Browsing by Author "Talka, Santeri"

Regional integration in Central Asia (CA) has seen very limited success, despite strong cultural and historical connections and shared grievances. I attempt to identify factors that promote or inhibit intensification of regional cooperation. I use a political economy approach to identify foundational factors, stakeholders and political phenomena that influence deepening regional cooperation. I analyse the formal institutional integration initiatives through realist and constructivist IR theories. I also bind the case study of Central Asia to a broader theoretical debate on the relationship between regionalism and multilateralism in 21st century. The relationship between intraregional dynamics (comprising the CA states) and interregional dynamics (comprising external sponsors or partners contributing to regionalism) is complex, and partially characterized by conflict of interests. CA states lack incentives to promote regional institutions and identities, but are willing to exploit regionalism opportunistically. I analyse CA policy principally through the framework of political elites, emphasizing nationalism and state sovereignty. Simultaneously, CA elites have used open regionalism to meet goals in globalist foreign policy and nationalistic domestic policy. On the other hand, external hegemons perceive strong incentives to promote regionalism under their own leadership. I analyse the external sponsors mostly through a neorealist framework of hegemonic influence. Despite these conflicts, there are some specific areas of shared interests, particularly fighting non- traditional security threats. Use of regional integration initiatives in CA can be perceived as not incompatible with greater multilateralism, even contributing to the integration of the region to a global system on its own terms. Based on this case study, I argue for a complex, non- categorical understanding of regionalism and multilateralism. I argue that new regionalism, and open regionalism in particular, have been used in CA for promoting specifically globalist policy agendas. This conclusion supports the premise that regionalism and multilateralism exist in a dynamic relationship, influencing each other in a mutually supportive manner. Rather than understanding regionalism as a “stumbling block” or temporary “building block”, it should be perceived as a permanent part of the contemporary global system.