Author: Jack Corso

Introduction to Kazakhstan

A Brief History

Pre-Soviet Union

The Kazakh steppe has been a traditional homeland of nomadic tribes that stand as the early ancestors of the modern Kazakh people. Though Kazakhs are Turkic people, their culture and way of life are greatly influenced by the surrounding civilizations that they have come into contact with. Modern-day Kazakhstan’s path became more apparent as the Russian Empire conquered the steppe as the country expanded eastward in the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

Kazakh SSR

Following the dissolution of Imperial Russia, Kazakhstan became a Soviet republic in 1925. The Kazakh SSR had an initially tumultuous past as forced agricultural collectivization under Joseph Stalin led to more than a million deaths in the 1930s. Moreover, the republic was the destination for many political and social opponents to Stalin’s regime exiled to Central Asia. However, due to positive agricultural programs in the 1950s and 60s, Kazakhstan was an attractive destination for agricultural workers from around the Soviet Union. Like much of the Soviet Union in the 1980s, Kazakhstan experienced significant upheaval. In late 1986, many young ethnic Kazakhs protested for the replacement of First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Kazakh SSR Dinmukhamed Konayev. Government soldiers were deployed to suppress the unrest leading to several deaths and many arrests. These events subsequently became known as the Jeltoqsan protest. In October of 1990, Kazakhstan declared sovereignty over its territory as a republic within the USSR, and in December of 1991, it officially declared independence as the last Soviet republic to do so.

Post-USSR

When Kazakhstan gained its independence in 1991, ethnic Kazakhs found themselves as a minority group in their own state. However, many non-Muslim ethnic groups moved to their respective states, while many Kazakhs living in other former Soviet states were repatriated. Between 1990 and 2019, Nursultan Nasarbayev, a holdover from the Soviet era, served as Kazakhstan’s president. In 2019, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev succeeded Nasarbayev.

Image Courtesy of Britannica

Modern Kazakhstan

The modern-day Republic of Kazakhstan is a linguistically, ethnically, and religiously diverse state. Although Kazakhstan is predominantly populated by ethnic Kazakhs, there are many ethnic Russians living within its borders. Moreover, along with Kazakh, Russian is an official language and the language of interethnic communication.

Kazakhstan is a presidential republic led by President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and acting Prime Minister Alihan Smaiylov. Although Almaty, a city of nearly two million people located in southeast Kazakhstan, is the country’s largest city, Nur-Sultan, a city of just over a million residents, is the capital. Kazakhstan has a bicameral parliament with an upper house, the Senate, and a lower house, the Majilis. Despite its outwardly democratic system, Kazakhstan is considered a consolidated authoritarian regime where free and fair elections are not provided.

Kazakhstan’s economy is primarily driven by the exportation of natural resources to partners in China, Italy, and Russia. Alternatively, Kazakhstan relies heavily on Russia and China for manufactured imports such as packaged medicine and cars. The average Kazakh citizen earns roughly 268,000 Tenge per month. Although an initially staggering number, this only amounts to about 620 USD, as $1 is worth approximately 432 Tenge.

Nazarbayev (left) and Tokayev (right) Image Courtesy of The Astana Times

January 2022

What happened?

For about a week and a half in early January, thousands of Kazakhs participated in violent protests. The situation was very volatile, and in many cities in the country, such as Almaty, a state of emergency was declared. On January 7^th, President Tokayev ordered security forces to “shoot to kill without warning.” This undoubtedly escalated the situation and caused more violence.

What caused the events?

The primary catalyst for the mass protests was the government lifting price caps on liquefied petroleum gas. This gasoline is a low price, low-carbon fuel used by many Kazakhs to power their cars. By lifting the price cap, the cost of liquefied petroleum gas doubled. However, this was not the only cause of the demonstrations. Significant social and economic inequalities, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the autocratic nature of the Tokayev regime motivated many Kazakhs to demonstrate.

What was the result?

Although the accurate number is somewhat unclear, officially, 225 people were killed during the demonstrations, and many more were injured. Kazakh authorities said that roughly 10,000 people were detained. Of the many thousands of people detained, approximately 700 criminal cases are open against protesters whose charges range from terrorism, murder, and seeking to overthrow the government.

President Tokayev appealed to the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization for assistance in ending the demonstrations. This is notable as it was the first time CSTO soldiers had been deployed. These soldiers were effective in securing airports and government buildings, although their deployment was very short.

In response to the economic concerns voiced by the demonstrators, the Kazakh government imposed a 180-day state regulation on fuel and food prices. The demonstrations also led to some political shifts as Tokayev’s cabinet, led by the former Prime Minister Askar Mamin, resigned.

