Russian foreign policy toward the Central Asian Region in comparison to the Chinese and American policies

State level: Political stability within Central Asian states shadowed by corruption, mafia networks, ethnic clashes, and illegal precedence. These states have not completely embraced the notion of a democracy since their creation. Considering their authoritarian leaders as legends who saved their country, citizens could not challenge their policies or expect free and fair elections [40, p. 138]. Nevertheless, these authoritarians have provided stability in the region. The most concerning issue is the forthcoming transfers of power, especially in Kazakhstan. The current President, Nazarbayev, has reigned since 1990 and is growing old. The Kazakh constitution allows for a temporary succession plan if the president is abruptly unable to rule, but there are no means nor precedent to establish a permanent president [40, p. 143]. Furthermore, this is an unspoken rule that ambitious actions have consequences. Rahat Aliev, the president's son in law, was vocal about his plans to run for election and was forced to leave Kazakhstan in 2007 [39, p. 144]. Uzbekistan also shares the custom of keeping ambitions hidden. The next ruler of Kazakhstan would also need Russia's silent blessing. Nazarbayev has been vital to helping the Kremlin carry out their economic community goals for Central Asia [40, p. 145].

There is a multi-tiered system of threats to stability in the region that will take years to resolve. The states themselves, their relationships with one another, and their relationships with the Great Powers are all currently vulnerable to conflict.

Drug Trafficking

Central Asia's geographic location makes regional security vulnerable to illicit trading. Afghanistan to the South has the world's largest poppy farms while Russia to the North has the world's worse opium addiction [41, p. 1235]. Illegal drug trade has become a large financial resource for terrorist groups. In the aftermath of 9/11, the West has made great efforts to quell terrorist groups and their hands in the drug trade in Afghanistan. Today, the majority of illicit trade is conducted on a mafia-state nexus [41, p. 1236-1237].

The collapse of the USSR allowed criminal syndicates in the region to take advantage of the insufficient border control. Since the 1980's, opium production in Afghanistan has increased 5 times. In 2010, roughly a quarter of all Afghan heroin ended up in Russia. That is essentially 90 metric tons of heroin being trafficked through Central Asia [41, p. 1237]. The trade is managed by regional mafias who also deal with trafficking cannabis, humans, and arms. Nowadays, heroin is their most lucrative product in the region. The local mafia has specialized in its trade since the 1980's and is associated with powerful businessmen and political elites [41, p. 1237-1238]. The mafia-state relationships are interdependent and mutually beneficial. The mafia-state connection is an exchange of favors where mafias are offered immunity for a percentage of this trade profits. For this reason, there is little violence involved in illicit trafficking [41, p. 1238]. Mafias also feel no need to engage in turf wars as the competition is not harsh. While actors outside the region continue to deal with the terrorist drug related networks, the Central Asian mafias act with little risk of abolishment [41, p. 1238]. If Russia, China, and/or the US desire to tackle the drug trade issue, they would have to jeopardize destabilizing well established mafia-state relationships.

Future Prospects

Although not all Great Powers have approached the region in the same way, there is a substantial window for future cooperation. Russia, China, and the US have similar policy goals for political stability, containment of radical Islam, and prevention of trafficking. All pursue an open door foreign policy with Central Asians. Areas where the Great Powers differ include the favorite types of political system: authoritarian or democracy. Russia and China have no problem building relationships with authoritarian leaders, while the US prefer to promote and establish a democratic political system. However, these differences do not need to impede a multilateral effort to eradicate political Islam and illegal trafficking. Cooperative diplomacy amidst the Great Powers can be utilized to address these concerns and manage their challenges in the twenty first century. Therefore, the story of the Great Powers in Central Asia does not need to end sadly.

References

goal policy obama trump

1. Faman M. E., Akyurt, Ali M. The Caucasus and Central Asia in Turkish Foreign Policy: The Time Has Come for a New Regional Policy. Alternatives Turkish Journal of International Relations, 2011, no. 2-3 (10), pp. 45-64.

2. TAKM. Avrasya Askeri Stattilti Kolluk Kuvvetleri Te^kilati [The Association of the Eurasian Law Enforcement Forces with Military Status].

3. Malysheva D. RIAC: Russia and Turkey in Central Asia: Partnership or Rivalry? March 16 2015.

4. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Turkey's Development Cooperation: General Characteristics And The Least Developed Countries (LDC) Aspect / Rep. of Turkey Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2018.

5. Menelly S. The Geographical Pivot of Central Asia. Harvard International Review, 2016, no. 1 (38), pp. 36-38.

6. Shaikhutdinov M. Central Asia in the Foreign Policy Strategy of Barack Obama's Administration: Results and Prospects. American Foreign Policy Interests, 2010, no. 2(32), pp. 83-92.

7. Bin H. Oil and Gas Cooperation Between China and Central Asia in an Environment of Political and Resource Competition. Petroleum Science, 2014, no. 4 (11), pp. 596-605.

8. Fatima Q., Zafar S. New Great Game: Players, Interests, Strategies and Central Asia. South Asian Studies, 2014, no. 2 (29), pp. 627-655.

