scholarly journals Caspian Sea Oil – Still the Great Game for Central Eurasia

2001 ◽  
pp. 101-108
Author(s):  
Andre Gunder Frank
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Defense ◽  
Far Right ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Central Eurasia ◽  
National Defense University ◽  
Great Game

A book with a foreword by Pat Clawson of the National Defense University and editor of ORBIS, and dedicated to Ronald Reagan and Target Ozxal, announces its U.S. far-right wing political pedigree literally up front. However the book is chock full of information, alas most already well known to anyone even remotely familiar with the problematique under review; but it also offers some incisive analysis. The twelve contributed chapters by fourteen authors and coauthors are divided into three parts dedicated to examining and analyzing the general history and mutual background of the Caspian Sea region; to the ?ve littoral states of Azerbaijan, Russia, Iran, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan; and to three ‘external’ interested states, the United States, Turkey, and Georgia. Nonetheless, the review by each author goes well beyond the nominative boundaries assigned to him or her and trespasses over into the topics, territories and their relations assigned to other authors. Quite prop-erly so, in view of the mutually complex real-life interrelations in the Caspian Sea Basin, so that no topic or state could be adequately understood in itself other than in relation to the others. Indeed, we are witnessing the contemporary continuation of the nineteenth century “Great Game” for the control of Central Eurasia. However, the oil connection also reaches well beyond Caspian Sea and must make this book pertinent also to readers of this journal.

X. Growing Tension and the Threat of War in the Southern Caspian Sea: The Unsettled Division Dispute and Regional Rivalry

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 575-591
Author(s):  
Hooman Peimani
Keyword(s):  
Caspian Sea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Caspian Region ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
American Military ◽  
Military Presence ◽  
Military Conflicts ◽  
Southern Caspian Sea

AbstractThe absence of an acceptable legal regime for the division of the Caspian Sea among its five littoral states has created grounds for conflicts, crises, and wars in the Caspian region, a situation worsened since 2001 when Iran, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan found each other on a collision course over the ownership of certain offshore oilfields. The region has since been heading towards militarization, while the persistence of conflicts over the Caspian Sea's division has prepared the ground for military conflicts. Fear of lagging behind in an arms and the manipulation of conflicts by the United States and Turkey have further encouraged militarization. Against this background, certain factors, including Turkey's efforts to deny Iran political and economic gains in the Caspian region, the growing American military presence in Eurasia, and the expanding American-Azeri military ties since 11 September 2001 will likely contribute to the creation of a suitable ground for a military conflict in the Caspian region.

INDUSTRY COOPERATION IN AN EMERGING REGION

2005 ◽  
Vol 2005 (1) ◽  
pp. 553-557
Author(s):  
Peter M. Taylor ◽  
Kjell T. Landin ◽  
Tim Duckworth ◽  
Jan Pietersz
Keyword(s):  
Black Sea ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Environmental Benefit ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Central Eurasia ◽  
Export Revenue ◽  
And Control ◽  
Response Capability

ABSTRACT During the 1990s, the Caspian Sea, Black Sea and Central Eurasia region emerged as one of the most important new sources of world oil supply, attracting development and providing vital new export revenue. With more growth and investment certain, the countries of the region are able to rely increasingly on the benefits arising from uninterrupted exports. As more oil is handled in the region, the shared desire is to eliminate any spills from these operations. Further to a strong commitment to apply preventive measures, a group of energy companies—working in cooperation with governments—also believe it is prudent to undertake actions that can significantly reduce the consequence of any such incidents. In 2002–03 these companies undertook a comprehensive study and detailed analyses of the state of oil spill preparedness in region. The study found that governments, companies, institutions and stakeholder groups widely agreed on the need for improved response capability. Beyond the significant economic and business risks posed by spills, there is universal concern to better protect the environment and the public. A poor spill response could harm the regions ecology, affect local business and the industry's reputation, with serious repercussions. In line with recommendations from the study, the oil industry launched an initiative to support the efforts of governments and promote regional response capability in mid 2003—the Oil Spill Preparedness Regional Initiative (Caspian Sea—Black Sea—Central Eurasia)—known as OSPRI. OSPRI embraces an overall vision, set out as … Industry and the region's governments work cooperatively to promote proven, credible, integrated, sustainable oil-spill response capability. OSPRI is action-oriented and brings a consistent, aligned approach for industry in its relationship with international and national partners when developing effective preparedness. OSPRI avoids piecemeal approaches and is encouraging planning processes based on clear command and control frameworks, the tiered response philosophy and response policy based on net environmental benefit (IPIECA 2000). This is making a significant contribution towards helping governments and operators achieve best practice in their contingency planning.

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 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.