American Response

The United States’ response to the upheaval in Kazakhstan was expected. Given the geographic distance between the two states, the U.S. could do little more than condemn the violence and ask all sides to work towards a peaceful resolution. However, the United States and Kazakhstan have a close political relationship as the U.S. was the first state to recognize Kazakhstan’s independence. Moreover, the two states have a close economic relationship. The United States has invested heavily in Kazakhstan’s energy potential, and nearly $54 billion has been invested into the Kazakh economy over the last thirty years.

Russian Response

Compared to the United States, Russia had a greater stake in calming the situation. Were the Kazakh protests successful, they may have provided a blueprint for anti-Putin actors in Russia. In many ways, Russia had a responsibility to assist the Tokayev government. Both states are CSTO members, and Russia had to assist when called upon. The unrest in Kazakhstan posed a tangible security concern for Russia as the two states share a massive border. Long-lasting unrest in Kazakhstan could have provided another problem for Russia along its borders, in addition to the concerns in the South Caucasus and Ukraine.

Kazakh protestors Image Courtesy of Financial Times

June 24, 2022
Georgia—Past, Present, Future, and the United States

A Brief History

The territory that the country of Georgia now occupies has seen human development since the Paleolithic period. Over the last few thousand years, the territory has been under the domain of Georgian, or Kartvelian, kingdoms and other regional empires. However, Georgia’s contemporary history began following the country’s absorption into the Russian Empire during the 19^th century.

Following the Russian Revolution, Georgia became independent from the USSR and came to be known as the Democratic Republic of Georgia (DRG) in 1918. However, in 1921, the DRG was forcibly integrated into the Soviet Union and would not regain its independence again until 1991. Georgia had an influential role in Soviet history. For example, the USSR was governed by Georgian-born Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili, better known as Joseph Stalin, from 1924 until his death in 1953.

The decade following Georgia’s independence, in 1991, was marked by significant political turmoil. Between 1995 and 2003, the country was led by President Eduard Shevardnadze. His eight-year rule as President was characterized by severe economic mismanagement and rampant institutional corruption. In response to Shevardnedze’s political failures, Georgians engaged in countrywide demonstrations demanding political transparency; these demonstrations were later termed the Rose Revolution. In the end, Shevardnadze vacated the presidency, and Mikheil Saakashvili was sworn in as President.

Saakashvili’s ascension to the presidency signaled that Georgia had chosen to resist Russian influence and fight corruption; however, Georgia’s position as a democratic state has become threatened in the last few months. After leaving office, Saakashvili moved to New York before ultimately moving to Ukraine, where he served as the Governor of Odessa, as well as other positions within the Ukrainian government. However, in 2018, he was tried and convicted in absentia for abuse of power. Saakashvili returned to Georgia in October 2021 and was subsequently arrested. After his arrest, Saakashvili went on a fifty-day hunger strike, which ended following his admittance to an intensive care ward after he fainted. Saakashvili asserts that his arrest and trial are purely political rather than based on any substantive issue. Regardless, the arrest of a former president does not bode well for democracy in Georgia.

Mikheil Saakashvili and George W. Bush—Image Courtesy of NATO

Background on Georgian Politics

Georgia’s capital is located in the central city of Tbilisi. Georgia’s government is a semi-presidential republic. Currently, the head of state is President Salome Zurabishvili, and the head of government is Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili. Unlike the United States, which has two chambers in its legislature, Georgia has a unicameral legislature: the Parliament of Georgia. In total, one hundred and fifty members are elected to represent the nearly five million people living in Georgia. One hundred and twenty members are elected through proportional representation, while the remaining thirty are elected through a single-member district plurality system; that is, a representative is elected to a parliamentary seat after reaching a majority vote. Presently, the political party Georgian Dream—Democratic Georgia forms the government with eighty-four seats. The United National Movement party, initially founded by Mikheil Saakashvili, sits on the opposition side with thirty seats.

Image courtesy of The World Factbook

Economy

Domestic Issues

Labor-intensive occupations drive the Georgian economy, with the two most important sectors being agricultural production and manufacturing. Due to its smaller population, Georgia’s workforce includes roughly 686,000 citizens. Despite relying on agriculture and manufacturing, the Georgian economy is transitioning towards a service and tourism-based economy. Between 2016 and 2017, the country’s GDP grew 5%, indicating positive economic development. However, Georgia still deals with significant unemployment, 11.8% by 2016 figures, and poverty, as nearly 20% of all Georgians lived below the poverty line in 2019.

