Suchergebnisse

Hazar Denizi Avrasya'nın tam kalbindedir. Jeopolitik açıdan son derece önemli bir konumdadır. Sahip olduğu hidrokarbon kaynaklarının yanı sıra, bu kaynakların ulaşılabilir olması ve mevcut arz piyasalarına alternatif olması nedeniyle de bölge dışı aktörlerin ilgi alanındadır. 1729'dan 1991'e kadar geçen süreçte Hazar'ı Sovyetler Birliği ve İran olmak üzere iki aktör paylaşmaktaydı. Ancak SSCB'nin dağılması ve üç yeni Cumhuriyetin kurulmasıyla birlikte kıyıdaş sayısı beşe yükselmiştir. Bu da Hazar hidrokarbon kaynakları üzerinde hâkimiyet ve paylaşım mücadelesinin başlamasına neden olmuştur. Başta ABD, kimi Avrupa devletleri ve daha sonra ÇHC olmak üzere pek çok bölge dışı aktörün de çeşitli düzeylerde katıldığı bu mücadeleler Hazar'ın jeopolitik önemini daha da artırmıştır. Hazar'ın hidrokarbon kaynaklarını paylaşma ve uluslararası piyasalara açma mücadelesi beraberinde 1990'ların ilk yarısından itibaren hukuki statü sorununu da ortaya çıkarmıştır. 51 çalışma grubu toplantısı, onlarca teknik toplantı ve beş devlet başkanları toplantısının ardından 12 Ağustos 2018 tarihinde Hazar Denizi'nin Hukuki Statüsüne İlişkin Konvansiyon (kısaca Hazar Konvansiyonu) imzalanmıştır. Hukuki statü sorununa kısmen çözüm getiren bu anlaşma kıyıdaşların pek çok endişesini de gidermiştir. Rusya ve İran güvenlik endişelerinden kurtulurken genç Cumhuriyetler; Kazakistan, Türkmenistan ve Azerbaycan ekonomik refah, istikrar ve SSCB'den kalma sınır problemlerinin çözümü yolunda umuda sahip olmuşlardır. Bununla birlikte hidrokarbon kaynaklarının paylaşımı, tartışmalı yataklar sorunu, Kazakistan'daki NATO üssü ve bölgedeki 93 uluslararası firmanın geleceği gibi hayati konular Hazar Konvansiyonu ile de çözülememiştir. Hazar jeopolitiğinin geçmişinden günümüze irdelenmesi ve nihayetinde Hazar Konvansiyonu'nun somut ve olası etkilerinin incelenmesinin amaçlandığı bu tez çalışması, nitel bir araştırma olarak tasarlanmış, döküman analizi yöntemi kullanılarak hazırlanmıştır. Dört bölüm halinde sunulan çalışmanın birinci bölümünde, çalışmanın kavramsal ve kuramsal temelini oluşturan jeopolitik ve ilgili kuram-yaklaşımlar ortaya konmuş, Hazar bölgesi açısından önemli bazı kuramlar ele alınmıştır. İkinci bölümde Hazar jeopolitiği detaylı şekilde incelenmiştir. Bölgesel ve bölge dışı aktörlerin Hazar jeopolitğine etkileri, boru hatlarının, Hazar hidrokarbon kaynaklarının bölge jeopolitiğini nasıl değiştirdiği ve bölgedeki jeopolitik mücadelenin sonucunda ortaya çıkan çatışma noktaları irdelenmiştir. Üçüncü bölümde Hazar'ın hukuki statüsü sorunu geçmişten günümüze gelişimi incelenmiş, soruna neden olan konular detaylı bir şekilde irdelenmiştir. Kıyıdaşların ve bölge dışı aktörlerin hukuki statü sorunu ile alakalı görüşleri ve önerileri ele alınmıştır. Çalışmanın dördüncü bölümünde Hazar Konvansiyonu'na giden süreç ve anlaşmanın analizi yapılmıştır. Kıyıdaşların savundukları tezlerden neden taviz verdikleri sorusuna cevap aranmış, konvansiyonun özelde kıyıdaşlara ve bölge dışı aktörlere, genelde ise Hazar jeopolitiğine etkileri sorgulanmıştır. ; The Caspian Sea is at the heart of Eurasia. It is in an extremely important position from a geopolitical point of view. In addition to its hydrocarbon resources, it is in the area of interest of non-regional actors because these resources are accessible and alternative to existing supply markets. In the period from 1729 to 1991, two actors, the Soviet Union and Iran, shared the Caspian. However, with the disintegration of the USSR and the establishment of three new Republics, the number of riparians increased to five. This led to the start of the conflict for dominance and sharing over the Caspian hydrocarbon resources. These conflicts, in which many non-regional actors, especially the USA, some European states and later the PRC, participated at various levels, further increased the geopolitical importance of the Caspian. The struggle to share the Caspian's hydrocarbon resources and open it to international markets has also brought up the legal status problem since the first half of the 1990s. After 51 working group meetings, dozens of technical meetings and five heads of state meetings, the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea (shortly Caspian Convention) was signed on 12 August 2018. This agreement, which partially solved the legal status problem, also relieved many concerns of the riparians. While Russia and Iran are getting rid of security concerns, young republics; Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan had hopes for economic prosperity, stability and the solution of the border problems inherited from the USSR. However, vital issues such as the sharing of hydrocarbon resources, the disputed deposits issue, the NATO base in Kazakhstan and the future of 93 international companies in the region could not be resolved with the Caspian Convention. This thesis study, which aims to examine the Caspian geopolitics from its past to the present and finally to examine the concrete and possible effects of the Caspian Convention, was designed as a qualitative research and prepared by using the document analysis method. In the first part of the study, which is presented in four parts, geopolitics and related theory-approaches, which form the conceptual and theoretical basis of the study, are revealed, and some important theories for the Caspian region are discussed. In the second part, the geopolitics of the Caspian Sea is examined in detail. The effects of regional and non-regional actors on Caspian geopolitics, how pipelines, Caspian hydrocarbon resources change the geopolitics of the region, and the conflict points that emerged as a result of the geopolitical struggle in the region were examined. In the third chapter, the legal status of the Caspian and its development from past to present are examined and the issues that cause the problem are examined in detail. Opinions and suggestions of riparians and non-regional actors regarding the legal status issue were discussed. In the fourth part of the study, the process leading to the Caspian Convention and the agreement were analyzed. An answer was sought to the question of why the riparians made concessions from the theses they defended, and the effects of the convention on the riparians and non-regional actors in particular, and on the Caspian geopolitics in general were questioned.

