DOCSLIB.ORG

Revisiting the Geo-Political Thinking of Sir Halford John Mackinder: United States—Uzbekistan Relations 1991—2005

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revisiting the Geo-Political Thinking of Sir Halford John Mackinder: United States—Uzbekistan Relations 1991—2005 Revisiting the Geo-Political Thinking Of Sir Halford John Mackinder: United States—Uzbekistan Relations 1991—2005 A thesis Presented to the Faculty of The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy by Chris Seiple In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 27 November 2006 Dissertation Committee Andrew C. Hess, Chair William Martel Sung-Yoon Lee Chris Seiple—Curriculum Vitae Education 1999 to Present: The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University: PhD Candidate 1994 to 1995: Naval Postgraduate School: M.A. in National Security Affairs 1986 to 1990: Stanford University: B.A. in International Relations Professional Experience 2003 to Present President, the Institute for Global Engagement (IGE) 2001 to 2003 Executive Vice President, IGE 1996 to 1999 National Security Analyst, Strategic Initiatives Group, Headquarters, United States Marine Corps 1997 National Security Affairs Specialist, National Defense Panel 1996 Liaison Officer, Chemical-Biological Incidence Response Force 1990 to 1994 Infantry Officer, United States Marine Corps Publications • Numerous website articles on Christian living, religious freedom, religion & security, engaging Islam, just war, and Uzbekistan (please see the website: www.globalengagement.org) • “America’s Greatest Story.” The Review of Faith & International Affairs. 4, no. 2 (Fall 2006): 53-56. • “Uzbekistan and the Bush Doctrine.” The Review of Faith & International Affairs. 3, no. 2 (Fall 2005): 19-24. • “Realist Religious Freedom: An Uzbek Perspective.” Fides et Libertas (Fall 2005). • “Understanding Uzbekistan,” an Enote publication distributed by the Foreign Policy Research Institute (1 June 2005). • “Uzbekistan: Civil Society in the Heartland.” Orbis (Spring, 2005): 245-259. • “Religion & Realpolitik,” St. Paul Pioneer Press, 12 November 2004. • “The 9/11 Imperative,” Outlook, GovtExec.com, 13 September 2004. • “Shaping Tomorrow’s Foreign Policy.” In America Moving Ahead, ed. Art Shostak, Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2005. [Originally published on IGE’s website as “Youthful America,” 6 January 2004]. • “Uzbekistan and the Central Asian Crucible of Religion and Security.” In Religion and Security: The New Nexus in International Relations, co-authored with Joshua T. White, ed. Dennis Hoover and Robert A. Seiple (New York: Roman & Littlefield, 2004). • “Religion and the New Global Counterinsurgency.” In The Iraq War, ed. Art Shostak, Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2004. [Originally published on IGE’s website, 2 September 2003]. • “Implications of Terrorism in Uzbekistan,” an Enote distributed by the Foreign Policy Research Institute (12 April 2004). • “Heartland Geopolitics and the Case of Uzbekistan,” an Enote distributed by the Foreign Policy Research Institute (25 January 2004). • “The Grand Strategy: Sustainment.” In In the Shadow of War, ed. Art Shostak, Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2004. [Originally published on IGE’s website, 25 April 2003]. • “Baghdad Spring.” In Victorious Hawks, Hopeful Doves, ed. Art Shostak, Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2004. [Originally published as an Enote for the Foreign Policy Research Institute, 24 March 2003]. • “Waging Peace,” Outlook, GovtExec.com, 20 May 2003. • “On Frailty & Freedom.” The Review of Faith & International Affairs. 1, no. 2 (Fall 2003). • “Of Wars and Rumors of Wars.” The Review of Faith & International Affairs. 