Ishmukhamedov Sharip
Department of International relations
TURAN University
050012 Bogenbai-batyr street 189-15
Almaty city,
Kazakhstan
[
[email protected]]
U.S. foreign policy in Central Asia and Kazakhstan in 21-st century
Key words: USA, foreign policy, Central Asia, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan,
Russia.
Summary
Central Asia is an important region in the world. It is located in the
center of the continent and has a favorable geopolitical location, rich for
mineral resources what attracts the attention of many countries. Region
only gains its economic independence and just formulates its foreign policy
strategy. United States also have economic, geopolitical interests in the
region. U.S. policy in the region already has its periods of development
and decline, of successes and failures. Currently, the main task of the
U.S. in the region is to prevent the inclusion of the region into Russia,
to prevent domination of influence of policies of China and Iran. In
addition, the prospect of U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan determines
the need to use of other methods to control the situation in the region.
New energy projects in the region of the gas pipeline to Pakistan and India
could be a promising new task of USA.
U.S. foreign policy in Central Asia and Kazakhstan in 21-st century has
passed different stages and periods of development. In the study of region,
we consider Asian 5 countries which previously were part of Soviet Union.
It is known that there are different views and interpretations of the term
"Central Asia". Different scientists and scientific schools include in this
term not only 5 Asian countries of the former Soviet camp, but also
Afghanistan, Pakistan or Mongolia and other countries. But we consider as
more correct way to include in it, only the former Soviet Union, Asian
countries: Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan.
Within a short period of time after gaining independence in the late
20th century, Central Asian region has received great attention of the
world community. Post-Soviet Central Asia in Washington's foreign policy
has become one of the main objects of American interests in the world.
U.S. attention to Central Asia is determined by different causes and
factors. Among the most important are:
First. The region is an important geopolitical area that links China and
Russia, East and West. The region is a transit route for goods and services
from Russia, Europe, China, and future route from India and Pakistan to
Europe. Political, military control over the Central Asian countries can
help, both Russia and the United States, Europe to control the actions of
Iran and China. This factor is known according to researches of Zbigniew
Brzezinski and Samuel Huntington. These scientists have confirmed that the
control of space of Eurasia is impossible without control in or influence
on the countries of Central Asia.
Second. Region is rich for natural resources such as oil, gas, metals,
uranium and others. Given the shortage and high prices of natural resources
make undeveloped resources of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan
advantageous objects for control and use. High demands for cheap energy
sources determine the energetic, economical interest to region of
neighboring countries, such as China, Russia, Eastern and Western Europe
and the United States.
Third. The region is particularly interesting as an opportunity to build
new military and political alliances. Region only recently became
independent and sovereign. Countries in the region are just beginning their
own foreign and military policy. In these circumstances, the U.S. is
interested in establishing new relationships with the leaders of countries.
U.S. may become a new, powerful actor in the region, which only builds and
defines its foreign policy and national interests for the future.
Fourth. There is great importance of the strategic and economic position
of the Caspian Sea. There are the different interests of the five countries
that have access to the Caspian Sea. The Caspian Sea is still do not have
final, official international status. The question of separation of
maritime boundaries between these countries is not yet resolved. The
biggest conflict can occur between Iran and Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan.
This question has a risk to cause interstate conflict over natural
resources of the sea. In this regard, the U.S. is interested to keep their
oil companies and contracts with Kazakhstan. It is obvious that the United
States will be on the side of the foreign policy of Kazakhstan's position
in resolving the status of the Caspian Sea.
Fifth. Interest of world-powers in the region is defined by its internal
weakness. Almost all the political regimes in the region are unstable and
volatile. In each of them there is an active opposition, which seeks to
change the political, social system or the country's government. The
revolutionary events in Kyrgyzstan show that such events may occur in every
country where democracy, civil society, market economy system are not
sufficiently developed. The inherent weakness of the countries in the
region determines the ability to influence on them and the use of force to
achieve interests of world-powers.
