Astana,
Kazakhstan
During the analysis of the security architecture of Central Asia there is emerged
a distinct regional structure in Central Asia with its unique patterns and
interactions with necessity to closer analysis in a regional perspective.
However, till the end of the Cold War, and dissolution of Soviet Union Central
Asia has been overlooked from the regional perspective. And anybody couldn’t
find a theoretical analysis focusing on the regions. This lack of attention was
mostly because of the principle preamble of the predominating realist paradigm
that focused on such a hard power security themes, as deterrence, coercion and
escalation, causes on stability, arms control and the importance of
conventional forces and limited war in the context of the nuclear age, what can
be called as Cold War atmosphere implications.
At the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union and until 1993 the
concept of Central Asia as a region does not exist, respectively, there was no
security cooperation ideas, covering exclusively Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Comprehension of the current situation
happened in the wider framework - first in the “reformed Union” format, and
then - in the CIS format. A reflection of this was the signing in 1992 of the
Collective Security Treaty Organization. The original agreement was signed by
the heads of the six CIS countries - Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia,
Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In 1993, the instruments of accession to the Treaty
was signed by Azerbaijan, Georgia and Belarus. The Treaty entered into force on
20 April 1994 for five year term.
In terms of safety the key points of the agreement are the following:
- “States
Parties reaffirm the obligation refrain from the use or threat of force in
international relations. They undertake to allow all disputes among themselves
and with other states by peaceful means”;
- “If one
of the member states will undergo aggression by any State or group of the
state, it will be considered as an aggression against all States parties”.
Thus, substantially the Collective Security Treaty affected not so much
collective security, as has been aimed at ensuring the collective defence. If
collective security involves the formation of a system in which each of its
member states, recognizing that the security of one is the concern of all, agrees
to join a collective response to any threats and breach of the peace, the
collective defence - a mechanism, States Parties that support the defence of
any state party if it is attacked by another state which does not belong to the
organization.
Countries of this region, the newly independent states understood the
importance of the early security foundations building, which could be the
reliable shield for the region. Creating strong defence system in Central Asia
will reduce external threats and ensure security in the region. Military
cooperation of Central Asia countries was historically, politically conditioned
and most profitable for their national interests. Scientists such as
Zh.M.Medeubayeva, A.T.Serikbayeva consider, “Multivector foreign policy pursued
by the states also encourages distancing from solving urgent problems in a
regional format” [1].
Stake in the formation of the security space The Collective Security
Treaty was made on the format of the military sector, despite the fact that the
possibility of securitization of these threats in the 1990s was extremely
limited. Accordingly, the Collective Security Treaty does not mean the
formation of a collective security system in any format of the CIS, nor in any
narrower format.
In the mid-1990s, the importance of the Treaty began to decline, at
least in connection with the two processes:
1. Consolidation of the concept of “Central Asia” as a marker indicating
a coherent regional grouping and, consequently, the formation of the perception
of a large part of the states - members of the Collective Security Treaty as “extra-regional
forces”.
2. Gradual actualization of the security issues that are not directly
related to the military sector (delimitation and demarcation of borders,
establishment of border regime; water management issues). Therefore occurred
problematization of the attraction of “non-regional powers” to
resolve them.
During 1990-2000 countries of Central Asia have been suggested other
formats of international multilateral co-operation, which are often regarded as
elements of a regional security system: the program “Partnership for Peace”,
the SCO and CSTO, based on the involvement of non-regional forces and retain
the majority of problematic points related to this factor.
The situation of regional security in Central Asia largely not
determined by a regional or quasiregional formation, but with the fact that
Central Asian countries are protected from traditional threats of security
(“territorial disappearance”) with rules and principles of the modern system of
international relations [2, p.
98], in other words – with its
structure. Moreover, all the Central Asian states not only declared adherence
to these norms and principles, but also implement them in practice.
This suggests that in the medium term, a key factor in determining the
question of regional security in Central Asia, will further the transformation
of the structure of international relations at the global (change of norms of
international law and, above all, the actualization of the issue of
humanitarian intervention, based on the erosion of the concept of national
sovereignty and non-interference principle), and regional level (a change of
attitude of the Central Asian states to modern standards of international
relations). In other words, there will be a crucial change in the security
regime – “a set of implicit or explicit principles, norms, rules and
decision-making procedures, defining the expectations of actors in
international relations” [2, p.
122]. In our case - operating in
Central Asia.
Thus, the question of regional security system could not be considered
separately from the analysis of the security regime.
