Rising Powers and Conflict Management in Central Asia
Lead Research Organisation:
UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
Department Name: Politics
Abstract
Since the end of the Cold War, most international responses to conflict have been governed by a broadly liberal set of norms, promoted by Western states, which linked conflict management to international intervention, democratisation and liberal state-building. Since the early 21st century, however, some of these norms -related to sovereignty in particular - have been sharply contested by Russia, China and other Rising Powers, in relation to successive internal conflicts in Sudan, Sri Lanka, Libya, Syria and others.
This process of norm contestation has also taken place in the region of Central Asia, where western notions of 'liberal peacebuilding' have often been rejected or substantially adapted by local elites, who have tended to favour the 'non-liberal' policies of the neighbouring states of China or Russia to maintain regime security. Such policies have tended to use authoritarian forms of conflict management to control outbreaks of violence, and have often been criticised by Western states. Rising Powers in the region have also differed markedly from many Western actors in their analysis of the causes of conflict in the region.
Some analysts have viewed this apparent competition between Russia, China and the West in Central Asia through the realist lens of a new 'Great Game'. This project takes a more critical and productive approach to these contestations of conflict-related norms, analysing the ways in which divergent discourses of conflict management are promoted, adapted and localised by Central Asians themselves. In this way, it will help to explain why Western approaches to conflict in the region, through the EU, bilateral relations or organisations such as the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, have often been rejected or undermined by local approaches to conflict management.
The project focuses in particular on three incidents of armed conflict- a rebellion against the government in Andijon, Uzbekistan, inter-ethnic violence in Osh, Kyrgyzstan, and armed rebellion in the Rasht valley of Tajikistan. In each case the international responses were complex and partly divergent along traditional lines of geopolitical competition. The project will conduct interviews in London, Beijing and Moscow with policy-makers, academics and NGOs, to assess the ways in which policymakers framed and understood these conflict situations. Fieldwork in Central Asia will assess local views in Osh and Rasht regions, both of the nature of the conflict, but also of the divergent international responses.
The project aims to explain the apparent failure of Western approaches to conflict management to gain traction in Central Asia, and will contrast those approaches with those promoted by Russia and China, both bilaterally, and through regional organisations. The project will be designed to have a significant impact, both in academic terms and in policy terms, by engaging closely with partners engaged in influencing or making policymaking in the UK, China and Russia. The project will aim to encourage improved understandings of such divergent approaches to conflict management with the aim of more effective responses to conflict in the region, in the context of more cooperative relationships between Rising Powers and the West.
This process of norm contestation has also taken place in the region of Central Asia, where western notions of 'liberal peacebuilding' have often been rejected or substantially adapted by local elites, who have tended to favour the 'non-liberal' policies of the neighbouring states of China or Russia to maintain regime security. Such policies have tended to use authoritarian forms of conflict management to control outbreaks of violence, and have often been criticised by Western states. Rising Powers in the region have also differed markedly from many Western actors in their analysis of the causes of conflict in the region.
Some analysts have viewed this apparent competition between Russia, China and the West in Central Asia through the realist lens of a new 'Great Game'. This project takes a more critical and productive approach to these contestations of conflict-related norms, analysing the ways in which divergent discourses of conflict management are promoted, adapted and localised by Central Asians themselves. In this way, it will help to explain why Western approaches to conflict in the region, through the EU, bilateral relations or organisations such as the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, have often been rejected or undermined by local approaches to conflict management.
The project focuses in particular on three incidents of armed conflict- a rebellion against the government in Andijon, Uzbekistan, inter-ethnic violence in Osh, Kyrgyzstan, and armed rebellion in the Rasht valley of Tajikistan. In each case the international responses were complex and partly divergent along traditional lines of geopolitical competition. The project will conduct interviews in London, Beijing and Moscow with policy-makers, academics and NGOs, to assess the ways in which policymakers framed and understood these conflict situations. Fieldwork in Central Asia will assess local views in Osh and Rasht regions, both of the nature of the conflict, but also of the divergent international responses.
The project aims to explain the apparent failure of Western approaches to conflict management to gain traction in Central Asia, and will contrast those approaches with those promoted by Russia and China, both bilaterally, and through regional organisations. The project will be designed to have a significant impact, both in academic terms and in policy terms, by engaging closely with partners engaged in influencing or making policymaking in the UK, China and Russia. The project will aim to encourage improved understandings of such divergent approaches to conflict management with the aim of more effective responses to conflict in the region, in the context of more cooperative relationships between Rising Powers and the West.