1, no. 1 (Spring 2003). • “Three Mile Island—The 20th Century's Introduction to the 21st Century Crisis,” with Michael J. Hillyard; concluding chapter in Hillyard’s book, Homeland Security and the Need for Change: Organizing Principles, Governing Institutions and American Culture. (Aventine Press, March 2003). • “Geo-Christianity: Back to the Future.” Prism (May 2003). • “Humanitarian Action and Private Security Companies: Opening the Debate,” an International Alert publication (June 2002). Co-authored with Tony Vaux, Gregg Nakano and Koenraad Van Brabant. • “Homeland Security Concepts and Strategy.” Orbis (April 2002): 259-273. • “The ‘Lessons’ of Kosovo.” The Marine Corps Gazette (June 2000): 39-41. • “Commentary & Reply,” Parameters, Spring 1999 (Response to “Interagency Operations Centers: An Opportunity We Can’t Ignore,” Parameters, Summer 1999). • “Window into an Age of Windows: The U.S. Military and the NGOs.” Marine Corps Gazette (April 1999): 63-71. • “Wrestling with Humanitarian Operations,” Marine Corps Gazette (December 1998): 24 [Published under “Gazette Staff”]. • “Consequence Management: Domestic Response to Weapons of Mass Destruction.” Parameters (Autumn 1997): 119-34. • “A ‘forward presence’ in a violent world,” by General Charles C. Krulak and Admiral Jay L. Johnson, The Washington Times, November 25, 1996 [ghost-written]. • “Combating the New Terrorism.” Proceedings (October 1996): 9. • The U.S. Military/NGO Relationship in Humanitarian Interventions. Carlisle, Pennsylvania, the U.S. Army Peacekeeping Institute, April 1996. Professional Associations • Senior Fellow, The Foreign Policy Research Institute, Program on National Security (Philadelphia) • Member, The Council on Foreign Relations (New York and Washington) • Member, The International Institute for Strategic Studies (London) • Member, Board of Directors, Wycliffe Bible Translators, USA (Orlando) Abstract This dissertation asks a simple question: Does Sir Halford John Mackinder’s geo-political thinking provide a suitable basis for examining and explaining the bilateral relationship between the United States and the Republic of Uzbekistan, 1991—2005? This dissertation re-visits Mackinder’s geo-political thinking, concluding that it is a living and comprehensive philosophy consisting of two perspectives which were meant to be applied in tandem to each new strategic era. These mutually dependent perspectives include the geo- communal view of man’s local interaction with and perception of geography, and the geo- strategic of a state’s understanding of, and interaction with, the Heartland (central Eurasia). Re-visited as such, this dissertation demonstrates the context and origins of Mackinder’s geo- political thinking (chapters 1 and 2), before modeling its explanatory suitability through an analytical narrative of the U.S.—Uzbekistan relationship (chapters 3 and 4). The dissertation also suggests a general set of hypotheses (chapter 2) that summarize and illustrate Mackinder’s comprehensive thinking, as applied through the analytic narrative of the U.S.—Uzbekistan relationship (chapter 5). Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to James Joseph Grey. He and his wife, Anne, lived across the street from me and Alissa. We spent many, many hours with them, loving and appreciating them more with each visit. We were fascinated by their service. Anne was a teacher; she had dedicated her life to the children in the Philadelphia school system. Jim was also a servant. He had fought in the Battle of the Bulge and he and Anne had served in George Kennan's Moscow embassy. Amidst work and the frenzy of everyday life, I looked forward to my conversations with Jim. We would debate the nature of God and leadership; who the “top three” Secretaries of State were in U.S. history; the elements of the Wehrmacht defeat in Russia; and, always, the exercise of American power. We would often sit back in his study, surrounded by the great books of world affairs. Or we would walk to downtown Narberth for a Friday lunch at “Greeks,” where we would talk geo-politics over a martini, or two. (Jim was old school State Department to the last). He always had time for me. He always listened. As I wrestled with the dissertation, Jim was indefatigably