SMALL-STATE POLITICS AND ALLIANCES: AN ANALYSIS OF ARMENIA-NATO PARTNERSHIP UNTIL THE VELVET REVOLUTION

Abstract

The primary aim of this study is to examine small states' politics of alliances in the case of Armenia-NATO relations. In this context, this article also identifies several approaches for explaining the foreign policies of small states within the framework of International Relations (IR) literature, with a specific focus on the case of Armenia. The initial sections of this article delve into the definition and characterization of small states, as well as evaluate the theoretical discussions that highlight the significance of both domestic and international factors in the decision-making process. This study scrutinizes the foreign policy of Armenia, thereby shedding light on the processes that pave the way for the Armenia-NATO partnership. Subsequently, this study argues that the Armenian way of alliances can only be understood by analyzing both internal and external factors combined. While the paper indicates that Armenia-NATO relations have not fundamentally transformed the entire context of Armenian foreign policy, it reveals that this growing partnership has created certain opportunities and constraints for both parties involved.

Keywords

• Small-state
• Foreign policy
• alliances
• Armenia
• NATO

Supporting Institution

Bu makale, yazarın Oxford Brookes Üniversitesi'nde 2015 yılında tamamlamış olduğu ,"Small States in Alliances. An analysis of Armenia-NATO partnership" adlı yüksek lisans tezinden faydalanarak üretilmiştir.

References

1. Armstrong, H. W. & Read, R. (2003). The determinants of economic growth in small states. The Round Table, 92(368), 99-124.
2. Baser B & Swain A. (2009). Diaspora Design Versus Homeland Realities. Caucasian Review of International Affairs, 3(1), 45-62.
3. Borshchevskaya A. (2013). Armenia’s Choice: Russia or the EU? Turkish Policy Quarterly, 12(1), 95-107.
4. Braveboy-Wagner, J. (2007). Small states in global affairs: The foreign policies of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Springer.
5. Braveboy-Wagner, J. (2010). Opportunities and limitations of the exercise of foreign policy power by a very small state: the case of Trinidad and Tobago. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 23(3), 407-427.
6. Brzezinski Z. (2009). An agenda for Nato: Toward a global security web. Foreign Affairs, 88(5), 2-12
7. Carlsnaes, W. (2007). How Should We Study the Foreign Policies of Small European States? Nação e Defesa, 118(3), 7-20.
8. Charap S. & Troitskiy M. (2013). Russia, the West and the Integration Dilemma. Survival, 55(6), 49-62.

