Introduction
It seems difficult to analyze democratic transition from the standpoint of international dimension both theoretically and practically because not so much literatures that discuss about what the external environment actually is and how it might contribute to domestic change (Cavatorta 2005). However, it does not mean that international context will be ignored in the analysis process because international factors might have impacts on the transition process through their connections with domestic actors particularly in terms of distribution of power and resources, which in turn have effect on how they will act (Cavatorta 2005). One thing to remember is a number of democratic students have engaged in the study of democratization by including international factors but their conclusion explains that domestic factors still dominate the pattern of development of a transition (Cavatorta 2005).
In understanding a detailed global politics, in this sense transition process, a coherent political trajectory should be assessed carefully such as the existing institutions and enduring legacies within a state, the quality of leadership, and other impetus from domestic and international political forces and events (Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011). International context should be understood as a mixture of international structure and agency in which countries experience such as structured international pressure, policies adopted by the leading nation-states in the system, and external shocks that affect domestic bargaining process (Cavatorta 2005).
During the transition process, domestic actors will react to adapt with internal circumstances in order to improve their position as well as be aware towards external actions, at the same time, international actors may change their policies towards domestic actors (Cavatorta 2005). In order to achieve interests, both international actors and states and the effects of its actions still rely on power for instance the spread of democratic principles are not primarily about democracy but security as well (Cavatorta 2005).
A pivotal social change in world politics is denoted by the transformation of the government system from authoritarian regimes to democratic ones (Schwartzman 1998). The concept of transition is not only a process of regime change but also an opening of economic faucet that are related to each other (Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011). Globalization is frequently regarded as an opportunity to mobilize democratization from below in order to achieve citizenship rights through social movement (Grugel 2003). Globalization contributes to the spread of liberal notions and democratic reforms throughout the world (Grugel 2003). Moreover, global transformations that triggered by democratization are relatively recent contribution in the study of politics (Grugel 2003).
The process of transition in the Arab world is marked by the new emergence of Islamist parties that have a crucial resonance for international community, particularly the West, both at decision-making policy and normative levels (Cavatorta 2005). There is a substantial gap between the levels of political freedom and economic development in Arab countries particularly in terms of democratically elected government (Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011). Economic liberalization allows transferring economic resources that has been dominated by the state elites to private sector, which then can spark modernization for instance, the development of social class and personal interests (Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011).
This essay will be divided into four parts. The first part is introduction that provides a general overview about international phenomena and transition process. Subsequently, global conditions that shaped transition process in the former authoritarian countries will be analyzed in the following section. The third section is case studies in which global process has affected transition in particular countries. The last part of the essay is conclusion that contains summary from the whole discussion.
Transition to democracy had begun in the 1980s in several countries in Latin America and in Eastern Europe, Asia, and African continent in the 1990s, which later known as third wave of democracy (Schwartzman 1998). Democracy is the best method to reach stability and national security (Cavatorta 2005).
Radical transformation has substantial consequences internationally as new government may have different guidelines from its predecessor and impinge on the interests of its neighboring countries and other international actors in unpredicted manners (Cavatorta 2005).
In the perspective of democracy, people should have faith and believe that they possess inalienable rights to determine what the best for them and have commitment that all people are essentially equal as well as ensuring that all forms of human government should reflect to this fundamental conception (Grugel 2003). One possible reason why democracy should be uphold is because the relationship between the notion of equal rights and citizenship that yearn a free and fair election in which cannot be found in despotic authoritarian states (Grugel 2003). Democracy without a thorough role of citizens is regarded as a continuation of elite rule and can undermines human development (Grugel 2003 and Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011). On the one hand, democracy can spark a robust trade and capital but on the other hand, economic openness not necessarily underpins democracy (Milner and Mukherjee 2009). (Milner and Mukherjee 2009).
Democratic process not only encompasses widespread participation of majorities in decision-making but it must be used for achieving social and economic justice (Schwartzman 1998). As Samuel Huntington explained that global atmosphere of democracy operates through deployment, demonstration effect, and snowballing, hence when it is transmitted across the globe, it may trigger effect elsewhere because countries may consider that democratization as solution of a problem (Schwartzman 1998). Global economic development in various fields can promotes global democratization such as technological innovations in communication and transportation that accompanied by global capitalism, generating professional workers and increasing the position of middle class worker due to the effect of industrialization, and mitigating economic gap between industrialized and non-industrialized countries (Schwartzman 1998).