The starting point of search should base on the formation of a regional
security system with a theoretical (scientific) understanding of the problem
with the following points:
1.
Central
Asia is the periphery of the modern system of international relations, in which
the interests of extra-regional powers are not manifest and, therefore, do not
overlap to a significant extent. Undoubtedly, this situation may change. For
example, during the withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan, or in the case
of the military campaign in connection with the contradictions that emerged in
Iran. However, these changes will in any case be temporary, as it was in the
early 2000s during the anti-terrorist action deployment coalition in
Afghanistan. Thus, the presence of extra-regional powers in Central Asia are
always temporary.
2.
The
Central Asian states - the so-called weak states. In this case, it is important
to bear in mind that we are talking about the concept of strength and weakness
of the state in terms of the theoretical analysis of security issues. In other
words, this division does not have a different nature, and is exclusively concerned
with the structural features of the state. The strength / weakness is fixed in
at least three measurements [2, p. 187]:
- Infrastructural capacity - the ability of government
institutions to implement the most important tasks and set policy on its territory;
- The possibility of coercion - the ability and
willingness the state of calls to use force against its power;
- Societal (identification) is the degree of
relatedness in which the population identifies with the nation-state and
receives its legitimate role in his life.
The main threats faced by the weak states are
internal:
- Calls on the part of various social groups, such as
ethnic groups, religious movements, ideological groups or local self-defence
units;
- Steady erosion of public institutions and processes
of the increase of lawlessness and a possible collapse of public institutions
can lead to a power vacuum in which the ruling elite has become one of several
groups fighting to fill the void, and claiming the formal powers of the State.
A key challenge faced by weak states, insecurity dilemma - a situation
in which national security is defined as regime security, confronts its
incompatible with the requirements of various social forces. At the same time,
“the more elite (modes) weak states seek to establish good governance, the more
they provoke calls for its power on the part of influential social groups”.
Central Asia cannot be considered as a fully independent regional
security complex. In the best case, this - unstructured space, which acts as
the insulator between neighboring complexes [3,
p. 336-359].
The source of a number of "non-traditional" security threats,
at least, the issues that are actively securitized in Central Asian countries,
namely Afghanistan, submitted beyond the regionalization of Central Asia.
Respectively the impact that the Central Asian countries can have on
Afghanistan, is extremely limited. Thus, if in Central Asia raises the question
of the feasibility of a regional security system, it’s bases can only be created
with structural reformatting the region.
Central Asian countries are forming a security policy based on military
doctrines and annual messages of the leaders of these countries. According to
the military doctrine of the Republic of Kazakhstan country has consistently
advocated the establishment of a system of international relations, when the
value of military force will be minimized and the settlement of disputes
between States will be carried out with the use of political, diplomatic and
legal instruments. The Republic of Kazakhstan considers that no state is its
potential enemy [8]. Military and political cooperation of the CAR countries in
the 2000s may be characterised as follows: attempts of countries of Central
Asia to create security system without the participation of non-regional actors
in the new century have not been continued in view of global geopolitical
conjuncture and complexity of the overall situation in the region as a result
of influence of external and internal factors [4, p. 122]. The main objectives of the Republic of Kazakhstan policy are
strengthening and development of international and regional security, political
stability in the country, the prevention of armed conflicts and to maintain
readiness of the Armed Forces, other troops and military formations of the
armed defence of the Republic of Kazakhstan and its allies, as well as in the
prevention of security threats and strengthening the stability the country
cooperates:
- with CIS in the framework of the CSTO, as well as on a bilateral
and multilateral basis.
- At the regional level: with the countries of Central Asia, with the
member countries of the SCO and the CICA.
- At global level with all the countries members of the UN on the basis
of international law.
The priority areas identified:
- The development of cooperation with the CSTO;
- Enhanced cooperation with NATO in the framework of “Partnership for
Peace”;
- The strengthening of bilateral cooperation with Russia, the US, China
and the EU;
- Participation in military forces in international peacekeeping
operations under the UN aegis.
In accordance with the national security concept to ensure the military
security of Kyrgyzstan it
provides the establishment and development of
partnership relations with the international military-political organizations
and states both at the international and regional level. Cooperation at the
regional level through the prism of the interaction with the CSTO, SCO, as well
as on a bilateral and multilateral basis with the CIS countries. At the global
level with all the countries whose policies do not contradict the UN Charter
and the interests of Kyrgyzstan. According to this concept, the Kyrgyz
government has identified the following key areas of prevention and
neutralization of threats:
-
The
formation of border perimeter security and good neighbourliness zone countries
on principles of equal security, respect for sovereignty and territorial
integrity within its existing borders;
-
The
establishment and strengthening of zones free from all weapons of mass
destruction;
-
Formation
of the necessary international legal framework for cooperation with the
organizations and the world community in combating international terrorism,
extremism and separatism;
-
Improving
the system of immigration, border and customs and sanitary control.