International Issues

Georgia mainly exports raw materials and manufacturing products. The country’s primary exports are copper, iron alloys, cars, packaged medicine, and wine. Despite them having a tense interstate relationship, Russia is the most common destination of Georgian exports. In 2019, 12% of Georgian exports went to Russia, followed by 12% to Azerbaijan and 9% to Armenia.

Although Georgia derives 65% of its electricity from hydroelectric sources, according to 2017 statistics, it still relies heavily on natural gas imports. Turkey is Georgia’s primary import partner, accounting for 17% of Georgian imports, followed by 11% for China’s, and 9% for Russia’s. The United States is a minor trade partner and only accounts for 5% of Georgian imports.

Georgia’s geographic position on the border of Europe and Asia yields some economic advantages. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the South Caucasus gas pipeline allow Georgia to play a significant role in the movement of oil and natural gasses from Central Asia to the Mediterranean Sea. Additionally, the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railroad positions Georgia in the middle of the transcontinental movement of goods.

Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Oil Pipeline—Image courtesy of Silk Road Studies

Territorial Issues

Although Georgia has made significant economic and political gains following their emancipation from the Soviet Union, this sovereignty is not without problems. Two regions of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, are breakaway regions, and multiple wars of independence have been fought over them.

Abkhazia

Abkhazia is an autonomous region in northwestern Georgia. Apart from Russia, the breakaway region is only recognized by five UN-recognized states. Between 1992 and 1993, Georgian forces fought against Abkhaz separatists in a thirteen-month war. A ceasefire subsequently ended the conflict, but the political ramifications remain. Abkhazia eventually declared its independence in 1999.

South Ossetia

South Ossetia is a breakaway state in North-Central Georgia, which makes up the southern half of the traditional homeland of the Ossetian people. The Russian republic of North Ossetia-Alania borders it to the north. Like Abkhazia, South Ossetia receives minimal recognition from the international community, outside of a few states. Russia recognizes South Ossetia and maintains a military presence in the region. In 2008, President George W. Bush campaigned for Georgia’s membership to the Membership Action Plan, designed to set Georgia on the track for NATO membership. In response, Russian President Vladimir Putin argued that any attempt to enlarge NATO was a national security threat and began preparing for an invasion. The Russo-Georgian war then took place once Russia invaded Georgia, where Georgian and Russian soldiers, as well as Russian-backed Ossetian separatists, fought against each other. This led to Russia occupying South Ossetia in an attempt to prevent Georgian ascension into NATO.

Cultural Dynamics

Many political dynamics serve as catalysts for conflict between Georgia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia; the different groups that live in the region being one of them. During the Soviet era, Abkhazia was populated by a mix of Abkhazians, Georgians, Russians, and Armenians; however, now the region is predominantly Abkhazian. Georgians are an isolated ethnolinguistic group, whereas Ossetians are an Eastern Iranian ethnolinguistic group, and Abkhazians are a Northwest Caucasian ethnolinguistic group. These groups, despite living together as part of the Soviet Union and being native to the Caucasus, are not related, and their ethnolinguistic differences became salient once the Union collapsed.

Georgian-American Relations

The United States and Georgia officially established diplomatic relations in 1992. Given the economic and political disparities between the two countries, Georgia certainly relies more on the United States. The United States has committed significant amounts of aid to Georgia, in order to advance democratic and economic growth within the country. However, the United States does rely on Georgia’s geographic position to advance its “competition” with Russia.

Multiple attempts to integrate Georgia into NATO have occurred, but none have been successful, especially after Russia’s 2008 invasion, whose likely goal was to prevent Georgian ascension into NATO. Georgia, although it lacks official membership, is a member state in the Partnership for Peace, which aims to build trust between NATO members and regional non-members.

Georgian and American soldiers in a joint training exercise, 2008—Image courtesy of NBC News

March 30, 2022
2021 Russian Gosduma Election

The Gosduma

What is it?

The Gosudárstvennaya duma, or Gosduma, refers to the State Duma of Russia. The Gosduma is the lower house of the Federal Assembly of Russia, while the Federation Council is the upper house. Since October 2016, Vyacheslav Volodin (UR) has served as chairman of the legislative body. The Gosduma consists of 450 members, referred to as “deputies,” who serve 5-year terms. To achieve an electoral majority in the Gosduma, a party must occupy 226 seats.

Comparison to U.S. Congress

Compared to the United States’ legislative system, the Gosduma shares more similarities to the House of Representatives. Both are the lower houses of their respective legislative bodies, and both consist of more members than the upper house. Additionally, the number of representatives each federal subject receives is not uniform. However, their differences are striking.