Planned Impact
1. Importance
This research project is designed to have a significant impact on policy discussions and outcomes, both in the UK and internationally. The project's engagement with the role of 'Rising Powers' in global governance and conflict management has implications for broader international policy concerns, beyond the case-study region of Central Asia.
2. Significance for UK foreign and development policies
The project is particularly relevant for UK and other EU government and non-government bodies engaged in conflict resolution and prevention. The UK government has taken a lead internationally on new approaches to conflict resolution, both directly and through funding UK-based NGOs. This project will encourage an informed discussion to emerge with Russian, Chinese and Central Asian actors about divergent approaches to conflict, attempting to improve mutual understanding of different approaches to preventing and responding to conflict in a region of potential strategic competition.
3. Impact built into research design
Impact will be integral to the design of the project and should be ensured by the participation as co-investigator of the NGO, Saferworld. An initial workshop in the UK at the beginning of the project, involving key individuals in UK government bodies and UK-based NGOs engaged with conflict issues, will be used to focus and refine the project's methods for achieving impact. Representatives from the UK Government, British-based NGOs, EU institutions, other national development agencies, foreign ministries and international NGOs, will be engaged through workshops and in the process of research in the Central Asian states.
4. Ongoing involvement of policy actors
To maintain engagement with policy-makers throughout the project, we will invite several representatives of the policy community to be members of an International Advisory Board (IAB) that would exist during the project's duration. The IAB will include at least one representative from Russia, China and Central Asia, in addition to UK government and non-government representation.
5. Impact on rising powers and Central Asia
Initial engagement with UK and EU actors will be accompanied by early engagement with partners in China and Russia, building on existing links and also developing new channels for dialogue. Two workshops are built into the design of the project in each of Beijing and Moscow during the course of the project, in partnership with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (Beijing), the School of Political Science of Tongji University (Shanghai) and the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow), and overseen by Saferworld, which already has significant involvement in both countries. We will engage with both government and non-government representatives in both countries at these events.
The project will focus particular attention on local stakeholders, including government and non-government actors and local communities in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. We will ensure that the concept of the project and its outputs are disseminated locally to interested parties through workshops in the region. We will also engage with diplomatic representatives of the three countries in the UK. Attention will be paid to the potential political sensitivities of the project, but we will also seek robust engagement with policymakers and academics from all countries in these fields.
6. Outputs for impact
In addition to academic outputs, we will produce briefing documents and policy papers aimed at a non-academic audience, to summarise the policy implications of the project. These will be presented at final workshops in UK, Russia, China and Central Asia, and distributed on a dedicated website, which will be updated regularly. The Saferworld report on China and conflict management in Central Asia will be published in three languages, and launched at Beijing, London and Moscow workshops
This research project is designed to have a significant impact on policy discussions and outcomes, both in the UK and internationally. The project's engagement with the role of 'Rising Powers' in global governance and conflict management has implications for broader international policy concerns, beyond the case-study region of Central Asia.
2. Significance for UK foreign and development policies
The project is particularly relevant for UK and other EU government and non-government bodies engaged in conflict resolution and prevention. The UK government has taken a lead internationally on new approaches to conflict resolution, both directly and through funding UK-based NGOs. This project will encourage an informed discussion to emerge with Russian, Chinese and Central Asian actors about divergent approaches to conflict, attempting to improve mutual understanding of different approaches to preventing and responding to conflict in a region of potential strategic competition.
3. Impact built into research design
Impact will be integral to the design of the project and should be ensured by the participation as co-investigator of the NGO, Saferworld. An initial workshop in the UK at the beginning of the project, involving key individuals in UK government bodies and UK-based NGOs engaged with conflict issues, will be used to focus and refine the project's methods for achieving impact. Representatives from the UK Government, British-based NGOs, EU institutions, other national development agencies, foreign ministries and international NGOs, will be engaged through workshops and in the process of research in the Central Asian states.
4. Ongoing involvement of policy actors
To maintain engagement with policy-makers throughout the project, we will invite several representatives of the policy community to be members of an International Advisory Board (IAB) that would exist during the project's duration. The IAB will include at least one representative from Russia, China and Central Asia, in addition to UK government and non-government representation.
