| As one of the ancient nomadic nations in the world, the Mongols have been especially proud of their history. Actually, the area of what is now called Mongolia has been ruled by various nomadic ethnics or entities. Since there is no room for this study to trace back the ancient ages, the thesis’main part starts in 1992 when Mongolia became an independent state de facto after 70-year strict tutelage of the former Soviet Union; and the writing ends in 2015 when the government of Mongolia formally declared to adopt the "Permanent Neutrality" policy, a milestone in Mongolian history.The year of 1992 heralds a new era in which the quest for national security and interests has become the’"primacy of foreign policy" of Mongolia. Prior to that year, however, Mongolia had not been a sovereign state in a real sense. The sudden disintegration of the former Soviet Union provided opportunities and challenges as well. Given the circumstances in which the country exists, the political elites of the post-Soviet Mongolia have to pursue their objectives realistically in the milieu where its only neighbors are two highly superior powers—China and Russia. In modern times, Mongolia, China and Russia have been intertwined with each other politically, economically and geo-strategically. Yet, an asymmetrical power relationship has remained among the tripartite sides for one century. Considering this, a stable and amicable relationship with the two giant neighbors becomes the undisputed precondition for Mongolia’s survival, security and interests.The question arises from wherein while Mongolia has keenly dealt with China and Russia, how it was motivated to pursue the "Third Neighbors’" policy since the year of 2010? Put it concretely, as a fragile state, does Mongolia have the capacity to achieve its desired objectives and, in so doing, what kind of results would be in view of the nature of geopolitics? In particular, after the collapse of the USSR in 1991, Mongolia has since struggled for an independent state with great uncertainties. It meant that the leadership in Ulaanbaatar has to take serious considerations to deal with the existing geopolitics wherein Mongolia’s desired status can’t be assured by force but through diplomacy only. Because of this, it was imperative for the ruling party of Mongolia to avoid challenging Russia and China, and at the same time to prevent its dependence on any other powers politically. With this end in their mind, the new leaders of Ulaanbaatar pursued national security and legitimacy in a cautious manner, that is, the fall of the Soviet dominance alerted all the great powers to view the status quo as the legitimate order in Mongolia. This requires that any radical change would likely be destructive of the geo-strategic structure that symbolizes the essential interests involving China, Russia, Mongolia and other great powers en bloc. Given that the test of Mongolian statecraft came in view of the relationship with the most immediate issue, it was imperative for the Mongolians how to insure their security, territorial integrity and economic growth in a structure of limited strategic maneuvrabilities.As stated previously, Mongolia’s quest for security and interests during the past two decades has been an understudied topic of research. The reasons for that backwardness are various but one fact is that Mongolia had been a Soviet protectorate for seven decades since the 1920s. As a result, to many people it is yet a mysterious land. Similarly, the post-Soviet Mongolians are well aware that it would be catastrophic if they radically approach foreign affairs or change the geopolitical structure keenly involved with two giant neighbors. Due to this reality, they had to carry on a proactive but pragmatic line in recognition of the existing order. Obviously, it does not fully conform to the aspiration of the new generation of political —social elites of Mongolia who might have dreamed of the past glory. But, since they aim at restoring Mongolia’s sovereignty and security by peace, what they needed urgently in view of the fragile domestic politics was something more precious, that is, the opportunities to preserve its own interests and to seek for strategic allies. For two decades, their diplomatic efforts had been consistently directed to Mongolia’s security and stability.The thesis then argues for the theme that the new generation of political elites of Mongolia in 2010 invoked the "Third Neighbor" concept as the policy option or exactly speaking as an expedient for power game? To that end, it draws on the essential concepts and principles in the study of foreign affairs, ranging the concepts such as alliance, balance of power, national security and power politics. As well-noted in modern diplomacy, the concepts and practices of alliance and the balance of power have been normally identified with European statecraft since the modern period. Later during the centuries of the overseas expansion, European powers carried on those principles and practices beyond Europe to distant states and the cultures. As a part of the Chinese Empire then, Mongolia was not affected by European ideas and practices until 1912 when the Empire collapsed. One decade later, Mongolia was under the de facto dominance of the Soviet Union and, in turn, it became one of the disputes between China and the USSR. In 1921, the only "body politics" in Mongolia was the People’s Party that received strong support from Moscow and it claimed independence in 1924. Yet, the Mongolian government for seven decades did not feature much the genuine marks of independence in light of the internationally--recognized rules and practices.What follows is a diplomatic narrative of Mongolia’s interactions with its two giant neighbors. In 1991 when the Soviet Union came to an end, it