From Conflict to Peace? Stateness Assessment of the South Caucasus countries at the crossroads of political processes from 2017 to 2022
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2023.2.5.011Keywords:
stateness, sustainability, state effectiveness, peace, resilience, South Caucasus, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-KarabakhAbstract
The article reflects on the sustainability and security perspectives of the South Caucasus region. While discovering the different approaches to the notion of “stateness” and its assessment methodologies, the article brings up the problems of insufficient clarification of the concept, the need for further work on its conceptual and functional formulations. As the assessment also covers the non-recognized states, the peculiarities, difficulties and possibilities of stateness assessment of non-recognized states are revealed. The article proposes a definition of stateness and an integral model for stateness assessment, which would make it possible to carry out the stateness assessment of both recognized and non-recognized states within the framework of one model. With the help of the developed ‘Peace Index’, the article comprehensively assesses the levels of stateness of the three recognized: Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan; and the three non-recognized states of the South Caucasus: Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia and South Ossetia through all four fields of stateness – political, economic, social and security for the years of 2017 to 2022. On the basis of the carried-out assessment, the article articulates policy recommendations for the South Caucasus countries and the region as a whole - guiding how to handle the current delicate situation in this strategically and geopolitically important region. The article suggests a) an immediate regional integration, b) economic cooperation as a key for conflict resolution, c) change of peace mediation format, d) support to the reconsideration of government-civil society relations format, making the civil societies of the South Caucasus states the inner constant peace-demanders and development-forcers - as the package-wise steps to transfer the South Caucasus region from conflict to peace.
References
Bartolini, Stefano. 2000. The Political Mobilization of the European Left, 1860–1980: The Class Cleavage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511521560
Bartolini, Stefano. 2005. Restructuring Europe: Centre Formation, System Building, and Political Structuring between the Nation State and the European Union Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199286434.001.0001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0199286434.001.0001
Brubaker, Rogers. 1996. Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511558764. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511558764
Caramani. Daniele. 2004. The Nationalization of Politics: The Formation of National Electorates and Party Systems in Western Europe. Cambridge, UK, New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616662. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511616662
Collier, Ruth Berins, and David Collier. 2002. Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Daalder, Hans. 1974. “The Consociational Democracy Theme.” World Politics 26 (4): 604-621. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2010104
Deutsch, Karl W. 1961. “Social Mobilization and Political Development.” The American Political Science Review 55 (3): 493-514. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952679. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1952679
Eisenstadt, Shmuel N., and Stein Rokkan. 1973. “Building States and Nations: Models, Analyses and Data Across Three Worlds.” American Behavioral Scientist 16 (5): 630-630. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276427301600503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000276427301600503
Fritz, Verena. 2007. State-Building: A Comparative Study of Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, and Russia. Budapest: Central European University Press.
Fukuyama, Francis. 2004. State-Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. Cornell University Press.
Fukuyama, Francis. 2005. “Building Democracy After Conflict: “Stateness” First.” Journal of Democracy 16 (1): 84-88. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2005.0006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2005.0006
Lange, Matthew, and Dietrich Rueschemeyer. 2005. “States and Development.” In: States and Development. Political Evolution and Institutional Change, edited by Matthew Lange and Dietrich Rueschemeyer, 3-25. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403982681_1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403982681_1
Lehmbruch, Gerhard. 1993. “Consociational Democracy and Corporatism in Switzerland.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 23 (2): 43-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3330858
Libaridian, Gerard. 2023. “Why War Won and Negotiations Lost? Is the Absence of War the Same As Peace?” Journal of Political Science: Bulletin of Yerevan University 2 (1(4):10-26. https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2023.2.4.010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46991/JOPS/2023.2.4.010
Lijphart, Arend. 1969. “Consociational Democracy.” World Politics 21 (2): 207-225. https://doi.org/10.2307/2009820. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2009820
Lijphart, Arend. 1977. Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Heaven, London: Yale University Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 2007. Thinking about Democracy: Power Sharing and Majority Rule in Theory and Practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203934685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203934685
Lindberg, Staffan I. 2001. “Forms of States, Governance, and Regimes: Reconceptualizing the Prospects for Democratic Consolidation in Africa.” International Political Science Review 22 (2): 173-199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512101222003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512101222003
Lindberg, Staffan I. 2009. Democratization by Elections: A New Mode of Transition? Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801893186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801893186
Linz, Juan, and Alfred Stepan. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America and Postcommunist Europe. Baltimore, London: John Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801851575. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801851575
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Rokkan Stein. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems and Voter Alignments: An Introduction.” In: Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, edited by Seymour Martin Rokkan and Rokkan Stein, 1-64. New York: The Free Press.
Mahoney, James. 2001. The Legacies of Liberalism: Path Dependence and Political Regimes in Central America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Manukyan, Violetta. 2018a. “Stateness and its Connection to International Recognition: The Case of States Emerged on the Self-Determination Principle.” Armenian Journal of Political Science 1 (8): 75-102. https://doi.org/10.19266/1829-4286-2018-01-75-102.