5. Impact on rising powers and Central Asia
Initial engagement with UK and EU actors will be accompanied by early engagement with partners in China and Russia, building on existing links and also developing new channels for dialogue. Two workshops are built into the design of the project in each of Beijing and Moscow during the course of the project, in partnership with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (Beijing), the School of Political Science of Tongji University (Shanghai) and the Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow), and overseen by Saferworld, which already has significant involvement in both countries. We will engage with both government and non-government representatives in both countries at these events.
The project will focus particular attention on local stakeholders, including government and non-government actors and local communities in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. We will ensure that the concept of the project and its outputs are disseminated locally to interested parties through workshops in the region. We will also engage with diplomatic representatives of the three countries in the UK. Attention will be paid to the potential political sensitivities of the project, but we will also seek robust engagement with policymakers and academics from all countries in these fields.
6. Outputs for impact
In addition to academic outputs, we will produce briefing documents and policy papers aimed at a non-academic audience, to summarise the policy implications of the project. These will be presented at final workshops in UK, Russia, China and Central Asia, and distributed on a dedicated website, which will be updated regularly. The Saferworld report on China and conflict management in Central Asia will be published in three languages, and launched at Beijing, London and Moscow workshops
Publications
Gullette D
(2018)
The affective politics of sovereignty: reflecting on the 2010 conflict in Kyrgyzstan
in Nationalities Papers
Heathershaw J
(2013)
Towards better theories of peacebuilding: beyond the liberal peace debate
in Peacebuilding
Heathershaw J
(2017)
Paradox of Power: Logics of State Weakness in Eurasia
Heathershaw J
(2019)
Centred discourse, decentred practice: the relational production of Russian and Chinese 'rising' power in Central Asia
in Third World Quarterly
Heathershaw J
(2015)
Offshore Central Asia: an introduction
in Central Asian Survey
Heathershaw, J
(2014)
Ethnographies of the State in Central Asia: Performing Politics
Heathershaw, J.D.
(2014)
The Myth of Post-Soviet Muslim Radicalization in the Central Asian Republic
Ismailbekova A
(2020)
Peace in the Family is the Basis of Peace in the Country: How Women Contribute to Local Peace in Southern Kyrgyzstan
in Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding
Khamidov A
(2018)
Bottom-up peacekeeping in southern Kyrgyzstan: how local actors managed to prevent the spread of violence from Osh/Jalal-Abad to Aravan, June 2010
in Nationalities Papers
Lemon E
(2014)
Mediating the Conflict in the Rasht Valley, Tajikistan The Hegemonic Narrative and Anti-Hegemonic Challenges
in Central Asian Affairs
| Description | 1. Conflict management in Central Asia during the period of research, 2005-2015, was dominated by local and state approaches which themselves reflect the consolidation of authoritarian regimes. Research in Uzbekistan showed that the government avoided ethnic-based conflict spilling over from Kyrgyzstan in 2010 by the rapid and forceful control of space and discourse. The state flooded minority Kyrgyz villages with security forces to prevent attacks on them, and tightly controlled information on the violence in Kyrgyzstan and public discussion of it in Uzbekistan. In Tajikistan, the conflicts themselves resemble purges within the state rather than rebellions against the state. 2. Where an institutionally and resource-weak central state is unable to contain conflict, powerful local actors with strong client support networks may intervene to intervene to prevent or de-escalate conflict. In southern Kyrgyzstan, local elites were able to prevent violence from spreading to some towns due to their inter-ethnic ties. In the city of Osh in that region, the mayor developed his own distinct approach to conflict management, independent of the national government, for a period of time. Vernacular discourses of conflict management profess concepts of peace which are distinct from those of the authoritarian state. 3. External actors - both Western and rising powers - have not been directly involved in conflict management and have uncertain indirect effects on local and state patterns. Further analysis and research is required to assess the importance of the post-colonial context in explaining variation in the roles of Russia and China in post-Soviet Central Asia. Our project was effective at establishing a new network of connections between Central Asian Studies in China and the UK, particularly between Exeter, Saferworld and Chatham House's Eurasia programme and East China Normal University and the Shanghai Institutes of International Studies in China. In Russia, merely conducting a workshop and keeping channels open given the downturn in relations with the West and academic openness was an achievement. 4. 'Peace' is a contested term deployed and used very differently by different actors for different ends. Different actors - central and local governments, ethnically-based communities, international organisations, and foreign governments - used different ways to speak about 'peace.' Although these bore some resemblance, in practice they were freighted with very different visions of how social difference should be accommodated and expressed in public space, and how power should be exercised. A concept of 'authoritarian conflict management' has been defined with economic, spatial and discursive dimension for further investigation in multi-methods, cross-regional and inter-disciplinary projects. 