Main Article Content
The study examines the key aspects of the integration processes taking place in the states of the South Caucasus after the collapse of the USSR, primarily military conflicts as a result of the unbalanced ethnic policy of the former metropolis. And it is they that largely determine the course and direction of the integration policy of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia. The methodology of the work is in the use of a comparative-historical and problem-research method of research combined with a critical analysis of researches related to the process of the post-Soviet transformation of the South Caucasus. The scientific novelty of the research lies in expanding the scientific understanding of the peculiarities of the existence of the newly independent states of the South Caucasus, determining the degree of influence of military conflicts on the integration prospects of the countries of the region. Analysis of studies, publications in the media, speeches and statements of the leaders of states allows us to determine how the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, the Russian-Georgian confrontations in Abkhazia and South Ossetia are reflected in the foreign policy course and the search for allies to resolve them.
It has been established that the course of integration processes in the South Caucasus is still under the influence and serious pressure from the Russian Federation, which actively hinders the integration intentions of the countries of the region. The search for its place in the new realities of the era of independence has become the reason for such a phenomenon as a multi-vector foreign policy. At the same time, it is obvious that as a result of military conflicts, the vector of Georgia's integration is aimed at the state’s entry into NATO as a guarantor of security against Russia's neo-imperial aggression. Armenia, as an aggressor in the Karabakh conflict, chose a generally pro-Russian integration vector, while Azerbaijan focused on an alliance with Turkey.
| Abstract views: 52 | PDF Downloads: 36 |
Hvozdkov, S. (2015). Postradianski derzhavy v zovnishnii politytsi SShA za chasiv prezydentstva Dzh. W. Busha [Post-Soviet states in foreign policy of USA during the presidency of J.W. Bush]. Etnichna istoriia narodiv Yevropy [Ethnic history of the peoples of Europe], 47, pp. 112-116. [In Ukrainian].
Honchar, Yu.B. (1997). Evoliutsiia polityky SShA shchodo intehratsiinykh protsesiv u Zakhidnii Yevropi (kinets 80-kh – 90-ti roky) [The evolution of US policy on integration processes in Western Europe (late 80’s – 90’s)]: abstr. dis. cand. of hist. sciences: 07.00.02. Kyiv. [In Ukrainian].
Bzheziynskyi, Z. (1998). Velikaya shakhmatnaya doska: hospodstvo Ameriki i yeho heostratehicheskiye imperativy [The Grand Chessboard: American Dominance and Its Geostrategic Imperatives]. Moskva: International relations. [In Russian].
Dudko, I. (2003). Natsionalni interesy SShA u postbipoliarnomu sviti [US national interests in the post-bipolar world]. Kyiv: KNEU. [In Ukrainian].
Demurin, M.V. (2007). Rossiya i strany SNG. Tsivilizatsionnyi vyzov. Chto delat Rossii s oskolkami byvsheho SSSR [Russia and the CIS countries. Civilization challenge. What has to do Russia with the fragments of the former USSR]. Politicheskii klass [Political class], 12, pp. 16-27. [In Russian].
Zhuravliov, V. (2004). Hlobalyzatsia: vyzovy istorii i otvety teorii [Globalization: Challenges to history and answers to theory]. Hlobalizatsia i humanitarnoye znaniye [Globalization and humanitarian knowledge], 1, pp. 43-46. [In Russian].
Zatulin, K. Vybor Armenii v polzu assotsiatsii s ES oznachayet opredelennyi tsivilizatsionnyi vybor [Armenia’s choice in favor of association with the EU means a certain civilizational choice]. [Online]. Available from: https://www.tert.am/ru/news/2013/07/14/zatulin/1486226 [In Russian].
Lapin, N. Fundamentalniye tsennosti tsivilizatsionnoho vybora v XXI stoletii [Fundamental values of civilization choice in the 21st century]. [Online]. Available from: http://vphil.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1137 [In Russian].
Romaniuk, O. (2006). Modeli postkomunistychnykh transformatsii [Models of post-communist transformations]. Politychnyi menedzhment [Political management], 3, pp. 35-50. [In Ukrainian].
Mekhtiiev, R. (2012). Horis – 2010: Sezon teatru absurdu [Horis-2010: Season of absurd theatre]. Kyiv: Dmitry Burago publishing house. [In Ukrainian].
Iskakov, I. (2014). Politicheskaia konkurentsiia i konsolidatsia v protsesse evraziiskoi intehratsii [Political competition and consolidation in the process of Eurasian integration]. Vestnik Baltiiskoho federalnoho universiteta im. E. Kanta [Bulletin of the I. Kant Baltic Federal University], 12, pp. 164-171. [In Russian].
Statut Orhanizatsii Obiednanykh Natsii i Statut Mizhnarodnoho Sudu [Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice]. [Online]. Available from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_010#Text [In Ukrainian].
Pryntsyp neporushnosti derzhavnykh kordoniv [The principle of inviolability of state borders]. [Online]. Available from: https://pidru4niki.com/1377030149456/pravo/printsip_neporushnosti_ derzhavnih_kordoniv [In Ukrainian].
Heopolitychnyi vuzol Pivdennoho Kavkazu (2020). [Geopolitical node of the South Caucasus]. Yevropeiska ta yevraziiska paradyhmy intehratsii yak faktor transformatsii postradianskoho prostoru: monohrafiia [European and Eurasian paradigms of integration as a factor in the transformation of the post-Soviet space: a monograph]. Kyiv: DU “Instytut vsesvitnoi istorii NAN Ukrainy”, pp. 180-196. [In Ukrainian].
V Gruzii ratifitsirovali sohlashenie o svobodnoi torhovle s Kitaem [Georgia ratified free trade agreement with China]. [Online]. Available from: https://www.nesgrorgia.ge/v-gruzii-ratifitsirovali-soglashenie-o-svobodnoj-torgovle-s-kitaem/ [In Russian].
Virmeniia pidpysala uhodu pro partnerstvo z YeS [Armenia has signed a partnership agreement with the EU]. [Online]. Available from: https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/news/28875370.html [In Ukrainian].