In May 2025, the operative analysis published by the PSCR program at BESA has extensively focused on the ongoing and potential conflicts in Central Asia, South and North Caucasus, Russia, and Moldova.
Alexander Shpunt analyses the rare case of a peaceful resolution of the post-Soviet territorial conflict as a result of territorial swaps that take into account the national interests of the two post-Soviet countries. The dispute around the Vorukh enclave, contested by Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, emerged in its open form in the 1950s, with the grounds being formed during the Soviet delimitation in the 1920s. The Soviet authorities were interested in concealing the problem and not solving it; thus, during the Soviet, as well as post-Soviet decades, no compromise was reached. On the contrary, violent confrontation erupted in 2022 in the enclave. It was only the rejection of references to the Soviet principles and documentation, very vague in determining the precise territories and conflict resolution options, that aided in (seemingly) resolving the conflict in 2025 to the mutual satisfaction of both conflicting sides.
The PSCRP team provides an account of another long-standing dispute over the territories that was formed under Soviet (namely, Stalin’s) rule, one between Chechnya and Ingushetia. Though being parts of a single supranational (binational) group, the Vainakhs, the two closely related ethnic groups share a solid history of post-Soviet confrontation. The transfer of the contested lands of Ingushetia’s Sunzhensky district to Chechnya in 2018 caused prolonged protest rallies and has led to the “Ingush affair,” the prosecution of public Ingush figures, which was perceived by Ingush society as a slap in the face. More recent outbreaks of public confrontation occurred in 2022, when Ramzan Kadyrov, the leader of Chechnya, publicly sided with the Batalkhajin brotherhood that was being persecuted in Ingushetia, and again in 2024 during a shootout near the Wildberries marketplace headquarters. In the latter situation, the “Kadyrovites” supported one side of the conflict, while several Ingush and Dagestani politicians had their vested interests associated with the other side. Two Ingush guards were killed, and Kadyrov claimed to be a subject of the assassination plot and declared a blood vengeance. This conflict, although largely not impacting individual interethnic interactions, might further escalate because of Chechnya’s leadership’s need to test their strength and expand their sphere of influence.
The PSCRP Team investigates the conflict potential of interactions between the “Russian Community,” a network of pro-government nationalist groups operating throughout Russia that rose to prominence after 2022, and ethnic minorities in southern Russia. Among the latter are such groups as Armenians, Kazakhs, Kurds, and Circassians, as well as labor migrants from Central Asia. The authors conclude that the main actors in conflict interactions include not only the “Russian Community,” but also the so-called “siloviki” (security forces that control the “Community” and approve its actions), the Central Investigative Committee (that frequently intervenes in the smallest conflicts involving “non-Russians”), and the Chechen authorities (that remain the only force that openly expresses disapproval of the nationalist groups’ and security institutions’ actions).
Anna Ayvazyan sheds light on the recent geopolitical developments in Armenia’s politics. After the violent “resolution” of the Karabakh problem by Azerbaijan, the main issue structuring Armenia’s foreign policy for the last decades started to fade away, while former geopolitical alliances (mostly in Russia) proved not sufficiently reliable. Against this background, Armenia’s leadership began looking for alternatives, the most viable of which is the potential EU accession. Russia’s war against Ukraine, as well as Armenia’s subsequent efforts to reduce security dependence on Moscow and diversify security partnerships, have directly impacted the perception and vector of Yerevan’s European aspirations. The author underlines that regional countries are doomed to constantly engage in delicate acts of balancing between major powers, and the rising inter-power tensions might disrupt this balance.
Alexander Shpunt presents the conflict around the political power in Gagauzia through the prism of the struggle between big businesses, oriented towards the East, and the political elite whose political future is tied to the West (namely, Romania and the EU)—a struggle typical for post-Soviet states. Eugenia Gutul, the head of the Gagauz autonomy, has been put under house arrest and is now facing the threat of being removed from her position, with the official reason being a criminal case related to financing her election campaign. Gagauzia has recently turned into a kind of “internal offshore” for the Moldovan business elites, allowing significant budgetary interventions from the side of Russia’s state-affiliated banks. At the same time, Turkic-speaking Gagauzians fear the “Romanization” of the country occurring in the form of rapid integration of Romanian officials into Chisinau’s political fabric. Simultaneously, Turkey is also exploring “the contours of a new location of influence.”
Vladimir (Ze’ev) Khanin shares his observations on the attitude of the “Russian street” in Israeli society towards the war in Ukraine. He demonstrates that the dominant political attitude in Israel towards Russia was largely formed by the significant share of former Soviet and Russian citizens in the Israeli electorate and the realization of Russia’s increasing role in the Middle East. However, among the Russophone Israelis, support for Ukraine was larger both after the annexation of Crimea (2014) and after the start of the full-scale war (2022); in the latter case, support for Kyiv was even more visible. Nevertheless, in their majority, Russophone respondents (regardless of their particular origin) did not advocate a more direct Israeli intervention in the war. All in all, their “Russianness” or “Ukrainianness” proved to be less significant than their Israeli identity; “Russian-speaking immigrants have largely integrated into Israeli society and adopted its dominant system of values and political beliefs.”
Last but not least, in accordance with what is now a good tradition, Alexander Shpunt presents his monthly monitoring of analytical publications focused on post-Soviet conflicts. This initiative summarizes the five most interesting publications, in the author’s assessment, focused on politics and economy in the post-Soviet region.
We continue to keep our readership constantly updated in these turbulent times.