Concerning to the
Kyrgyz official leadership opinion, which is reflected in the concept,
inter-State relations in Central Asia characterized, on the one hand, as the
desire to integrate on the other as the competition in the struggle for
survival due to the process of national self-determination, finding ways of
political and economic integration into the world community [5].
According to the Kazakh researcher I.A.Chernyh positions of the two
countries is determined by the fact that they cannot ensure their military
security without reliable contacts with external actors such as Russia, China
and the United States. On the other hand, they cannot relax due to the
different policy of other Central Asian states (in the first place - with
Uzbekistan). Therefore, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan always offer and participate
in the models of non-regional powers, thus ensuring, on the one hand, the
balance of them, and on the other side to balance military capabilities and the
regional ambitions of Uzbekistan. Thus, the political leadership of the two
countries committed to providing military security, balancing between world and
regional power centers [6,
p. 220].
In official documents of the Republic of Uzbekistan it is stated
the need to create a unified system of regional security in Central Asia, under
which the country will play a leading role and will be able to declare the
status of a regional leader [10, p. 37]. However, despite calls for the
integration of countries in the region they have mutual contradictions on a
number of issues of regional security, including border issues between
countries, water and energy disputes and ethnic divisions.
With the declaration of permanent neutrality in 1995 [7]
Turkmen leadership has repeatedly noted the importance of peaceful cooperation,
non-interference policy in the affairs of other countries and complete
disarmament. As a neutral country, Turkmenistan is not a member of any military
alliance or bloc, because he seize the guarantees of security from the UN.
Representatives of law enforcement agencies are taking part in various meetings
of the CIS as observers. The only exception is the participation in the work of
the Coordinating Committee on Air Defence under the Council of Defence
Ministers of the CIS member states.
The geopolitical situation of Tajikistan, its military-strategic
position, the low probability of a large-scale war and the difficult economic
conditions of the country virtually eliminates the need and the opportunity to
advance the creation of a powerful
groups of armed forces in its geo-strategic areas. Taking into account the
serious threat of military conflict, not only for Tajikistan, but for all
Central - Asian region, it is necessary:
-
Adhere
to the principles of peaceful coexistence, political solution of regional and
international disputes and conflicts, respect for the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of States, non-interference in their internal affairs and
inviolability of state borders;
-
Deny war, of use of force or threat of force to achieve
political, economic and other purposes;
-
Condemn
all acts of international terrorism, political extremism, separatism and drug
trafficking.
Thus the influence of external factors on the formation of a single
regional Central Asian security is very high. According to the opinion of Kyrgyz researcher M.Imanaliev, one of the most
important issues facing the Central Asian countries - is a matter of choice of
values. The inherited and acquired the political, social, cultural and ideological
identity is difficult to determine the choice of the appropriate niche for the
individual countries and the region as a whole, which meets the needs of people
living in the states of Central Asia, and the interests of the international
community.
The Central Asian states attempts to join forces in the military –
political sphere was initially very successful. In January 1994, the leaders of
three Central Asia countries signed a treaty on the formation of the Central
Asian Union, which objectives were the creation of economic and security space
of countries in the region. In the first half of the 90s CAU were focused on
solving economic problems, although the Union was essentially a geo-economic
and geo-political system characterized as a condition for increasing security
resource of the regional association actors. Absence of a direct military
threat to the end of 90s predetermined nature of interstate documents adopted
by Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan [1, p.8].
Agreement on military – technical cooperation between the three
republics, signed in the same year consisted of sixteen articles.
Military-technical cooperation in the region had been gaining the real. The
adoption of this document was beginning of military cooperation between the
states and participants of Central Asia Union. Such a mechanism of insuring
security had never existed in Central Asia’s history. The agreement on military
– technical cooperation between the Central Asian countries was the only
document until the political situation had become worth in the second half and
the end of the 1990. The governments tried to overcome internal and external
threats, risks, relying upon this document and it had significant role in that
period [1, p.8].
In spite of the fact that some politicians and analysts had critically
evaluated the Union asserting that the CAU has a few prospects of becoming
influential force in Central Asia, the CAU had continued working since 1990s
with some difficulties on the stage of Central Asian region.