As Craig Murphy argues that the present global governance is undemocratic, morally insufficient and inefficient due to the inability of the poor developing world to demand transfer resources from the wealth-developed world (Grugel 2003). Global governance agencies such as World Trade Organization (WTO) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) seem unable to do more to overcome world social problem or to guarantee the conditions for global peace and democracy because they are themselves is a source of global inequality that contribute to the increasing numbers of poor countries (Grugel 2003).
Transition Process In Former Authoritarian Countries
This section will discuss about transition process in two different former authoritarian countries namely Morocco and Iraq.
Morocco
World economic crisis in the early 1980s sparked moves toward economic and political liberalization around the world (Cavatorta 2005). The crisis came at a time of high external debt that made Morocco underwent a declining in GDP, undermining monetary and financial balances, and soaring unemployment (Cavatorta 2005). As Azzedine Layachi accounts that Morocco was the first country in North Africa that utilized Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) with the aim of recovering the economy and social problems (Cavatorta 2005). However, the decision to reform the political system was mainly domestic field and was based on the objective to retrieve legitimacy for the regime (Cavatorta 2005). The EU refrained not to push Morocco for implementing real democratic changes instead accentuating superficial democratic gesture aimed at international public opinion (Cavatorta 2005).
Iraq
Military invasion to Iraq purportedly was addressed to make the country more democratic (Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011). High levels of incomes particularly from crude oil mineral resources become an obstacle of democratization in Middle Eastern countries (Tetreault, Kapiszewski, and Okruhlik 2011). The religious parties of Shi’ite attempts to implement Islamic law and reinforce Islamic norms of behavior throughout the country (Cole 2011). Iraqi communities consist of Shi’ite Arabs in the south that dominates the population at about 60 percent, Sunni Arabs in the center north, and Kurds/Turkmen in the farther north in which accounted for 17 percent respectively (Cole 2011).
After 2003, Iraq involved a new page in its political and social life. It is open to multiparty politics, media diversity, union life and openness to the world market and competition. Political, social, economic monopoly of a single party has become the past. Indeed, the absolute monopoly of power by authoritarian regimes and dictatorships for a long time left many diseases and injuries and the impurities of the political environment and social and cultural development in Iraq. This has had adverse effects on culture and bad behavior of Iraqi politics. The culture of violence, exclusion and physical and intellectual tyranny are the current culture in Iraqi society. It is widely practiced in the family, school, and other Iraqi institutions. And the use of violence in Iraq often used as a way to solve problems. Economically, Saddam's regime has brought the country to its knees. Thirty-five years of economic mismanagement, two major wars against Iran and Kuwait, and twelve years of sanctions have weakened the entire infrastructure of the country. The departure of the creation of the Iraqi state is not the result of a consent of the people, "the borders of Iraq, the result of one force ratio of the victorious powers in 1918, mainly the United Kingdom and France envelop linguistic and religious heterogeneous enough together that enmities, rivalries, ancient hostilities and exasperate it even better undermine the foundations of the rule of law that can be exploited or manipulated by external powers". These three antagonistic communities are not ready to meet within a nation state, and forget their identities for Sunni Arab Iraq. King Faisal, I did not hide this feeling 'I say that my heart is full of sorrow, and I believe that there is still not in Iraq for the Iraqi people. It is the country that I took upon myself the task of composition. "
The question is that the absolute monopoly of Ba'athist (Sunni Arabian nationalism) from Iraq to peaceful conducted several internal attempts, sometimes as violent, authoritarian dictatorship to reform the system in power. But they confront an iron fist of Saddam's regime. So a solution by an external actor will be welcome, even if there are questions about the legality and legitimacy of this act. To change an authoritarian regime with a democracy that meets and respect cultural and religious ethnic diversity of the Iraqi people (Romano and Gurses, 2011).
With the coming to power of the Bush II administration, and in the wake of reactions to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and the "war on terror" launched by President Bush. Iraq (which until now has not been connected to the attacks of 11 September), was charged with Iran and North Korea, to be part of the "Axis of Evil."
