No abstract

No abstract

The article traces the chronology of the political interactions between the U.S. and Kazakhstan in the 1990s. Utilizing factual information and official sources the authors assess the genesis and evolution of the relationship between two countries. The basis for the development of bilateral cooperation was nuclear disarmament and extensive cooperation in the energy sphere. Despite political obstacles in the interaction between countries in the late 1990s the U.S. always held Kazakhstan in high regard as a gateway into the Central Asian region. Likewise, Kazakhstan continues to perceive Washington as one of the most important extraregional power that supports its economic development and helps keep the geopolitical balance.

This article presents a chronological overview of Kazakh-American relation dynamics in the period of G. Bush Jr. and Obama’s administrations – periods with principally varying perspectives on the region including Kazakhstan. The authors have aimed at showcasing the change in the priorities of the American foreign policy in relation to Kazakhstan – from a partner in war against terrorism, joint oil projects to the role of a transitionary state between the U.S. and Afghanistan. At the same time, it is not appropriate to claim that Kazakhstan was merely participating in bilateral relations. The authors highlight dividends that Kazakhstan received as a result of collaborating with Washington.

The role of international organizations becomes especially acute when nation-states cannot establish consensus with regard to local, regional and global issues. Considering that international organizations are made up of members with varying power dynamics, there is often criticism that they represent the interests of power players and not a true consensus-building platform that would enable solving collective issues. The schools of realism and neoliberalism in the framework of International Relations attribute various roles to international organizations (IOs); while the first regard them as mere instruments of nation-states, the latter view them as crucial international players with autonomous status. This article critically evaluates various issues related to the efficiency and design of international institutions in the framework of this interparadigm debate and with consideration of the UN as a prime example. The analysis illustrates that further research in the field of IOs is imperative for both theoretical model-building as well as practical developments in the field. Finding workable models is a vital concern for all international organizations, regardless of their purpose, size and origin.