36
impose strict control over the spread of weapons with mass destruction; rather, his
foreign policies dwelled on increasing the transport of oil from foreign suppliers to
the US market. During his administration, the US oil imports had increased to constitute more than 50% of the total US consumption for the first time in American
history. There was great anxiety as regards the security of America’s long-term
energy supply. Hence, based on these and various other reasons, Bush ensured that
his major duty as the president was to address the issue of “energy crisis” existing
in the country (www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4458.htm 2017).
Ariel Cohen believes that the best way to facilitate access to Central Asian and
Caucasus for US policymakers is to strengthen pro-Western states such as Azerbaijan
and Georgia—along with friendly nations like Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan while
ensuring the continued independence of the NIS. The US, Cohen continues, should
also work with its allies in the region such as Israel, Turkey, and Western Europe, in
order to reach the peaceful resolution of ethnic conflicts, to provide an impetus for
economic growth, and to develop flows of in East-West trade and investment (www.
heritage.org 2016).
Brenda Shaffer points out that there are a number of American interests which
can be advanced through the success of policies in the Caspian Basin, in terms of
their implications both in regard to littoral states (Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan,
Iran, and Turkmenistan), as well as neighboring countries that belong to the wider
security and energy transit picture of the basin (Georgia, Turkey, and Uzbekistan).
According to the professor, these interests include:
1. Successfully operating and establishing stability in global energy supplies and
increasing the variation of supplies in areas beyond the Persian Gulf,
2. Promoting the well-being of a US ally, i.e., Turkey, currently experiencing an
economic crisis,
3. Enhancing relationships with Islamic countries,
4. Promoting US economic benefits,
5. Encouraging efforts made by the states in the Caucuses and Central Asia to
achieve their independence and to successfully establish democracy, and advocating peace, stability, and prosperity throughout the region. (www.belfercenter.
org 2016a, b).
Brenda Shaffer believes that they are some important factors which played a key
role in shaping the first phase of energy diplomacy in the Caspian Basin; (1) the
land lock geography of Caspian Basin, (2) the creation of new energy export projects was seen as a means to establish the legitimacy of the new states in a region in
which the US was very active. By encouraging their independence, security, and
stability, the US could thereby increase the mutual benefits to itself and the fledgling post-Soviet states, (3) Russia was weak in the first decade after the Soviet collapse, and possessed relatively little means toward the establishment of new energy
projects in the region, (4) The new states were in dire need of FDI in order to govern
and support minimal public services, and thus eager to provide attractive terms for
investors. In the first phase of Caspian energy diplomacy, the emphasis lay on the
production and export of oil. This was followed by a second phase in which Caspian
2 Literature Review
impose strict control over the spread of weapons with mass destruction; rather, his
foreign policies dwelled on increasing the transport of oil from foreign suppliers to
the US market. During his administration, the US oil imports had increased to constitute more than 50% of the total US consumption for the first time in American
history. There was great anxiety as regards the security of America’s long-term
energy supply. Hence, based on these and various other reasons, Bush ensured that
his major duty as the president was to address the issue of “energy crisis” existing
in the country (www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4458.htm 2017).
Ariel Cohen believes that the best way to facilitate access to Central Asian and
Caucasus for US policymakers is to strengthen pro-Western states such as Azerbaijan
and Georgia—along with friendly nations like Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan while
ensuring the continued independence of the NIS. The US, Cohen continues, should
also work with its allies in the region such as Israel, Turkey, and Western Europe, in
order to reach the peaceful resolution of ethnic conflicts, to provide an impetus for
economic growth, and to develop flows of in East-West trade and investment (www.
heritage.org 2016).
Brenda Shaffer points out that there are a number of American interests which
can be advanced through the success of policies in the Caspian Basin, in terms of
their implications both in regard to littoral states (Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan,
Iran, and Turkmenistan), as well as neighboring countries that belong to the wider
security and energy transit picture of the basin (Georgia, Turkey, and Uzbekistan).
According to the professor, these interests include:
1. Successfully operating and establishing stability in global energy supplies and
increasing the variation of supplies in areas beyond the Persian Gulf,
2. Promoting the well-being of a US ally, i.e., Turkey, currently experiencing an
economic crisis,
3. Enhancing relationships with Islamic countries,
4. Promoting US economic benefits,
5. Encouraging efforts made by the states in the Caucuses and Central Asia to
achieve their independence and to successfully establish democracy, and advocating peace, stability, and prosperity throughout the region. (www.belfercenter.
org 2016a, b).
Brenda Shaffer believes that they are some important factors which played a key
role in shaping the first phase of energy diplomacy in the Caspian Basin; (1) the
land lock geography of Caspian Basin, (2) the creation of new energy export projects was seen as a means to establish the legitimacy of the new states in a region in
which the US was very active. By encouraging their independence, security, and
stability, the US could thereby increase the mutual benefits to itself and the fledgling post-Soviet states, (3) Russia was weak in the first decade after the Soviet collapse, and possessed relatively little means toward the establishment of new energy
projects in the region, (4) The new states were in dire need of FDI in order to govern
and support minimal public services, and thus eager to provide attractive terms for
investors. In the first phase of Caspian energy diplomacy, the emphasis lay on the
production and export of oil. This was followed by a second phase in which Caspian
2 Literature Review