This explains the geopolitical importance of the region in the modern
world. In terms of geographic location, Central Asia borders in all
directions with major world regions of economical development. Central Asia
borders in the west with Europe and Caucasus, in the east - with China, in
the north - with the Russian Federation, in the south it borders with
Afghanistan, India, Iran and Pakistan. Thus the Central Asian states,
located entirely within the continent, have the ability to exit to the
ocean only through the transit routes. This situation determines necessity
to the Central Asian countries to cooperate or to be in dependence from
bordering countries which can grant them transit routes to trade with
world.
By the volume of fuel and energy resources of oil and gas, the region
ranks second in the world. It also has solid reserves of rare minerals such
as gold, platinum, copper and heavy metals. Region is also rich for the
most important source of future energy – uranium.
Region despite its natural sources is very unstable and has high risks
of conflicts. Central Asia is in the middle of four official and unofficial
nuclear powers - Russia, China, India and Pakistan. The region is home to
50 million people, which despite the common history represent different
ethnic groups. In recent history there have been ethnic, linguistic,
religious conflicts in the countries of Central Asia. There were also
numerous territorial, water disputes between countries. As a result, the
region is very vulnerable and unstable. Economic, social, internal problems
can easily turn into ethnic conflicts in any of the countries in the
region. Low standard of life of the population speaks about the
vulnerability to external influence.
Almost every country had its own civil conflicts and clashes in the late
20th and early 21st century. After independence the Central Asian countries
faced with two types of geopolitical changes - internal and regional. Some
problems were inherited from the Soviet period: political, ethnic,
territorial and other problems. This has contributed to the emergence of
serious geopolitical issues in the region.
The most important peculiarity the geopolitical changing in Central Asia
was after the events of 11 September 2001 when region transformed into an
arena of struggle for power between regional power-leaders and the United
States.
United States acting as a global super power pursues a number of
specific interests in Central Asia, which include:
1) The United States seeks to maintain control and access to the energy
resources of the region, especially in Kazakhstan.
2) The United States is trying to prevent Iran's influence in the
region. The conflict between the U.S. and Iran defines U.S. interests to
limit the spread of Iranian influence in Central Asia.
3) The United States is trying to prevent the restoration of the Soviet
Union. United States oppose joining the countries of Central Asia to Russia
in the new organizations of Moscow - the Customs Union, the Eurasian
Economic Union.
4) One of the new tasks of United States becomes limiting the influence
of China in the region. Successful cooperation of countries with China in
the region weakens American interests and positions of American companies.
Multimillion-dollar investment projects across the region links them by
economic threads with China.
Russian and Chinese interests in Central Asia are determined by the task
of ensuring of national security. Loss of influence in Central Asia, for
each of them defines a direct threat to the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of Russia and China. Each of them will be unable to protect there
vast borders of the presence of U.S., if US will be able to gain the
support or create a military alliance with the countries of the region.
Central Asian region is a strategic region for Russia and China what
determined by great influence of region to their inner stability,
transregional trading and other.
Currently this region becomes especially important in connection with
the upcoming 2014 withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Obviously,
after the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the situation in Central Asia will
significantly change. To study the prospects and predict the future of U.S.
actions in the 21st century we should reveal early U.S. policy in the
region.
It is possible to pick out several periods in the evolution of U.S.
policy in Central Asia.
The first period. This is the time after independence of Central Asian
countries in 1991-1992. In the first phase was the process of diplomatic
recognition of new independent states of Central Asia by the United States.
It was a difficult period for the countries of Central Asia. Rapid collapse
of the Soviet Union also urged the United States; other countries to define
their interests and policy toward the region. At the first stage the most
important task of USA was to solve problem of the Soviet nuclear weapons in
Kazakhstan. As it is know, all the nuclear missiles of Kazakhstan were
transferred to the U.S. and Russia. In turn, Kazakhstan received guarantees
of security and territorial integrity from the United States and Russia, as
well as from Britain, France and China.
The second period. The administration of Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000).