5. The evaluation of fieldwork via ethics procedures used in UK academia, often derived from medical school models, may only poorly approximate the challenges faced. Research in Tajikistan was abandoned and in southern Kyrgyzstan it was paused on two occasions due to the closing down of the space for fieldwork. In June 2014, one of our contracted researchers in Tajikistan was arrested and detained on charges of espionage for 36 days. Our research team became the object of the authoritarian state's conflict management strategy as it sought to control all information produced about the conflict in question. We learnt a great deal about the ethical dilemmas of research. The PI subsequently chaired a taskforce of the Central Eurasian Studies Society (USA) which reported on the changing risks of fieldwork in the region in 2016. |
| Exploitation Route | The team is committed to furthering research through partnerships with scholars working on other methods (particularly quantitative social scientists working on large datasets in conflict studies, including a group at the University of Exeter), in other regions (particularly the Middle East and North Africa, but also other adjacent regions of Eurasia and South Asia where authoritarian methods have been prominent) and with other disciplines (including historians and area studies scholars of other regions). These three types of scholars are included in new research funding bids aimed at expanding the general validity and audience for findings. In addition, our partnership with Saferworld has been successful in pioneering long-term, project-based cooperation between the organization and academics. Our papers on their website have high download statistics. In total, 40,000 downloads took place of papers in English, Russian and Chinese in the period from 2013-2016. Chatham House were also involved in the project throughout and hosted a total of four project-linked events over the four years of the programme. In 2014-15, the Heathershaw/Montgomery report on radicalization was the third-most downloaded paper on the Chatham House website. These figures show that our research is being used by others, probably in a huge variety of ways. For example, this research and a follow-on study was cited in the World Migration Report 2018. |
| Sectors | Government, Democracy and Justice,Security and Diplomacy |
| URL | https://excas.net/projects/rising-powers/ |
| Description | We identify three specific areas of impact from our research, all of which are emergent, beginning in late-2014 as we began to move to the dissemination stage of our research. First, we have had a national impact within Kyrgyzstan (the site of one of our case studies) which has begun to manifest itself since the end of the project. Second, we have had international impact, from 2014, largely in the West, with regard to the understanding of radicalization in Central Asia. Third, we have begun to have impact in Russian and Chinese policy analysis circles through the translation and dissemination of our work in Moscow and Beijing from 2015 onwards. First, a major strand of our research has been investigating the 2010 ethnic violence in southern Kyrgyzstan. This violence has generally been narrated in Kyrgyzstan as an attempt by a disloyal Uzbek minority to destroy the Kyrgyz state. Although this claim is baseless, it informs continued policy towards the minority, hardening resentment and hampering reconciliation. Our research, and the scholar we have come into dialogue with through workshops/conference sessions/publications, has pushed at alternative perspectives and narratives around what happened up to, during, and after 2010. An earlier paper by Nick Megoran, Averting Violence in Kyrgyzstan: Understanding and Responding to Nationalism, published by Chatham House in 2012, highlighted the consequences of this polarised debate and how they may be attenuated. Due to extreme political sensitivities, we had been reluctant to push and publicise our findings in Kyrgyzstan: allegations of 'external support for separatists' could exacerbate tensions. However, following a successful presentation at a conference in 2017 and reconnection with a local scholar who shares our views and who was wanting to publish his work on the Osh events, Nick Megoran secured ESRC Impact Acceleration Account funding to work with the scholar, Prof Abylabek Asankanov, to challenges racist narratives against the Uzbek minority in Kyrgyzstan around the 2010 violence. Seminars were held in Chatham House (London) and the Academy of Sciences (Bishkek) in the summer of 2018. These were attended by key Kyrgyz journalists and embassy officials (London) and government representatives, security officers and politicians (Bishkek), the Bishkek event making national television in the republic. As a follow up, Megoran and Asankanov are looking at publishing articles in Kyrgyzstan. In February 2019 they met in Bishkek to plan this out, after Megoran delivered another version of the talk at the University of Central Asia, in an event sponsored by the British embassy in Bishkek. Second, our research found that armed conflicts attributed to Islamic violent extremism were caused by other factors, largely involving the political economy of the state. We also found that the labelling of purged officials and insurgents as 'terrorists' and 'radicals' was part of the discursive