positive, always encouraging me. It was a powerful example. I can still see him walking along Anthwyn Road, the perfect gentlemen, greeting neighbors with the proper, and genuine, gesture or words. He was my friend. I miss him. Acknowledgements I am grateful to God for this experience and the people I have met along the way. As I approached the end of my Pentagon tour in 1998, I was thinking about getting out of the Marine Corps. That summer I met Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., who recruited me to come to Fletcher. That fall, I met my wife, Alissa. We were married on 5 June 1999, I left the Marine Corps in July and we moved to Boston on 24 August 1999. I had planned to write my dissertation on managing the consequences of a WMD terrorist incident in the U.S. (something I had worked on at the Pentagon). In December of 1999, after completing my first semester of coursework as well as my first case study, it occurred to me that I wanted to write on something I knew nothing about…Uzbekistan. And thus I committed the cardinal sin of PhD students: I switched horses in mid-stream. Alissa supported me. Neither one of us, however, could have imagined that that Christmas 1999 decision would result in seven more years of “Ph.D. Candidate” status! I am thankful for Bob Pfaltzgraff. I am grateful to Mark Semioli for making me aware of the profound implications I faced one seemingly ordinary October night as I debated with him whether or not to leave the party, or ask this woman I had met at the door, Alissa, to dinner. “Your decision to stay or go could quite possibly be the biggest decision of your life.” Without this confluence of events, which I consider divine, this dissertation would not be possible. Along the way, I have been blessed with incredible friends and support. I am grateful to Sodyq Safaev who opened the door for me in Uzbekistan. Without him, I would not have met and learned from all the friends I have today in that great country. I am also blessed by the wonderful friends I have made in the U.S.; people like Matt Bryza, who selflessly serves our nation. I am filled with gratitude for the people who have also encouraged me along the way: my mom and dad (who introduced me to Sodyq Safaev); my sister, Amy, and her husband, D.B., who let me live with them in Providence R.I., for my last semester of coursework as Alissa took a job in New York; my brother, Jesse, who inspired me with his own graduate degree in conflict resolution; and Mike Hillyard, John Hillen and Pauletta Otis, each of whom nagged me about finishing the task.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 8 Days Tour Program. (Tashkent–Samarkand–Bukhara– Charwak – Tashkent)
    UZBEKISTAN – 8 DAYS TOUR PROGRAM. (TASHKENT–SAMARKAND–BUKHARA– CHARWAK – TASHKENT) DATE MODE DAILY SCHEDULED PROGRAM PLACE Day 1 Arrival to Tashkent in the evening by flight. TASHKENT FLIGHT Meet and greet and transfer to hotel. After check in free time for rest. BUS Dinner at local restaurant. Overnight at hotel. Day 2 BUS Breakfast at the hotel. TASHKENT Full day sightseeing in Tashkent: • Khast Imam complex • Othman Quran (1200 y.o.) • Chorsu bazaar • Kukeldash madrasah (XVI c.). Lunch at local restaurant. • In the afternoon visit: • Alisher Navoi theatre square • Museum of Applied Arts. Dinner at local restaurant. Overnight at hotel in Tashkent. Day 3 BUS Breakfast at the hotel. Transfer to train station high-speed train “Afrosiyob” to Samarkand. TASHKENT HIGH Arrival to Samarkand. SPEED Sightseeing of Samarkand: TRAIN • Registan Square SAMARKAND • Gur Emir Mausoleum • Ulugbek’s Observatory Lunch and dinner at local restaurants. Overnight at hotel in Samarkand. Day 4 BUS Breakfast at hotel. SAMARKAND In the morning drive to Bukhara via Imam Al Boukhari Complex. • Sightseeing of Imam Al Boukhari Complex. BUKHARA Lunch box. Check into hotel. Dinner at local restaurant. Overnight at hotel in Bukhara. Day 5 BUS Breakfast at hotel. BUKHARA Full day sightseeing tour in Bukhara: FLIGHT TASHKENT Bakhouddin Nakshbandi Complex Chor Bakr necropolis Kalon ensemble Madrasah Miri-Arab Magoki-Attori mosque Chashma-Ayub Madrasah Ulugbek and Abdulazizkhan Kosh madrasah Trade domes Lyabi hauz complex. Dinner at local restaurant. Transfer to airport for flight. Bukhara - Tashkent flight. Arrival to Tashkent. Transfer to hotel. Overnight at hotel in Tashkent. Day 6 BUS Breakfast at hotel. TASHKENT Transfer to Ugam Chatkal State National Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Celebrating Nowruz in Central Asia
