Economic coercion as a means of hybrid warfare: The South Caucasus as a focal poin

• Autorzy: Iskandarov Khayal , Gawliczek Piotr

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.35467/sdq/151038

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The rapidly changing security environment has brought a plethora of non-military measures to the fore. These measures have completely changed the nature of hostilities by giving them a hybrid character. With regard to the South Caucasus region, the chasm among the political courses pursued by particular states makes the overall region more susceptible to diverse external threats of a political, economic, military and cultural nature. This paper focuses on the economic component of the hybrid warfare in the South Caucasus region. The issues are considered from a security point of view and not from an economic perspective. The vulnerabilities of particular nations in the region to economic coercion are highlighted in the paper and suggestions for improving them made. The authors underscore the regional unity in the South Caucasus as a prerequisite for eliminating or at least mitigating economic dependence and healing the “regional fracture” that has lasted for decades.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

hybrid warfare; economic dependence; economic coercion; economic leverage; economic power

• Wydawca: Akademia Sztuki Wojennej
• Czasopismo: Security and Defence Quarterly
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 40, No. 4
• Strony: 47--57
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 38 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Iskandarov Khayal

• Military Scientific Research Institute, National Defence University, Yasamal district, str. academician Shafaet Mehdiev 136, AZ1065, Baku, Republic of Azerbaijan