strategy used by local state actors in Rasht to control the narrative about the conflict and delegitimise armed resistance. This research, and earlier research by John Heathershaw (PI) and David Montgomery (CI on a related British Council project), was used in a paper entitled the Myth of Post-Soviet Muslim Radicalization in Central Asia published by Chatham House in November 2014. The paper challenged the 'radicalization' framing with regard to religious change, political mobilization and armed conflict in the region, and demonstrated the political misuses of this framing. In 2014-15 the paper was the third most-downloaded on the Chatham House website and was presented both at Chatham House and other venues in Europe and the United States including the UK Foreign Office and US Department of Defence. Multiple invitations to present the paper, as well as considerable coverage in the press and on social media, suggest that the paper has caused a rethink in how Central Asia is understood and an appreciation of how governments instrumentally deploy 'radicalization' to justify tactics of repression. At the very least, the policy conversation on the topic has appeared to improve as research is required to come to more careful conclusions on this topic and draw on greater evidence. There is some anecdotal evidence of counter-radicalization development projects being rewritten and/or reconsidered in light of the research. Third, An important overarching theme for the research project was the concept of 'Rising Powers', with a particular focus on the role of Russia and China in Central Asia, and the interactions between those states and Western powers. We aimed to both ensure that policymakers were better informed on the dynamics of Russian and Chinese influence in Eurasia, while also questioning parts of the policy discourse around the 'Rising Powers' theme. In particular, we aimed to introduce views and evidence from Central Asia into the often poorly informed policy debate on Rising Powers. We also used our workshops and conferences to improve dialogue between Western officials and analysts and their counterparts in Russia, China and Central Asia. We used two main mechanisms for engagement on the Rising Powers theme. Firstly, we engaged a wide audience through policy-oriented publications. Saferworld published two major reports aimed at policymakers: Shifting geopolitics in Central Asia The roles of China, Russia, India, and Turkey (7 November 2013) and Central Asia at a Crossroads (July 2015). The latter report was also published in Russian and in Chinese. All reports achieved high levels of download and feedback. Project members made numerous other written contributions to the debate in the media, blogs and journals. Secondly, the project developed strong links and engagement with partner institutions in China and Russia, with whom we engaged with policymakers, analysts, experts and officials in a series of workshops and conferences. We held workshops in Shanghai (with the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, in October 2015) and in Moscow (with the Institute of Oriental Studies, Academy of Sciences in May 2016), and invited speakers from China and Russia to contribute to three policy conferences at the Royal Institute for International Affairs (Chatham House), attended by diplomats, journalists and private sector executives (September 2013; October 2015; July 2016). We have continued these activities following the completion of the project through joint events held with Chinese and Russian partners, and we continued to engage in a growing policy debate about the impact of China's Belt and Road Initiative and Russia's Eurasian Economic Union in Central Asia. In June 2017, we attended and presented at the ESRC Rising Powers and Interdependent Futures conference at Manchester and arranged for the invitation and participation of UK and Russian foreign policy professionals. From 2019-2021, the AHRC-ESRC-FCO Knowledge Exchange Fellowship [ES/S009493/1] of David Lewis provides the opportunities to further impact foreign policy debate on rising powers in the UK. David will be on secondment to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Eastern Research Group to provide research on Russian foreign policy and to promote enhanced interaction between the FCO and external academics. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2013 |
| Sector | Security and Diplomacy |
| Impact Types | Policy & public services |
| Description | Citation in World Migration Report 2018 |
| Geographic Reach | Multiple continents/international |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in systematic reviews |
| Impact | Our research found that armed conflicts attributed to Islamic violent extremism were caused by other factors, largely involving the political economy of the state. We also found that the labelling of purged officials and insurgents as 'terrorists' and 'radicals' was part of the discursive strategy used by local state actors in Rasht to control the narrative about the conflict and delegitimise armed resistance. This research, and earlier research by John Heathershaw (PI) and David Montgomery (CI on a related British Council project), was used in a paper entitled the Myth of Post-Soviet Muslim Radicalization in Central Asia published by Chatham House in November 2014. The paper challenged the 'radicalization' framing with regard to religious change, political mobilization and armed conflict in the region, and demonstrated the political misuses of this framing. In 2014-15 the paper was the third most-downloaded on the Chatham House website and was presented both at Chatham House and other venues in Europe and the United States including the UK Foreign Office and US Department of Defence. Multiple invitations to present the paper, as well as considerable coverage in the press and on social media, suggest that the paper has caused a rethink in how Central Asia is understood and an appreciation of how governments instrumentally deploy 'radicalization' to justify tactics of repression. At the very least, the policy conversation on the topic has appeared to improve as research is required to come to more careful conclusions on this topic and draw on greater evidence. |
