نشریه مطالعات خاورمیانه
سال دوازدهم شماره 3 (پیاپی 43، پاییز 1384)

Following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Central Asia has witnessed extensive deep changes turning it into a battle groundfor regional and trans-regional powers. On the other side, change in NATO’s mission after the end of the Cold War and the adoption of NATO’s eastward enlargement policy became an important partner in the Russia-West relations thus adding to the region’s complexities. Considering the consequences of NATO’s eastward enlargement, this article tries to answer the question what role NATO plays in order to preserve security in Central Asia. Noting a variety of challenges in the region, the author discusses a new Great Game which has begun between the great powers. In this matrix, NATO acts as an instrument for the advancement of the United States and the policies of the European Union. The importance of the article refers to the fact that the United States has paid special attention to Central Asia as part of the Greater Middle East. Hence, to examine the consequences of events and changes in the region may help better understand the issues of the Middle East.

Criticizing the policy of securitizing issues, Barry Buzan sets a new strategy with regard to the management of domestic security issues before the Third World statesmen; a strategy that today enjoys utmost importance and efficiency. The author tries to redefine and reconstruct this analytical pattern at the international level. To do this, first in a theoretical discussion he introduces the concept of security code of regions. This concept is a reply to the important question that to what degree an actor may achieve security. Within this framework, two major positions are distinguished: non-securitized and securitized positions. Analyzing the structure of the global security system and examining the changed place of the Middle East from an important peripheral region during the Cold War to a focal point of security equations in the post-Cold War era, the author concludes that the Middle East is defined as a securitized region in all Western scenarios.

Since the late 1990s, the Middle East region has attracted serious attention by Russia once again. Although Russians maintain their close ties with the West particularly the United States, they havetried to play an active independent part in the region. Since Russia has not managed to act as an influential player in the Middle East yet due to its various problems as well as the existing conditions of the international system, it has largely emerged as a peripheral pragmatist actor. This type of acting means that Moscow looks pragmatically at its foreign policy issues towards the region and acts to secure its interests according to such a vision. That is the reason why Russia did not oppose substantially to the plan of the Greater Middle East, but it fails to cooperate with it effectively.

The formation of security regimes in the relations among the states represents the appearance of a fragile compromise among the former adversaries or rivals that do not consider conflict and war as a suitable means, but they are still far from building trust and alliances. Security regimes tend to be replaced by either friendly relations and even alliances or a return to conflict and confrontation. In an optimistic view, the perception of war as a taboo leads the states to avoid conflict and to create security regimes which in turn gives way to the establishment of security communities. Now what is the situation for the Middle East? According to the author, although the Iraqi regime as a serious threat has been overthrown and the United States sees itself committed to mediate between the Palestinians and Israelis, there still remain numerous challenges to regional security. Thus, the time is still ripe for the formation of bilateral or multilateral security regimes.

From the very beginning, the Turkish-Iraqi relations have experienced fluctuations and the influence of various historical, geographical, economic and strategic factors have complicated such ties. This article studies the course of such relations with a historical perspective and particularly focuses upon two factors including territorial disputes and the requirements of the international system. On this basis, the end of the Cold War and rise of new alignments have also affected mutual relations notably the occupation of Iraq by U.S. forces has disrupted preceding regional balances. Consequently, Turkey should not make a mistake in its perception or action this time. A factor that has to be taken into precise consideration by Turkey’s politicians is the presence of Iraq’s Turkmen community. Perseverance in this case may ultimately bring about political control for Turkey over northern parts of Iraq. Although the contents of the article are mainly of historical nature, it might be useful for recognizing the opinions of the Turkish researchers and historians concerning regional issues.

This article seeks to explain the place of the Middle East in the present volatile conditions by adopting a new approach to recent developments in the oil market. To this purpose, a new analytical framework within the production peak theory has been used in order to extrapolate recent developments in the market and its future orientations. The main question is whether recent market developments have to be considered as a shock as was the case in the past combined with the rise of oil prices a number of less important changes, or the previous oil shocks should be regarded as shakes of a strong earthquake; an earthquake that will bring a new order into power and will drastically affect the role and place of the Middle East in the world oil market? The author accepts the second view and tries to explain the causes of this earthquake and its impact on the major five oil-producing countries in the Middle East notably Saudi Arabia.