Understanding the relations between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan: from defensive realism to constructivist policy in the period of 1991-2024

Аннотация

This paper explores the transition from defensive realism to constructivist policies in Uzbekistan’s approach toward Afghanistan, analysing the driving factors behind this shift and its implications for regional stability. By examining key historical moments, policy decisions, and emerging trends, it provides insight into how Uzbekistan’s foreign policy has adapted to meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century. Keywords: Central Asia, Taliban, Airitom Free Zone, realism, constructivism, Trans-Afghan corridor. Afghanistan through economic cooperation, Introduction: The relationship between Afghanistan infrastructure projects, and cultural exchange, and Uzbekistan has historically been shaped by reflecting a deeper understanding of the geographical proximity, cultural ties, and shared interconnectedness between peace and regional security concerns. Over the decades, this relationship prosperity. has evolved under the influence of shifting geopolitical dynamics, regional challenges, and changes in domestic Theoretical Framework. Defensive Realism policies. Initially characterized by defensive realism, First, before understanding defensive realism, it is where Uzbekistan prioritized securing its borders and necessary to understand the essence of realism. John minimizing external threats from Afghanistan, recent Mearsheimer, one of the most prominent academic years have seen a gradual shift toward a more realists today, cites five fundamental rules of realism constructivist approach, emphasizing cooperation, the international system is anarchic. States, by nature, mutual understanding, and regional integration. have offensive military capabilities and the ability to Defensive realism, rooted in the idea of self- harm or destroy each other. No state can ever be sure preservation and power balancing, guided Uzbekistan’s that another state will not use its offensive military policies toward Afghanistan during periods of capabilities. The primary motive that governs states is instability, particularly following the Soviet withdrawal survival. It argues that states are instrumentally and the rise of the Taliban in the 1990s. Uzbekistan’s rational. Realism is a complex and diverse family of strategies during this time focused on fortifying views, theories, and arguments that are routinely borders, limiting spillover effects of conflict, and applied in international relations. Two main strands of maintaining a defensive posture to safeguard its realism are widely prevalent today. Firstly, offensive sovereignty. However, as regional dynamics have realism mainly advanced by John Mearsheimer, holds evolved, Tashkent has increasingly recognized the that states seek to increase their power because they importance of engaging with Afghanistan through can never be sure that current friendly states will not dialogue, development initiatives, and multilateral oppose them in the future. Another one is defensive frameworks. This shift aligns with constructivist realism, mainly associated with Kenneth Waltz, argues principles, where ideas, norms, and identities play a that rational states in anarchy are primarily concerned central role in shaping foreign policy. Uzbekistan’s with maintaining (not improving) their relative power. renewed approach seeks to foster stability in International Journal Of History And Political Sciences 34 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ijhps International Journal Of History And Political Sciences (ISSN – 2771-2222) Mearsheimer considers offensive realism to be the best as the system of democracy, are accepted by any state or most authentic form of realism. However, most based on its own views and what is suitable for it, and modern realists (and indeed all non-realists) see this as states can determine their position in international an empirical rather than a theoretical matter. Some relations under any circumstances, and if the time states are, in fact, status quo powers. Others are comes, they can change it to another. Alexander revisionists. How many generations can a defensive Wendt, one of the founders of constructivism, in his realist world of status quo great powers (safe from book called “Anarchy is What States Make of it: The revisionist states that seek to continually improve their Social Construction of Power Politics”, explains the positions) develop (for example, in Europe over the anarchic nature of the international system as a social century following Napoleon’s defeat in 1815)? Here, it construction of states and lists several of its is shown that defensive realism emphasizes the state manifestations. In this, criticizing realism and as the primary and attempts to minimize obstacles in liberalism, they consider it wrong to see anarchy as a an anarchic international system. It advocates permanent and unchanging state. Constructivism, on balancing strategies that emphasize the maximum the other hand, explains anarchy as a problem that is power of the dominant powers w