| URL | https://www.iom.int/wmr/world-migration-report-2018 |
| Description | 'The 2010 Osh Events: New Perspectives.' ESRC Impact Acceleration Award [Grant Ref: ES/M500513/1, Newcastle University] |
| Amount | £4,128 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Newcastle University |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 02/2018 |
| End | 07/2018 |
| Description | College Impact Support Funds |
| Amount | £1,501 (GBP) |
| Organisation | University of Exeter |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 03/2017 |
| End | 06/2017 |
| Description | FCO Fellowship - David Lewis |
| Amount | £114,868 (GBP) |
| Funding ID | ES/S009493/1 |
| Organisation | Economic and Social Research Council |
| Sector | Public |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 03/2019 |
| End | 02/2022 |
| Description | International responses to violence in the South of Kyrgyzstan, June 2010 |
| Amount | £9,663 (GBP) |
| Organisation | Open Society Foundation, New York |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| Country | United States |
| Start | 05/2013 |
| End | 05/2014 |
| Description | Open Innovation Award |
| Amount | £9,500 (GBP) |
| Organisation | University of Exeter |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 03/2017 |
| End | 05/2017 |
| Description | University of Exeter, Humanities and Social Sciences Strategy, project grant |
| Amount | £9,914 (GBP) |
| Organisation | University of Exeter |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Start | 06/2013 |
| End | 12/2013 |
| Description | Central Asian political exiles and extra-territorial security |
| Organisation | Amnesty International |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | Having identified shared research interests, we began a number of areas of collaboration. Cooley and Heathershaw organise a series of conference panels (2013), edited a volume (2015, see output below) and authored a book together related to the themes (2017). Lemon, a PhD student and associate of the award, became a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia (2016). In 2016, we began the Central Asian Political Exiles project out of this collaborative research. In 2017-18 this project was funded ($60,000) by the Open Society Foundations, supporting a post-doctoral project manager, Dr Saipira Furstenburg. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Cooley (Columbia) became an advisory board member on this award (2012). A workshop on the theme of the award was hosted and funded by the Harriman Institute (2014) and another is planned for 6 May 2018, also funded by Columbia.. Over the period since the end of the award, we have extended our partnerships in the areas of data-sharing, joint reports and submission to international bodies and courts to include the following organizations: Fair Trials International, Amnesty International, Foreign Policy Centre, Human Rights Watch and several Russian and Central Asian human rights groups. |
| Impact | Heathershaw & Cooley, 'Offshore Central Asia', Central Asian Survey (2015), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02634937.2015.1008816 Cooley & Heathershaw, Dictators Without Borders (Yale 2017) https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300208443/dictators-without-borders These output are in the area of international relations. |
| Start Year | 2012 |
| Description | Central Asian political exiles and extra-territorial security |
| Organisation | Columbia University |
| Department | Harriman Institute |
| Country | United States |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | Having identified shared research interests, we began a number of areas of collaboration. Cooley and Heathershaw organise a series of conference panels (2013), edited a volume (2015, see output below) and authored a book together related to the themes (2017). Lemon, a PhD student and associate of the award, became a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia (2016). In 2016, we began the Central Asian Political Exiles project out of this collaborative research. In 2017-18 this project was funded ($60,000) by the Open Society Foundations, supporting a post-doctoral project manager, Dr Saipira Furstenburg. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Cooley (Columbia) became an advisory board member on this award (2012). A workshop on the theme of the award was hosted and funded by the Harriman Institute (2014) and another is planned for 6 May 2018, also funded by Columbia.. Over the period since the end of the award, we have extended our partnerships in the areas of data-sharing, joint reports and submission to international bodies and courts to include the following organizations: Fair Trials International, Amnesty International, Foreign Policy Centre, Human Rights Watch and several Russian and Central Asian human rights groups. |
| Impact | Heathershaw & Cooley, 'Offshore Central Asia', Central Asian Survey (2015), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02634937.2015.1008816 Cooley & Heathershaw, Dictators Without Borders (Yale 2017) https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300208443/dictators-without-borders These output are in the area of international relations. |
