ABSTRACT

While there is a growing body of research on the role of international organisations (IOs) in regional security governance, relatively little attention has been paid to IO responses to the secessionist conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh (NK), in Abkhazia/South Ossetia in Georgia as well as in Crimea/Eastern Ukraine. This article explores the differences between NATO’s and the CSTO’s responses to the three conflicts. Our findings demonstrate that NATO neglected the conflict in NK which stands in sharp contrast to its active responses to the outbreak of war in Georgia (2008) and Crimea/Eastern Ukraine (2014). The CSTO, however, has largely avoided any engagement in all three cases. Three factors were of crucial importance to explain this variation: the level of regional security institutionalisation, both IOs’ geostrategic threat perceptions as well as both IOs’ mutual perception, hence, their IO-IO (non)relationship.

摘要

尽管关于国际组织在区域安全治理中的作用的研究越来越多，但对IO对纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫（NK），格鲁吉亚的阿布哈兹/南奥塞梯的分裂主义冲突的回应的关注却很少以及克里米亚/东乌克兰。本文探讨了北约与CSTO对这三种冲突的回应之间的差异。我们的发现表明，北约忽略了北约地区的冲突，这与它对格鲁吉亚（2008年）和克里米亚/东欧乌克兰（2014年）爆发战争的积极反应形成鲜明对比。但是，CSTO基本上避免了在所有这三种情况下的任何参与。解释这种差异至关重要的因素有三个：区域安全制度化水平，