The document was a new step of generating a need for collective security
system in Central Asia. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan in the framework on
the Collective Security decided to develop cooperation and firstly provide
comprehensive support to prevent threats to independence and sovereignty,
territorial integrity, conduct an independent policy, In the case of situation
which according to one of the High Contracting Parties, constitutes a threat of
armed attack by other states, the High contracting Parties shall immediately
hold appropriate consultations with each other both on a tripartite basis, and
within the framework of international organizations to take measures for the
peaceful settlement of this situation, as well as common defense.
Realized the complexity of an independent military integration,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan began to cooperate with external actors
for more specific implementation plans for joint defense in the region,
preventing the threat of war and preserving peace. Most experts consider that
the main reason for the inability of Central Asian countries to ensure a
regional security system is their unwillingness to work closely with neighbors
to establish regulated environment for interstate cooperation. Multi-vector
foreign policy pursued by the states also encourages distancing from solving
urgent problems in a regional format. The desire of maneuvering between the
world actors in order to obtain benefits for the country and keep at least the
minimum share of independence, sadly led primarily to alienation from its
neighbors [1, p.9].
Military and political cooperation of the CAR countries in the 2000s may
be characterized as follows: attempts of countries of Central Asia to create
security system without the participation of non-regional actors in the new
century have not been continued in view of global geopolitical conjucture and
complexity of the overall situation in the region as a result of influence of
external and internal factors. It should be specially said about such factor as
the misregulating of the intergovernmental relations in the CAR, in the field
of which new problems, accumulated on the traditional problems inherited from
the Soviet period. There exists distrust to each other between countries.
Thereby the possibility of close cooperation of the region’s countries in
military and political aspect to maintain regional security gave way to the
creation and strengthening of such system by external, international and
regional organizations.
Military and political cooperation of region states become fully to
concentrate in the framework of multilateral structures with the direct
participation of Russia, China and Western countries by 2003-2004. The process
of formation of security system in the CAR made for the construction of the
architecture of security, where the pillars are the CSTO, SCO and NATO.
However, the allies agreed on the list
of foreign policy issues to speak with one voice and it may be noted as an
important positive step in the evolution of organization. In 2011 leaders of
CSTO’s country-members agreed to place military bases of third powers only with
the consent of the other members of CSTO. It is necessary to start
institutional reforms, to formulate strategy, to start practical steps rather
than written declarations that don’t get their realization in political life.
Obviously, it is necessary to make the organization attractive to participants,
to extend the number of countries that wish to join organization, not to leave
it [1, p.13].
During the period of radical reconstruction of the structure of
international relations system the Central Asian states did not have a significant
military and economic potential, and none of the countries has not been able to
claim the role of a regional leader. Due to its geopolitical location Central
Asian countries are in the sphere of influence of other centers of power -
Russia, the US and China. The importance of the Central Asian region in the
political interests began to increase, according to a US senator A.Krenston’s
words: “Central Asia will play an important economic and political role. The US
is also considering the region of barrier against the infiltration of Islamic
fundamentalism from Afghanistan and Iran” [8, p. 227]. These reasons determined the active participation of Russia and USA
in strengthening security in Central Asia. This concern was due to the desire
of countries to prevent the “export” of terrorism, extremism and drug
trafficking on its territory. In addition to these reasons, transit and energy
potential of Central Asia may become a part of Europe and Asia. The development
of such a dialogue between civilizations was evident in the establishment of
regional institutions in the field of security, as the SCO, CSTO and CICA. Analysis
of these structures shows that this is not just a mechanism for the development
of regional security, it is primarily Eurasian security mechanisms.
Military-political cooperation of Central Asian countries to promote
regional security, began with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). SCO
is one of the most effective Asian security mechanisms, with the inclusion of
Central Asia. Initially, the establishment of the SCO was linked to the
question of delimitation of borders in Central Asia and China, as well as
providing confidence-building measures in border areas. 3 post-Soviet countries
in the face of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan with the legal successor
of the Soviet Union the Russian Federation made the joint delegation in
Shanghai in 1996 and signed an agreement on confidence-building in the military
field in the border area, which was named “Shanghai
Declaration”. The declaration consists of 16 articles, with the following
objectives:
- Promote and develop long-term relations based on good neighborhood and
friendship;
- Renunciation of the use or threat of force;
- The rejection of unilateral military superiority;
- The mutual reduction of armed forces;
- The strengthening of confidence-building measures in the military
sphere.