This thesis will determine the influence of Turkey's domestic resources on Turkey's foreign relations with the five Turkic states in the Caspian Sea Region. The spheres analyzed in this study are the common ties, which are history, culture, religion and language, with the regional countries, pan-Turkism, Turkey's initial interactions as well as ongoing constructive policies in the region. Findings showed that both Turkey and the five Turkic republics were enthusiastic to carry their relations in every field to future cooperation following the break up of the Soviet Union. However the Turkic Republics' interest in Turkish development model gradually declined starting from the 1994s.The hypothesis that socio-cultural ties will ease establishing close foreign relations is applicable to all five republics. The Turkic states welcomed Turkey's educational and cultural policies with great willingness. In the field of business we find that Turkish economy follows a similar pattern in its relations with the Azerbaijani and Central Asian markets. Accordant policy goals of Turkey and the five republics led Turkey to establish close foreign relations with the regional countries. Turkey tried to give military aid to the Turkic republics of Central Asia in their struggle against terrorist groups which have the capacity to destabilize governments and to threaten international security. The hypothesis that the more Turkey has business interests in the Caspian Sea Region the more Turkey will have closer foreign relations with Turkic countries is mostly apparent in the case of Azerbaijan. In the area of energy politics Turkey has its strongest link with Azerbaijan. Besides being strong economic partners Turkey is Azerbaijan's biggest supporter in the region against Armenia. ; 2008-05-01 ; M.A. ; Sciences, Department of Political Science ; Masters ; This record was generated from author submitted information.

