| Abstract [eng] |
The question of small states in the academic literature is still treated as marginal, analyzing international relations as a “game of great powers”. But the fact, that majority of states in contemporary international arena can be described as small, proves that analysis of behavior of small states is also important. Even though the security of small state is always in challenge, the number of small states in international arena is not decreasing, but even increasing. That means, that the problem of (in)security of small state is not irresolvable. Even though the question of security of small state is essential and tends to determine other aspects of behavior of small state in international arena, this issue was deeply analyzed only in 1950’-1970’. After the end of Cold War, the nature of international system have been modified in several aspects, and this also affected the question of the security of small state. Nevertheless international conjuncture sets several constrictions on the choices of security of small state, the final combination of choices belongs to the competence of the small state itself. This combination of choices is considered to be the model of security – the complex of long-term political choices in the sphere of foreign and security politics, being fixed in the strategic documents (Concept of national security, Strategy of national security, Strategy of foreign policy, Military strategy) and constantly appearing in political practice. If permanent political practice does not coincides with the principles, fixed in strategic documents, and then the principles, which are evident in political practice, are taken as a background of the model of security. The “model of security” is the original term, introduced in this paper. In literature the term “security policy” is used, but “security policy” emphasizes the partners of foreign policy, at the same time “the model of security” focuses attention on the type of relation between the state and its partners of foreign and security policy. In the period of Cold War small states, located in the intersection of interests of two superpowers, had only two opportunities: to joint one of them (to go to alliance) or not to join (to remain neutral). After the collapse of bipolar international system, one more model of security – complementarism - became possible. The main idea of complementarism can be described as the ability of small state to guarantee it‘s national security, relying not on one, but several „suppliers“ of security. The main question of analysis was why small states, located in similar external conditions, tend to choose different models of security to maintain national security. The region of South Caucasus was chosen as an empirical case of analysis. Nevertheless states of South Caucasus are in maximum similar conditions, they choose different models of security to maintain national security: Georgia – alliance, Armenia – complementarism, Azerbaijan – neutrality. The results of analysis showed, that, in the case studied, two factors influence choice of the models of security: different type of threat to territorial integrity and different strategic resources of the country. The first factor determines the level of flexibility of the model of security – the more intensive the threat to territorial integrity is, the less flexible the model of security will be. The second factor influences the direction of the main vector (or vectors) in the model of security. It is worth to mention, that the results of analysis showed, that internal factors play a huge role in determining the model of security of the state. “Classical” theoretical insights stated that only external factors are those who determine choice of model of security of small state. As the analysis of case of the states of South Caucasus proved, the ignorance of the role of internal factors was one of the main missing points in the studies of security of small states. |