The development of
the military cooperation was
agreed in Article 13, under which it was decided to hold a meeting of experts
to discuss the points of the agreement [9].
In
From the geopolitical perspective it meant that the SCO will not be
engaged only to Asian security space, but will cover all the Eurasian
continent. In the opinion of the American political scientist and prominent
statesman Zbigniew Brzezinski “Union of Russia and China is dangerous for US
policy in Eurasia” [10, p.134].
In 2001, the heads of 6 states signed the Declaration on the
establishment of the “Shanghai Cooperation Organization”, where determined
access to the global level of the maintenance of security and dialogue between
civilizations and ultimately, “the translation of the SCO mechanism to a higher
level of cooperation” [11, р. 22-29].
According to the Kazakh researcher M.T.Laumulin “SCO
was originally created as an openly anti-American project. Its bearing axis was
military-technical cooperation between Moscow and Beijing” [12,
p. 258] “According to the words of the President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov, -
Russia and China - all these years of geopolitical game, each side tried to
extract from their relations with the US and the West in their own advantage. In
these circumstances, the SCO was needed first of all to “demonstrate their flag” in Central
Asia to Americans” [12, p.259].
As for SCO, its activities differently evaluated by both Russia and
China: for Russia Shanghai Cooperation Organization is a structure of coordinating
efforts of its members in the field of security: China regards the SCO as a
bridge of trade and economic cooperation with the countries of Central Asia.
For China economic cooperation with Central Asia means, primarily, the
development of ccoperation in the energy sphere. China wants to diversify oil
supplies for its booming economy. For China, it was important to find an
alternative to oil and gas supplies to traditionally unstable Middle East.
Central Asia in the circumstances , it is more reliable supplier in terms of
security of hydrocarbon supply routes. The countries of Central Asia to China
are not only a “strategic rear,” but also “strategic reserves” in terms of
energy security.
Cooperation between PRC and Russia within SCO is one of the important
factors providing strengthening and development of the organization. But, in
the face of differences in understanding
the aims and function of SCO between RF and PRC it can be risk of
intensification of political strife for sphere of influence between two powers.
At the same time as for Russia as for China it is extremely important to
constrain the competition and to develop mutually beneficial cooperation.
Cooperation in the safety sphere in SCO generally has declarative
character, in other words, is limited
with adoption of conventions on fight against terrorism, separatism and
extremism. Unfortunately, it is possible to summarize that forms of cooperation
are reduced only to exchange of information, creation of general databases and
reduction to a consensus of the participating countries on a number of
theoretically important questions in the field of world politics and the
international relations. In the field of military defense it is possible to
consider a real practical action carrying out joint antiterrorist doctrines, in
which not all the member states participated [1,
p.14].
Active participation of Central Asian countries on regional security system can be seen on the example of the creation of CICA. The initiator
of the creation of the security mechanism in Asia was the President of
Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who proclaimed the idea on the 47th
UN General Assembly in October 1992 . According to K. Tokayev idea of
establishing the CICA was “a logical continuation of the security policy of
Kazakhstan” [13, p. 32]. Activities of region countries on CICA
formation took quite a long time and was complicated by a variety of problems.
The basic principles of the functioning of the CICA mechanism have been
proposed by Kazakhstan and supported by the other members of this forum [52, p.
130]. One of the main threats included on the agenda of the CICA is the issue
of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. At the 48th UN General
Assembly President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov put forward the
idea of the formation of a zone free from nuclear weapons in Central Asia [14,
p. 134].
Also, an important aspect of the CICA activity is to establish contacts
and relations with regional and international organizations to support joint
efforts to strengthen peace and security in Asia. The result of efforts to
develop relations with other organizations, is signing memorandums with various
international organizations. Special attention deserves a memorandum of
understanding between CICA and the SCO in which the parties cooperate on
security issues.
Over the past twenty five years the value of
Central Asia in world politics has increased significantly. Therefore, Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan entered into the number of priority countries in foreign policy of great powers in the world.
To the formation of the policy of main geopolitical players in Central
Asia influenced several key events in the world, such as the disintegration of
the Soviet Union, the terrorist attacks in September 2001, the military events
in Afghanistan, Iraq, the status and strained relations with Iran.
In addition, in the foreign policy of the world powers in regard to
Central Asia can be traced specific differences and highlighted the stages that
are typically associated with periods of leadership of individual presidents.