    Arts & Traditions Along the Silk Road: Celebrating Nowruz in Central Asia Dear Traveler, Please join Museum Travel Alliance from March 12-26, 2021 on Arts & Traditions Along the Silk Road: Celebrating Nowruz in Central Asia. Observe the ancient traditions of Nowruz (Persian New Year) in Bukhara, visiting private family homes to participate in elaborate ceremonies not often seen by travelers. Join the director for exclusive, after-hours access to Gur-e-Amir, the opulent tomb of Mongol conqueror Amir Timur (Tamerlane) in Samarkand. Explore the vast archaeological site of Afrasiab, and marvel at the excavated treasures in its dedicated museum in the company of a local archaeologist. We are delighted that this trip will be accompanied by Helen Evans as our lecturer from The Metropolitan Museum of Art. This trip is sponsored by The Metropolitan Museum of Art. We expect this program to fill quickly. Please call the Museum Travel Alliance at (855) 533-0033 or (212) 302-3251 or email [email protected] to reserve a place on this trip. We hope you will join us. Sincerely, Jim Friedlander President MUSEUM TRAVEL ALLIANCE 1040 Avenue of the Americas, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10018 | 212-302-3251 or 855-533-0033 | Fax 212-344-7493 [email protected] | www.museumtravelalliance.com BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB Travel with March
    [Show full text]
  • Backstreets & Bazaars of Uzbekistan 2020
    Backstreets & Bazaars of Uzbekistan 2020 ! Backstreets & Bazaars of Uzbekistan A Cultural & Culinary Navruz Adventure 2020 – Cultural Series – 10 Days March 16-25, 2020 Taste your way through the vibrant heart of the Silk Road, Uzbekistan, on a culinary and cultural caravan held during the height of Navruz. A centuries-old festival, Navruz is a joyous welcoming of the return of spring and the beginning of a new year, when families and local communities celebrate over sumptuous feasts, songs and dance. Beginning in the modern capital of Tashkent, introduce your palate to the exciting tastes of Uzbek cuisine during a meeting with one of the city’s renowned chefs. Explore the ancient architecture of three of the most celebrated Silk Road oases – Bukhara, Khiva and Samarkand – and browse their famed markets and bazaars for the brilliant silks, ceramics and spices that gave the region its exotic flavor. Join with the locals in celebrating Navruz at a special community ceremony, and gather for a festive Navruz dinner. Along the way, participate in hands-on cooking classes and demonstrations, meet with master artisans in their workshops, dine with local families in their private homes and discover the rich history, enduring traditions and abundant hospitality essential to everyday Uzbek culture. © 1996-2020 MIR Corporation 85 South Washington St, Ste. 210, Seattle, WA 98104 • 206-624-7289 • 206-624-7360 FAX • Email [email protected] 2 Daily Itinerary Day 1, Monday, March 16 Arrive Tashkent, Uzbekistan Day 2, Tuesday, March 17 Tashkent • fly to Urgench • Khiva Day 3, Wednesday, March 18 Khiva Day 4, Thursday, March 19 Khiva • Bukhara Day 5, Friday, March 20 Bukhara • celebration of Navruz Day 6, Saturday, March 21 Bukhara • celebration of Navruz Day 7, Sunday, March 22 Bukhara • Gijduvan • Samarkand Day 8, Monday, March 23 Samarkand Day 9, Tuesday, March 24 Samarkand • day trip to Urgut • train to Tashkent Day 10, Wednesday March 25 Depart Tashkent © 1996-2020 MIR Corporation 85 South Washington St, Ste.