9. Payne K. B., Foster J. S. Russian strategy Expansion, crisis and conflict Comparative Strategy, 2017, no. 1 (36), pp. 1-89.

10. Ziegler C. E. Russia in Central Asia: The Dynamics of Great-Power Politics in a Volatile Region. Asian Perspective, 2014, no. 4(38), pp. 589-617

11. Yesdauletova A., Yesdauletova A. The Eurasian Union: Dynamics and Difficulties of Post-Soviet Integration. TRAMES: A Journal of the Humanities & Social Sciences, 2014, no. 1 (18), pp. 3-17.

12. Swanstrom N. Sino-Russian Relations at the Start of the New Millennium in Central Asia and Beyond. Journal of Contemporary China, 2014, no. 87 (23), pp. 480-497.

13. The Military Balance. International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2017, vol. 117, no. 1.

14. Spechler M. C., Spechler, D. R. Russia's lost position in Central Eurasia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 2013, no. 1 (4), pp. 1-7.

15. Pikalov A. Uzbekistan between the great powers: a balancing act or multi-vectorial approach? Central Asian Survey, 2014, no. 3 (33), pp. 297-331.

16. Zubaida S. Islam and Nationalism: Continuities and Contradictions. In the Ninth Ernest Gellner Nationalism Lecture, London: ASEN, LSE, 2003.

17. Fourest C. Brother Tariq The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan. New York, London, Encounter Books, 2008. 608 p.

18. Khalid A. A Secular Islam: Nation, State and Religion in Uzbekistan. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 2003, no. 35, pp. 51-63.

19. Tugal C. The Fall of the Turkish Model: How the Arab Uprisings Brought Down Islamic Liberalism. London, New York, Verso, 2016. 304 p.

20. Reuters. Putin Opens Moscow's Largest Mosque, Warns against Extremists. September, 23, 2015.

21. Sharshenova A., Crawford G. Undermining Western democracy promoting in Central Asia: China's countervailing influences, powers and impact. Central Asian Survey, 2017, pp. 1-20.

22. Kim Y. The New Great Game in Central Asia Post 2014: The US `New Silk Road' Strategy and Sino-Russian Rivalry. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 2013, no. 2 (42), pp. 275-286.

23. Purbrick M. Maintaning a Unitary State: Counter-terrorism, Separatism, and Extremism in Xinjiang and China. Asian Affairs, 2017, no. 2 (48), pp. 236-256.

24. Khalifa-Zadeh M. The South Caucasus: Obama's Failed Russia `Reset' and the Putin Doctrine in Practice. MERIA Journal, 2014, no. 3(18), pp. 32-45.

25. Marten K. Trump and Putin, Through a Glass Darkly. Asia Policy, 2017, (23), pp. 36-42.

26. Wood A. et al. The Russia Challenge. Chatham House Report. 2015, pp. 50-56. Standish R. Central Asia's Autocrats Welcome the Age of Trump. Foreign Policy, 2017, (31).

27. Interfax. Nazarbayev congratulates Trump on winning U. S presidency, invites him to Kazakhstan. Russia & CIS General Newswire, November 9, 2016.

28. US Embassay & Consulate in Kazakhstan. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson remarks for Astana EXPO- 2017. June 22, 2017.

29. US Department of State. Remarks at the United Nations Security Council Session on Nuclear Non-Proliferation. New York City, Sept. 21, 2017.

30. Cooley A. The New Great Game in Central Asia. Foreign Affairs, August 7, 2017.

31. Campbell C. Why Donald Trump Really Shouldn't Play Games With China Over Taiwan. Time, December 12, 2016.

32. Hoover A. Report: Trump asks State Department for 50 % cut to UN funding. The Christian Science Monitor, March 2017.

33. Meister S. Russia and the EU in Central Asia--geopolitics or partnership? Geopolitics, History & International Relations, 2009, no. 1 (1), pp. 164-170.

34. Klare M. T. From Scarcity to Abundance: The New Geopolitics of Energy, Current History, 2017, no. 786 (116), pp. 3-9.

35. Ro'i Y., Wainer A. Muslim identity and Islamic practice in post-Soviet Central Asia. Central Asian Survey, 2009, no. 3(28), pp. 308-322.

36. Omelicheva M. Y. The Ethnic Dimension of Religious Extremism and Terrorism in Central Asia. International Political Science Review, 2010, 31 (2), pp. 167-186.

37. Cheterian V. Kyrgyzstan: Central Asia's Island of Instability. Survival, no. 5 (52), pp. 21-27.

38. International Crisis Group. Report analyzes water pressures in Central Asia. Times of Central Asia, September 11, 2014. Available At: https://www.crisisgroup.org/europe-central-asia/central-asia/233-water- pressures-central-asia (accessed: 12.09. 2014).

39. Shenin S. Y. The Transfer of Power in Central Asia and Threats to Regional Stability. Connections, 2014, no. 1 (14), pp. 137-147.

40. De Danieli F. Beyond the drug terror nexus: Drug trafficking and state-crime relations in Central Asia. International Journal of Drug Policy, 2014, no. 6 (25), pp. 1235-1240.

Размещено на Allbest.ru