If in the United States we can say about the governments of President George HW
Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and nowadays two terms of Barack Obama’s
presidency, in Russian Federation, we can consider the periods of the
presidency starting with Boris Yeltsin, Vladimir Putin, Dmitry Medvedev, and
then, since 2012, the term of Vladimir Putin again.
Ensuring regional security is the main agenda of many organizations
operating in the former Soviet Union, particularly in Central Asia, CSTO, SCO,
CICA. For such major powers as Russia and China, they are mechanisms for
coordination of decisions taken jointly in the CA region. Despite the fact
that, formally, these organizations pursue different goals, they often
duplicate each other's actions. Initially, three projects of regional security have
been established in the framework of the CIS in Central Asia: unified air
defense system, joint peacekeeping operations and anti-terrorist structure and
functions of the CSTO air defense system. This circumstance leads to the
conclusion that the function of the CIS in the sphere of security and partially
performed in other organizations. In the future, security issues in Central
Asia will be on the shoulders of the CSTO and the SCO member countries. SCO as
primarily reflects the security strategy in Central Asia not only Russia, but
also China.
According to British researcher on
regional security B.Buzan “Central Asian region refers to a separate set of
regional security, geopolitical maneuvering in the region has a unique
position, which distinguishes it from other parts of the world. Internal and
external actors compete in the “new great game” affraying of the influence, and play challenging and
unstable strategic games” [15, p.436]. If to consider Central Asia as a new set of
regional security, able to link Europe and Asia for the solution of common
problems, to further the formation of regional security requires the development
of inter-regional cooperation, both in Europe and Asia.
This year will be an important stage in the work of regional
institutions in the field of security and cooperation. In 2016 expected number
of important summits and meetings which will discuss topical issues of regional
security, the SCO summit and the OIC Council of Foreign Ministers in Tashkent,
the Caspian summit in Astana, the summit of the Council of Cooperation of
Turkic Speaking States (CCTS) in Kyrgyzstan. It is also expected to intensify regional
dialogue platforms in the format of "C5 + 1" with the US,
"EU-Central Asia" and "Japan Central Asia".
In general, it should be stated that the formation of a regional system
of international relations in Central Asia objectively presupposes the existence
of different types of relationships and vectors of different directions. In
Central Asia there is a discrepancy in the understanding of their interests,
and the strategy and prospects of geopolitical development in the region, which
is manifested both in terms of the CIS, and in the development of relations
with foreign states. At the same time, security and development challenges
require management to the Central Asian states to overcome the contradictions,
to find various forms of compromise, diplomacy to improve co-operation and to
establish the best options for bilateral and multilateral relations.
LIST OF
REFERENCES:
1. Zh.M.Medeubayeva,
A.T.Serikbayeva. Multifactoral as a challenge to regional security system in
Central Asia.-Relevant problems of regionalization in the context of world
development.-Astana.-2014.-p.-5-17
2. Jackson R.
Regime Security // Contemporary Security studies. – Oxford University
Press.,-2010
4.
Назарбаев Н.А. На пороге ХХІ
века. –
Алматы: Жибек жолы, 2010. – 260 с.
5.
Указ Президента Кыргызской Республики от 1 июня
6.
Черных И.А. История формирования системы региональной безопасности в
Центральной Азии (1991-2006 годы), 2007.-325 с.
7.
Военная доктрина Туркменистана http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/pdf_state/Military-Doctrine-TJ.pdf
8.
Ертысбаев Е. Казахстан и Назарбаев: логика перемен.-Астана: Елорда, 2001.-576
с.
9.
Бурнышев Р., Черных И. Безопасность в Центральной Азии: методологические рамки
анализа (военный сектор безопасности) – Алматы: Казахский-Немецкий
университет.2006.-С.336-369.
10. Brzezinski Zb.
The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its geostrategic imperatives.
SA5IC.,-2010.-256
p.
11.
Дипломатический вестник. –
12.
Лаумулин М.Т. Куда дрейфует Центральная Азия? / М. Лаумулин Библиогр.:
с. // Казахстан в глобальных процессах. - 2013. - № 3. - С. 12-31
13.
Токаев К. Он делает историю: сборник статей и очерков. – Астана: Фолиант,
2010.-348 с.
14.
Ермекбаев Н.Б. Сотрудничество со странами Азии – один из приоритетов внешней
политики Казахстана. // - Астана.-2013ю-№2.-С.128-136.
15. Buzan B., Waever O. Regions and Powers: the
structure of International Security. – Cambridge University Press, 2003.-569 p.