JOURNAL OF CENTERAL ASIA AND THE CAUCASUS STUDIES
Year:2018 | Volume:24 | Issue:103 |Papers Count:6

Formation of OPEC and exploiting petroleum as pressure tool by Arabian countries for countering with Zionist Regime during early 70th century was a prominent example of petroleum’ s political significance. In order to prevent the reduction of petroleum exportation during Cold War era, the USSR tried to reduce the importance of its political dimension. Following the collapse of USSR and surmount of liberalism and occidentalization during Yeltsin era, the petroleum maintained its unpolitical nature. Still since the beginning of Putin’ s presidency, especially after the ignite of the new cold war following Iraq’ s occupation in 2003, Russian Federation was gradually inclined to convert petroleum from an economic instrument to a political and even security one. The Energy Strategy of Russia for the period up to 2020 articulates that energy resources are the main instruments for driving Russia’ s exterior and interior politics. Against this backdrop, the present article is trying to find out the main reason for Russia to exploit energy resources as a political instrument. Using the theoretical framework of bureaucratic decision making, the authors argue that interior bureaucratic considerations including balance of power, as well as internal conflicts in Putin’ s government, are the main reasons for the mentioned question. The internal power relationship especially the core role of petroleum companies in Russia’ s governmental decision making has led to the weaponization of energy.

Since the end of cold war neither the Great Britain nor Russia has ever prioritized one another; and therefore their mutual relationship has been mainly confined to the framework of European Union and NATO. This has happened irrespective of their common history, including both countries’ presence in Security Council, their actorness as great powers and coalition in some international crises including their cooperation in Napoleonian War and strategic cooperation in World War II. The Great Britain and Russia’ s envision about each other is formed in a framework of rivalry and bellicosity. Brexit has also been one of the challenges in their relations; still their diplomatic relationship in at its lowest level since the end of cold war. The author attempts to answer the following question: How are the effective factors on Britain and Russia’ s disagreement assessed? The author argues that their different prism for seeing the international order after cold war, Russia’ s hybrid war in Great Britain and its attempt to manipulate in 2016 survey, Ukraine’ s crisis and Crimea’ s accession to Russia, the murder of some Russian citizens in Britain as well as their divergent approach towards the Syrian crisis, have all led to a threat perception from one another and a reduction in mutual relations. Using explanatory – analytical research method, the author attempts to find an answer for the article’ s question.

The present literature attempts to throw light on extremism in Xinxiang, its causes and strengthening factors. Furthermore the central government’ s transaction and proceedings towards the citizens of that province in scrutinized. Regional and racial divergence of Xinxiang Uighurs in contrast to China’ s main population, besides susceptibility from extremist and Islamist groups in Central Asia are among the causes of extremism in Xinxiang. This land is prone to instability and growing clashes between Han Chinese and indigenous Uighurs; the first one in an attempt to overwhelm, and the latter one for autonomy or dependence. Focusing on the effects of Central Asia extremism on separatism and extremism inclinations in Xinxiang, the authors try to find an answer for the following question: What strategies has China’ s central government taken for containing extremism in Xinxiang? The authors argue that China’ s government has taken a hybrid containment strategy. The strategy of developing China’ s western regions; suppression strategy; religious control and population change are the most important internal measures taken by China’ s government in economic; security; and cultural – societal sectors respectively. Strengthening economic relations with Xinxiang neighbors, investment in energy sectors in that region, Belt – Road Initiative, using potentialities of SCO, as well as designing a political – security strategy for stabilizing neighboring countries to Xinxiang, are the measures taken for the exterior dimension. Using explanatory – analytical research method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research questions.

Following the collapse of USSR, an increase of western influence in geopolitical and security areas in Russia, has been one of the effective factors in the interaction between Moscow and western countries especially the United States. Some impetuses such as enlargement of the European Union, and NATO, democracy promotion in post-soviet atmosphere and the Eastern Partnership have been effective on the formation of disagreement – cooperation paradox between west and Europe. West’ s last attempt for increasing influence in post – soviet atmosphere, was Ukraine’ s crisis and Crimea’ s accession to Russia. This crisis highlighted the point of contrast between Russia and the west. The present literature addresses the following question: Which model has Russia taken for interacting with international system, especially west, since 2014? The authors argue that since 2014, Russia has chosen the balance of power strategy as a behavioral model to confront international system and the west. Russia’ s most important features of balance of power are countering with the United States’ unilateralism; accepting US and China as main actors; hard and soft balance; as well as regionalism. Using explanatory – analytical research method, the authors try to tell why the research findings provide an answer to the research questions.

Although west has been a main issue for many societies and states in last centuries, for Russia it has been different and very fundamental. It is nearly about five centuries that Russia has been affected by evolutions of European renaissance; sometimes in an interaction, sometimes in a contrast. Russia’ s geographical, cultural and religious situations, has always experienced both fragments and concomitants with west, leading to some important results in Russia’ s political life and foreign behavior. Against this backdrop, Russian administrations’ visions towards west and that vision’ s impact on their internal and foreign behavior, and last but not least; the reason of Russian administrations’ special reaction towards west, and considering that as a main issue, are the questions addressed in this literature. The hypothesis of this article as that the root of Russia’ s behavior towards west should be understood in its neighboring and propensity. Russia neither has been able to annex to the west, nor has been able to separate from it and go on its own way.

Kremlin insisting on the idea of BRICS as a diplomatic club of emerging regional powers for a decade and rebuilding this idea in order for challenging US domination over global economic institutions, parallel attempts of the BRICS in line with the US-led order, particularly with the Brett on Woods Financial system, has created an emerging network of partnership between revisionist powers with the goal of changing global governance. There is no doubt that BRICS is one of the most strategic forces to reforming international system as well as a novel strategic management. However, it is mostly about the difference between what Kremlin wishes for and what it gains. The main question of this study is "What are Russia's expectations regarding BRICS and to what extent these expectations are obtainable? "The initial response to the first part of the question is that "Russia expects that Brix by weakening US-led institutions in the management of the global economy and creating alternative regimes creates a multipolar international system including Russia as an important pillar". For the second part, the hypothesis has been tested that "although Brix's acts, considering continuing convergence the focus of the member states on the criteria of sustainable development and political governance, will lead to weakening US-led institutions and creating alternative regimes in long term, Russia's position in the coming order will remain similar to what it is. "The findings of the paper conducted by documentary-library methodology and analyzed through a causal method in qualitative and descriptive dimensions confirm the hypotheses.