Abstract
For centuries, world powers have struggled for influence in the geographical area formed by Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Central Asia is the least explored world region and has long been a source of geopolitical tension. The aim of this study was to characterize Central and South Asia as a priority for Russian and British foreign policy in the second half of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Scientific and historiographic methods were used to analyze documented facts and ensure reliable results. Foreign policy relations of the Russian Empire and Great Britain during the great geopolitical confrontation were analyzed by comparison. The results support the hypothesis that there were influence spheres, contentious issues, and interests, which enabled the players to find compromises at the end of the ‘Great Game’ without resorting to force. These facts enriched diplomatic practices in buffer states, natural boundaries, de-escalation, and agreements for improving conflict management between competing foreign nations.
Reference35 articles.
1. "1. Ahmar, M. (1994). Reviewed Work: The Great Game: The Struggle for Empire in Central Asia by Peter Hopkirk. Strategic Studies, 16(4): 90-95. Retrieved July 23, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/45182152.
2. 2. Alder, G. (1981). Big Game hunting in Central Asia. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 9(3): 318-330. doi:10.1080/03086538108582599
3. 3. Anderson K., Talskaya O. (2019) Rationale for the Russian Empire's Central Asian Policy in the Context of the 'Great Game' // Bulletin of the Moscow State Regional University (Electronic Journal) № 2. с. 22-30. Doi:10.18384/2224-0209-2019-2-958
4. 4. Boulger, D. C. (1879). England and Russia in Central Asia. London: W. H. Allen & Company. https://www.wdl.org/en/item/17698/.
5. 5. Brezhneva S. (2000). Accession of Central Asia to Russia: A Historiographical Aspect. Vestn. Tatishchev Volga University. Ser. In: Vestnik of Volga Region State University named after Tatishchev, Ser. of History, (2000). 2. С. 122-136.