    [Show full text]
  • HIZB UT-TAHRIR Islam’S Political Insurgency
    HIZB UT-TAHRIR Islam’s Political Insurgency Zeyno Baran The Nixon Center December 2004 About the Nixon Center The Nixon Center is a non-partisan public policy institution established by former President Richard Nixon shortly before his death in 1994. Committed to the analysis of policy challenges to the United States through the prism of the American national interest, the Center is a substantively and programmatically independent division of the Richard Nixon Library and Birthplace Foundation. Major programs of The Nixon Center include the Chinese Studies Program, Immigration and National Security Forum, International Security and Energy Program, National Security Program, Regional Strategic Program, and U.S.- Russian Relations Program. Topics addressed by the Center’s programs range from U.S. relations with China and Russia to energy geopolitics in the Persian Gulf and Caspian Basin and European security issues. The Center is supported by the Nixon Library and Birthplace Foundation endowment as well as by foundation, corporate and individual donors. Copyright 2004 The Nixon Center. All Rights Reserved. “Hizb ut-Tahrir: Islam’s Political Insurgency” By Zeyno Baran The Nixon Center 1615 L Street, N.W., Suite 1250 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 887-1000 Fax: (202) 887-5222 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.nixoncenter.org Editing, Layout and Design by Thomas M. Rickers Order from the Richard Nixon Library and Birthplace Foundation 1-800-USA-8865 INTRODUCTORY NOTE This Nixon Center monograph, Hizb ut-Tahrir: Islam’s Political Insurgency, breaks new ground in exploring the danger posed by the spread of radical Islamist ideology. The focus of this monograph is Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islamiyya (The Islamic Party of Liberation), which has successfully sown the seeds of an ideology encouraging a clash of civilizations in over forty countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Engaging Central Asia
    ENGAGING CENTRAL ASIA ENGAGING CENTRAL ASIA THE EUROPEAN UNION’S NEW STRATEGY IN THE HEART OF EURASIA EDITED BY NEIL J. MELVIN CONTRIBUTORS BHAVNA DAVE MICHAEL DENISON MATTEO FUMAGALLI MICHAEL HALL NARGIS KASSENOVA DANIEL KIMMAGE NEIL J. MELVIN EUGHENIY ZHOVTIS CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN POLICY STUDIES BRUSSELS The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is an independent policy research institute based in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound analytical research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe today. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors writing in a personal capacity and do not necessarily reflect those of CEPS or any other institution with which the authors are associated. This study was carried out in the context of the broader work programme of CEPS on European Neighbourhood Policy, which is generously supported by the Compagnia di San Paolo and the Open Society Institute. ISBN-13: 978-92-9079-707-4 © Copyright 2008, Centre for European Policy Studies. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the Centre for European Policy Studies. Centre for European Policy Studies Place du Congrès 1, B-1000 Brussels Tel: 32 (0) 2 229.39.11 Fax: 32 (0) 2 219.41.51 e-mail: [email protected] internet: http://www.ceps.eu CONTENTS 1. Introduction Neil J. Melvin ................................................................................................. 1 2. Security Challenges in Central Asia: Implications for the EU’s Engagement Strategy Daniel Kimmage............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Global Journal on Humanites & Social Sciences
    Global Journal on Humanites & Social Sciences Issue 4 (2016) 857-864 Selected Paper of 4rd World Congress of Administrative and Political Sciences, (APDOL-2015) 26-28 November 2015, Rome, Italy Security threats and challenges in the post-soviet Central Asia: religion-based extremism on case study of ISIS Fatima Kukeyeva*, IR Department, al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Karasai Batyr 95, Almaty, 050000, Kazakhstan Leila Delovarova, IR Department, al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Karasai Batyr 95, Almaty, 050000, Kazakhstan Tolganay Ormysheva, IR Department, al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Karasai Batyr 95, Almaty, 050000, Kazakhstan Yermek Chukubayev, IR Department, al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Karasai Batyr 95, Almaty, 050000, Kazakhstan Suggested Citation: Kukeyeva, F., Delovarova, L., Ormysheva, T. & Chukubayev, Y. (2016). Security threats and challenges in the post-soviet Central Asia: religion-based extremism on case study of ISIS, Global Journal on Humanites & Social Sciences. [Online]. 04, pp 857-864. Available from: http://sproc.org/ojs/index.php/pntsbs Received May 10, 2015; revised August 16, 2015; accepted September 16, 2015. Selection and peer review under responsibility of Prof. Dr. Andreea Iluzia IACOB ©2016 SciencePark Research, Organization & Counseling. All rights reserved. Abstract Nowadays the post-Soviet Central Asian countries face a broad range of security challenges and threats. Some of them are systemic in nature, while others occur sporadically. Many challenges and threats are coming from the outside the region, but the countries’ internal situation and background including historical, economic, social and political aspects. The reaction in the countries on religious-based radicalism and movements like ISIS is an ambiguous. The range and level of the threats and challenges depends on various reasons and different in all Central Asian countries.
