The South Caucasus is an unstable and unpredictable hotbed of problems: closed borders, unresolved conflicts, acrimonious neighbors, trafficking and a lack of democratic governance. Unfortunately, it has been given limited attention by the international community and rather too much attention from some others. A decade ago this could have been blamed on a lack of knowledge of the region. Nowadays, it’s more a case of lack of interest, with many in the West not viewing the region as a security threat. They see the continuation of the status quo as acceptable in the complacent belief that it will hold forever. It’s time to wake up because it will not. Lessons that should have been learned from the 2008 war between Georgia and Russia have not hit home. Back then the international community had an unconcerned approach towards South Ossetia and Abkhazia, apparently believing that the underachieving peace talks were actually holding the status quo together and would eventually achieve something.

Then the world woke to the sound of rumbling tanks and gunfire as Russia and Georgia went to war. Following the cease-fire there was much talk from the West about "doing more” to prevent the same thing from happening again -- most notably in the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the Azerbaijani province of Nagorno-Karabakh -- but as is frequently the case the chattering eventually died down and did not turn into concrete actions. Two years later not only have the Russians still failed to fully implement the cease-fire plan over Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the West is still scratching its head over how to be more useful in the Karabakh conflict. The Russians have made themselves at home in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, while Armenia and Azerbaijan defense spending has soared. While it is unlikely either the leadership of Azerbaijan or Armenia would purposely start a new war, troops in the trenches and generals in the barracks are getting increasingly frustrated over the lack of progress after almost two decades. Increased violations across the "line of contact” have resulted in the death toll increasing, and it is not unlikely that at some point one of these violations will accidentally go too far and result in a new war. The consequences of such a war would be devastating.

The approach of the West is disappointing and shortsighted. The South Caucasus is the backyard of the EU, which should be ready to take on a greater role. Given the EU has very little "baggage” with the region -- unlike some of the others -- it is well placed to do so. If just one influential member state would seriously make the region a priority, it could make a difference to the EU’s approach. This was the case with the Western Balkans when certain member states pushed the region hard on the EU’s agenda. Unfortunately, until now, not a single EU member state is ready to do that for the South Caucasus. The fact that the region is of increasing geostrategic importance, having crucial energy and transport links, makes this approach even more myopic.

The EU may also find it useful to coordinate any future policy with Turkey. For years Turkey punched below its weight in the region and is now looking for a wider role. While Turkey has been somewhat successful economically, politically it has not been able to make much progress. Its Caucasus Stability Platform, launched in the aftermath of the Georgia-Russia war, has not progressed. It was a mistake to make itself and Russia the only external participants, excluding the EU and the US. Furthermore, Turkey’s stalled rapprochement with Armenia and its failed attempt to assert itself into the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict have demonstrated that Turkey rushed too quickly into the Caucasus quagmire. Turkey has the potential to play a strong role, but it needs to take a more careful approach involving other relevant partners such as the EU and accept that it can never be part of the Karabakh peace process.

The EU also needs to move away from being apparently obsessed about the Russian reaction to everything. According to Thomas de Waal, one of the world’s leading experts on the South Caucasus, the West should stop over-exaggerating Russia’s power and influence, portraying the countries of the region as little more than pawns on a chess board that Russia moves around. The "savviness” of the locals should not be underestimated given that they have spent the last 200 years cultivating their relations with Moscow and playing the big players off each other. Under Soviet rule too -- leaders such as Haydar Aliyev and Edward Shevardnadze were very much their own men, giving the right nod to Moscow when it was needed but still very much ruling their own lands and opening up to the West. Furthermore, unlike some other countries such as Ukraine, Belarus or Kazakhstan, there are only 2 percent ethnic Russians in this region.

Simply, we need a more serious and coordinated approach to reduce tensions and help find solutions to conflicts, bringing greater awareness to the region and developing the instruments we have available to be more useful there.