During this period, the United States offered to countries different ways
to cooperation. The major direction of cooperation was a development of
democracy in countries. Economical treaties were also actively developed.
USA actively cooperated with it's international ally – Turkey to build
strong connections between Central Asian countries. Turkey was also a model
for the region as an example of further development. New "Turkic world" was
a project of USA to activate regional integration between Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan as an alternative to the CIS. The "Turkic world"
project was an opportunity to divide Central Asian countries from influence
and control of Russia, to prevent recovery of new USSR. For this cases USA
and Kazakhstan, USA and Kirgizstan signed Charter on Democratic Partnership
in 1994. These charters activated American economic assistance to Central
Asian countries, which adopted the policy of democratization and
accelerated establishment of a market economy. Charters assured readiness
of the countries to develop strong and long-term relations. Assistance to
Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan was provided within various international
organizations like IMF, World Bank.
Significant issues in Central Asian policy were guaranties of security
and stability for Kazakhstan. December 5, 1994 in Budapest, Russian, U.S.,
and British leaders signed the Memorandum on Security Assurances for
Kazakhstan due to his rejection of nuclear weapons.
At this stage a major role in the formulation of U.S. policy in the
region played a democratic projects and motives. Democratic plans of
Clinton administration influenced on the content of U.S. policy. An
important feature of the U.S. Central Asian policy was a priority of
democratic values over actually American economical interests. In
particular, the lack of democracy and respect for human rights almost
completely blocked political relations of U.S. with Uzbekistan and
Turkmenistan. So, in August 1992, Karimov criticized the U.S. Embassy in
Tashkent for contacts with the Uzbek political opposition and assessments
of the internal life of the country by U.S. (Aydin 2004, 70-80).
But the most important task for U.S. policy was plans for the
development of economic relations in the region. Oil and gas resources of
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan have attracted U.S.
investors. In this period economic interest of U.S. companies quickly grew
in the region. Economic development plans for oil extraction and
transportation become the most important. As a result, new economic rivalry
between Russia and the United States has started. There were established
new plans to build oil and gas pipelines from the region towards Turkey to
strengthen position of American oil companies. In particular, there were
realized projects "Baku – Supsa" and "Baku –Ceyhan" and still not realized
until now the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan
on the Caspian Sea, bypassing Russia. The U.S. supported the EU gas
projects in the field of construction of new transport routes INOGATE ,
TRACECA - "Great Silk Road " also bypassing Russia. At the same time a very
large force was applied to neutralize the Iranian routes to transport
Kazakh oil and Turkmen gas via Iranian territory.
Another important task was the goal of reducing the influence of Russia
in the region. U.S. implemented two directions in this task.
The first area was a creation of international organizations without
Russia's participation. On 10th October 1997 in Strasbourg was a
constituent forum of GUAM, an organization of independent states without
Russia. In April 1999 Uzbekistan joined this structure and in the same year
Uzbekistan refused to renew the Collective Security Treaty of the CIS which
was under Russian control.
Another direction was projects to unite Central Asian countries into one
international organization without Russian participation. U.S. state
foundations sponsored internal integration between countries. As a result
there were Central Asian Union (1994-1998), Central Asian economic
fellowship (1998-2002) and Organization "Central Asian cooperation" (2002-
2005). Active American and Turkish military support and different kinds of
military equipment gifts to Ministry of defense helped to create Central
Asian allied military union – "CenterAsBat". It existed during nineties and
united military unions of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kirgizstan (Ebel,
Menon, 2000, 33-40).
Foreign policy goal of the U.S. to create military partners in the
region carried out by the NATO. All Central Asian countries are members of
the Program "Partnership for Peace" in 1994. Only Tajikistan joined the
program in 2002.
