Georgia’s NATO Membership within Context of the Black Sea Dimension of “the New Great Game”

Year 2010, Volume: 27 Issue: 27, 1 - 22, 01.07.2010

Gökhan Özkan

Abstract

Georgia’s NATO membership became a dispute between the NATO member countries and the Russian Federation. It is argued that Russia perceives Georgia’s NATO membership as a move that aims to take the control of critical energy infrastructure in the Caspian and Black Sea regions while NATO tries to be more influential on this geography strategic for the energy security of the US and the EU. This asymmetry of perceptions and interests between Russia and NATO is expected to complicate power dynamics further in the region. In this paper, Georgia’s NATO membership and the clashes between Georgia and Russia in the summer of 2008 were analyzed within context of the Black Sea dimension of “the new great game”. The membership process of Georgia and debates among the NATO member countries about Georgia’s membership were evaluated. Geopolitical consequences of the clashes between Georgia and Russia, the impact of clashes on the pipeline projects such as the Nabucco and reaction of the NATO countries to Russia’s military operations in the region were investigated. Increasing geopolitical importance of the Wider Black Sea Region and Turkey’s regional policies were examined. It is anticipated that Georgia’s NATO membership will continue to be a topic of discussion between Russia and NATO and the geostrategic and geoeconomic importance of the wider Black Sea Region will increase.

Keywords

The Black Sea, Georgia, NATO, Russia, Turkish Foreign Policy, energy security

“Yeni Büyük Oyunun” Karadeniz Boyutu Bağlamında Gürcistan’ın NATO Üyeliği

Abstract

Gürcistan’ın NATO üyeliği NATO üyesi ülkeler ve Rusya Federasyonu arasında tartışma konusu olmuştur. Rusya’nın Gürcistan’ın NATO üyeliğini Hazar ve Karadeniz Bölgeleri’ndeki kritik enerji altyapısının kontrolünü ele geçirmeye yönelik bir hamle olarak algıladığı, buna mukabil NATO’nun ABD ve AB’nin enerji güvenliği açısından stratejik olan bu coğrafyada daha etkili olmaya çalıştığı savunulmaktadır. Bu çıkar ve algılama asimetrisinin bölgedeki güç dinamiklerini daha da karmaşık hale getirmesi beklenmektedir. Bu makalede, Gürcistan’ın NATO üyeliği ve Gürcistan ve Rusya arasında 2008 yazında yaşanan çatışmalar “yeni büyük oyunun” Karadeniz boyutu bağlamında analiz edilmiştir. Gürcistan’ın üyelik süreci, NATO üye ülkeleri arasında Gürcistan’ın üyeliği ile ilgili yaşanan tartışmalar değerlendirilmiştir. Gürcistan ve Rusya arasında yaşanan çatışmaların jeopolitik sonuçları, çatışmaların Nabucco gibi boru hattı projeleri üzerindeki etkileri ve NATO ülkelerinin Rusya’nın bölgedeki askeri operasyonlarına tepkileri irdelenmiştir. Geniş Karadeniz Bölgesi’nin artan jeopolitik önemi ve Türkiye’nin izlediği bölgesel politikalar ele alınmıştır. Gürcistan’ın NATO üyeliğinin Rusya ile NATO arasında tartışma konusu olmaya devam etmesi ve Geniş Karadeniz Bölgesi’nin jeostratejik ve jeoekonomik öneminin artması beklenmektedir.