    [Show full text]
  • “New Type of Major-Country Relationship” with the United States
    U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Staff Research Backgrounder June 25, 2013 China Seeks a “New Type of Major-Country Relationship” with the United States by Caitlin Campbell Research Director and Policy Analyst, Foreign Affairs and Energy and Craig Murray Senior Policy Analyst, Military and Security Affairs Disclaimer: This paper is the product of professional research performed by staff of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, and was prepared at the request of the Commission to support its deliberations. Posting of the report to the Commission’s website is intended to promote greater public understanding of the issues addressed by the Commission in its ongoing assessment of U.S.-China economic relations and their implications for U.S. security, as mandated by Public Law 106-398 and Public Law 108-7. However, the public release of this document does not necessarily imply an endorsement by the Commission, any individual Commissioner, or the Commission’s other professional staff, of the views or conclusions expressed in this staff research report. China is seeking a “new type of major-country relationship”* with the United States, according to official statements from Chinese leaders. Beijing has deliberated this concept since at least 2011, and it has been referenced frequently by high-level Chinese officials and widely discussed in Chinese media since February 2012, when then presumptive Chinese president Xi Jinping evoked it during a visit to the United States. 1† This approach likely is intended to create an environment more conducive to China’s rise by promoting more stable relations with the United States and avoid or, if necessary, manage tension that history suggests is inevitable between established and rising powers.
    [Show full text]
  • An Emerging Picture of the Neolithic of Northeast Iran
    IranicaAntiqua, vol. LI, 2016 doi: 10.2143/IA.51.0.3117827 AN EMERGING PICTURE OF THE NEOLITHIC OF NORTHEAST IRAN BY Kourosh ROUSTAEI (Iranian Center for Archaeological Research) Abstract: For many years the Neolithic of the northeastern Iranian Plateau was acknowledged by materials and data recovered from the three sites of Yarim Tappeh, Turang Tappeh and Sang-e Chakhmaq, all excavated in the 1960-1970s. In the last two decades an increasing mass of information based on archaeologi- cal fieldworks and reappraisal of archival materials have been built up that is going to significantly enhance our understanding on the Neolithic period of the region. The overwhelming majority of the information is obtained from the Shahroud area and the Gorgan plain, on the south and north of the Eastern Alborz Mountains respectively. So far, sixty two Neolithic sites have been identified in the region. This paper briefly reviews the known Neolithic sites and outlines the various implications of the newly emerging picture of the period for the northeast region of Iran. Keywords: Neolithic, northeast region, Sang-e Chakhmaq, Shahroud, Gorgan plain, Jeitun Culture Introduction Since Robert Braidwood’s pioneering investigations in the Zagros Mountains in 1960s (1961), western Iran has been the interest area for scholars who searching the early evidence of domestications. The follow- ing decades witnessed a series of well-planned works (e.g. Hole et al. 1969) in the region that considerably contributed to our understanding on early stages of the village life. Renewal of the relevant investigations in the Zagros region in recent years points the significance of the region on the incipient agriculture in the Near East (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Wheat Production and Regional Food Security in CIS: the Case of Belarus, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan
    FAO Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia Policy Studies on Rural Transition No. 2016-1 Wheat production and regional food security in CIS: The case of Belarus, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan Zvi Lerman, David Sedik Yuliy Yusupov, Ivan Stanchin and Irina Kazakevich April 2016 The Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia of the Food and Agriculture Organization distributes this policy study to disseminate findings of work in progress and to encourage the exchange of ideas within FAO and all others interested in development issues. This paper carries the name of the authors and should be used and cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations and conclusions are the authors’ own and should not be attributed to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, its management, or any member countries. Zvi Lerman is Sir Henry d’Avigdor Goldsmid Professor of Agricultural Economics, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. David Sedik is the Senior Agricultural Policy Officer in the FAO Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia. Yulii Yusupov is the Director of the Center for Economic Development in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Ivan Stanchin is Professor of Financial Economics and Accounting at the Voronezh Economic-Legal Institute in Voronezh, Russia. Irina Kazakevich is a Senior Economist at the Institute of System Research of the Agro- industrial Complex, National Academy of Science of Belarus, Minsk, Belarus. 2 Contents Figures .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Development in Western Central Asia in the Chalcolithic and Bronze Ages
