Baner czasopisma
Extended European Security Complex and the South Caucasus: the US policy approaches





This paper analyses the US’s strategic interests and policy approaches towards the South Caucasus vis-a-vis competing geopolitical paradigms. It concerns the security challenges for the region, which arise from contradictions between integration, disintegration, and sovereignty in the shared neighbourhood of the European Union (EU) and Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). The geopolitical, geo-economic and security interests of the United States, Russia, the European Union, Turkey, and Iran are all engaged in the South Caucasus, here is where their security interests intersect. The paper utilizes the Regional Security Complex Theory. From this perspective, the strategic fulcrum of regional security lies in the regions and powers. Therefore, the South Caucasus has an ever-increasing importance for the US interests both as a gateway to Eurasia and as the eastern edge of Europe. Thus, within the context of the largest competing alternatives of the geopolitics and geo-economics of the EU, the Russia-led EAEU, China’s Belt and Road and India’s North-South Corridor – the South Caucasus, an integral of European super-complex, appears as an insulator and corridor between the West and the East, the North and the South. Hence, the US policies have been aimed at making the South Caucasus an eastern extension of the enlarged European regional security complex.

Ademmer E., Delcour L. Wolczuk K. 2016. “Beyond Geopolitics: Exploring the Impact of the EU and Russia in the ‘Contested Neighbourhood’.” Eurasian Geography and Economics, Vol. 57, No. 1: 1-18. 
Borshchevskaya A. 2019. “The South Caucasus Factor of the United States-Russia-Iran Triangle.” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, September 16. clnyb929txdbfss [accessed on: 30.06.2021[.
Brooks S. G., Ikenberry G. J. Wohlforth W.C. 2012. “Don’t Come Home, America: The Case against Retrenchment.” International Security, Vol. 37, No. 3: 7-51. 
Brzezinski Z. 2004. The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership. New York: Basic Books. 
Buzan B., Waever O. 2003. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. 
Chausovsky E. 2021. “Integrating U.S. policy in the Caucasus.” Newlines Institute, May 13, [accessed on: 30.06.2021]. 
Congressional Research Service (CRS). 2010. Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia: Security Issues and Implications for U.S. Interests. CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress, March 11.
Cornell S. E. 2005. Small Nations and Great Powers: A Study of Ethno Political Conflict in the Caucasus. London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, Taylor & Francis E-Library. 
Cornell S. E., Starr S. F., Tsereteli M. 2015. A Western Strategy for the South Caucasus. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program: Silk Road Paper, February. 
Cornell S. 2005. “US engagement in the Caucasus: Changing Gears.” Helsinki Monitor, No. 2: 111-119.
Decree of the President of the Russian Federation № 640. 2016. “On the approval of the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation” (In Russian: Указ Президента Российской Федерации от 30.11.2016 г. № 640, Об утверждении Концепции внешней политики Российской Федерации) (accessed on: 10.05.2021). 
Derghoukassian Kh. 2006. “Balance of Power, Democracy and Development: Armenia in the South Caucasian Regional Security Complex.” Universidad de San Andres, AIPRG Working Paper No. 06/10: 1-18. 
Dragneva R., Wolczuk K. 2012. “Russia, the Eurasian Customs Union and the EU: Cooperation, Stagnation or Rivalry?”. Chatham House, REP BP 2012/01: 1-16. 
Fukuyama F. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: The Free Press. 
Hunter Sh. T. 2010. Iran’s Foreign Policy in the Post-Soviet Era: Resisting the New International Order. Santa Barbara, California: Praeger.
Huntington S. P. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster. 
Kaplan R. D. 2003. “America and the Tragic Limits of Imperialism.” The Hedgehog Review, Spring: 56-67. 
Mahbubani K. 2008. The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East. New York: Public Affairs. 
Mahbubani K. 2013. The Great Convergence: Asia, the West, and the Logic of One World. New York: Public Affairs. 
Markedonov S. M., Suchkov M. A. 2020. “Russia and the United States in the Caucasus: Cooperation and Competition.” Caucasus Survey, Feb: 1-17. 
Mearsheimer J. J. 2011. “Imperial by Design.” The National Interest, No. 111, January/February: 16-34. 
Mirzoyan A. 2010. Armenia, the Regional Powers, and the West: Between History and Geopolitics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 

Moniquet C., Racimora W. (eds.), 2013. The Armenia-Iran Relationship: Strategic Implication for Security in the South Caucasus Region. European Strategic Intelligence & Security Center (ESISC), January. 
Moshes A. 2006. “The Eastern Neighbours of the European Union as an Opportunity for Nordic Actors.” Danish Institute for International Studies, DIIS Working Paper 12. 
National Security Strategy of the United States of America. 2017. The White House, Washington, December. https://trumpwhitehouse. [accessed on: 30.06.2021]. 
Nixey J. 2010. “The South Caucasus: drama on three stages.” In: America and a Changed World: A Question of Leadership, R. Niblett (ed.). London: Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 125-142. 
Novikova G. 2019. “The Policy of the United States in the South Caucasus.” European Security & Defence, No. 14, May. [accessed on: 30.06.2021]. 
Rumer E., Sokolsky R., Stronski P. 2017. U.S. Policy Toward the South Caucasus: Take Three. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Stepanyan A., Minasyan L. 2013. “Great Armenia and Euphrates Frontier in 60-S A.D. (Conflict, Ideas, Settlement).” Journal of Armenian Studies, No. 1 (1), NAS RA, N 1 (1): 14-33. 
Tashjian Y. 2021. “Armenia and India’s Vision of “North-South Corridor”: A Strategy or a “Pipe Dream”?” The Armenian Weekly, March 24. [accessed on: 30.06.2021].
The Armenian Weekly. 2018. “John Bolton’s Trip to Armenia Draws Strong Reactions.” November 1. /2018/11/01/john-boltons-trip-to-armenia-draws-strong-reactions/ [accessed on: 30.06.2021].
The White House. 2021. Remarks by President Biden at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. July 27. (accessed on: 30.08.2021). 
The White House. 2021. Statement by President Joe Biden on Armenian Remembrance Day, April 24. /briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/24/statement-by-president-joe-biden-on-armenian-remembrance-day/ (accessed on: 30.06.2021). 
Yepremyan T., Mkrtchyan N. 2016. “On Reasons behind Armenia’s Integration Choice: EU vis-à-vis Russia-Led EEU.” In: EU Relations with Eastern Partnership: Strategy, Opportunities and Challenges. Chişinău, Chernivtsi, Tbilisi: Tipografia “Print-Caro,” 174-195. 
Yepremyan T. 2017. “The Geopolitical Dimension of the Eastern Partnership: An Alternative to Solution.” European Studies Journal, No. 10, Eastern Partnership: Self-Determination and Geopolitics / Geoculture (II): 89–108. 
Yepremyan T. 2018. “Armenia Within the Complex of ‘Overlapping Authority and Multiple Loyalty’: Security Challenges” In: The European Union and The Eastern Partnership: Security Challenges. Supplement to Eurolimes Journal. Chisinau-Chernivtsi-Tbilisi, 227-241.
Yepremyan T. 2020. “Why Europe should care about Nagorno-Karabakh: A Civilisational and Geopolitical Perspective.” New Eastern Europe, Nov. 3. 
Zarifian J. 2008. “Christian Armenia, Islamic Iran: Two (Not So) Strange Companions Geopolitical Stakes and Significance of a Special Relationship.” Iran and the Caucasus, Vol. 12: 123-152.