intertrendsМеждународные процессыInternational Trends / Mezhdunarodnye protsessy1728-27561811-2773AEFIR10.17994/2023.21.3.74.1intertrends-368Research ArticleФИКСИРУЕМ ТЕНДЕНЦИЮCATCHING A TRENDТрясущаяся шахматная доска: влияние изменений в россйско-турецких отношениях на Южный КавказTrembling Chessboard: The Effects of Changing Russian-Turkish Relations in the South CaucasusАйарБашаранAyarBaşaranАрсланОркунArslanOrkunАнкарский университетТурцияAnkara University, 06590, AnkaraTurkeyНациональный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»РоссияHSE University, 101000, MoscowRussian Federation202319022024213103118Copyright © Айар Б., Арслан О., 20232023Айар Б., Арслан О.Ayar B., Arslan O.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.intertrends.ru/jour/article/view/368

В данном исследовании рассматривается влияние динамики российско-турецких отношений на внешнюю политику государств Южного Кавказа. С 2016 г. взаимодействие этих двух игроков существенно изменилось и оказало влияние на многие регионы, в том числе и на Кавказ. Анализ нового режима российско-турецких отношений после 2016 г. и его последствий для региона необходим для лучшего понимания внешнеполитических решений государств Южного Кавказа. В этой связи исследование начинается с рассмотрения стратегических подходов Российской Федерации и Турецкой Республики в регионе. Затем в статье даётся краткий обзор двусторонних отношений этих двух государств. Далее оценивается общий геополитический статус Азербайджана, Армении и Грузии, рассматривается возможное влияние динамики отношений между Россией и Турцией на их внешнюю политику. В статье делается вывод о том, что изменившиеся отношения между Россией и Турцией оказывают существенное влияние на внешнюю политику стран региона. В частности, в исследовании делается вывод о том, что Азербайджан проводит относительно автономную внешнюю политику и придерживается стратегии баланса, стремясь поддерживать отношения как с Россией, так и с Турцией, не становясь чрезмерно зависимым ни от одной из них. Особенно это стало заметно после Второй карабахской войны 2020 года, после которой Баку стал стремиться к ещё более тесным отношениям как с Анкарой, так и с Москвой. Армения же стремится уменьшить влияние России, добиваясь внешней поддержки в конфликте с Азербайджаном и изучая возможности включения в новые транзитные маршруты. В этом контексте Ереван стремится к более тесным связям с западными игроками, Исламской Республикой Иран и Индией. Грузия сохраняет свои притязания на Абхазию и Южную Осетию, но избегает участия в региональных конфликтах, чтобы не вызвать противодействие со стороны России, придерживаясь осторожной и осмотрительной стратегии, чтобы избежать любой эскалации, которая превратит страну в ещё один фронт в текущем кризисе между Западом и Россией.

This study explores the impact of shifting dynamics in Russian-Turkish relations on the foreign policies of South Caucasian states. Since 2016, the interaction between those two actors has changed significantly and had an impact on many regions, including the Caucasus. Analyzing this new mode of Russo-Turkish relations post-2016 and its implications for the region is essential to better comprehend the foreign policy decisions of the South Caucasian states. Therefore, the study begins by delving into the strategic approaches of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey in the region. Then, the article provides a concise overview of the bilateral relations between these two nations. Subsequently, it evaluates the overall geopolitical status of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia, considering how their foreign policies might be influenced by the evolving relations between Russia and Turkey. The article concludes that the altered relationship between Russia and Turkey significantly impacts the foreign policies of regional countries. Specifically, the study suggests that Azerbaijan is pursuing a relatively autonomous foreign policy and adopts a strategy of balance, aiming to sustain relationships with both Russia and Turkey without becoming overly reliant on either. This became evident especially after the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War of 2020, after which Baku pushed for even tighter relations with both Ankara and Moscow. Armenia, on the other hand, seeks to diminish Russian influence by seeking external support in its conflict with Azerbaijan and exploring opportunities for inclusion in new transit routes. In this context, Yerevan has been seeking closer links with the Western actors, the Islamic Republic of Iran and India. Georgia, the third case of the study, maintains its claim to Abkhazia and South Ossetia but avoids involvement in regional conflicts to prevent antagonizing Russia, following a cautious and observant strategy, in order to avoid any escalation that would turn the country into another front in the current crisis between the West and Russia.