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8975-6530

autor

Gawliczek Piotr

• University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Elk Campus Branch, Tadeusz Kosciuszko Street 23, 19-300 Elk, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Brkić I. (2020) ‘The relationship between economic freedom and economic growth in EU countries’, Doctoral Thesis, Castellón de la Plana.
• 2. Calha J.M. (2015) ‘Hybrid warfare: NATO’s new strategic challenge?’, General report. NATO Parliamentary Assembly, Defence and Security Committee. Available at: https://.nato-pa.int/download-file?filename=sites/default/files/documents/2015%20-%20166%20DSC%2015%20E%20BIS%20-%20HYBRID%20WARFARE%20-%20CALHA%20REPORT.docx (Accessed: 10 January 2022).
• 3. Camilli E. (2016) Understanding national security strategies. Available at: https://.academia.edu/21910174/Understanding_National_Security_Strategies (Accessed: 22 February 2022).
• 4. Carment D. (2018) War’s future: the risks and rewards of grey-zone conflict and hybrid warfare. Available at: https://.cgai.ca/wars_future_the_risks_and_rewards_of_grey_zone_conflict_and_hybrid_warfare (Accessed: 8 January 2022).
• 5. Chase-Dunn C. (1975) ‘The effects of international economic dependence on development and inequality: a cross-national study’, American Sociological Review, 40, pp. 720–738. doi: 10.2307/2094176.
• 6. Civil.ge (2022) Georgia’s economic dependence on Russia increased in 2021, report says. Available at: https://civil.ge/archives/476918 (Accessed: 17 April 2022).
• 7. Cooper R.N. (2004) Is “economic power” a useful and operational concept? Available at: https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/3677050 (Accessed: 12 April 2022).
• 8. Dayspring S.M. (2015) ‘Toward a theory of hybrid warfare: the Russian conduct of war during peace’, Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School.
• 9. De Waal T. (2021) In the south Caucasus, can new trade routes help overcome a geography of conflict? Available at: https://carnegieendowment.org/files/de_Waal_South_Caucasus_Connectivity.pdf (Accessed: 18 January 2022).
• 10. Drury A.C. (2005) ‘Economic coercion in theory and practice’, in C. Drury (ed.) Economic sanctions and presidential decisions. Advances in foreign policy analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 8–31. doi: 10.1057/9781403976956_2.
• 11. Ducaru S.D. (2015) ‘Framing NATO’s approach to hybrid warfare’, in N Iancu, A Fortuna, C Barna and M Teodor (eds.), Countering hybrid threats: lessons learned from Ukraine. Amsterdam, Berlin, and Washington DC: IOS Press. pp. 3–11.
• 12. Dudin M.N., Fedorova I.J., Ploticina L.A., Tokmurzin T.M., Belyaeva M.V. and Ilyin A.B. (2018) ‘International practices to improve economic security’, European Research Studies Journal, XXI(1), pp. 459–467. doi: 10.35808/ersj/962.
• 13. EADaily (2022) Transfers were calculated in Armenia: Russia is the leader, Turkey closes a dozen. Available at: https://eadaily.com/ru/news/2022/01/27/v-armenii-podschitali-transferty-rossiya-lider-turciya-zamykaet-desyatku (Accessed: 18 December 2021).
• 14. Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan to the Federal Republic of Germany (2020) On November 10, 2020, a statement was signed by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia and the President of the Russian Federation. Available at: https://berlin.mfa.gov.az/en/news/3786/on-november-10-2020-a-statement-was-signed-by-the-president-of-the-republic-of-azerbaijan-the-prime-minister-of-the-republic-of-armenia-and-the-president-of-the-russian-federation (Accessed: 30 March 2022).
• 15. Hadzhiev B. (2020) ‘Enablers of hybrid warfare: the Bulgarian case’, Journal of International Studies, 13(1), pp. 28–43. doi: 10.14254/2071-8330.2020/13-1/2.
• 16. Hafiz H. (2016) ‘Beyond liberty: Toward a history and theory of economic coercion’, Tennessee Law Review, 83, pp. 1071–1136.
• 17. Hergnyan S. (2020) 2019: A Record $1.454 Billion in Overseas Bank Transfers from Armenia. Available at: https://hetq.am/en/article/113230 (Accessed: 21 March 2022).
• 18. Interfax.az (2022) Money transfers to Azerbaijan in 2021 increased by 3.6%. Available at: http://interfax.az/view/858926 (Accessed: 5 March 2022).
• 19. Iskandarov K. and Gawliczek P. (2020a) ‘Hybrid warfare as a new type of war. The evolution of its conceptual construct’, in M Banasik, P Gawliczek and A Rogozinska (eds.), The Russian Federation and international security. Warsaw: Difin Publishing House, pp. 96–107.
• 20. Iskandarov K. and Gawliczek P. (2020b) ‘Hybrid warfare as an instrument of political leverage (With a special focus on the South Caucasus)’, in M Banasik, P Gawliczek and A Rogozinska (eds.), The Russian federation and international security. Warsaw: Difin Publishing House, pp. 169–180.
• 21. Janashia E. (2015) Russia enhances soft power in Georgia through local NGOs. Available at: http://.cacianalyst.org/publications/field-reports/item/13243-rujssia-enchances-soft-power-georgia-local-ngos.html (Accessed: 18 December 2021).
• 22. Kim S.C. (2019) ‘China and its neighbors: asymmetrical economies and vulnerability to coercion’, Issues & Studies: A Social Science Quarterly on China, Taiwan, and East Asian Affairs, 55(4). pp. 1–25. doi: 10.1142/S1013251119500073.
• 23. Kommersant (2020) Rosselkhoznadzor banned the import of tomatoes and apples from Azerbaijan Available at: https://.kommersant.ru/doc/4604831 (Accessed: 26 December 2021).
• 24. Kustra T. (2021) Economic coercion and sanctions. Available at: https://.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199743292/obo-9780199743292-0289.xml (Accessed: 18 February 2022).
• 25. Lambert M. (2017) The Caucasus as a laboratory for Russian hybrid warfare. Available at: https://.macdonaldlaurier.ca/the-caucasus-as-a-laboratory-for-russian-hybrid-warfare-michael-lambert-for-inside-policy/ (Accessed: 1 December 2021).
• 26. Minniti F. (2018) Hybrid warfare and hybrid threats. Available at: https://eeradicalization.com/hybrid-warfare-and-hybrid-threats/ (Accessed: 11 December 2021).
• 27. Mouravi G.T. (2016) ‘External political actors and influences in the south Caucasus’, Sociology and Anthropology, 4(8), pp. 698–709. doi: 10.13189/sa.2016.040804.
• 28. Nordby G. (2019) The four types of economic coercion. Available at: https://medium.com/@gnorby01/the-four-types-of-economic-coercion-810f1fd7f11a#:~:text=The%20four%20types%20are:%20Foreign,,%20Financial%20Power,%20and%20Trade (Accessed: 16 December 2021).
• 29. Papava V. (2012) ‘Economic component of the Russian-Georgian conflict’, SSRN Electronic Journal. , 6(1), pp. 61–71. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2182507.
• 30. Piriyev H., Tahirov R. and Iskandarov K. (2022) The second Karabakh war. Military-political analysis. Baku: Militay Publishing House.
• 31. PopulationU (2022) Countries by GDP. Available at: https://.populationu.com/gen/countries-by-gdp (Accessed: 23 May 2022).
• 32. Retter L., Frinking E., Hoorens S., Lynch A., Nederveen F. and Phillips W. (2020) Relationships between the economy and national security. Analysis and considerations for economic security policy in the Netherlands. Santa Monica, CA and Cambridge: RAND Corporation.
• 33. Rukomeda R. (2018) Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine: the latest developments and trends. Available at: https://cids.no/2018/09/28/russias-hybrid-war-against-ukraine-the-latest-developments-and-trends/ (Accessed: 20 December 2021).
• 34. Sehgal I. (2019) Strategic coercion through hybrid warfare. Available at: https://fp.brecorder.com/2019/02/20190215447229/ (Accessed: 16 December 2021).
• 35. Sperling J. and Kirchner E. (1995) ‘The changing definition of security’, Paper delivered at the ECSA Conference Charleston, SC, 11–14 May 1995. Available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/7020/1/sperling_james.pdf (Accessed: 4 February 2022).
• 36. Statista (2021) Caucasus countries: national debt from 2012 to 2022 in relation to gross domestic product. Available at: https://.statista.com/statistics/980478/national-debt-of-the-caucasus-countries-in-relation-to-gross-domestic-product-gdp/ (Accessed: 8 March 2022).
• 37. The World Bank (2020) Ease of doing business ranking. Available at: https://.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/pdf/db2020/Doing-Business-2020_rankings.pdf (Accessed: 4 February 2022).
• 38. Uren D. (2020) The growing threat of economic coercion. Available at: https://aicd.companydirectors.com.au/membership/company-director-magazine/2020-back-editions/december/the-growing-threat-of-economic-coercion (Accessed: 18 December 2021).