvia (Alfrēds Bīlmanis) and Estonia (Johannes Kaiv) with the US Department of State. Baltic diplomats constantly emphasized the need to confront the Soviet propaganda machine with regard to the denial of the «voluntary Sovietization of the Baltic» and the practice of sweeping accusation of refugees in «betrayal» and «cooperation with the Germans». In turn, they pointed to the need to extend the jurisdiction and mandate of international organizations on Baltic refugees, to determine their legal status and to prevent their recognition as the Soviet citizens in some European countries.The article deals with the documental potential of the diplomatic correspondence of the US foreign policy department. Attention is drawn to the analysis of this issue in the research works of foreign historians.During the first post-war years in matter of refugees’ problem and displaced persons, it was found that American diplomacy was in search of consensus between humanitarian reasons for ensuring human rights to asylum and the fulfillment of allied obligations in course of the activities of Soviet repatriation missions. However, «Baltic refugees» were a separate category, which Americans tried not to extradite from their occupied territory to the USSR cause of their non-recognition policy of Soviet annexation of Baltic states.

The Oil and Gas Industry in Kazakstan

1998 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 557-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik S. Karibdzhanov ◽  
Murat A. Taishibayev
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Sedimentary Basins ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Market ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Gas Industry ◽  
Oil Reserves ◽  
The Government

In Kazakstan, there are currently over sixty known oil and natural gas fields, including five sedimentary basins with a potentially large amount of proven and expected gas and oil bearing seams. The largest and best known are the Caspian (Prikaspiiski), South Mangishlak (Uzhno-Mangishlakski), Ustiurt-Buzachi (Ustiurtsko-Buzachinski), Torgai (Torgaiski), and Chu-Sarisu (Chu-Sarisuiski). Kazakstan is ranked twenty-fourth among the world's 55 oil-producing countries by many analysts. It has about 60 billion barrels of oil reserves. Indeed, it has been estimated by many of the same analysts that the offshore fields in the Caspian Sea, which borders Kazakstan's western territory, contain at least 26.6 billion barrels of extractable oil reserves. Yet in 1994, according to an article in Oil and Gas Journal, the government of the United States stated that it “does not consider Kazakstan as the most important source of oil supplies for the United States; however, Kazakstan might play [an] important role in reduction of the [sic] oil price.” Oil is a vital resource for Kazakstan and its extraction will play a major role in fostering the country's future development and relations with major oil consumers. Accurately estimating Kazakstan's reserves, and its ability to sell it on the world market, remains a major concern for Almaty.

International Law, US Foreign Policy and Post-9/11 Islamic Fundamentalism: The Legal Status of the 'War on Terror'

2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 87-103
Author(s):  
Javaid Rehman ◽  
Saptarshi Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
The United Nations

AbstractThe days immediately after 11 September 2001 saw considerable tension, anger and anxiety. These politically charged days witnessed significant activity within the United Nations and various agencies of international law. The world community rightly condemned the 9/11 attacks as cowardly actions and an unforgivable crime against humanity. The entire global public opinion expressed sympathy for the victims of 9/11 and empathised with the people of the United States. The show of human solidarity as well as the Resolutions within the United Nations were the responses from the international community and international law to the terrorist attacks on the United States. It becomes, therefore, quite ironic that the enormity of the 9/11 human tragedy was used by the United States government to undermine the established norms, practices, principles and framework of international law. Over the past six years, the United States foreign policy has continued to violate international law and brutalise human dignity. This paper critically examines the systematic violation of international norms under the banner of 'war on terror'. It takes the view that the 'war on terror' has had exactly the effect which it proclaimed to prevent-namely the growth of radicalisation, terrorism and Islamic extremism.

scholarly journals US Policy towards Ukraine under Donald Trump’s Administration: Problematic Issues and Prospects

2020 ◽  
pp. 658-667
Author(s):  
Olha Kravchenko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trump Administration

The article describes and analyses the policy of the Trump administration towards Ukraine. Traditionally, the election of a new US President has some impact on the Washington’s position on Ukrainian issues, and the end of the presidential tenure serves as a reason to take stock of the results. Donald Trump’s presidency has not been marked by profound changes in the US foreign policy towards Ukraine, as it was inertially in line, for the most part, with the previous years. The American political establishment primarily views Ukraine through the prism of the security paradigm as a bulwark of deterring its global opponents, particularly Russia. Thus, the article deals with the challenges and prospects of the modern US policy towards Ukraine. The priorities of the US foreign policy towards Ukraine traditionally consist of the issues enshrined in the 2008 U.S.-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership. The article focuses on defence, security, and energy cooperation. In this regard, the United States remains the major guarantor of the territorial integrity and independence of Ukraine. In deterring the Russian aggression, the Trump administration generally follows the approach of the imposition of economic sanctions, launched during the presidency of Barack Obama. It is important to stress that the United States focuses not only on the problem of the armed conflict in Donbas but also on the attempted illegal annexation of Crimea by Russia. At the same time, the focus on security issues has its negative repercussions, as it leads to certain limitations in bilateral relations, as evidenced by the lack of large-scale joint projects and weak trade and economic cooperation that impacts Ukraine’s position in the US foreign policy priorities. In the meantime, regardless of the name of the future US President, Washington’s support for Ukraine will be maintained. The close involvement of the United States in the negotiation process for the settlement of the conflict in Donbas and de-occupation of Crimea would significantly influence the course of events, but it is difficult to predict whether this prospect will become a reality. Keywords: US foreign policy towards Ukraine, Trump administration, strategic partnership, U.S.-Ukraine bilateral relations, process of impeachment.

Prospects for US foreign policy to end-2016

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Us Foreign Policy ◽  
Political Support ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Mass Shooting

Subject Prospects for US foreign policy to end-2016. Significance The June 12 mass shooting in Orlando will sharpen US partisan divisions ahead of November's elections, making it more challenging for President Barack Obama to focus on international developments in his final months in office. Before his successor is inaugurated in January 2017, Obama will seek to build political support in Washington for his distinctive view of the United States' global role, convey steady stewardship of US national security ahead of the election, preserve the foreign policy achievements of his presidency and manage any regional challenges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document