In support of the 1441 Security Council, adopted on 8 November 2002 the United States claims the material breach of the resolution by Iraq that has an armed operation necessary to maintain peace and deter Saddam Hussein. But France opposed the US plan threatens to use its veto. So the United States abandoned the idea of getting the approval of the United Nations when it was clear that a resolution would never vote.
While an internal green light (see obligation) exists for the Bush administration to change the Iraqi regime and ousted the jurisdiction of Saddam by the "Iraq Liberation Act" law of 1998, finally Bush issued an ultimatum to the Iraq March 17, 2003: "All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end. Saddam Hussein and his son must leave Iraq gifts forty-eight hours. Their refusal to do so will result in an armed conflict that has a start time of our choosing, for their own safety, all foreign nationals, including journalists and inspectors, should leave Iraq immediately". The "Iraqi Freedom" operation began on 20 March 2003 by the United States and ended On 18 December 2011 with the withdrawal of the last US troops. The operation led to the quick defeat of the Iraqi army and the regime fell. The completion of the fighting officially declared on 1 May 2003 by President George W. Bush under the banner Mission accomplished. The main problem is that a system can be changed by force. But is that democracy can install by force, or more precisely by the occupation? what does the consequence of a democracy prevail in a multi-ethnic and confessional society like Iraq? is that the American intervention managed to establish a democratic system in Iraq? the legitimacy of political actors led to the occupation of the suitcase to establish a democratic system?
The process of constitutional transition in Iraq
The constitutional process in Iraq after 2003 is the initiative of the Coalition Provisional Authority headed by American Paul Bremer following its resolution July 13, 2003, to establish the Transitional Government Council (SGC) in 25 members. Members are most sects and political, religious and ethnic in Iraq. The coalition provisional authority has defined the functions and responsibilities of CGT. The most significant were the appointment of interim ministers and the possibility of appointing a preparatory constitutional committee responsible for drafting a new constitution for Iraq. But soon the majority of people opposes this initiative and refuses a constitution by an unelected council and imposed by the occupation. At the request of Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the UN expert analyzes the situation and will reach a compromise solution to the CGT and the Coalition Authority. Writing a Basic Law before the elections provided that only serve to regulate the transition and to take the name "transitional Administrative Law" and not the constitution. This law will regulate the political process and the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqi people still in force until the issuance of the Permanent Constitution of Iraq 15 October 2005. The United Nations has supported this initiative and in particular, the Security Council in its resolution (1546) Adopted unanimously June 8, 2004, to determine and legitimized the transitional period in Iraq, acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of United Nations as follows: In (paragraph 2) Notes with satisfaction that, by 30 June 2004 the occupation will end, and that Iraq will reassert its full sovereignty; And (paragraph 4, c) providing for: The holding of democratic direct elections, before 31 December 2004 if possible and in any event 31 January 2005 at the latest, to the Transitional National Assembly, which tasks will include forming a transitional Government of Iraq and drafting a permanent constitution, leading to the formation, on 31 December 2005 at the latest of a government elected in accordance with that constitution. "
One effect the first Iraqi elections took place on 30 January 2005 aimed to elect the 275 members of the Transitional Iraqi National Assembly in order to draft a final constitution of Iraq, following the draft constitution adopted by this meeting will be a referendum in October 2005. However, the problem faced by this election is the lack of Sunni representation in the decision to boycott the elections and also linked to the fear of violence and the threat of terrorism. So there is a block of 48% of Shiites and a block of 27% Kurdish. To overcome this obstacle and solution to the lack of various represent the National Assembly decided to create a constitutional committee of 71 members (elected and unelected) is composed as follows (Shiite 28, 15 Kurdish, Sunni 15, 8 liberal and left 5 minority) to prepare a formal proposal for permanent Iraqi constitution by 15 August 2005 and then publish the project to the Iraqi people for two months, to take that knowledge and discuss the content. This project was put to a referendum October 15, 2005, and had received the support of 78.59 voters. As there is another vision also that the political process in Iraq since 2003 is strengthened and imposed by foreign forces and US occupation. The democratic transition is artificial processes. The different stages of the transition process appear as theoretical deadlines that meet first in a purely external calendar including the US and the constitution is written under the control of US, the true transitional period in Iraq begins after total retirement American troops in 2011. in reality, one can notice that the constitutional transition in Iraq does not go as it should, it's done so exceptionally.