In the Gosduma, all 85 federal subjects are represented; this includes oblasts, republics, krais, autonomous okrugs, federal cities, and autonomous oblasts. However, while the number of representatives a U.S. state receives is contingent on its population, the number of representatives a federal subject receives is contingent on the number of constituencies, or sub-regions within it. For example, Adygea, a republic, has one constituency, while the Rostov Oblast has seven constituencies. Thus, the two federal subjects are represented by one and seven representatives in the Gosduma, respectively.

A second significant difference between the U.S. House and Russian Gosduma is how they behave politically. In the case of the U.S. House of Representatives, the House is a significant legislative body. The Gosduma is as well, but compared to the House, the Gosduma is more executive-focused. Rather than serving primarily as a legislative body, the Gosduma is a reliable ally of the executive and works to forward the policy goals of the Putin Administration.

Administrative Divisions of Russia

Image courtesy of World Atlas

Primary Political Parties in Russia

United Russia—Yedinaya Rossiya

United Russia (UR) is the largest and most influential political party in Russia. Former President Dmitry Medvedev has chaired the party since 2012, and the party is the legislative backbone for President Vladimir Putin. Although it is a centrist, big-tent party, UR is definitively conservative and promotes nationalist positions like building up Russia’s military, staunch Euroscepticism, and further ties between the state and the Russian Orthodox Church.

Liberal Democratic Party of Russia—Liberal’no-demokraticheskaya partiya Rossii

Of the parties that occupy seats in the Gosduma, the LDPR is unquestionably the most ultra-nationalist, right-wing party. Vladimir Zhirinovsky has led the party since the 1990s, but despite being far more hardline and conservative than UR, the LDPR poses virtually no threat to the Putin regime.

Communist Party of the Russian Federation—Kommunističeskaya Partiya Rossijkoj Federatsii

The Communist Party traces its roots back to the early revolutionary movement in imperial Russia and built upon Marxist-Leninist ideology. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the creation of the independent Russian Federation, communist parties were banned between 1991 and 1993. However, in 1993, the Communist Party officially registered as a legal political party with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation.

A Just Russia-For Truth—Spravedlivaya Rossiya-Za pravdu

Compared to UR, the LDPR, and the Communist Party, A Just Russia is relatively new, having been founded in 2006. The party is considered to be center-left while being a moderate supporter of the Putin regime. It backed him during the 2018 presidential election after opting not to nominate any of its members for election.

Russian United Democratic Party “Yabloko”—Rossiyskaya obyedinyonnaya demokraticheskaya partiya

Of the four aforementioned political parties, “Yabloko” is perhaps the most unique. It is a social-liberal, center-left party with favorable views on the European Union and the United States. These views make it an outlier compared to most Russian parties, including liberal and left-wing parties.

Political Spectrum of Russian Political Parties

Election Results

Election Background

Between September 17^th and 19^th in 2021, Russians across the country turned out to vote for their constituency’s representative to the Gosduma. It is estimated that approximately 51.7% of eligible voters cast their ballots.

Results

In total, United Russia won just under 50% of the vote. This signaled that despite losing 19 seats, resulting in 324 seats, the pro-Putin United Russia party is still undoubtedly in control. The closest competitor to UR was the Communist Party which amassed just under 19% of the vote and gained 15 seats, increasing its total to 57. Although the LDPR won over 7.5% of the vote, the party experienced a net loss in seats resulting in only 21 seats occupied by its politicians. A Just Russia won 7.46% of the vote but experienced positive growth as the 4 additional seats won by the party resulted in a total of 27 occupied seats. Lastly, “Yabloko” won a mere 1.3% of the vote, resulting in the party occupying 0 seats in the Gosduma.

Composition of the Gosduma post-election

Image courtesy of Radio Free Europe/Free Liberty

Why are the results important?

Although the election results were unsurprising, they indicate that the Putin regime is still squarely in power. Despite losing 19 seats, UR has retained a supermajority and controls the legislative process. Despite UR’s significant victory, the election has been marred by controversy. Communist Party officials, candidates, and supporters alleged that the government had committed significant election fraud, and allies of imprisoned dissident Alexei Navalny echoed the CP’s objections.

Anti-corruption demonstrators at the Communist Party rally following the preliminary results

Implications for the United States

For the United States, the results of the Gosduma election mean very little. United Russia remains the most powerful party with an anti-western stance, and its victory signals that this position will continue. Moreover, it indicates that anti-American sentiment is still prevalent in Russian society, at least to some extent.
The response by the U.S. government was unsurprising. In a press statement, Ned Price, a U.S. State Department Spokesperson, condemned the election and said that it “took place under conditions not conducive to free and fair proceedings.” Moreover, the U.S. criticized the Russian government’s use of laws that designate opposition political groups and movements as “extremist organizations” and “foreign agents.”

