فصلنامه مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز
پیاپی 123 (پاییز 1402)

Among the countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus, the Republic of Azerbaijan has special importance for Israel due to its geographical location and being on the west and east routes. This regime has started relations with Azerbaijan for three decades and has entered a new stage in recent years. Given the above explanations the question arises, where is Azerbaijan's position and role in Israel's national security strategy? And what is Israel's approach to the development of relations with Azerbaijan? The underlying hypothesis is that Israel's approach to relations with Azerbaijan can be understood in light of the concept of strategic depth and the pursuit of Israel's security needs. From this point of view, the development of relations with Baku is important for the continuation of Israel's life. The results show that Israel seeks to turn Azerbaijan into the strategic depth of this regime in the South Caucasus to overcome its geopolitical weaknesses and repel its military threats. Also, this measure helps Tel Aviv to strengthen its deterrent strategy against Iran. Israel's nesting in Azerbaijan and the development of these relations in military-security dimensions can affect Iran's national security and lead to Iran's distance from Azerbaijan and make colder relations between the two countries. To conduct the article, the explanatory method has been used and the data was gathered through the library method.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is one of the longest international crises officially started on February 20, 1988. As an important and influential actor in the geopolitical region of the South Caucasus, the Republic of Azerbaijan faced the crisis caused by the occupation of lands by Armenia after gaining independence. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict later turned into an international crisis due to the intervention of some foreign powers. It is believed that Turkey's support for the Republic of Azerbaijan is an attempt to expand its sphere of influence both by increasing Baku's position in the conflict and by marginalizing the influence of Iran and Russia in the region. On the other hand, due to Iran's concern about insecurity spilling over into its northwestern borders while opposing foreign intervention in this crisis, it wants to resolve the conflict emphasizing diplomacy and direct negotiations between the parties to the conflict. The main question of the research is, what strategy do Iran and Turkeye follow regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict? The research hypothesizes that Turkeye is trying to fundamentally change the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh in Baku's favor by developing comprehensive relations with the Republic of Azerbaijan and securing its regional goals and policies. On the other hand, while opposing any change in its northern borders, Iran has adopted a policy of neutrality towards Karabagh. However, the significant change in the military balance in favor of the Republic of Azerbaijan following the 2020 war has led Tehran to withdraw from its traditional policy of neutrality and openly support the sovereignty of the Republic of Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh. The qualitative analysis method was used to analyze the data of this research.

The Karabakh crisis remained in a state of neither war nor peace for tens of years, but with the Second Karabakh War, it came out of the state of "frozen conflict" and the South Caucasus, especially the Karabakh region, underwent deep changes. Since this war is not a random thing but rooted in the historical developments of the region, the main question of the article is “how did the course of historical developments in the South Caucasus affect the geopolitics of that region in the 2020 Karabakh war?” In response, this hypothesis proposes that the zero-sum situation was the principle governing the geopolitical developments of the South Caucasus region and its lasting legacy. This article has evaluated the complex history of the South Caucasus its geopolitics and its economic and cultural components, Geo-economics, and Geo-culture, and examined its consequences for the Nagorno-Karabakh war in 2020. The findings of the research showed that the Second Karabakh war was an ethnic-territorial war and the economic components played an essential role in its formation. Also, the sum of zero is the ruling principle in this region. In this article, a deductive research approach has been used, which is with the application of the geopolitical study model in the framework of regional studies. The data analysis was descriptive-analytical and the data of this research was collected using internet and library sources.

Following the outbreak of renewed conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh in late 2020, a trilateral agreement mediated by Russia was signed. This led to the withdrawal of Armenian forces and civilians from around 35% of the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, putting approximately 70% of the area under Baku and its allies' control. This paper examines the geopolitical dimensions of the Nagorno-Karabakh frozen conflict and explores the prospects for resolving it given the geopolitical changes after the 45-day war in 2020 between Baku and Yerevan. The key research question is: What impact have the geopolitical changes following the 2020 Azerbaijan-Armenia war had on resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh frozen conflict? Using a descriptive-analytical approach and geopolitical framework, the hypothesis was tested that the geopolitical changes have complicated the conflict while strengthening Baku's position. The findings confirm the hypothesis, suggesting the geopolitical complexities make a peaceful solution more difficult while increasing the likelihood of further military action by Azerbaijan.

American pragmatists consider the realist and liberal tradition in international relations to be inefficient and believe that most of the successes of American foreign policy have been achieved with a pragmatic approach and a peaceful method and emphasis on diplomacy. At first, Biden's foreign policy was organized around the issue of human rights and democracy, but the outbreak of the war between Russia and Ukraine caused a change in priorities. Therefore, by transitioning from liberalism to pragmatism in foreign policy, he tried to manage this crisis. The purpose of this article is to examine the change of priorities and approaches in Biden's foreign policy after the Russia-Ukraine war. The question of this article is: What did the Russia-Ukraine war cause? Has there been a change in the priorities of Biden's foreign policy? The hypothesis of this research, which tries to be proven with analytical and explanatory methodology and emphasis on objective and tangible political facts, is: that understanding the war between Russia and Ukraine as a strategic threat from the government Biden changed the approach in American foreign policy to manage this crisis. In such a way that pragmatism became the focal point and central core of Biden's foreign policy, and issues such as human rights and democracy are marginal issues.

The Caspian region's strategic investment potential, energy reserves, and geo-economic significance have garnered attention from both regional and global powers. Among these, China, a trans-regional force, has displayed a keen interest in the region, employing a strategic blend of economic and energy diplomacy. By prioritizing the implementation of the One Belt - One Road initiative for investments and application, and subsequently emphasizing energy diplomacy, China has sought to bolster its economic diplomacy in the Caspian region. This article delves into China's economic diplomacy approach in the Caspian region, particularly concentrating on Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan. Employing a mixed-methods research approach encompassing both qualitative and quantitative analysis, this study examines the pivotal success factors underpinning China's diplomatic efforts in the region. The investigation reveals that China's economic diplomacy hinges on the One Belt - One Road initiative, with energy diplomacy integral to its execution. Notably, the foundation of China's successful diplomatic model lies in the cultivation of mutual trust and the pursuit of mutually beneficial outcomes.