The barriers that disabled constitutional transition in Iraq
The insecurity has played a crucial role in the way the constitutional transition is made. For the order number 1 of the coalition authority on 16 May 2003, P. Bremer said the demobilization of Baath party and his advocate. Thus, the army, the various security forces and Iraqi intelligence without an accompanying measure. This policy eventually completed the complete disorganization of the political and administrative system of the country. This decision directly hit nearly 500 000 people (and their extended families), suddenly prohibited employment in the public sector. This purge justified the crimes and abuses committed under the former regime in a society where membership in the Baath party was essential (to access scholarships, diplomas, and jobs in the public service), irrespective of Community origin. So these measures appear to be an unjustified collective punishment and cause swelling (Whitehead, 2009). Weapons still circulate freely and cheaply. This factor will fuel the chronic violence and promote the tipping some in the opposition, crime or armed insurrection. P. Bremer admitted in his televised interview: "the biggest mistakes committed while in office to let debaathification process (lustration law) in the hands of certain political groups, making it a means of settling political scores close."In addition to the politician have expanded the process of card that includes only 1% of the regime at the base," the law has served to resign 11000 teach that n ' has nothing to do with the initial of the law." This is one of the main reasons for the ethnic war in 2004 and 2005, and until today the law known as being against the Sunnis. The reason they ask to ignore this law through demonstration, leading to sometimes violent confrontation. The insecurity has also prevented the international community, or another actor to take its share of responsibility to help Iraq in its democratic transition. This explains why the end of the occupation did not involve a large investment of the international community, the UN could not because of security conditions, play the crucial, vital or motor provided by resolutions 1546 the security Council, especially after the attack that claimed the lives of sending special UN in Baghdad on 19 August 2003, and the Secretary General has remained very cautious about the commitment of his organization, it was therefore reduced to a mission of humanitarian assistance mainly from Amman and Kuwait City, with a total of 33 agencies, funds, and programs of the UN system. Similarly, the EU limit their action to mere training missions, strictly conditioned by the security situation. These missions are therefore conducted mainly outside Iraq. This is the case of the mission of the European Union (EUJUST Lex), security and the rule of law, launched by the European Council in February 2005.
The absence of a national consensus: During the democratic transition, the state changes from an authoritarian or dictatorial regime to a democratic regime that respects fundamental rights. In this passage national consensus is the spine, it is reflected by the agreement of all political and social forces of the transitional process, or the hands of a substantial majority. It is the essential condition of peaceful political change towards democracy. The prerequisite for any democratic transition was at the center of the occupation of players democratic transitions. Without him, the transition to democracy will be difficult, sometimes even impossible. Before the fall of the Saddam regime, two national conferences held between the Iraqi opposition. First, it's placed in the protected area of Kurdistan in Salah al-Din in the fall of 1992 when this area becomes the basis for reunification and refuge of all opponents of Saddam. Make a commitment to the future of the political system in Iraq, the conference members present agree on federalism, reform of the army and justice, etc. And strengthen the conference by the Second Congress in London in 2002 to adopt the strategy of managing the post-Saddam period. Outside the conference is conducted under the influence of the Kurds and Shiites mainly. Although these two parts represent about 70-80% of the Iraqi population, but reduced the presence or absence of the Sunnis in these conferences have had negative consequences on the post-Saddam period. Iraq is a country that contains three main communities (Kurdish-Shiite-Sunni) without a consensus among the three, we cannot expect the national consensus. Why after the fall of Saddam, Sunnis do not participate in the first legislative election and the referendum boycotted the new permanent constitution. The result is the discontent of Sunnis and their permanent application for review of the constitution and refuses the beginning of the federal system (Neep, 2003). The minimum consensus existed between the opposition forces was due to American pressure and the coalition authority. Paul Bremer in his book explains very well the state of consensus between the main Iraqi forces should take responsibility for the administration and management of Iraq "after arriving in Baghdad on 26 May 2003, and my first meeting with the Iraqi elite Group of 7, it took twenty minutes to agree on a person to them, who speak in a press conference with me. I understood the mission will be very difficult and skirts! "However, even with the adoption of the new constitution in Iraq, the country is still in the very difficult period of democratic consolidation. The political transition has absolutely needed a catching up by social transition also (Sinkler, 2006).