During the Clinton administration the United States began to define a
strategic partner in the region. Uzbekistan was selected as a main
strategic partner in the region. This country is situated in the middle of
Central Asia, has the largest population and comparatively the largest
army. Uzbekistan was perceived by Americans as a "key" to the region due to
it's good location and territorial remoteness from Russia. United States
began to support independent of Russia's position foreign policy of
Uzbekistan and its desire to play a leading role in Central Asian
integration. However, the U.S. partnership with Karimov's authoritarian
regime was very difficult and controversy. Cooperation with the
authoritarian regime did not correspond with the objectives of US to
develop and support democracy in the region, but political and military
objectives were above U.S. democratic ideals. As a result, in the mid-90s
the main U.S. ally in the region has become an authoritarian Uzbekistan
(Lewis 1992, 99).
The problem of U.S. policy in Central Asia consisted that all countries
had authoritarian regimes. Some countries, such as Uzbekistan, Tajikistan
and Turkmenistan were absolute authoritarian countries with oppressive
regimes which suppressed the opposition and the media. Other countries have
also been authoritarian but had democratic election procedures, a
multiparty system and a range of media. But energy projects to develop oil
resources and build gas pipelines from the region to Europe prevailed over
the U.S. democratic ideals.
It is important to note that the U.S. has conducted an active policy in
the region in 70-80s of XX century, particularly in Afghanistan. During
this period "Taliban" movement seized power in Afghanistan which was
previously sponsored and supported by Pakistan to fight with Soviet troops
in the country (Murphy 2010, 1-2). But after the Soviet withdrawal, the
movement became independent and seized power in Afghanistan (1996-2001). It
was a military, political, religious movement, consisting of radical
Islamists. It began to threaten the stability and order within the
countries of Central Asia. There was a danger of spread of its influence in
the region and support for radical Islamists in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.
Third Period. U.S. policy after September 11, 2001.
This period occurred during the G.Bush administration. The terrorist
attacks on the U.S. were carried out by terrorist movement "Al-Qaeda",
which found refuge and support in Afghanistan which was under the "Taliban"
control. The U.S. war in Afghanistan has intensified all U.S. policy in
Central Asia. The war has shown the importance and significance of the
region for success and victory against the terrorists. U.S. signed
agreements on military- political, transport cooperation to fight against
terrorism with all the Central Asian countries except Turkmenistan, which
had active economic ties with the Taliban. According to various sources the
Taliban had active foreign trade through Turkmenistan and had support by
its leader Saparmurat Niyazov (Esenov 2003).
The administration of George W. Bush has also increased economic
assistance to countries of region as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan
(Daly, Meppen, Socor, Starr 2006). Since the summer of 2003, the U.S.
funded construction in Kazakhstan joint transport hub - Seaport in the oil
city of Aktau (Kucera 2012). Actual military bases of U.S. were created in
Uzbekistan – "Karshi-Khanabad" (2001-2006) and in Kirgizstan – "Manas"
(2001-2014).
Uzbekistan remained a major geopolitical and military partner of the
U.S. in the region. Uzbekistan conducted a policy of the United States, in
particular the Central Asian integration process through the creation of
the Central Asian Cooperation Organization. Cooperation between Uzbekistan
and the United States was in the interests of both sides. So, in April 2002
the President of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov said: "The decisive role in
removing tension and danger on the southern borders of Uzbekistan played
only the U.S., their determination and well-trained armed forces, but not
parties of the Treaty on Collective Security" (Barabanov 2005, 11).
During this period in the United States occurred very serious study of
the principles of the Central Asian policy. "National Security Strategy" of
2002 influenced to the content of U.S. policy in Central Asia. The
principle of "aggressive realism" demanded decisive action in the
implementation of U.S. interests in the region (Collins 2002, 22). Strategy
demanded solutions of dilemmas - realization of democratic ideals, or the
realization of economic and military plans of the United States. At the
first stage of the Bush policy, the United States hoped that the Central
Asian authoritarian regimes can really change to and develop democracy.
They hoped that this change will lead to greater stability in the region.
But it became clear that process of democratization will bring to the
"Revolutions of flowers".
The Bush administration has confirmed that Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan
remain major U.S. strategic partners in the region. These two states were
seen as key to the U.S. military presence in the region. The United States
also stepped up to support the local opposition. However, from the
standpoint of political elites in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan it was the
intervention in the internal affairs of countries. As a result American
Embassy supported opposition and later in March 2005, President of
Kirgizstan Akayev was overthrown during the "Tulip Revolution".