inflicted severe impacts on Mongolia as a whole. In view of the previous extensive relationship with the USSR, the leaders of Mongolia were then in a dilemma as it lacked of the necessary resources of national reconstruction that involves the strong and rational authorities, efficient and sustainable development policy, and diverse capacities like capitals, technologies and human labors. For sure, China seems to be in an upper position comparing to other powers. Yet, no matter who runs the Mongolian state, there is a strong tendency to balance China against other great powers, near or afar, and then in reverse. The geopolitical structure which had been among the tripartite sides has made the Mongolian government seek for security and diplomatic means available outside its physical realm. Likewise, the common sense and rational analysis of foreign affairs have cautioned the new leaders in Ulaanbaatar to define their foreign policy in view of the disparity between its objectives and the means that it has really possessed.Given this, central to the thesis is that in the post-Soviet era. Mongolia’s quest for national security and interests has to be carried out in the context of the geopolitical structure. This was fundamentally true since diplomacy was the only feasible means for the Mongolians who were well-aware of the disparity between their desired objectives and the power they have actually possessed. Yet, the issue comes out of the fact if the geopolitical structure was un-changeable by force, what about to try diplomacy by inviting more external players to be involved? It is evident that the policy-makers of Mongolia did convert its foreign policy from previous passivity that was the basic feature of its politics prior to 1992, to proactive efforts for security and interest in the post-Soviet era. Considering this, the thesis aims to address three differing but related questions as follows.Firstly, how has Mongolia since the 1990s pursued its policy objectives in a geo-strategic reality that actually restrains the diplomatic options? Secondly, has Mongolia’s desire to be a proud country and its limited means at hands precluded the new leadership in Ulaanbaatar from adopting the statecraft, which aims to apply the balance of power tenet to Mongolia’s foreign policy-making? Thirdly, admitting that it was true, why and how did the policy-makers and their followers of Mongolia approve the "Third Neighbors" policy?Theoretically, Mongolia’s approach to the issues of its security and interests has arguably represented a balanced judgment that the overall value it extracts from the existing structure goes to the foundation of its foreign policy in the post-Soviet age. Since the great powers, far and near, have been involved their common interests into Mongolia’s affairs, the relative but not exclusive relations are clearly governed by the doctrines of the balance of power and the mutual benefits as well. Due to this, political theorist like Mongolia would be capable of demonstrating its will and wisdom to struggle for security and legitimacy in the asymmetry of their relations with great powers. As it has occurred all the time, in a closely knit system, balance of power doctrine puts a tremendous emphasis on diplomatic maneuverability, as it is held that foreign policy objectives are for the creation and preservation of the equilibrium while endorsing collective security and interdependence of states. It means that in the post-Soviet era, Mongolia’s security and interests are vulnerable to the assertive policy from either Russia or China. But the Mongolia’s government was able to find the chances to capitalize on two neighbors’mutual suspicions in order to gain more favorable agreements in negotiations or smartly to involve more foreign powers into the Mongolian chess-game. In so doing, Mongolia, although fragile in a geopolitical term, can still find the necessary strategies to maneuver among the multiple power politics. For sure, this is a sort of the chess-game of uncertainties in the world politics.The thesis aims to analyze the intellectual reasons articulated by the political and social elites of Mongolia in order to justify their quest for national interests and security in the very circumstances. It is reasoned by political scientists that national interests and security have been the central issues by the nature of the world in which states exist. Therefore, diplomacy is the natural application of intelligence and tact to the conduct of official relations between governments of sovereign states in an anarchic world. Mongolia set out its diplomatic task in 1992 when the Cold War ended with the collapse of Soviet influence over the landlocked country. In 1994, it approached China to conclude a bilateral friendship and cooperation treaty. Yet, in 2006 when Mongolian leaders paid formal visit to Moscow, both parties agreed to reaffirm their bilateral strategic relations in light of the security and economic needs. Considering what are discussed above, this study argues that such a diplomatic outcome is testimony to the success of Mongolia’s quest for security and interests in a confounding structure that is unchangeable by force.However, like all other states, great or small, Mongolia would like to pursue more diplomatic options into which are not only involved China and Russia, but also other powers like the United States, Japan and EU as the primary players as the "Third Neighbor" policy stated. The reason for selection of this topic is that Mongolia is formally accepted as a sovereign state but also a geopolitically isolated one at once. It means such a state is particularly vulnerable to its superior neighbors, a paradox concerned with Mongolia and other powers of the world. This study addresses the reasons why Mongolian leaders