The negative impact of the occupation on the democratic transition process in Iraq
The American intervention in Iraq gave apparition concept of the superiority of American democracy as being the democracy of other nations, even above the norm and international law. Bypassing the international community by false pretense to achieve its interest in a specific place in the world President Bush told the UN: "We will use the power of our values to develop a free and prosperous world." But for what reason, American democracy should be higher than the other democracies? Who dares to say, what I do is the true democracy, but not others. So the others are forced to follow me. If they do not follow me willingly, I imposed by force. And the biggest paradox of this logic promoted for freedom and democracy by occupation. At the same time the political player who arrived in the suitcase of force involved is not very legitimate in the eyes of the people. Because most of them do not experience on land, they just evident returned from a lanyard life in exile in Europe or the United States or elsewhere (Selim, 2012). Furthermore, their presence is sometimes caricatured, they are not the real decision maker. Their presence has served to disguise the occupation force. The coalition authority with his creation directly assured the management of Iraq after the fall of Saddam and indirectly influenced the political life and the direction in which Iraq must borrow. The election and the drafting of the constitution and even the composition of the transitional government were controlled by the Americans. That there was not hidden by P. Bremer during his interview with the Washington Post in 2003: "I am not against the elections, but I want it (Iraqi) to do so they take account our interests." and it returns clearly inconsistent with the stated objective by the Bush administration to establish a sovereign and stable Iraqi government. Even the legal system has not escaped the negative impact of this intervention (Saunavaara, 2013). The establishment of the Special Criminal Court is the claim of the victims of the regime to try genocide crimes against humanity committed by the most important members of the Baath party, including Saddam Hussein. But what is annoying is the status of this Tribunal created by P. Bremer and the occupation authority after surgery, October 10, 2003, at Law No. 1 of the CGT, who was under the Authority the coalition. What made a lot of noise on the legitimacy of the court, as it is created by the occupation (Jeffrey, 2007). In addition, several human rights organizations have expressed concern, denouncing the limits of the rights of defense. "We have serious concerns about the fact that the court does not guarantee a fair trial in accordance with international law." Until now the Iraqi legal system could not get to his feet, permanent political influence on judicial trial. During last legislative election in 2010, the Sunni list Al-Iraqi chaired by Iyad Alawi, won the largest number of seats in parliament (92 seats), in this case "the President of the Republic supports the candidate of the parliamentary majority group formation of the Council of Ministers within fifteen days from the date of the election of the President of the Republic" but the Supreme judicial Council made the decision to give the right to Al-Maliki Prime Minister come out (90 seats) being the candidate compound again to the government (Ghai, Lattimer and Said, 2003).
The need for social transition, to complete the transition to democracy
One priority of the people is to release as quickly from a dictatorial regime that steals their fundamental right policy but also to have a better social life than before. The majority of the population hoped intervention to topple Saddam Hussein and have improved their daily lives. But the relief of the end of oppression quickly turned pragmatic wait. This has quickly given way to a sense of humiliation against a foreign presence quickly perceived as occupying. Then with the disorder and the increasing insecurity, this feeling becomes dull anger. The frustrations of years of oppression and sanctions are now fueled by daily access to electricity problems, drinking water, gasoline in a safe environment increasingly degraded (Munson, 2009). The Iraqi state, in effect, disappeared along with Saddam Hussein and since he could not rise from the ashes. The existence of the phenomenon known as the distribution, has further deepened over the tearing Iraqi society. At each election, Iraqis expect improving their life and minimum need of essential public services such as security, health, education, etc. they will be the victim of a lanyard trading period for a government can be composed or position can be addressed. The last legislative elections were held in March 2010. It took until December to find a compromise to share the position and appoint ministers. Currently, the government is weak, corrupt, seat new patronage networks to nepotism. Iraqi society in the power feeds in part on old hierarchies (tribal, religious legitimacy), this democratic era also did not lead the company into the processing machine. This explains the current society is still under the influence of tribal and religious classic. Even politicians take this situation and sometimes receive their order in a tent or a tribal leader in a mosque. The opening on individualism and women's rights are issues that have still needed much work. The advancement of the political and economic sector should be parallel with the social sector. Because the political transition will be slow, if the social transition does not accompany this process (Dodge, 2005).