    Veget Hist Archaeobot (1999) 8:13-19 Vegetation History and Archaeobotany © Springer-Verlag 1999 Agricultural development in western Central Asia in the Chalcolithic and Bronze Ages Naomi F. Miller University of Pennsylvania Museum, Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology, 33rd and Spruce Streets, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA Received September 14, 1998 / Accepted May 15, 1999 Abstract. This paper lays out archaeobotanical evidence archaeologists recognize stylistic continuities, there are of cereals and fruits from 5th-2nd millennium B.C. sites important differences between these occupations, which in Turkmenistan (Anau, Gonur) and Uzbekistan (Djar- are separated by several hundred years (F. Hiebert, per- kutan). Our current res,earch program (1989-present) fo- sonal communication). That is, the cultural relationship cuses on systematic recovery of botanical remains in between the people of Jeitun and Anau is not clear. their stratigraphic context. The cereals from these sites Some time between the earliest attested agriculture at include Hordeum vulgate L. ssp. vulgare (6-row barley) Jeitun and the settlement of Anau, farmers living north and Tritieum aestivum L. s.1. (bread wheat). The pres- of the Kopet Dag increasingly grew crops that are often ence of plump grains of 6-row barley and bread wheat associated with irrigation in an arid environment: varie- may indicate that small-scale irrigation was practised at ties of 6-row barley and hexaploid bread wheat. For ex- Anau as early as the Chalcolithic period. The possibility ample, at one late Neolithic site, Chagylly Depe, the ar- is also raised that these plump-grained types may have chaeologists report, in addition to Hordeum distichum come from the east rather than through northern Iran.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond the Legacy of Mackinder
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by MURAL - Maynooth University Research Archive Library Geopolitics, 18:917–932, 2013 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1465-0045 print / 1557-3028 online DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2013.789865 Beyond the Legacy of Mackinder GERRY KEARNS Department of Geography, National University of Ireland Maynooth, Kildare, Ireland For the Geopolitics Lecture at the Association of American Geographers Annual Meeting 2010, the paper examines the core features of Mackinder’s geopolitical imaginary, reviews contem- porary challenges to those elements and develops an alternative conception of space for a Progressive Geopolitics. INTRODUCTION Having spent about thirty years on the research that went into a book subti- tled, ‘The Legacy of Halford Mackinder,’ to be then asked within a month of its publication to give a lecture entitled, ‘Beyond the Legacy of Mackinder,’ seemed a little harsh.1 Nevertheless, it is an honour to have been asked to deliver a lecture for the journal Geopolitics, so today, I will accept the challenge and explore how we might indeed move beyond the legacy of Mackinder. I’m going to identify six elements of the geographical imagi- nary that is at the heart of Mackinder’s work and which in turn explains why Mackinder continues to be drawn upon by some of those engaged in foreign policy debates. Then I’m going to suggests ways that these six elements were challenged by some of his contemporaries and through this not only to show that the particular context in which Mackinder worked although very important for understanding his ideas did not determine what Downloaded by [Maynooth University Library] at 03:43 22 August 2017 those ideas were.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir Halford John Mackinder Was a British Geographer Who Wrote A
    Sir Halford John Mackinder : Sir Halford John Mackinder was a British geographer who wrote a paper in 1904 called "The Geographical Pivot of History." Mackinder's paper suggested that the control of Eastern Europe was vital to control of the world. Mackinder postulated the following, which became known as the Heartland Theory: Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island Who rules the World Island commands the world The "heartland" he also referred to as the "pivot area" and as the core of Eurasia, and he considered all of Europe and Asia as the World Island. In the age of modern warfare, Mackinder's theory is widely considered outdated. At the time he proposed his theory, he took into consideration world history only in the context of conflict between land and sea powers. Nations with large navies were at an advantage over those that could not successfully navigate the oceans, Mackinder suggested. Of course, in the modern era, the use of aircraft has greatly changed the ability to control territory and provide defensive capabilities. The Heartland theory is a geopolitical concept which analyses the political and economic success of the world’s regions by geography. The theory was hypothesized by 20th-century British geopolitical scholar, Halford Mackinder in his paper to the Royal Geographical Association entitled, “The Geographical Pivot of History” in 1904. According to the theory, the core of global influence lies in what is known as the Heartland, a region of the world situated in Eurasia due to its sheer size, a wealth of resources, and a high population.
    [Show full text]