In Uzbekistan, U.S. supported local public and created their own
organizations, which helped local opposition. Similar policy helped to
change the political regime in Georgia and Ukraine. Uzbek leader tried to
contradict democratical projects of USA. In May 2005, after the bloody
suppression of the mass rallies in Andijan, the Uzbek government has
accused for organization of these events western non-governmental
foundations and the U.S. government. Cooperation with the United States has
been curtailed, and U.S. troops were forced to leave the base at Karshi-
Khanabad in 2006. Uzbekistan then within a few years began to focus its
foreign policy on Russia and China.
As a result of military failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. was
forced to pay greater attention to these countries, but not to Central
Asia. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan require large financial outlays, new
soldiers and attention of the government. U.S. had no more free resources
for Central Asian policy. Moreover, the economic situation, the economic
crisis in America also contributed to an active foreign policy. Failures in
U.S. foreign policy led to the defeat of the party of George W. Bush in the
presidential election in 2008.
But the war in Afghanistan showed that the U.S. needs the countries of
Central Asia. This war has demonstrated the importance of the region. U.S.
troops in Afghanistan were supplied through Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and
Uzbekistan. It happened when transport route through Pakistan has been
blocked during "Taliban" terrorist activities.
The fourth period. Presidency of Barack Obama and the prospects of the
new regional policy.
The victory of the candidate of the Democratic Party in 2008 was a
response to the failures of the Bush administration in domestic and foreign
policy of the United States. Active propaganda and forceful implementation
of democratic institutions around the world had to strengthen U.S. global
positions. However, the ideology of Republicans led to a long-term war in
Iraq, declination of U.S. popularity around the world and spending huge
material resources. There were not found the presence of terrorists,
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The war in Afghanistan still has
little success. Taliban still controls most of Afghanistan (Martin 2012).
President Obama won the election with plans to withdraw troops from Iraq
and to rapidly in Afghanistan. The task to win the war in Afghanistan
implied the increase of American interests to the five countries of Central
Asia. But in 2009, President Obama announced a new strategy for U.S.
foreign policy. The main attention was paid to the internal situation and
the Asia - Pacific region. The new administration has recognized the real
fact of a general decline of American capabilities to solve key global
processes alone.
For modern Central Asia particular importance was a transformation of
U.S. policy towards Russia. The new policy was called "reset relations". In
particular, it was a signing of an agreement on START April 8, 2010. The
new Democratic administration declared that it is ready to actively
cooperate with Russia and Central Asian countries. But the current
situation in Syria and Ukraine shows that the U.S. and Russia are still
rivals. The rivalry will continue in the Central Asian region too. But now
the balance is different, Russia is actively cooperating with China in
various international projects.
Currently the most serious decision of the U.S. in the region is the
plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. According to the plans U.S. will
transfer full control over security to the Afghan military and will be
completed by 2014. But the completion of presence of U.S. militaries and
NATO in Afghanistan does not mean the end of mission of the international
coalition and their military and political presence in the country. But the
withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan may lead to large-scale
destabilization of the country, as it was after the withdrawal of Soviet
troops and the defeat of the Najibullah government by "Taliban".
It is obvious that the end of military campaign in Afghanistan will
transfer to another policy to preserve U.S. positions in country and
strengthen it. Some aspects of U.S. foreign policy in Afghanistan and
Central Asia are seen now. According to modern news and information in
media U.S. Secretary's Assistant on issues of South and Central Asia Nisha
Desai Bisval has started her trip in 2014 to Central Asia from
Turkmenistan. "President Barack Obama gave her words of gratitude to the
Turkmen leader Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov for his international initiatives
on provision of peace, stability and security in Central Asia and expressed
confidence that the project of the Turkmenistan - Afghanistan - Pakistan -
India (TAPI) gas pipeline at over 1 700 km length and capacity of about 30
billion cubic meters of gas per year will be implemented" (Kyrzhaly 2014).