РоссияТурцияЮжный КавказАрменияАзербайджанГрузиявнешняя политикамалые государстваRussiaTurkeySouth CaucasusArmeniaAzerbaijanGeorgiaforeign policysmall statesReferencesAvdaliani E. (2022). Georgia and the Second Karabakh War. In H. M. Yavuz, & M. Gunter (eds.). The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Historical and Political Perspectives. Routledge. P. 303–320.Avdaliani E. (2022). Georgia and the Second Karabakh War. In H. M. Yavuz, & M. Gunter (eds.). The Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict: Historical and Political Perspectives. Routledge. P. 303–320.Aydın M. (2009). Geographical blessing versus geopolitical curse: great power security agendas for the Black Sea region and a Turkish alternative. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. Vol. 9. No. 3. P. 271–285.Aydın M. (2009). Geographical blessing versus geopolitical curse: great power security agendas for the Black Sea region and a Turkish alternative. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies. Vol. 9. No. 3. P. 271–285.Aydın M. (2020). The Long View on Turkish-Russian Rivalry and Cooperation. The German Marshall Fund. URL: https://www.gmfus.org/news/long-view-turkish-russian-rivalry-and-cooperation (accessed: 17.08.2023).Aydın M. (2020). The Long View on Turkish-Russian Rivalry and Cooperation. The German Marshall Fund. URL: https://www.gmfus.org/news/long-view-turkish-russian-rivalry-and-cooperation (accessed: 17.08.2023).Balta E. (2019). From Geopolitical Competition to Strategic Partnership: Turkey and Russia after The Cold War. Uluslararasi İliskiler. Vol. 16(63). P. 69–86.Balta E. (2019). From Geopolitical Competition to Strategic Partnership: Turkey and Russia after The Cold War. Uluslararasi İliskiler. Vol. 16(63). P. 69–86.Broers L. (2020). Did Russia win the Karabakh war? Eurasia.net. URL: https://eurasianet.org/ perspectives-did-russia-win-the-karabakh-war (accessed: 17.08.2023).Broers L. (2020). Did Russia win the Karabakh war? Eurasia.net. URL: https://eurasianet.org/ perspectives-did-russia-win-the-karabakh-war (accessed: 17.08.2023).Cecire M. (2013). The Merchant Hegemon: Georgia’s Role in Turkey’s Caucasus System. In Kakachia K., Cecire M. (eds.) Georgian Foreign Policy: The quest For Sustainable Security. Tbilisi: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. P. 111–124.Cecire M. (2013). The Merchant Hegemon: Georgia’s Role in Turkey’s Caucasus System. In Kakachia K., Cecire M. (eds.) Georgian Foreign Policy: The quest For Sustainable Security. Tbilisi: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. P. 111–124.Coyle J. J. (2021). Russia‘s Interventions in Ethnic Conflicts: The Case of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Palgrave Macmillan. 188 p.Coyle J. J. (2021). Russia‘s Interventions in Ethnic Conflicts: The Case of Armenia and Azerbaijan. Palgrave Macmillan. 188 p.Çelikpala M. (2019). Bugüne Tarih Olarak Bakmak: Türkiye-Rusya İlişkilerinin Serencamı ve Geleceği [Viewing Present as History: The State and the Future of Turkey-Russia Relations]. EDAM. 31 p.Çelikpala M. (2019). Bugüne Tarih Olarak Bakmak: Türkiye-Rusya İlişkilerinin Serencamı ve Geleceği [Viewing Present as History: The State and the Future of Turkey-Russia Relations]. EDAM. 31 p.Dadparvar S., Kaleji V. (2023). The Persian Gulf-Black Sea International Transport and Transit Corridor: Goals and Constraints. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. (Published Online First) P. 1–23.Dadparvar S., Kaleji V. (2023). The Persian Gulf-Black Sea International Transport and Transit Corridor: Goals and Constraints. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. (Published Online First) P. 1–23.Erşen, E. M. Çelikpala (2019). Turkey and the changing energy geopolitics of Eurasia. Energy Policy. Vol. 128. P. 584–592.Erşen, E. M. Çelikpala (2019). Turkey and the changing energy geopolitics of Eurasia. Energy Policy. Vol. 128. P. 584–592.Fidan H. (2010). Turkish Foreign Policy Toward Central Asia. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 109–121.Fidan H. (2010). Turkish Foreign Policy Toward Central Asia. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 109–121.Gvalia G., Siroky, D., Lebanidze, B., & Iashvili, Z. (2013). Thinking Outside the Bloc: Explaining the Foreign Policies of Small States. Security Studies. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 98–131.Gvalia G., Siroky, D., Lebanidze, B., & Iashvili, Z. (2013). Thinking Outside the Bloc: Explaining the Foreign Policies of Small States. Security Studies. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 98–131.Hill F., Kirişçi K., Moffatt, A. (2015). Armenia and Turkey: From normalization to reconciliation. Brookings. URL: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/armenia-and-turkey-from-normalization-to-reconciliation/ (accessed: 25.12.2022).Hill F., Kirişçi K., Moffatt, A. (2015). Armenia and Turkey: From normalization to reconciliation. Brookings. URL: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/armenia-and-turkey-from-normalization-to-reconciliation/ (accessed: 25.12.2022).Idan A., Shaffer B. (2011). The Foreign Policies of Post-Soviet Landlocked States. Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 241–268.Idan A., Shaffer B. (2011). The Foreign Policies of Post-Soviet Landlocked States. Post-Soviet Affairs. Vol. 27. No. 3. P. 241–268.Ipek P. (2015). Ideas and Change in Foreign Policy Instruments: Soft Power and the Case of the Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency. Foreign Policy Analysis. Vol. 11. No. 2. P. 173–193.Ipek P. (2015). Ideas and Change in Foreign Policy Instruments: Soft Power and the Case of the Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency. Foreign Policy Analysis. Vol. 11. No. 2. P. 173–193.Javadi-Arjmand M. J. (2018). Iran and Turkey in the South Caucasus: Competition and Cooperation. Journal of Iran and Central Eurasia Studies. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 15–31.Javadi-Arjmand M. J. (2018). Iran and Turkey in the South Caucasus: Competition and Cooperation. Journal of Iran and Central Eurasia Studies. Vol. 1. No. 1. P. 15–31.Jesse N. G., Dreyer, J. R. (2016). Small States in the International System: At Peace and War. Lexington Books. 214 p.Jesse N. G., Dreyer, J. R. (2016). Small States in the International System: At Peace and War. Lexington Books. 214 p.Kaleji V. (2023). Iran and the Role of Transit Corridors in the South Caucasus in the Context of the War against Ukraine. Caucasus Analytical Digest. No. 132. P. 14–20.Kaleji V. (2023). Iran and the Role of Transit Corridors in the South Caucasus in the Context of the War against Ukraine. Caucasus Analytical Digest. No. 132. P. 14–20.Kazantsev A. A., Rutland P., Medvedeva S. M., Safranchuk I. A. (2020). Russia’s policy in the “frozen conflicts” of the post-Soviet space: from ethno-politics to geopolitics. Caucasus Survey. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 142–162.Kazantsev A. A., Rutland P., Medvedeva S. M., Safranchuk I. A. (2020). Russia’s policy in the “frozen conflicts” of the post-Soviet space: from ethno-politics to geopolitics. Caucasus Survey. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 142–162.Konovalov I. P. (2020). Kavkazskaya Shakhmatnaya Doska [Caucasian Chessboard]. s.l.:Vorobʹev A.V. 272 p.Konovalov I. P. (2020). Kavkazskaya Shakhmatnaya Doska [Caucasian Chessboard]. s.l.:Vorobʹev A.V. 272 p.Korybko A. (2017). Russia’s New Thinking Towards Armenia and Azerbaijan: An “Obstructionist” vs. an “Integrationalist”. Oriental Review. URL: https://www.globalresearch.ca/russias-new-thinkingtowards-armenia-and-azerbaijan-an-obstructionist-vs-an-integrationist/5609262 (accessed: 17.08.2023).Korybko A. (2017). Russia’s New Thinking Towards Armenia and Azerbaijan: An “Obstructionist” vs. an “Integrationalist”. Oriental Review. URL: https://www.globalresearch.ca/russias-new-thinkingtowards-armenia-and-azerbaijan-an-obstructionist-vs-an-integrationist/5609262 (accessed: 17.08.2023).Kortunov A. (2019). The Astana Model: Methods and Ambitions of Russian Political Action. In Mezran K., Varvelli A. (eds.) The MENA Region: A Great Power Competition. Ledizioni LediPublishing. P. 53–64.Kortunov A. (2019). The Astana Model: Methods and Ambitions of Russian Political Action. In Mezran K., Varvelli A. (eds.) The MENA Region: A Great Power Competition. Ledizioni LediPublishing. P. 53–64.Köstem S. (2019). Geopolitics, identity and beyond: Turkey’s renewed interest in the Caucasus and Central Asia. In Erşen E., Köstem S. (eds.). Turkey’s Pivot to Eurasia: Geopolitics and Foreign Policy in a Changing World Order. Routledge. P. 111–128.Köstem S. (2019). Geopolitics, identity and beyond: Turkey’s renewed interest in the Caucasus and Central Asia. In Erşen E., Köstem S. (eds.). Turkey’s Pivot to Eurasia: Geopolitics and Foreign Policy in a Changing World Order. Routledge. P. 111–128.Köstem S. (2021). Russian-Turkish cooperation in Syria: geopolitical alignment with limits. Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 34 (6), 795–817.Köstem S. (2021). Russian-Turkish cooperation in Syria: geopolitical alignment with limits. Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 34 (6), 795–817.Köstem S. (2022). Managed Regional Rivalry Between Russia and Turkey After the Annexation of Crimea. Europe-Asia Studies. Vol. 74. No. 9. P. 1657–1675.Köstem S. (2022). Managed Regional Rivalry Between Russia and Turkey After the Annexation of Crimea. Europe-Asia Studies. Vol. 74. No. 9. P. 1657–1675.Kubicek P. (2021). Strictly Pragmatism?: Prospects for a Russian- Turkish Partnership. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 233–250.Kubicek P. (2021). Strictly Pragmatism?: Prospects for a Russian- Turkish Partnership. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 233–250.Kutlay M., Öniş Z. (2021). Turkish foreign policy in a post-western order: strategic autonomy or new forms of dependence? International Affairs. Vol. 97. No. 4. P. 1085–1104.Kutlay M., Öniş Z. (2021). Turkish foreign policy in a post-western order: strategic autonomy or new forms of dependence? International Affairs. Vol. 97. No. 4. P. 1085–1104.Lobell S. E., Jesse N. G., Williams K. P. (2012). Why do secondary states choose to support, follow or challenge? International Politics. Vol. 52. No. 2. P. 146–162.Lobell S. E., Jesse N. G., Williams K. P. (2012). Why do secondary states choose to support, follow or challenge? International Politics. Vol. 52. No. 2. P. 146–162.MacFarlane N. S. (2020). Russia in the South Caucasus. In Yemelianova G. M., Broers L. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of the South Caucasus. Routledge. P. 305–316.MacFarlane N. S. (2020). Russia in the South Caucasus. In Yemelianova G. M., Broers L. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of the South Caucasus. Routledge. P. 305–316.Mamedov R. Lukyanov G. (2018). Russia and Turkey: Approaches to Regional Security in the Middle East. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 51–71.Mamedov R. Lukyanov G. (2018). Russia and Turkey: Approaches to Regional Security in the Middle East. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 51–71.Markedonov S. (2018). Russia and the conflicts in the South Caucasus: main approaches, problems, and prospects. Caucasus Edition. Vol. 3. No. 2. P. 24–47.Markedonov S. (2018). Russia and the conflicts in the South Caucasus: main approaches, problems, and prospects. Caucasus Edition. Vol. 3. No. 2. P. 24–47.Markedonov S. M., (2021). Postsovetskiye De-Fakto Gosudarstva: Traektorii Bor'by Za Suverenitet [Post-Soviet De Facto States: Trajectories Of Their Struggle For Sovereignty]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 65. No. 12. P. 79–89.Markedonov S. M., (2021). Postsovetskiye De-Fakto Gosudarstva: Traektorii Bor'by Za Suverenitet [Post-Soviet De Facto States: Trajectories Of Their Struggle For Sovereignty]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 65. No. 12. P. 79–89.Markedonov S.M., Suchkov M.A. (2020). Russia and the United States in the Caucasus: cooperation and competition. Caucasus Survey. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 179–195.Markedonov S.M., Suchkov M.A. (2020). Russia and the United States in the Caucasus: cooperation and competition. Caucasus Survey. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 179–195.Mustofaev M. (2022). The Organization of Turkic States: A New Approach to Global and Regional Challenges. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 27. No. 1. P. 105–120.Mustofaev M. (2022). The Organization of Turkic States: A New Approach to Global and Regional Challenges. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 27. No. 1. P. 105–120.Oran B. (2002) Türk Dış Politikası – Cilt 2 [Turkish Foreign Policy – vol. 2]. İstanbul: İletişim. 