The influence of US international military campaigns on the adoption of Goldwater-Nichols act and its consequences

2017 ◽  
pp. 110-117
Author(s):  
Oksana Manchulenko
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
National Defense ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Joint Chiefs Of Staff ◽  
Us Military ◽  
Joint Forces ◽  
National Defense University ◽  
The Us ◽  
Chain Of Command ◽  
Military Campaigns

The Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 was the most comprehensive and important defense reorganization legislation since its initial establishment in 1947. It has administrated the way the United States has organized, planned, and conducted military operations for the last thirty years. Despite this, a strong opposition movement organized primarily by Navy Secretary John F. Lehman, almost endangred the adoption of the mentioned above law. This opposition also included members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, prominent Senators and Congressman, and Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger. A ten year retrospective of the Act’s passage at the National Defense University (NDU) in 1999 detailed its six most significant achievements. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as an individual, was designated the principal military advisor to the President and other senior officials. The Chairman was assigned new responsibilities in the areas of strategic planning, logistics, net assessments, joint doctrine, and joint programs and budgets. A Vice Chairman position, outranking the other chiefs was created to assist the Chairman and act as the Chairman in his or her absence. The Joint Staff was expanded beyond 400 members and placed directly under the control of the Chairman. The power and influence of the deployed unified commanders was also increased by providing them authority over subordinate commands in their areas of responsibility, especially regarding joint training, force organization, and force employment. Finally, the Joint Specialty Officer program was mandated. This program was designed to ensure the services assigned some of their highest quality officers to joint duty.”1 Nearly all in attendance at the 1999 NDU event concluded that passage of the legislation was a universal good. The subject of the article is the influence of international US military campaigns on the adoption of Goldwater-Nichols Act. This article tends to examine the background which led to the adoption of Goldwater Nichols Act, the opposition of the Marines and Navy against the aforementioned Act. The goal is to analyze the main changes brought in by the Goldwater-Nichols Act and their impact on the development of the US military. The phenomena concern “Joint Forces” and the increase of effective cooperation between the departments. The key provisions, which strengthened the position of the Secretary of Defense and outlined its role in the chain of command, will be evaluated. Keywords: Goldwater-Nichols Act, reorganization, conflict, Joint Chiefs of Staff, Department of Defense, unified commanders

scholarly journals CASPIAN SEA IN REGIONAL ENERGY SECURITY

2020 ◽  
pp. 167-173
Author(s):  
Aygerim Yergalievna Ibrayeva ◽  
Raikhan Mukhamedzhanovna Tashtemkhanova
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Caspian Region ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
The Caucasus ◽  
East Europe ◽  
Regional Energy ◽  
Power Centers

The Caspian Sea is the world’s largest inland body of water, with an area of 370 thousand km2 and which washes the territories of five neighboring states – Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan. In the Caspian region, the political, military-strategic and economic interests of not only these coastal countries, but also many others, including non-regional ones, are clearly traced. The Caspian region attracts both with its huge reserves of hydrocarbons and its opportunities for their transportation, as it is located at the junction of the regions of the Middle East, Europe, the CIS, South and East Asia. this makes it self-evident that such power centers as the eu, the united states, china, india and others are showing increased interest in the caspian region. their policies in the caucasus, central asia and the middle east have a direct or indirect impact on the caspian region as a whole, as well as on the problems of ensuring its security.

scholarly journals A STUDY ON TREND AND GROWTH OF GRAPE IN TAMIL NADU

2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 6579-6585
Author(s):  
Dr. R. ANGAMUTHU
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Tamil Nadu ◽  
The United States ◽  
Paper Analysis ◽  
World Production ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
Cent Level ◽  
Rate Of Decline ◽  
In The Beginning

In this paper analysis Area, Production and Productivity of Grape in Tamil Nadu during the year from 2008-09 to 2017-18.Grape cultivation is believed to have originated in Armenia near the Caspian Sea in Russia, from where it spread westward to Europe and eastward to Iran and Afghanistan.  The estimated total world production for grapes in 2018 was 79,125,982 metric tons up by 6.5 per cent from 74,276,583 tons in 2017.  China was the largest producer of grapes, accounting for 16.9 per cent of global production.  Italy came second at 10.8 per cent, followed by the United States at 8.7 per cent.  In Tamil Nadu level, the productivity in the beginning year was 29.80 million tons and 27.27 million tons in the end year, however during middle of the period the productivity was zigzag movement respectively.  The rate of decline in compounded term (CAGR = -2.81, t = -3.75, P = < 0.05) is marginally significant at 5 per cent level.  The rate of decline production & productivity in compounded term (CAGR = -6.18, t = -2.00, P = < 0.01) and (CAGR = -3.74, t = -1.11, P = 0.01) are marginally significant at 1 per cent level.  It is found that production and productivity are ups and down movement throughout the period.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document