The dissolution of the U.S.S.R. and the achieved independence of the former Soviet republics (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan) have led to a change in the geopolitical situation in the Caspian region. Five entities of the international law appeared on the shores of the Caspian.1 Almost immediately, there emerged a problem of defining the status of the Caspian Sea. Russo-Persian and Soviet-Iranian agreements, in spite of the centuries-old history, did not determine the international legal status of the Caspian Sea and, therefore, did not regulate questions of subsoil resources' utilization. The need for regulating the development of mining in the Caspian region was absent during the period of the U.S.S.R. since all of the Caspian Soviet republics were subjects to its unified code of laws. Furthermore, in contrast to the 19th century, when the output of the Caspian region's oil fields had an impact on the world oil market, in the 20th century, the center of oil production began to shift to other regions of the Soviet Union. Accordingly, the interest in the Caspian region and its hydrocarbon resources was sharply reduced. The question of the international legal status of the Caspian Sea arose immediately after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and was caused by discrepancies in the national interests of the states of the Caspian region, as well as the lack of legal measures that would be adhered to by all the countries of the region and which could serve as the basis for determining the international legal status of the Caspian Sea. The New Independent states (NIS) of the Caspian region were not parties to the previous treaties, which did not meet their political and economic aspirations. The discovery of large oil and natural gas deposits in the Caspian Sea had posed not only a question of the definition of its international status, but also the question of how to divide the Caspian natural resources. The earlier Russo-Persian (and subsequently Soviet-Iranian) treaties were concerned only with issues of regulating navigation and fishing and did not affect the questions of exploration, extraction, and transportation of crude oil and natural gas by installing pipelines on the bottom of the Caspian Sea, etc. Not having any historical commitments, the new Caspian countries—Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan—began to pursue a unilateral policy, in which their national interests prevailed.2 Despite the divergent positions, the Caspian countries managed to achieve bilateral and tripartite agreements on the legal status of the part of the Caspian Sea. This gave precedence for creating legal means for further development of oil and gas fields on the Caspian Sea shelf. Within the five-sided format of negotiations, the countries of the region are continuing negotiations, planning to sign the Convention on the international legal status of the Caspian Sea in 2017. © 2017, CA and CC Press AB. All rights reserved.

This article studies the gist and area of focus of U.S. geopolitics in the Caspian Region. However, it takes a general approach and does not examine U.S. relations with each of the Caspian states individually. It analyzes the reasons for the U.S.'s increased interest in the region and determines the main trends of its political and economic activity. The article concludes that the U.S.'s successful geopolitical activity in the region has helped Europe to become the first major importer of Caspian oil.

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of newly independent States marked the uprising of a new era in the region of the Caspian Basin. Failing to reach a consensus regarding the legal nature of the Caspian, Russia, Turkmenistan, Iran, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan's policies have been characterized by a perpetual pursuit of establishing themselves as key-role agents in the region. The question about "Lake or Sea" is yet to be answered after many decades. This paper focuses on analyzing the significance of the Caspian Basin for the littoral States and how it determines their political agenda.

The historical routes from the People's Republic of China (PRC) and India to the Middle East or Europe ran north of, south of, and across the Caspian Sea. Since 1500, maritime transport has dominated trade between Europe and East Asia. Central Asia became an economic backwater, incorporated into the Russian Empire and later forming part of the Soviet Union from 1917 to 1991. Practically all the trade links ran north to the Russian Federation. In the 21st century, with the increasing significance of Central Asia as an energy producer, countries have constructed several oil and gas pipelines. However, for trade in other goods, new transport corridors opened up more slowly until, in the 2010s, the PRC - EU rail links began operating through Kazakhstan. This paper examines the establishment of new trade corridors in the form of pipelines and railway lines, focusing on trans-Caspian links. It also discusses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international trade. The disruption resulting from lockdowns and quarantine requirements has negatively affected maritime, air, and other types of transportation. The COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with substantially depressed energy prices, is putting additional financial pressure on the Caspian governments, which are struggling with the major medical challenges that the pandemic has created.

