نشریه مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی
پیاپی 16 (بهار و تابستان 1394)

With the dissolution of the Soviet Union، the newly formed independent states believed that the root of their economic problems lay in the communist economic policies and leaned towards free market economic system. The movement of such nations during the economic transition period has a close relationship with globalization. Globalization itself has close ties with players in the international economic arena. Countries that have the highest potential for attracting these players can make the most profit during this process. In this essay، we examine the indexes of foreign direct investment، foreign trade، labour'' remittance، social development in Kazakhstan. By studying Kazakhstan Qualitative and quantitative statistics، we concluded that Kazakhstan was more successful in attaining the indexes of globalization and these indexes had greater effect in the social development of the said country than other countries in Central Asia. Kazakhstan، by having greater economic freedom has experiences social-economical development

In the past twenty-five years، the Russian government has been faced with widespread corruption and despite all of his efforts، hasn’t able to control it. According to Transparency International report in 2013، this country was the 127th among 177 countries. This article tries to analyze the role of administrative oligarchy and continuity of corruption in Russia. The main question of this article is that why the Russian government’s programs to bands corruption، has been ineffectiveness? The hypothesis is that the power of administrative oligarchy as the main barrier preventing the effectiveness of the anti-corruption programs of Russian government. To examine this hypothesis، we discuss about the concept of oligarchy and its indications، the formation of oligarchy in Russia and his relations with corruption، and impact of power of administrative oligarchy on the ineffectiveness of anti-corruption programs.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union، until the rise of Putin''s in the Russia، Because in the West-centric approach in the foreign policy، the West Asia and North Africa in foreign policy of this country have، no place. Putin on the rise، Russia''s renewed interest in the this regions. In the course of its efforts to participate in this strategic area، because of implications for the revival of Russia as a superpower that can compete with America with the goal of establishing a permanent presence and take a role in regional developments، sale weapons and military equipment to the region، Fear from the spread of terrorism and extremism from West Asia and North Africa to Muslim south areas If neglect this area، and Finally the trade of goods and services in these countries. In this period، Russia attempted In addition to expanding relations with Turkey، Iran and Saudi Arabia in countries such as Egypt، Yemen، Iraq، Syria، Palestine and Israel as the sphere of influence of USSR، be present. the purpose of this study، is examining of foreign policy of Russia in this period.

Historically، Central Asia and the Caucasus has been the source of important developments in the regional and global level. The whole geopolitical theories in the 20th century and 21 paid special attention to this area. Geopolitical status of the region has posed challenges for residents and even neighbors of the region. These challenges can be described as the divergence factors. Therefore، this paper tries to investigate the fragile and divergent geopolitical factors in this region. The methodology of this paper is analytical-descriptive. The basic question is that what and how geopolitical factors prevent the formation of regional integration in Central Asia and the Caucasus? It seems that geopolitical factors such as Geo-economy، enclosed position and lack of access، placement in the marginal and the reciprocity of interests، identities and ideologies، made fragile the stability and regional relations of the region. Hence، there has been no convergence in the Caucasus and Central Asia.

The fall of the Soviet cause to a vacancy of power between current powers in the former territory of the empire and in the whole of Europe and cause many wars. Events such collapse of Yugoslavia and karabakh war affected by this fall and that lead to international society concerns. karabakh war between of Armenia and Azerbaijan that had started while the soviet government was stable and reach a peak after falling of it. This war leads to OSCE being drawn up to this conflict. So the main concern of authors is response to this question that what factors caused that OSEC could not be successful in solving the conflict. Accordingly the hypothesis is that: «transformation the completion of superpowers from United Nations to Security Council has caused the poor performance of OSCE on Karabakh crisis. In this paper by using the descriptive – analytical method we examine this issue based on the theory of collective security. Results show that the OSCE has failed to reach its purpose and to end the conflict after 20 years. This failure has led to continuity of» no war، no peace«situation in Karabakh.

This paper aims to investigate the change in Turkey''s Security Discourse in process of Turkey''s Europe Union accession. It seems that Europeanization of turkey is one of the most important factors in the change of its security discourse. Turkey''s political and security language has changed and in this country، we are witnessing a new political and social contracts that lead to a normalization process. Among other reasons، process of desecuritization is the result of the European Union accession process and concomitant events، a transformation of the political landscape، and the Compliance with EU norms. Within this process of desecuritization formerly securitized issues have perceived as normal political issues. To test this hypothesis، the authors with use of Europeanization literature while comparing the security discourse in Turkey before and after the start of the new millennium، tries to evaluate the normalization of Armenian issue and Turkey– Armenia relations in the framework of this discursive change.

The concept of energy security has been changed into one of the key and controversial concepts in international relations and energy economy in the recent years. The literature of this concept has more developed in Europe. Because، European countries supply their major needs by imports. Hence، Russia which is one of the main suppliers of EuropeUnionenergy uses leveraging energy for closer to Europe. In this regard، one of the main purposes of Europe Union is to decrease dependency to Russia in the field of energy and finding alternative ways that these Europe attemptshas been unable to obtains successfully so-far. The main question of this study is that: in this regard relationship with Europe countries،Russia is faced with what opportunities? The main hypothesis: the strategy of Russia energy constantly is that، matters Russia as an oil empire that is able to play geopolitical about energy and tries to use Russian energy supplies and pipeline monopoly for supplying its interests in Eurasia especially in the relation with Europe Union for more dependency to itself.

In August 1991 Ukraine gained its independence after the collapse of the Soviet Union and it has experienced many ups and downs over the years until today. During 2014، Once again، Ukraine has been the scene of many conflicts. Many observers believe the roots of these tensions are the internal problems of ethnic tensions in the country and some others say Ukraine is the confrontation scene of trans-regional powers such as United-States of America and European Union with Russia. In some cases even this conflict is interpreted as the «new cold war». In this article the main question is what are the effects of Ukraine Crisis on United States and Russia relations? The research hypothesis is that this crisis –with intensification of tensions between the two countries in short and medium-term – won’t have a profound impact on the nature of the relations between the two countries. That’s because geopolitical and geo-economics considerations in this region deter major powers from serious conflicts.