It is obvious that plans for the TAPI will be basic strategy of U.S.
foreign policy in Central Asia. This trip is evidence that Washington tries
to convince the Turkmenistan that there won't be problems with the safety
of the pipeline, and U.S. forces will remain in region. Turkmenistan is
fully authoritarian country but it has rich gas resources and it borders
with Afghanistan along 744 kilometers. This trip also shows that U.S.
administration is ready to have economic relations with authoritarian
states it will be efficient to U.S. interests in region.
There are information that U.S. Secretary's Assistant on issues of South
and Central Asia Nisha Desai Bisval will visit all Central Asian countries
in 2014. It is obvious that her trip is an opportunity to fulfill early
plans of Barak Obama to contradict Russian plans to reestablish Soviet
Union in region and his own plan "New Silk Road" (Kostenko 2014).
At the same time there was other information that describes modern
methods of U.S. policy in region. Different NGOs in Uzbekistan and
Kirgizstan claim that from 2013 there was serious reduction of U.S.
sponsored programs to study Central Asian problems and situation.
Economic methods now become more actual and used more than methods to
support NGO, scientists, free mass media, political parties in region.
Modern U.S. policy is shifting methods to fulfill major tasks and accord
to changes in region. Many scientists confirm that in 2014 there was a
reduction of political, geopolitical attention and interest to Central
Asia. There are different facts. First, the U.S. State Department reduces
public funding of research projects on Central Asia. Professor of American
University Bucknell Amanda E.Wooden writes that serious reduction of
government funding decreased from 2014 to 2007 by 60% (Iankovskaia 2013).
Another researcher Yadgor Norbutaev believes that cuts in funding happened
due to the general changes in American geopolitics. In his article
"American chess in Central Asia: Game is over", he concluded that the
reduction of interest linked to the understanding of the U.S. State
Department, that Central Asia is not the key region. It is far less
important than Eastern Europe, the Middle East or Southeast Asia. And
reduction of interests are not liked to withdrawal from Afghanistan
(Norbutaev 2013).
So it is possible to make conclusions on U.S. foreign policy in Central
Asian region. There are seen 4 major periods.
1. The initial period. In the first half of the 1990-s priority was
given to relations with Russia. Cooperation with the countries of Central
Asia was within the frame of diplomatic contacts.
2. Since 1993 there was acceleration of U.S. policy in region and
defined key objectives of U.S. foreign policy. As the main U.S. ally in
region become Uzbekistan, that conducted the policy to unite the countries
of Central Asia, as alternative project to the CIS. U.S. policy actively
involved Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan to the democratization process.
During this period, the greatest success have been achieved for U.S.,
European Union companies which get access to Kazakh oil, Turkmen gas.
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan became partners of NATO. U.S. military
bases were opened in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.
3. The period of presidency of G.Bush. After the attacks of September
11, 2001 the U.S. strategy in the region has become quite aggressive. The
war in Afghanistan has identified new challenges in the region. Rivalry
with Russia peaked during the "color revolutions" in Kyrgyzstan, Georgia,
Ukraine, and Russia's war with Georgia in 2008. U.S. policy has become more
concrete and objective in the region.
The main task was to develop economic partnership with Kazakhstan for
the development of natural resources, support the establishment of the
Central Asian Cooperation instead CIS, development of military cooperation
of NATO and the countries of the region. The main policy in the region was
conducted through Uzbekistan. But later, however, criticism of Karimov 's
authoritarian regime led to the loss of strategic partner in Uzbekistan.
4. During the presidency of Barack Obama the main policy has been around
the war in Afghanistan. There were made attempts to reset a dialogue with
Russia and China. U.S. policy has reached the awareness of the possibility
of loose the war. The prospect of losing the war in Afghanistan identified
temporary collapse of U.S. policy in Central Asia. Lack of success in
Afghanistan reduced U.S. activity in the Central Asian region. U.S. failed
to oppose the creation of the Customs Union, the prospect of the Eurasian
Union under Moscow run. As a result of low attention to region, conflicts
with leaders of region countries, inefficient policy U.S. lost military
bases in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.