orcid:0000-0003-4538-4944 ; orcid:0000-0001-7368-1757 ; WOS:000385793000009 ; Globalization and liberalization of the economies in worldwide raise the importance of transportation strategies to make difference in competitive environment. The rise of Asian economies attracted the attention of other countries. As a result of, the center of gravity of the World trade has shifted towards the east, Eurasian countries has appeared as ensuring sustainable economic growth by developing the trade relations among Eurasian countries as well as with other countries, and also European countries decided to expand the transport networks which facilitate trade relations. In line with these strategies, Asia-Europe transport corridor projects have been created. Some of these projects are; the Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T), Pan-European Corridors (PEC), Modern Silk Road and Europe-Caucasia-Asia Transport Corridor (TRACECA). But, there are deficiencies (like infrastructure, legislation) existing when these projects put into practice, and also, Caspian Sea (as an important land defect) necessitates intermodal transportation. In this paper, it has been aimed to examine alternative transportation lines in the region, reveal the current problems, and propose solutions within the context of infrastructure or transport policies. In scope of the study, qualitative research technique used, several visits were made to stakeholder countries to obtain data from field studies, and workshops were held as closed sessions. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. ; Yildiz Tech Univ, Gebze Tech Univ, Istanbul Tech Univ

The author concentrates on the geopolitical games in the Caspian region and identifies the factors that have remained prominent in the last twenty years and, in fact, determined the developments in this part of the world, viz. oil and gas reserves, the scope of their industrial production, and the recently built export pipelines as geopolitical instruments of the Caspian states and T extra-regional players. He analyzes the geopolitical aims of Russia, the European Union, the U.S., and China, the key players responsible for the Caspian geopolitical context, to conclude that the region's geopolitical, social, economic, and political future, as well as its interstate relations largely depend on the pace at which oil and gas is produced and pipeline projects implemented. © 2013, (publisher). All rights reserved.

The European Union (EU) energy policy in the Caspian Region that includes such littoral states as Russia, Iran, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan took its shape gradually. The new data about availability of considerable hydrocarbon resources in the new Caspian states, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan focused its growing attention on extraction and delivery of potential volumes of oil and natural gas to the European countries. And the European states initiated new pipeline projects. The energy diplomacy played an important role in creation of new energy flows that became an essential element of the shaping system of international relations in the Caspian Region. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015.

Political science explains various motives for political violence. This research focuses on a particular kind of motivation: ethnicity. The 20th century has seen many instances of ethnic violence, and this research seeks to understand why it occurs in one place and time and not the other. Traditionally the literature on ethnic violence reflects on economic conditions, regime type, geopolitics and historical context as significant variables. This research posits that Kazakhstan managed to avoid ethnic violence because it is more politically developed. The existence of an accommodative legislative assembly, which assures the rights of ethnic minorities, is an example of Kazakhstan's model of ethnic inclusiveness and harmony. Such mechanisms are wholly absent in Azerbaijan, despite immense oil wealth; it exhibits cases of extreme ethnic violence, terrorist mobilization and threats to regime survival. Relatively politically developed states like Kazakhstan are more inclined towards ethnic tolerance, inclusion (&) harmony, while underdeveloped states lack the apparatus' therein, resulting in exclusion and conflict. The main implication of the research is that neither territorial disputes, nor resource curse nor post-Soviet disintegration help to explain why ethnic conflict happens in one place, Azerbaijan, and not in the other, Kazakhstan. There is however a positive relationship between ethnic inclusion (&) ethnic harmony. ; 2018-08-01 ; M.A. ; Sciences, Political Science ; Masters ; This record was generated from author submitted information.

We all know that the European gas reserves in the North Sea are rapidly depleting. This means that the leading countries of Western Europe and some of the East European countries will have to look for fuel elsewhere. Scared by the Russian-Ukrainian "gas squabbles" they are actively seeking alternative sources. Poland went as far as suggesting that the EU should create an energy pact (patterned on NATO) under which all members would pledge to help those in their ranks that need urgent support. So far, the idea has not gained support. Today, new pipelines from the Caspian area, the Middle East, and North Africa might be built; new marine terminals for tankers carrying liquefied gas from the Persian Gulf are also needed. The commissioned North African gas fields cannot cover Europe's gas needs. The Middle East cannot be described as a stable gas supplier; it also prefers to sell its liquefied gas to Southeast Asia. In this context, the Caspian looks like the best possible option. Practically all the projects look at Central Asia and Azerbaijan as the main gas suppliers; so far little has been said about the projects' possible economic efficiency. It is still much more important to attract attention to one's own country, to raise a "political wave," and to scare away potential rivals. The Europeans are working on the Nabucco project (a gas pipeline that will go from the southern part of the Caspian, via Turkey to Southeast Europe. It will end in Baumgarten in Austria). The plan is far from complete: investments, gas sources, and transportation tariffs have not been discussed, no national companies have been set up for engaging in construction; preliminary works have not yet begun. The "gas projects on paper" seem to pursue purely strategic aims. The West and Russia are fully aware that until the Caspian's legal status has been fixed all talks, let alone agreements, on extracting anything on the Caspian shelf or laying pipelines on its bed will remain futile deliberations measured in megaand giga-bites of political wishful thinking rather than in cubic meters and dollars. This and the fact that the local proven gas reserves will not be enough to fill all the pipelines are successfully ignored.