| Start Year | 2012 |
| Description | Central Asian political exiles and extra-territorial security |
| Organisation | Fair Trials International |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | Having identified shared research interests, we began a number of areas of collaboration. Cooley and Heathershaw organise a series of conference panels (2013), edited a volume (2015, see output below) and authored a book together related to the themes (2017). Lemon, a PhD student and associate of the award, became a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia (2016). In 2016, we began the Central Asian Political Exiles project out of this collaborative research. In 2017-18 this project was funded ($60,000) by the Open Society Foundations, supporting a post-doctoral project manager, Dr Saipira Furstenburg. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Cooley (Columbia) became an advisory board member on this award (2012). A workshop on the theme of the award was hosted and funded by the Harriman Institute (2014) and another is planned for 6 May 2018, also funded by Columbia.. Over the period since the end of the award, we have extended our partnerships in the areas of data-sharing, joint reports and submission to international bodies and courts to include the following organizations: Fair Trials International, Amnesty International, Foreign Policy Centre, Human Rights Watch and several Russian and Central Asian human rights groups. |
| Impact | Heathershaw & Cooley, 'Offshore Central Asia', Central Asian Survey (2015), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02634937.2015.1008816 Cooley & Heathershaw, Dictators Without Borders (Yale 2017) https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300208443/dictators-without-borders These output are in the area of international relations. |
| Start Year | 2012 |
| Description | Central Asian political exiles and extra-territorial security |
| Organisation | Foreign Policy Centre |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Private |
| PI Contribution | Having identified shared research interests, we began a number of areas of collaboration. Cooley and Heathershaw organise a series of conference panels (2013), edited a volume (2015, see output below) and authored a book together related to the themes (2017). Lemon, a PhD student and associate of the award, became a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia (2016). In 2016, we began the Central Asian Political Exiles project out of this collaborative research. In 2017-18 this project was funded ($60,000) by the Open Society Foundations, supporting a post-doctoral project manager, Dr Saipira Furstenburg. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Cooley (Columbia) became an advisory board member on this award (2012). A workshop on the theme of the award was hosted and funded by the Harriman Institute (2014) and another is planned for 6 May 2018, also funded by Columbia.. Over the period since the end of the award, we have extended our partnerships in the areas of data-sharing, joint reports and submission to international bodies and courts to include the following organizations: Fair Trials International, Amnesty International, Foreign Policy Centre, Human Rights Watch and several Russian and Central Asian human rights groups. |
| Impact | Heathershaw & Cooley, 'Offshore Central Asia', Central Asian Survey (2015), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02634937.2015.1008816 Cooley & Heathershaw, Dictators Without Borders (Yale 2017) https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300208443/dictators-without-borders These output are in the area of international relations. |
| Start Year | 2012 |
| Description | Central Asian political exiles and extra-territorial security |
| Organisation | Open Society Foundation, New York |
| Country | United States |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | Having identified shared research interests, we began a number of areas of collaboration. Cooley and Heathershaw organise a series of conference panels (2013), edited a volume (2015, see output below) and authored a book together related to the themes (2017). Lemon, a PhD student and associate of the award, became a postdoctoral fellow at Columbia (2016). In 2016, we began the Central Asian Political Exiles project out of this collaborative research. In 2017-18 this project was funded ($60,000) by the Open Society Foundations, supporting a post-doctoral project manager, Dr Saipira Furstenburg. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Cooley (Columbia) became an advisory board member on this award (2012). A workshop on the theme of the award was hosted and funded by the Harriman Institute (2014) and another is planned for 6 May 2018, also funded by Columbia.. Over the period since the end of the award, we have extended our partnerships in the areas of data-sharing, joint reports and submission to international bodies and courts to include the following organizations: Fair Trials International, Amnesty International, Foreign Policy Centre, Human Rights Watch and several Russian and Central Asian human rights groups. |
| Impact | Heathershaw & Cooley, 'Offshore Central Asia', Central Asian Survey (2015), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02634937.2015.1008816 Cooley & Heathershaw, Dictators Without Borders (Yale 2017) https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300208443/dictators-without-borders These output are in the area of international relations. |
| Start Year | 2012 |