put forward the "Third Neighbor" policy through its newly-passed "National Security Scheme" in 2010. It seemed to parlay all its bets into proactive responses from other major powers in the world arena.To that end, the thesis employs the classical realism which defines analytical narrative as the organization of materials in a chronologically sequential order, and the focusing of the content into a single coherent story. Although a historical review of the rise and fall of Mongolia was made in the part of introduction, the primary method is directed to create a theoretically cognizant and provisional account of foreign policy of a state based upon the prevailing circumstances. However, as political scientist Joseph Nye, Jr. have argued, all three types of doctrines— realism, liberalism and constructivism—are helpful in examining the policy-making of a state, including Mongolia, this study argues for how the goals that states sought changed over time through neo-realism and neo-liberalism, and at the same time, draws on different fields and disciplines to examine the processes by which leaders, peoples, and history memory alter their preferences, shape their identities, and learn new behavior, which is the core concept of constructivism. In the light of the rationales above, the thesis used deductive and inductive methods. The deductive approach was used to establish and develop research questions and conceptual structure while the inductive approach was used in the analysis of the arguments and further test them according to the theories involved.For some reasons, the current scholarship on Mongolia’s foreign policy towards China and Russia in the context of the "Third Neighbors" policy is quite limited. Although there are much pre-existing literature on great powers’politics, Mongolia’s foreign policy and its domestic politics, interactions among/between China, Russia and Mongolia, etc., there has been comparatively little analysis on the topic presented here. Therefore, this study aims to address Mongolia’s priority issue of national security in a not favorable geopolitical context. By exploring the avenues through which Mongolia can generate, collate and coordinate external factors, the thesis tries to address the issue of promoting its national interests and security needs. Given this, it is anticipated that smaller state can be critically considered with a view to maintaining the argument that given appropriate diplomatic efforts and rational leadership, Mongolia has demonstrated its desired goals with little cost paid. As Hans Morgenthau argued, a sound foreign policy must be evaluated from the basic criterion that the goals that a state pursues must be matched to its available means and other relevant powers’ concerns. As stated earlier, Mongolia’s elites have been aware of the approaches to other leading powers as the third neighbors; in the meantime, it does all necessary efforts to assure Moscow and Beijing of its independent policy intentions by its active involvement into foreign affairs as a responsible and moderate actor in international affairs.Accordingly, the thesis is divided into six parts with an introduction which contains the theme, research questions, relevant theories and analytic framework, research methodology and finally the arrangements of the whole thesis. Then the thesis traces a historical path from the client of Chinese empire to the protectorate of the former Soviet Union 1912-1992. But a brief account of ancient Mongol empire was unfolded for understanding contemporary tripartite relations among Mongolia, China and Russia (or USSR). During this period, the Soviet Union was evidently dominant in their triangle interactions.As the main body of the thesis starts in 1992 when the Mongolians made all possible efforts to look into the new destiny, a real independence meant involving into the post-Soviet international order. Yet, due to the past dominance by the USSR, Mongolia in fact lacked of all resources to achieve its goals of national independence, security and interests. As a result, the domestic dilemma was concerned with the ruling elites in Ulaanbaatar to carry on its new issue-orientated policy. The following chapters cover the full question why the political elite in 2010 decided to propose a tripartite strategic structure in which Mongolia pursued more diplomatic room. Does this policy function well into the benefits of Mongolian security and real interests?The discussion goes to the possible ramifications of the recent shift in China’s favor of the balance of power simply because today’s Russian power has been strained both at home and abroad. Yet, the thesis explores the Sino-Russian strategic partnership that has been strong enough to prevent any attempted intervention from the "third" power or powers coalition. Due to this, the Mongolian government formally stated in September 2015 that the Mongolian State would adopt the principle of "permanent neutrality". This study naturally ends in the year of 2015 when the substantial change in its foreign policy was made.All in all, the thesis tries to explain the efforts of Mongolian Governments to pursue their desired goals of national security and stability as the core tasks in a fragile geo-strategic structure. To that end, both historical and theoretical approaches are definitely helpful. Yet, the key argument in examining Mongolia’s "Third Neighbor" policy should relate to the whole range of concerns—international, regional, bilateral and domestic. In order to eliminate its geo-strategic dilemma, the decision of adopting "permanent neutrality" is evidently one of the major milestones in the history of Mongolia, as the leaders of new state finally realize the pragmatic way they should take for their national interests. |
PDF Full Text Request