• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [],
  "type": "pressRelease",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Caucasus"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Climate Change",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Press Release

U.S. should increase support in Caspian region

Focusing U.S. policy in the Caspian on containing Russian and Chinese influence has done little to advance U.S. security interests, and reduced its standing in the region to its lowest level in decades. The Obama administration needs a new approach that provides opportunities for local leaders to engage with the United States in economic and political development.

Link Copied
Published on Feb 11, 2009

WASHINGTON, Feb 11—Focusing U.S. policy in the Caspian on containing Russian and Chinese influence has done little to advance U.S. security interests, and reduced its standing in the region to its lowest level in decades. The Obama administration needs a new approach that provides opportunities for local leaders to engage with the United States in economic and political development, concludes a new policy brief by Martha Brill Olcott.

Olcott recommends five building blocks for a new U.S. policy for the Caspian region:

  1. Focus on military reform and capacity rather than military alliances. U.S. operations in Afghanistan depend on cooperation with the Caspian states, but the recent Russia–Georgia crisis underscores that NATO membership should only be offered to states who control their internationally recognized borders.
  2. Support fair market pricing for energy producers and consumers to promote energy independence for the Caspian region. The United States has wasted fifteen years pressing for unrealistic oil and gas pipelines that bypass Russia.
  3. Provide technical assistance for projects that capitalize on the region’s vast renewable energy resources—biofuels, solar, and wind power. Renewable energy projects would create major economic opportunities and minimize potential conflicts between neighboring states.
  4. While the United States should continue to press hard on human rights issues, sanctions will only block U.S. assistance on critical development projects. Providing education and democracy assistance at the grassroots level is the best way to promote political development in the region.
  5. Appoint a presidential envoy for the region. Europe, Russia, and China all have senior level officials assigned to the region.

Olcott concludes:

“This new approach to the Caspian states would enhance U.S. national security. It would also help improve the lives of the people of these countries and make them more likely to embrace the political and economic values that prompt the United States to international engagement.”

###


NOTES

  • Direct link to the PDF: www.carnegieendowment.org/files/us_caspian_policy.pdf
  • Martha Brill Olcott is a senior associate with the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Program. Olcott specializes in the problems of transitions in Central Asia and the Caucasus as well as the security challenges in the Caspian region more generally. Her book, Central Asia’s Second Chance, examines the economic and political development of this ethnically diverse and strategically vital region in the context of the changing security threats post-9/11.
  • President Obama has inherited a tougher foreign policy inbox than any president has faced since Harry Truman; establishing priorities among dozens of conflicts and crises requires new understanding of the most critical regions, the most salient issues within them, and the issues ripest for new direction. In its series, Foreign Policy for the Next President, the Carnegie Endowment’s experts endeavor to do just that. They separate good ideas from dead ends and go beyond widely agreed goals to describe how to achieve them.
     
  • The Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Program has, since the end of the Cold War, led the field on Eurasian security, including strategic nuclear weapons and nonproliferation, development, economic and social issues, governance, and the rule of law.
  • The Carnegie Moscow Center was established in 1993 and accommodates foreign and Russian researchers collaborating with Carnegie’s global network of scholars on a broad range of contemporary policy issues relevant to Russia—military, political, and economic.
  • Press Contact: Trent Perrotto, 202/939-2372, tperrotto@ceip.org
Climate ChangeForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesCaucasus

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Commentary
    AI in Outer Space: Opportunities, Risks, and the Governance Gap

    How is AI reshaping space security, creating governance challenges, and where does international diplomacy stand today?

      Tejas Bharadwaj, Almudena Azcárate Ortega

  • Paper
    Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with China

    After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.

      Saheb Singh Chadha

  • Article
    Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026

    This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    The Unresolved Challenges in U.S.–India Semiconductor Cooperation

    The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.

      Shruti Mittal

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.