Keywords

Karadeniz, Gürcistan, NATO, Rusya, Türk Dış Politikası, enerji güvenliği

References

• ALLISON Roy, “Russia resurgent? Moscow’s campaign to ‘coerce Georgia to peace’”, International Affairs, V. 84, N. 6, 2008, pp. 1145–1171.
• ASMUS Ronald D., Next Steps in Forging a Euro-Atlantic Strategy for the Wider Black Sea, German Marshall Fund of the United States, Washington 2006.
• BARAN Zeyno - Robert A. Smith, “The Energy Dimension in American Policy towards the Black Sea Region”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, V. 7, N. 2, 2007, pp. 265–274.
• BARTON Barry et al., Energy Security: Managing Risk in a Dynamic Legal and Regulatory Environment, Oxford University Press, New York 2004.
• BLANK Stephen, “What Comes After the Russo–Georgian War? What’s at Stake in the CIS”, American Foreign Policy Interests, N. 30, 2008, pp. 379–391.
• BRZEZINSKI Zbigniew, The Grand Chessboard, Basic Books, New York 1997.
• GÜLTEKIN-PUNSMANN Burcu - Krassimir Y. Nikolov, “European Union Ap- proaches to Fostering Synergies of Cooperation and Integration Around the Black Sea”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, V. 8, N. 2, 2008, pp.109–128.
• HADFIELD Amelia, “EU Foreign Energy Policy: In the Pipeline?”, FORNET CFSP Forum 4, N. 1, 2006, (% June 2009), http://www.fornet.info.
• HARKS Enno, “Energy Security: The Challenge of the Twenty-first Century”, in V. Perthes and S. Mair (eds.), European Foreign and Security Policy: Chal- lenges and Opportunities for the German EU Presidency, Research Paper 10, German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), Berlin, Oc- tober 2006.
• HERD Graeme P., MOUSTAKIS, Fotios, “Black Sea Geopolitics: A Litmus Test for the European Security Order?”, Mediterranean Politics, V. 5, N. 3, 2000, p. 117-139.
• KAMALOV İlyas, “Karadeniz Bölgesindeki Bazı Güncel Sorunlar”, Karadeniz Araştırmaları, C. 6, S. 21, 2009, ss. 13-21.
• KARABULUT Bilal, “Küreselleşme Sürecinde Güvenlik Alanında Değişimler: Karadeniz’in Güvenliğini Yeniden Düşünmek”, Karadeniz Araştırmaları, C. 6, S. 23, 2009, ss. 1-11.
• KISHKOVSKY Sophia, “Georgia Is Warned by Russia Against Plans to Join NATO”, The New York Times, June 7, 2008, p. 8.
• KOÇER Gökhan, “Karadeniz’in Güvenliği: Uluslararası Yapılanmalar ve Türkiye”, Gazi Akademik Bakış, C. 1, S. 1, 2007, ss. 195-217.
• LUGAR Richard, “Energy and NATO: Senator Lugar’s Keynote Speech to the German Marshall Fund Conference on 27 November 2006, Riga”, 2006, (5 March 2009), http://Lugar.Senate.gov/energy/press/speech/riga.h-tml.
• MAKARYCHEV Andrey, “Russia, NATO, and the “Color Revolutions”, Russian Politics and Law, V. 47, N. 5, 2009, pp. 40–51.
• MARSH Steve - Hans Mackenstein, The International Relations of the European Union, Pearson Longman, Harlow 2005.
• MCELHATTON Emmet, “Georgia: A Bridge too Far?”, New Zealand International Review, V. 34, N. 1, 2009, pp. 2-7.
• MITCHELL Lincoln A., “More than location: crafting a US policy for the Black Sea region”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, V. 8, N. 2, 2008, ss. 129– 140.
• MONAGHAN Andrew, “Russia’s Energy Diplomacy: A Political Idea Lacking a Strategy?”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, V. 7, N. 2, 2007, pp. 275–288.
• NIETO Alejandro Sanchez Cornejo, “A Drop in the Ocean: Bulgaria’s NATO Membership and Black Sea Geopolitics”, European Security, V. 17, N. 4, 2008, pp. 517-532.
• O’HARA Sarah L., “Great game or grubby game? The struggle for control of the Caspian”, Geopolitics, V. 9, N. 1, 2004, s. 148.
• SHERR James, “Security in the Black Sea region: back to Realpolitik?”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Vol. 8, No. 2, June 2008, 141–153.
• SIRECI Jonathan – Damon Coletta, “Enduring without an Enemy: NATO’s Realist Foundation”, Perspectives, V. 17, N. 1, 2009, s. 57-82.
• THE WHITE HOUSE, “Transcript of the Vice-President’s remarks at the 2006 Vilnius http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/05/20060504-1.html. 4 May2006, (17 February 2008),
• TRENIN Dimitri, “Russia Leaves the West”, Foreign Affairs, V. 85, N. 4, 2006, pp. 87-96.
• TRIANTAPHYLLOU Dmitrios, “Energy Security and Common Foreign and Secu- rity Policy (CFSP): The Wider Black Sea Area Context”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, V. 7, N. 2, 2007, pp. 289–302.