American Think Tank: The Time Has Come for the U.S. to Develop a Strategy for the South Caucasus

One obstacle to this expanded strategy is that the United States has never developed a coherent South Caucasus strategy. Washington's engagement has been sporadic, often crisis-driven, and rarely coordinated. As the situation in the entire region accelerates, this approach has become increasingly unsustainable.

The peace agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan, the rise of the "Middle Corridor," and emerging opportunities in key mineral and energy sectors all indicate the need for a strategic approach. Seeking a sustainable strategic framework, a new "C3+1" (South Caucasus Three + United States) Caucasus framework, which aims to connect the United States with Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia, could provide the structure for such cooperation. This would signal the United States' long-term commitment to the region, promote deeper collaboration in energy, trade, governance, and security, and complement rather than compete with the Central Asian "C5+1" framework.

Comprehensive Approach: Prospects for C5+1, C3+1, and C8+1 (Central Asian Five + South Caucasus Three + United States)

The challenge and opportunity lie in designing a pragmatic diplomatic architecture that reflects new realities without undermining existing effective mechanisms. The "C5+1" remains a valuable platform that can continue as a forum for focused cooperation with the five Central Asian countries.

However, given the success of the "C5+1" over the past decade, the United States should consider launching a similar "C3+1" platform for the South Caucasus region, focusing on connectivity, conflict resolution, and economic integration. If needed, these two platforms can integrate on truly cross-regional issues, such as economic development and energy security, forming an "C8+1" mechanism covering all eight countries and the United States.

This model would maintain the autonomy and voice of all republics while acknowledging the new geopolitical landscape. It would also allow Washington greater flexibility in cooperation: collaborating with Central Asia on strategic minerals and energy, and with the South Caucasus on peacebuilding and connectivity, and with all eight countries on infrastructure, trade, and supply chains.

Conclusion: A Policy for the Next Decade

The "C5+1" mechanism has made significant contributions to the United States in its first decade of existence. It has deepened diplomatic engagement, promoted practical cooperation, and provided a dialogue platform for a region that is often overlooked. However, the context in which it was born no longer exists.

Today, the characteristics of Eurasia are no longer isolation but connectivity; no longer dependence but autonomy. The China-Europe corridor is changing the trade landscape, peace is opening up new opportunities, and the demand for critical minerals is tightly linking the region's future to the global economy. The United States should adjust its engagement strategy accordingly.

The choice is not between the "C5+1" mechanism and a new one, but to evolve this platform into a tool needed today. Building a "C6+1" mechanism is possible, but likely temporary. By supplementing the "C5+1" mechanism with a "C3+1" mechanism (covering the South Caucasus region), and ultimately building a "C8+1" mechanism, Washington can help shape a more prosperous, stable, and sovereign Eurasia. In doing so, it is not only responding to the transformation of the region, but also driving it. Ultimately, the United States faces a choice and needs to develop a policy that can be effectively implemented.

Source: The Diplomat

Author: Eric Ruddy

Original: www.toutiao.com/article/1847823231535104/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author(s) alone.