Current information on U.S. policy in Central Asia shows that there is a
serious reduction of U.S. funded programs to study region. But visits of
U.S. officials to Turkmenistan, Kirgizstan, Kazakhstan in 2014 show that
energy development programs become major methods of foreign policy in
region. And these programs will become actual method to reduce Russian,
Chinese influence in region after withdrawal of U.S. forces from
Afghanistan. U.S. plans to leave all military equipment from Afghanistan
after withdrawal to Uzbekistan shows that Uzbekistan still remains a
strategic partner for U.S.
List of References and Sources
1. Aydin 2004 - Gulsen Aydin, "Authoritarianism versus democracy in
Uzbekistan: domestic and international factors", Ankara: METU, 2004.
2. Ebel, Menon 2000 - Robert Ebel, Rajan Menon, "Energy and conflict in
Central Asia and the Caucasus". Lanham: Roman and Littlefield Publisher
inc., 2000.
3. Lewis 1992 – Lewis Bernard, "Rethinking the Middle East", Foreign
Affairs. - 1992. - Vol. 71. - №4. - Р. 99-119.
4. Murphy 2010 – Murphy Dan, "WikiLeaks shocker? In Kabul, Pakistan
support for Taliban is no surprise", The Christian science monitor. July
26, 2010.
5. Esenov 2003 – Esenov Murat "Niyazov crimes evidences are more than
enough " (interview) [Internet site:
, accessed 1-04-2014]
6. Daly, Meppen, Socor, Starr 2006 - Daly John, Meppen Kurt, Socor
Vladimir, Starr Frederick, "Johns Hopkins University: Anatomy of a Crisis:
U.S.-Uzbekistan Relations 2001-2005" [Internet site: <
http://www.cfr.org/uzbekistan/johns-hopkins-university-anatomy-crisis-us-
uzbekistan-relations-2001-2005/p11416>, accessed 1-04-2014]
7. Kucera 2012 - Kucera Joshua, "Kazakhstan: U.S. Interest in Global Hub
on the Caspian" [Internet site: <
http://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/kazakhstan-aktau-united-states-caspian-
sea-caucasus-trade-afghanistan-silk-road-strategy >, accessed 1-04-2014]
8. Barabanov 2005 - Barabanov Oleg, "NATO's policy toward Central Asia
and the Caucasus', The southern flank of the CIS. Central Asia - Caspian
Sea - Caucasus Energy and politics. Moscow: Navona publishing, 2005. –
P.11.
9. Collins 2002 - Collins Kevin, "Stabilizing or destabilizing Central
Asia? The Great Powers and Central Asia After September 11", Reconfiguring
East and West in the Bush-Putin Era (Conference). Berkeley University.
April 14, 2002. – P.22.
10. Martin 2012 - Martin David, "After 11 years the Taliban are still
not defeated" [Internet site: < http://www.cbsnews.com/news/after-11-years-
the-taliban-are-still-not-defeated>, accessed 1-04-2014]
11. Kyrzhaly 2014 - Kyrzhaly Svetlana, "Turkmen gas and pipeline
diplomacy of the USA" [Internet site: < http://rusmininfo.com/analytics/16-
01-2014/turkmen-gas-and-pipeline-diplomacy-usa >, accessed 1-04-2014]
12. Kostenko 2014- Kostenko Iylia, "U.S. Secretary's Assistant on issues
of South and Central Asia Nisha Desai Bisval will visit Kirgizstan"
[Internet site: , accessed 1-04-2014]
13. Iankovskaia 2013 - Iankovskaia Marya, "Washington no longer
interested in the study of Central Asia" [Internet site:
, accessed 1-04-2014]
14. Norbutaev 2013 - Norbutaev Yadgor, "American chess in Central Asia:
Game is over" [Internet site: ,
accessed 1-04-2014]
