Luca Anceschi

The Tyranny of Pragmatism: EU–Kazakhstani Relations

The pragmatic interests of Kazakhstan and the European Union have profoundly influenced the relationship between them, preventing the establishment of successful cooperation in the human dimension. This article investigates these dynamics in detail, placing its spotlight on the role assigned to the relationship with the European Union in the most recent technologies of power devised by the Kazakhstani regime. Particular attention here will be devoted to the tension between the regimes search for international legitimacy and its efforts to insulate itself from EU pressures for political liberalisation.

Turkmenistan and the virtual politics of Eurasian energy: the case of the TAPI pipeline project

ABSTRACT In December 2015, leaders from Central and South Asia took part in the ground-breaking ceremony for the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) natural gas pipeline project. Sixteen months later, a confusing information flow continues to obfuscate external assessments of the project’s development: official rhetoric notwithstanding, there is no certainty on the details of project financing, while the pipeline route has yet to be determined. To illuminate this obscure implementation path, this article regards TAPI as a virtual pipeline, an infrastructure project that wields invaluable influence only when it is employed as a foreign policy tool or permeates domestic discourses of progress framed by the elites of the four consortium partners. The constituent elements of TAPI virtuality are discussed here through a dedicated focus on the process of energy policy-making of Turkmenistan – the sole supplier of gas for the pipeline project and the consortium’s key stakeholder.

Dilemmas of Compatibility: GCC-Kazakhstani Relations

Abstract: This article examines in detail the political and economic relations that post-Soviet Kazakhstan established with member states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). It argues that the underpinning compatibilities shared by the states in question led to the progressive failure of most initiatives attempting to connect Kazakhstan with the Arab Gulf. The paper devotes its initial attention to the detrimental influence that the logic of regime maintenance exerted vis-à-vis the establishment of political cooperation between the parties. In reflecting on how the wider GCC-Kazakhstani relationship came to feature a very narrow agency, the paper will also highlight the dynamics through which structural economic factors prevented the consolidation of successful commercial ties between two critical constituencies of contemporary Asia.

Energy Governance and Climate Change: Central Asia’s Uneasy Nexus

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union the international community has looked at Central Asia’s energy resources with increasing interest. The substantial hydrocarbon reserves of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan and, to a lesser extent, the abundant yet untapped hydropower capacities held by Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, have been the main factors behind the region’s growing relevance in international affairs.

Central Asia: Pragmatism in Action

The Obama administration has inherited a difficult case in Central Asia. Once shunned by successive U.S. administrations for its poor record on human rights and its geostrategic position that was assumed to be peripheral to U.S. interests, Central Asia was thrust on the U.S. foreign policy radar in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Security concerns, followed closely by establishing access routes to the region’s fossil fuels, have dominated the minds of policy makers ever since. In between these concerns has been the nagging question of political reform, something the Central Asian leadership has been disinclined to adopt. The Bush administration tried to find a balance between competing objectives in relation to Central Asia. Generally emphasizing the security aspect of the relationship, the Bush administration peppered its public statements on Central Asia with the occasional reference to the normative concepts of good governance and rule of law. The latter may have been mere window dressing, but such reference was a reminder of an inherent tension between pragmatism and idealism in the foreign policy of the United States. This chapter traces the ebbs and flows of these competing goals and examines the responses formulated by the Obama administration. It is argued that the Obama administration has continued to regard security and access to fossil fuels as Washington’s primary objectives while pushing concerns with normative aspects of foreign policy further to the background.