March 4, 2022
Zapad 2021—Eastern Europe’s Military Alliance and NATO

Overview of Zapad 2021

What is it?

Zapad 2021 was a week-long joint military exercise between Russia and Belarus. Zapad, Russian for “west,” took place in Russia’s Western Military District, Belarus, and areas under the Northern Fleet’s Joint Strategic Command in the Baltic Sea. Zapad was proceeded by drills in the geographic regions of Vostok, “east,” in 2018, Tsentr, “center,” in 2019, and Kavkaz, “Caucasus,” in 2020. The exercise consisted of a three-day defensive phase simulating an invasion by Western actors, referred to as the Polar Republic, and a four-day counter-offensive to regain lost territory. Zapad essentially represented a show of Russian-Belarusian military solidarity and served as a staging ground for new doctrine, strategy, and weapons systems.

Image Courtesy of the ISW

Important Actors

Russia and Belarus were the primary states involved in the exercise, although military representatives from India and states in the Caucasus and Central Asia were present. Despite unreliable statistics, it is believed that a total of 200,000 military personnel participated in the exercises, and roughly 80 aircraft and helicopters, up to 15 ships, and nearly 300 tanks were used.

Image Courtesy of Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Significant Developments from the Exercise

Overall, Zapad was hailed as a success by the participating states. By the end of the exercise, the combined military force had defeated the Polar Republic, which served as a fictitious representation of NATO. Belarusian Defense Minister Viktor Khrenin expressed satisfaction with the exercise’s results and hailed his military for its capabilities. The most intriguing technological success was the performance of Russia’s newly developed autonomous tanks, which represent the Russian military’s success in developing new autonomous weaponry.

Although not a direct result of the exercise, Vladimir Putin had to recuse himself from viewing the exercise due to being exposed to the Covid-19 virus. Putin tested negative for the virus but isolated himself as members of his staff had tested positive.

Implications for NATO and Eastern European Geopolitics

The exercise was meant to serve as a show of unity between Russia and Belarus, and a show of force directed towards NATO. To the first point, Russia and Belarus’ close military relationship was apparent even before the exercise, as Belarus had recently purchased over $1 billion in Russian weaponry. This significant purchase signals that Belarus is concerned about its security. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko asserted that Zapad was practice for preventing a western-backed color revolution in Belarus in response to the 2020 mass protests against his regime.

Image Courtesy of The Guardian

Zapad caused significant concern in Ukraine, a country currently in conflict with Russian-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country. In response, the United States, Ukraine, and several other NATO countries plan to hold a joint military exercise in late September 2021 in response to Zapad named “Rapid Trident—2021.”

Before the exercise, NATO officials advised Russia to be transparent and warned that any miscalculations could ignite a potential conflict. However, it is clear that Zapad was used to demonstrate Russia’s new military capabilities and project strength rather than serve as a pretense for an invasion of a neighboring state.

November 16, 2021
The Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh and Its Implications

What is Nagorno-Karabakh?

The landlocked, mountainous region of Nagorno-Karabakh in the South Caucasus has seen some of the most consistent, brutal fighting in the post-Soviet world. Although it is a small region, Nagorno-Karabakh has existed at the junction between many historic powers such as the Russian, Ottoman, and Persian Empires. Thus, the region has developed a great diversity in language, religion, and ethnicity, each of which has significantly contributed to its history. During the Soviet era, the region was known as the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (NKAO) in the Azerbaijan Soviet Social Republic (ASSR). Although located within the ASSR, the NKAO was populated primarily by Armenians with Azerbaijani and Russian minorities. These groups coexisted peacefully until the late 1980s when the disintegration of the Soviet Union gave way to increased nationalist sentiment on both sides. By the late 1980s, the NKAO received aid from the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, and relations developed between the two groups.

The territory is currently internationally recognized as part of the Republic of Azerbaijan, despite attempts by ethnic Armenians to unite the NKAO with the Armenian SSR and the successor state, the Republic of Armenia. The Republic of Artsakh is an internationally unrecognized state inside Azerbaijan that is predominantly ethnic-Armenian. It wields de facto control over parts of Nagorno-Karabakh from its capital Stepanakert.