Manukyan, Violetta. 2018b. “The Challenges of Post-Conflict Stateness: The Case of Artsakh.” Scientific Artsakh 1: 243-248.
Manukyan, Violetta. 2020a. “Challenges and Perspectives of Stateness Assessment of Recognized and Non-Recognized States.” Bulletin of Yerevan University: International Relations, Political Science 11 (1 (31): 69-83.
Manukyan, Violetta. 2020b. “Non-recognised states, security threats and post conflict ‘stateness’: The quartet of post-Soviet space.” EUCACIS Online Paper 11: 1-15. Accessed July 16, 2023. https://iep-berlin.de/site/assets/files/1342/eucacis_online_paper_violetta_manukyan-1.pdf.
Meleshkina Elena. 2011. “Studies of State Consistency: What Lessons Can Be Extracted? Stateness in political science and political practice.” Political Science 2: 9-27 (In Russian) [Мелешкина, Елена. 2011. “Исследования государственной состоятельности: какие уроки мы можем извлечь?” Политическая наука 2: 9-27].
Melville, Andrei Yu., and Denis K. Stukal. 2011. “Conditions of democracy and limits of democratization. Factors of regime changes in post-communist countries: an experience of comparative and multidimensional statistical analysis.” Polis. Political Studies 3: 164-183 (In Russian) [Мельвиль, Андрей, и Денис К. Стукал. 2011. “Условия демократии и пределы демократизации. Факторы режимных изменений в посткоммунистических странах: опыт сравнительного и многомерного статистического анализа.” Полис. Политические исследования 3: 164-183].
Melville, Andrei, Yuri Polunin, Mikhail Ilyin, Mikhail Mironyuk, Ivan Timofeev, Elena Meleshkina, and Yan Vaslavskiy. 2010. Political Atlas of the Modern World: An Experiment in Multidimensional Statistical Analysis of the Political Systems of the Modern States. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444327540
Moore, Barrington Jr. 1993. Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World. Boston: Beacon Press.
Nettl, John P. 1968. “The State as a Conceptual Variable.” World politics 20 (4): 559-592. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2009684
Petrosyan, Violetta. 2016a. “From Conflict to Peace: The Features of Post-Conflict State-Building.” Armenian Journal of Political Science 1 (4): 15-44. https://doi.org/10.19266/1829-4286-2016-01-15-44.
Petrosyan, Violetta. 2016b. “The Dilemma of International Recognition of States Emerged on the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination: The World after Yugoslavia.” Armenian Journal of Political Science 2 (5): 107-132. https://doi.org/10.19266/1829-4286-2016-02-107-132.
Petrosyan, Violetta. 2016c. “From Conflict to Peace: The Issues of Post-Conflict Stateness as a Global Security Threat: The Case of Non-Recognized States of Post-Soviet Space.” In: The Local Roots of Global Peace International Conference Proceedings, 29-38. Yerevan: NT Holding.
Pierson, Paul. 2000. “Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics.” American Political Science Review 94 (2): 251-267. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2586011
Pierson, Paul. 2004. Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400841080
Rae, Heather. 2002. State Identities and the Homogenisation of Peoples. Cambridge Studies in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511491627
Rokkan Stein. 1980. “Territories, Centres, and Peripheries: Toward a Geoethnic-Geoeconomic-Geopolitical Model of Differentiation within Western Europe.” In: Centre and Periphery: Spatial Variation in Politics, edited by Jean Gottmann, 163-204. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications..
Rokkan, Stein. 1973. “Cities, States and Nations: A Dimensional Model for the Study of Contrast in Development.” In: Building states and nations: Method and data resources, edited by Shmuel Noah Eisenstadt and Stein Rokkan, Vol. 1, 13-38. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Rokkan, Stein. 1987. Center Periphery Structures in Europe: An ISSC Workbook in Comparative analysis. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.
Rokkan, Stein. and Valen, Henry. 1962. “The Mobilization of the Periphery: Data on Turnout, Party Membership and Candidate Recruitment in Norway.” In: Approaches to the Study of Political Participation, edited by Stein Rokkan, 111-158. Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000169936200600108
Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815805. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815805
Skocpol, Theda. 1985. “Bringing the State Back In: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research.” In: Bringing the State Back In, edited by Peter B. Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol, 3-38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628283.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628283.002
Spruyt, Hendrik. 1996. The Sovereign State and its Competitors. An Analysis of System Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tilly, Charles. 1975. “Reflections on the History of European State-Making.” In: The Formation of National States in Western Europe, edited by Charles Tilly, 3-83. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tilly, Charles. 1985. “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime.” In: Bringing the State Back In, edited by Peter B. Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol, 169-191. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628283.008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628283.008
Torosyan, Tigran, and Hayk Sukiasyan. 2014. “Three Stages of Post-Soviet Transformation, Three Groups and Paradigms.” Armenian Journal of Political Science 1(1): 51-61. https://doi.org/10.19266/1829-4286-2014-01-51-61.
Ziblatt, Daniel. 2006. Structuring the State: the Formation of Italy and Germany and the Puzzle of Federalism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400827244
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Violetta Manukyan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