637 p.Oran B. (2002) Türk Dış Politikası – Cilt 2 [Turkish Foreign Policy – vol. 2]. İstanbul: İletişim. 637 p.Oskanian K. (2011). Turkey's global strategy: Turkey and the Caucasus. IDEAS reports – special reports, Kitchen, Nicholas (ed.) SR007. LSE IDEAS. London: London School of Economics and Political Science. P. 23–27.Oskanian K. (2011). Turkey's global strategy: Turkey and the Caucasus. IDEAS reports – special reports, Kitchen, Nicholas (ed.) SR007. LSE IDEAS. London: London School of Economics and Political Science. P. 23–27.Petrov A. (2023). Georgia in a New World: Between Russia and the West. Russian International Affairs Council. URL: https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/analytics/georgia-in-a-new-worldbetween-russia-and-the-west/ (accessed: 17.08.2023).Petrov A. (2023). Georgia in a New World: Between Russia and the West. Russian International Affairs Council. URL: https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/analytics/georgia-in-a-new-worldbetween-russia-and-the-west/ (accessed: 17.08.2023).Rogozinska A., Olech A. K. (2020). The Russian Federation's Military Bases Abroad. Institute of New Europe. 88 p.Rogozinska A., Olech A. K. (2020). The Russian Federation's Military Bases Abroad. Institute of New Europe. 88 p.Sanai M. (2020). Vzaimootnosheniya Irana i Tsentral'noy Azii: Tendentsii i perspektivy [Relations between Iran and Central Asia: Trends and Perspectives]. Moscow: Iranskaya Biblioteka. 320 p.Sanai M. (2020). Vzaimootnosheniya Irana i Tsentral'noy Azii: Tendentsii i perspektivy [Relations between Iran and Central Asia: Trends and Perspectives]. Moscow: Iranskaya Biblioteka. 320 p.Shamarina O. A. (2020). Gruziya v kontekste turetskoy politiki "myagkoy sily" na rubezhe vekov [Georgia in the Turkish «Soft Power» Policy Context on the Cusp of Centuries]. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 20. No. 2. P. 231–236.Shamarina O. A. (2020). Gruziya v kontekste turetskoy politiki "myagkoy sily" na rubezhe vekov [Georgia in the Turkish «Soft Power» Policy Context on the Cusp of Centuries]. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 20. No. 2. P. 231–236.Stent A. (2019). Putin's World: Russia against the West and with the Rest. New York: Twelve. 448 p.Stent A. (2019). Putin's World: Russia against the West and with the Rest. New York: Twelve. 448 p.Suchkov M. A. (2018). The Caucasus. In Tsygankov A. P. (ed.). Routledge Handbook of Russian Foreign Policy. Routledge. P. 311–324.Suchkov M. A. (2018). The Caucasus. In Tsygankov A. P. (ed.). Routledge Handbook of Russian Foreign Policy. Routledge. P. 311–324.Sushentsov A., Neklyudov N. (2020). The Caucasus in Russian foreign policy strategy. Caucasus Survey. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 127–141.Sushentsov A., Neklyudov N. (2020). The Caucasus in Russian foreign policy strategy. Caucasus Survey. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 127–141.Trenin D. (2020) Moscow’s New Rules. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. URL: https:// carnegiemoscow.org/commentary/83208 (аccessed: 30.03.2023).Trenin D. (2020) Moscow’s New Rules. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. URL: https:// carnegiemoscow.org/commentary/83208 (аccessed: 30.03.2023).Wezeman P. D., Kuimova A., Smith J. (2021). Arms transfers to conflict zones: The case of NagornoKarabakh. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. URL: https://www.sipri.org/commentary/ topical-backgrounder/2021/arms-transfers-conflict-zonescase-nagorno-karabakh (accessed: 25.12.2022).Wezeman P. D., Kuimova A., Smith J. (2021). Arms transfers to conflict zones: The case of NagornoKarabakh. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. URL: https://www.sipri.org/commentary/ topical-backgrounder/2021/arms-transfers-conflict-zonescase-nagorno-karabakh (accessed: 25.12.2022).Yurdakal O. (2021). Investitsionnaya Politika Turtsii v Gruzii Posle Raspada SSSR [Turkey's Investment Policy in Georgia after the Collapse of the USSR]. Rossijskij vneshneekonomicheskij verstnik. No. 7. P. 126–134.Yurdakal O. (2021). Investitsionnaya Politika Turtsii v Gruzii Posle Raspada SSSR [Turkey's Investment Policy in Georgia after the Collapse of the USSR]. Rossijskij vneshneekonomicheskij verstnik. No. 7. P. 126–134.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.