Geographic location of Nagorno-Karabakh region – Image Courtesy of Al Jazeera

Mapping the Conflict

First Nagorno-Karabakh War (1988-1994): While citizens of the Soviet Union, ethnic Armenians and Azerbaijanis lived peacefully. However, as the USSR deteriorated, so did relations between the two groups. Subsequently, war broke out between the Armenian and Azerbaijani Soviet Republics in 1988 and ended in 1994, just a few years after both countries achieved independence from the USSR in 1991. The Armenian side was ultimately victorious and made significant territorial gains as the Republic of Artsakh gained de facto independence status and unification with the Republic of Armenia. However, the Azerbaijani Supreme Soviet (the body akin to Congress) rejected this status and gained recognition from the international community as the sole ruler of the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict (2016): The period between 1994 and 2016 saw some minor outbreaks of violence violence which did not comparable to the first war. This relatively peaceful period ended in early April 2016 when fighting broke out on a larger scale, with both sides asserting that the other instigated the fighting. Between April 2^nd and the 5^th, dozens of soldiers and several civilians were killed on both sides of the conflict. While there was no clear winner following the ceasefire agreement, Azerbaijan won a symbolic victory as its success proved that it had become a match for Armenia since the previous conflict.

Nagorno-Karabakh War (2020): September through November of 2020 saw the most intense and devastating fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh in the post-Soviet era. Azerbaijan’s superior military capability led to a decisive victory. Azerbaijan regained much of the territory it had lost in the previous conflicts, including five cities, four towns, and 286 villages. However, it did not take Stepanakert, the capital of Artsakh, which remains in Armenian hands under the protection of Russian peacekeepers. While the territorial gains and losses were significant for both sides, the loss of life was also significant. Nearly 6,000 people were killed during the war, including 77 Armenian and 92 Azerbaijani non-combatants. Additionally, over 130,000 people were displaced, including approximately 90,600 people from Nagorno-Karabakh who moved to Armenia and approximately 40,000 from areas near the line of contact on the Azerbaijani side. Although the subsequent ceasefire was met with joy in Baku and anger in Yerevan, the human costs were extremely detrimental on both sides.

Territorial changes after the 2020 peace deal – Image Courtesy of BBC

Actors and Their Motivations

Republic of Artsakh: Self-determination is the driving motivator for the unrecognized state of the Republic of Artsakh. At present, Artsakh is not recognized by a single United Nations member, including Armenia. However, it is recognized by the non-UN member, unrecognized states of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both located in Georgia, and Transnistria, located in Moldova. It suffered significant territorial losses to Azerbaijan during the 2020 conflict, and its reliance on Armenia for political, economic, and military assistance indicates that it may be unstable were it to achieve independence.

Republic of Armenia: Armenia is motivated by the geopolitics of the South Caucasus. It is bordered by an unfriendly Turkey to the west and Azerbaijan to the east. A fellow ethnic-Armenian state in Artsakh makes for a critical ally, despite not formally recognizing its existence. Armenia may also view the Nagorno-Karabakh region as a historic piece of Greater Armenia, and retaining the territory would represent a victory for the Armenian diaspora.

Republic of Azerbaijan: While Armenia and Artsakh are motivated by their shared ethnic background and desire for self-determination, Azerbaijan is motivated by its desire to maintain its territorial integrity. Nagorno-Karabakh, which accounts for roughly five percent of Azerbaijani territory, is internationally recognized as Azerbaijan. Despite this distinction, Nagorno-Karabakh is populated almost exclusively by ethnic Armenians, with a few hundred ethnic Azerbaijanis and Russians. However, with the territorial changes resulting from the war in 2020, it is likely that ethnic Azerbaijanis will move into the territory retained by Azerbaijan.

January 2021 Meeting between Armenian PM Pashinyan, Azerbaijani President Aliyev, and Russian President Putin – Image Courtesy of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Republic of Turkey: Turkey has been a fervent supporter of Azerbaijan and contributed to its military buildup since the early 1990s. The nationalistic government in Ankara has utilized the common Turkic background shared by the two countries to strengthen their interstate relationship and garner support for the Azerbaijani cause in Turkey. In addition, relations between Turks and Armenians have been historically hostile and are officially non-existent. President Erdogan of Turkey has insisted that Armenia withdraw from occupied Azerbaijani territory.

Russian Federation: Although Russia has been a traditional ally to Armenia, it is a neutral actor and has actively supplied weapons to each side since the 1990s. Despite this, Russia does not want a conflict near its borders. It leveraged its position as the regional hegemonic power to become an arbiter during negotiations between the warring parties and deployed its forces as peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh. Peace in Nagorno-Karabakh may depend on how long Russia stays in the region as a peacekeeping force.