The Caspian Sea region has hitherto largely been investigated from a New Great Game perspective that depicts the region as a geopolitical battleground between regional and external great powers because of its rich natural resources, strategic location, environmental issues and the legal disagreement. This dissertation, by contrast, looks at the Caspian Sea region through the lens of classical functionalism, which still acknowledges the difficulties and problematic starting situation of power politics in the region. This dissertation, however, seeks to show that there are ways forward by identifying mechanisms and means to transform the New Great Game into functional cooperation. The core aim of this thesis is to portray an alternative image of the Caspian Sea region. The dissertation examines three intertwined case studies, namely the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline (BTC), the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) and the Caspian Environmental Program (CEP).

2005-2007 appear to become the most significant years in the history of the Caspianoil and gas export projects as their construction is approaching its final stage.They are:1. May 2005 - inauguration of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline2. June 2006 – Kazakhstan official joining the BTC, which will supply thepipeline not only with the Kazakh oil, but will also lead to its economicexpediency,3. 2006 was the final year of the construction of two regional gas pipelinesthat are increasing their global importance: Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum (BTE)and Iran-Armenia. 2006-2007 also seems to become the most important year for the attemptsto find a non-military solution of the Iranian nuclear problem, which may causesome re-establishment in Iranian-Western relationships. This reestablishment, inits turn, may become an important background for establishing of Iran-EU gasenergy dialogue.In the first place the article dwells on the problems and perspectives of theCaspian gas export to Europe and also supply and transit security problems. Webecame aware of leaving the internal political processes in the Caspian countriesout of this paper, for this issue needs a special study.

This article focuses on American energy policy toward Azerbaijan, amidst increasing tensions in U.S.-Russian relations followingRussia's abrupt withdrawal from Shell's Sakhalin-2 energy project in September of 2006. It recommends a preventive policy for Washington by which it will secure its future energy interests in the region. This policy recommends for Washington to form alliances with Caspian republics such as Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan by promoting the political independence of the Republics of the Caspian Basin and by assisting their governments in establishing infrastructure for regional gas supplies and pipes. The article also discusses the role of the United States in assisting all parties involved in the protection of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline from terrorist threats and social unrest in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Western countries have signed several agreements regarding the use of hydrocarbon resources in the Caspian Basin, with the aim of diversifying their energy suppliers. However, recession in the world economy and persistently low oil prices have profoundly affected the economies of the Caspian states, whose gross domestic product and exports are dominated by oil and oil products. Strongly dependent on export revenues from oil and gas, the economic growth of these states has slowed since 2014. Although limited energy resources have stimulated an emphasis on security of supply, fundamentally understood as a continued and low-risk strategy of interruption of energy import flows, low oil prices have also maintained focus on the challenge of security of demand faced by energy-producing economies in terms of stable energy export revenues. However, geopolitical developments around the world, especially local armed conflicts, highlight the importance of secure routes, as they present a threat to energy transportation. Using an indicator-based approach and country-level data over the period 2000−2017, this paper assesses the security of demand for the oil and gas of three countries in the Caspian region: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan, over a 16-year period, capturing the geopolitical situation and contributing to a greater understanding of the impact of energy-transporting countries' geopolitical situation on energy transportation to the European Union (EU). The results demonstrate that risk of energy security of demand is greater when political risk in energy-transporting countries is included within a measure of energy security of demand, i.e., risky external energy demand. The sharp decline in political stability and absence of violence or terrorism ratings in Ukraine and Turkey has increased the risk of security of energy demand in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan. The results highlight the importance of cooperation not only between the EU and the Caspian region, but also with energy-transporting countries, such as Ukraine, Georgia, and Turkey. Alternatively, routes may be found that bypass countries with low levels of political stability, such as through the Trans-Caspian Pipeline.