Conclusion:
Democracy is not a prepared dish, which can be carried over and applied in the same way. A country may be help or support to find the right path and to reach democracy. But in no way democracy and how to live cannot be imposed on a country without taking into account the specificity of this country. The United States did not have a concrete plan for the post-Saddam period. Only after the fall of the regime the concept of nation building and democratization appeared. Because the main reason for the intervention was assumed by Paul Wolfowitz, when was asked about the difference in treatment between Iraq and North Korea (country of the axis of evil): "Let's simply. The biggest difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq: the country swimming in a sea of oil" (Barakat, 2005). For bureaucratic reasons, the problem is fixed on weapons of mass destruction, because it was the only ground on which everyone could agree. Despite the progress and relative success in the democratization process in Iraq, but there are challenges and obstacles facing democracy, which affect the future of the political experience of the nascent democracy in Iraq. These barriers can lead to political tensions. The situation needs reconciliation among political parties to resolve political crises First, eliminating the phenomenon of terrorism and violence, fight against corruption and radical reform of the corrupt administration, etc. Democratic transition and construction need the will of the responsive and efficient public conscience in the practice of democracy. Iraqi women had the opportunity to have a permanent constitution after 40 years of the interim constitution. It is a constitution that takes diversity and respects the specificity of the Iraqi people. Theoretically with this permanent constitution, Iraq had overcome the "transition period" in 2005. The period of consolidation is taking a simple change the constitution on paper. It is now, after the withdrawal of US troops begins experiencing for Iraqi women, if they can live together in peace and spend their transition period only to an agreement between them to achieve the rule of law. Yet the reality is not so optimistic.
Works cited
Barakat, S. (2005). Post-Saddam Iraq: deconstructing a regime, reconstructing a nation. Third World Quarterly, 26(4-5), pp.571-591.
Cavatorta, F. (2005). The International Context of Morocco’s Stalled Democratization. Democratization, 12(4), 548-566. Available from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13510340500226101 [Accessed 10 May 2016].
Dodge, T. (2005). Chapter one: Order and violence in post-Saddam Iraq. The Adelphi Papers, 45(372), pp.9-23.
Ghai, Y., Lattimer, M. and Said, Y. (2003). Building democracy in Iraq. London: MRG International.
Grugel, J. (2003). Democratisation Studies Globalisation: The Coming Of Age Of A Paradigm. British Journal of Politics and International Studies, 5(2), 258-283. Available from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-856X.00106/epdf [Accessed 10 May 2016].
Jeffrey, A. (2007). The politics of 'democratization': Lessons from Bosnia and Iraq. RRIP, 14(3), pp. 444-466.
Munson, P. (2009). Iraq in transition. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books.
Neep, D. (2003). The impact of war in Iraq: Democratization or destabilization of the Middle East?. The RUSI Journal, 148(2), pp.10-15.
Romano, D. and Gurses, M. (2011). Conflict, democratization, and the Kurds in the Middle East.
Saunavaara, J. (2013). Enforced democratization in Japan: lessons for Iraq and Afghanistan. Democratization, 21(6), pp.1074-1090.
Selim, G. (2012). The impact of post-Saddam Iraq on the cause of democratization in the Arab world. International Journal of Contemporary Iraqi Studies, 6(1), pp.53-87.
Sinkler, A. (2006). Iraq. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press.
Whitehead, L. (2009). Losing ‘the Force’? The ‘Dark Side’ of democratization after Iraq. Democratization, 16(2), pp.215-242.
Schwartzman, K.C. (1998). Globalization and Democracy. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 159-181. Available from http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.159 [Accessed 10 May 2016].
Bibliography
Blank, S. (2007). U.S. interests in Central Asia and the challenges to them. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College.
Central Asia and the Caucasus. (1998). Luleo, Sweden: The Center.
Dawisha, K. and Parrott, B. (1997). Conflict, cleavage, and change in Central Asia and the Caucasus. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Monitoring Environmental Expenditure in Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia. (2006). OECD Papers, 5(12), pp.1-146.
Peimani, H. (2009). Conflict and security in Central Asia and the Caucasus. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO.