Russian peacekeepers in Nagorno-Karabakh – Image Courtesy of Reporters Without Borders

United States of America: Unlike Russia, the United States is not particularly involved in the region. However, both the Biden and Trump administrations attempted to secure peace between both sides. While the United States is not a regional actor, it does have a vested interest in securing peace. The United States’ NATO ally Turkey is closely aligned to Azerbaijan. If the conflict were to grow, the United States could find itself at odds with an Armenia-aligned Russia.

Future of Armenian-Azerbaijani Relations

Lachin Corridor : The Lachin Corridor is a narrow swath of land which connects Armenia and Artsakh. The corridor is a significant economic factor in Nagorno-Karabakh because it allows for the movement of people and goods from Armenia to Artsakh, although much of the surrounding territory was retaken by Azerbaijan in 2020. Presently, the Lachin Corridor is under the control of Russian peacekeeping forces per the 2020 armistice agreement.

Nakhchivan: Although located outside of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, the Azerbaijani autonomous exclave of Nakhchivan is not immune to interstate fighting between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In 2021, armed forces from Armenia and Azerbaijan clashed along the border of Nakhchivan and Armenia, resulting in one injury on both sides. The situation in Nakhchivan is only just developing, and further clashes could trigger a more significant regional conflict.

Lachin Corridor and Nakhchivan – Image Courtesy of Eurasian Geopolitics

September 16, 2021
Russian Economics – Domestic and International Developments, and the US

Following the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, a state marked by its centrally planned economic system, the modern Russian state transitioned to a market-based economy. However, Russia’s economy is still significantly influenced by a powerful conglomerate of policymakers and oligarchs.

Economic Status of Russian Citizens

Russia ranks 70^th internationally in quality of life of citizens. Low wages are a large part of the problem; the average yearly income is roughly $11,260. Although the financial standing for the average Russian has improved over the last thirty years, 12.6% of Russian live below the poverty line. In addition, the average Russian pensioner receives a monthly stipend of $59. Because of this, many pensioners have to supplement this stipend by growing their own food. Russian currency has depreciated over the last few years. In 2020, 74 Russian Rubles were equal to 1 USD or 0.85 Euros. However, the Russian government provides free healthcare and public school education to every citizen. Thus, the average Russian is not burdened by these expenses, and can use their income for other essentials. While Russia has experienced some economic growth since 1991, there is still much to be done to improve the living standards for the average citizen.

Image Courtesy of The Moscow Times

Population Decline

Due to lower birth rates and increased emigration, compounded with the Covid-19 pandemic, Russia’s population is expected to decrease significantly. Between 2021 and 2024, Russia’s population is projected to decrease by roughly 1.2 million people. This potential population decrease would have a disastrous impact on Russia’s already limited labor force, and the inability of immigrants to enter the country to work due to the pandemic has only exasperated this problem.

Imports and Exports

Although Russia is quickly transitioning to a service-based economy, it is still a prominent exporter of raw materials. In 2019, Russia’s primary export partners were China (14%), the Netherlands (10%), Belarus (5%), and Germany (5%). Of these exports, wheat, iron, and especially natural gas and petroleum to western Europe were most significant. Russia must import technology from more technologically developed states to keep up. It relies on imported car and vehicle parts, medicine, computers, and aircraft technology from China, Germany, and Belarus, each state accounting for 20%, 13%, and 6% of Russia’s total imports in 2019, respectively.

Europe relies heavily on Russian natural gas and oil, and a new pipeline called Nord Stream II is currently under construction. The Nord Stream II project will stretch from Ust-Luga, Russia, to Northeast Germany. The pipeline will strengthen the European Union’s natural gas supply security and streamline the delivery of Russian gas. The new pipeline is predicted to add 2.7 billion euros to the Russian GDP and create roughly 144,000 full-time pipeline-related jobs.

Image Courtesy of bne IntelliNews

Despite the tumultuous relationship between American president Biden and Russian president Putin, the former seems to have little objection to the European Union furthering its reliance on Russian energy. President Biden elected not to sanction the company behind the project, Nord Stream AG, even though engaged in sanctionable behavior, because the pipeline was almost complete. Sanctions would have a damaging effect on the United States’ European allies, who stand to benefit significantly from the pipeline.

Image Courtesy of The New York Times

The United States has become increasingly reliant on Russian energy as well. Given the sanctions on Venezuelan crude oil and the reduced shipments from OPEC states, Russian oil and petroleum products have supplemented the United States’ energy needs. In 2020, Russian oil and refined products accounted for a record high 7% of American oil imports and surpassed imports from Saudi Arabia. Valero and Exxon Mobil imported roughly 55 million and 50 million barrels of Russian oil in 2020, respectively.