9. Cooper, A. & Shaw, T. (2009). The diplomacies of small states. Palgrave Macmillan.
10. Cornell S. (2001). Small nations and great powers. Curzon. Elman M. (1995). The Foreign Policies of Small States: Challenging Neorealism in Its Own Backyard. British Journal of Political Science, 25(2), 171-217.
11. Galstyan N. (2013). The main dimensions of Armenia`s foreign and security policy. Norwegian Peacebuilding Resource Centre, 1-4.
12. German T. (2012). The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia: Security Issues in the Caucasus. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 32(2), 216-229.
13. Grieco, J. M. (1990). Cooperation among nations: Europe, America, and non-tariff barriers to trade. Cornell University Press.
14. Gvalia G, Siroky D, Lebanidze B & Iashvili Z. (2013). Thinking Outside the Bloc: Explaining the Foreign Policies of Small States. Security Studies, 22(1), 98-131.
15. Handel M. (1990). Weak states in the international system. F. Cass.
16. Herzig, E. & Kurkchiyan, M. (2005). The Armenians. Curzon.
17. Idan A & Shaffer B. (2011). The Foreign Policies of Post-Soviet Landlocked States. Post-Soviet Affairs, 27(3), 241-268.
18. Inbar, E., & Sheffer, G. (2013). The National Security of Small States in a Changing World. Routledge.
19. Jervis R. (1978). Cooperation under the Security Dilemma. World Politics, 30(2), 167-214.
20. Kaeter, M. (2004). The Caucasian republics. Facts On File.
21. Kalpakian J & Ipek V. (2011). The Turkish-Armenian Rapprochment Processes: A Case Study Approach. Digest of Middle East Studies, 20(2), 291-321.
22. Kotanjian H. (2004) Armenian Security and U.S. Foreign Policy in the South Caucasus. Connections: The Quarterly Journal, 03(2), 15-32.
23. Lobell, S., Ripsman, N. & Taliaferro, J. (2009). Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy. Cambridge University Press.
24. Mehdiyeva N. (2011). Power games in the Caucasus. I.B. Tauris.
25. Minasyan S. (2012). Domestic Dimensions of Armenia`s Foreign Policy. PONARS Eurasia Policy Memo, 209, 1-5.
26. Mirzoyan, A. (2010). Armenia, the regional powers, and the West. Palgrave Macmillan.
27. Morgenthau H. (1967). Politics among nations. Knopf.
28. Papazian T. (2006). From Ter-Petrossian to Kocharian: Explaining Continuity in Armenian Foreign Policy, 1991-2003. Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, 14(2), 235-251.
29. Payaslian, S. (2007). The history of Armenia. Palgrave Macmillan.
30. Peimani, H. (2009). Conflict and security in Central Asia and the Caucasus. ABC-CLIO.
31. Petros T. (2003). Evolution of Armenia`s Foreign Policy. International Policy Research Group, 13(3), 1-17.
32. Priego A. (2008). Nato Cooperation Towards South Caucasus. Caucasian Review of International Affairs, 2(1), 50-57.
33. Rose G. (1998). Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy. World Pol, 51(1), 144-172.
34. Sarian, A. (2006). Economic Challenges Faced by the New Armenian State. Demokratizatsiya, 14(2), 193-221.
35. Schweller R. (1992). Domestic Structure and Preventive War: Are Democracies More Pacific? World Politics, 44(02), 235-269.
36. Shafee F. (2010). New Geopolitics of the South Caucasus. Caucasian Review of International Affairs, 4(2), 184-186.
37. Shahnazaryan D. (2006). The South Caucasus: Problems of Stability and Regional Security. Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, 14(3), 355-360.
38. Snyder J. (1991). Myths of empire. Cornell University Press.
39. Steans J, Pettiford L and Diez T (2010). Introduction to international relations. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
40. Steinmetz R. & Wivel A. (2010). Small states in Europe. Ashgate.
41. Üstün, M. T. (2023). Dağlık Karabağ Sorunu: İkinci Karabağ Savaşı’nda Ermeni Diasporasının Ulusötesi Faaliyetleri. Astana Yayınları.
42. Walt S. (1987). The origins of alliances. Cornell University Press.
43. Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Random House.
44. Waterman H, Zagorcheva D & Reiter D. (2002). NATO and Democracy. International Security, 26(3), 221-235.
45. Wivel A and Oest K. (2010). Security, profit or shadow of the past? Explaining the security strategies of microstates. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 23(3), 429-453.
46. Wohlforth, W. C. (1994). Realism and the End of the Cold War. International Security, 19(3), 91-129.
47. World Bank. (2023). World Bank in Armenia. [online] Available at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/armenia [Last accessed 10 April 2023].
48. World Bank. (2023). Azerbaijan. [online] Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/country/azerbaijan [Last accessed 10 April 2023].
49. Zakaria F. (1998). From wealth to power. Princeton University Press.
50. Zakaria F. (2008). The post-American world. W.W. Norton.
51. Zarifian J. (2008). Christian Armenia, Islamic Iran: Two (Not So) Strange Companions Geopolitical Stakes and Significance of a Special Relationship. Iran and the Caucasus, 12(1), 123-151.
52. Zarifian J. (2009). Iran and Its Two Neighbours Armenia and Azerbaijan: Resuming Relationships under America's Suspicious Eyes. Iran and the Caucasus, 13(2), 383-399.
53. Zarifian J. (2014). The Armenian-American Lobby and Its Impact on U.S. Foreign Policy. Society, 51(5), 503-512.