September 1, 2021
Primary Actors in the Ukrainian Conflict

Since the Russian Federation’s annexation of Crimea through military action in March 2014, Ukraine has been a state plagued by conflict. The conflict now involves the region of Donbas, consisting now of the two separatist People’s Republics of Luhansk and Donetsk, in addition to Crimea. It has drawn in actors including the European Union and the United States, in addition to groups in Ukraine and the governments of both Russia and Ukraine.

Why did Russia annex Crimea?

Russia has a historical relationship with the territory of Crimea; it was part of Russia for more than one hundred and fifty years, and was transferred to Ukraine in 1954 when both countries were part of the USSR. Russia’s actions were precipitated by several factors, including Ukraine-wide protests which forced Ukraine’s Russian-aligned President Yanukovych to step down, and concerns that Ukraine was developing stronger ties to the European Union.

Next Steps and Peace Agreement

Not long after the annexation, pro-Russia separatists seized multiple government buildings across Eastern Ukraine and declared themselves the heads of independent states; these seizures effectively represented the start of the conflict in the Donbas. After a few months of fighting, Russian military forces formally entered Ukraine to provide support to the separatists. The Second Minsk Agreement was signed by then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2015. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and then-French President Francois Hollande provided diplomatic assistance and mediated the negotiations. The agreement sought to establish an immediate ceasefire and security zone. However, the agreement’s goals were not achieved, and fighting continued sporadically—most of which was attributed by outside conflict monitors to Russian and separatist forces.

Since the failed 2015 agreement, fighting has remained sporadic with western actors, specifically the United States, offering lethal aid to the Ukrainian government in 2017. This decision signaled a significant change in the United States’ policy towards Ukraine, which had only offered nonlethal, economic assistance to that point. There appears to be no clear victor or path to peace in the Donbas. March of 2021 signaled a renewed intensity as, after a relative calm, the conflict escalated once again with an increase in casualties.

Image source: Council on Foreign Relations

Pro- Ukrainian Actors

The Ukranian side of the conflict involves both the Ukrainian national military and volunteer civilian battalions. The primary goals of the military—and by extension, the state—are to maintain territorial integrity and defend the Ukrainians living in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions. Unofficial civilian battalions are motivated more by an ultra-nationalist sentiment and Ukrainian patriotism. The fervent nationalist views exhibited by volunteer battalions sometimes coincide with extreme far-right positions, the most notable far-right battalion being the Azov Battalion.

Pro-Russian Actors

The Donbas region has two main economic centers, Donetsk and Luhansk, and a significant proportion of both these cities’ residents identify with Russia either ethnically or linguistically. Russian is widely spoken as a first language. Separatists and their supporters see themselves as distinct from the rest of Ukraine despite their shared national origin. Pro-Russia and separatist forces represent the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics in Eastern Ukraine, both of which declared independence in 2014. The primary goals of these actors are to achieve independence from Ukraine and strengthen their ties with Russia. Despite operating within the territorial boundaries of Ukraine, these groups are considered pro-Russian actors.

As the other prominent state actor, Russia has a vested interest in the outcome of the conflicts. The Donbas and Crimea situations make it unlikely that Ukraine can join NATO, because an attack on one NATO state must be treated as an attack on all. Therefore, Ukrainian membership would severely escalate the risk of armed conflict between NATO and Russia, at a time when the goal for the US and many European governments is to de-escalate tension. The conflicts also make EU accession unlikely for the foreseeable future. A western-aligned Ukraine would damage the close economic, political, and cultural ties the two countries share and that Russia values highly. Were Ukraine to become a member of either or both organizations, Russia would see this as an encroachment by western states on its perceived sphere of influence. Thus, by actively backing the separatist and deploying its forces in Ukraine, Russia can forestall encroachment, despite the threat of further sanctions by the international community.

July 19, 2021
Jack Corso, University of Alabama

Linkedin

Jack is a second-year graduate student at the University of Alabama. He is working toward a Master of Arts degree with a major in International Relations and minors in Comparative and American Politics. Thematically, he enjoys studying Eastern European/Eurasian politics, conflict, and authoritarianism. Regarding international relations theory, Jack tends to employ a realist approach but respects the other IR theories. Additionally, he believes that restraint-oriented foreign policy should be the norm, not the exception, for the United States. He is excited to contribute to ACE and work alongside like-minded researchers from his generation. Outside of his academic and professional interests, Jack enjoys watching Chicago and University of Alabama sports, listening to music, and spending time with his friends and loved ones.

June 2, 2021