{"word_count": 3311, "character_count": 28090}
Twenty years ago, after the collapse of the USSR, the countries of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan) and the Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia) became independent. The Central Asian republics, created between 1924 and 1936, could then &#8211; unexpectedly &#8211; enjoy a sovereignty previously unknown to them, whereas in the Caucasian states, the strong national movements that had developed during perestroika were deeply rooted in the past. During the 20th century, these Soviet socialist republics had been integrated into the unified production and trade system set up on the scale of the USSR and the principles of socialist planning. In this framework, they could take advantage of the resources and development policy of the Soviet state. Thus, despite any lacks or shortcomings they might have, the Caucasian and Central Asian republics belonged to the developed world in the bi-polar geopolitical division. The Caucasus and Central Asia served as models, if not showcases, for some Third World countries, all the more so as the USSR provided assistance to developing countries struggling against imperialism. Since the collapse of the USSR and the East-West division, the North-South opposition seems to have become one of the major reading grids of the international scene. Whereas during the Cold war, geopolitical analyses rested on the ideological and strategic confrontation between capitalist and socialist worlds, the North-South grid, for the most part, pointed to inequalities in development. Appearing in the 1970s, the notion of &#8220;South&#8221; in fact replaced the term &#8220;third world countries&#8221; or &#8220;developing countries, as opposed to the &#8220;North&#8221;, the developed and industrialised countries. Then came the expression &#8220;South countries&#8221;, referring to the diversity of this heterogeneous ensemble made up of both emerging and least advanced countries. In these new divisions of today&#8217;s globalised and regionalised world, where do we situate the independent states of Central Asia and the Caucasus?Research on contemporary trends in Central Asia and the Caucasus contains few attempts at examining the analysis grids elaborated to study the South countries &#8211; despite the fact that after the crisis at the turn of the 1990s and the magnitude of its economic, political and social impact, the newly independent Central Asian and Caucasian states were included, by international institutions as well as non-governmental organisations, in the &#8220;South countries&#8221;. As a result, during the 1990s, international assistance destined for the Central Asian republics and, to a lesser extent, the Caucasian republics, tended to slip from &#8220;transition&#8221; to &#8220;development&#8221; aid. In this respect, according to some analysts, Central Asia and the Caucasus followed a very original post-soviet trajectory, having entered into the globalised world by means of what could be called &#8220;third worldisation&#8221;. Thus they argue that the border between the &#8220;North&#8221; and the &#8220;South countries&#8221;, formerly located on the border of the USSR, was from then on situated on the southern border of Russia. Since it opposes a former metropolis and its former colonies, an approach in terms of &#8220;South countries&#8221; falls into a post-colonial pattern; as such, it leads us to examine the USSR&#8217;s imperial dimension and to mobilise the theoretical approaches (theory of dependency, post colonial studies, etc) to which we owe the notion of &#8220;South countries&#8221;. The current trajectories of Central Asia and the Caucasus also suggest that development issues be examined in the context of globalisation. In particular, these issues require an analysis of the transition paradigm developed during the 1990s by international organisations, aimed at replacing the socialist model with a political system organised on a democratic basis, an economy based on liberal capitalist principles and a Euro-Atlantic geopolitical positioning. Economic and social dynamics have tended to invalidate this teleological notion, which conditioned development and oriented the insertion of Central Asian and Caucasian republics into the mechanisms of globalisation. However, it is essential to question transition policies in order to evaluate the slippage towards the &#8220;South&#8221; which has taken place since their independence.The present period can be likened to a moment of diversification and individualisation of societies, economies and territories, on the basis of the Newly Independent States. In this respect, an examination of contemporary transformations in all their complexity not only means keeping a close watch on the diversity of political, economic and social actors, but also trying to identify the fault lines which tend to segment Central Asian and Caucasian territories and societies. The aim of the conference &#8220;The Caucasus and Central Asia, twenty years after independences: an examination of the notion of &#8216;South Countries&#8217;&#8221; &#8211; is to question the relevance of heuristic tools based on territories situated in the &#8220;South&#8221; but also, the very notion itself of &#8220;South countries&#8221;, so as to gain insight into the southern peripheries of post-soviet space. Its purpose is to bring together researchers in all social science disciplines (sociology, history, political science, geography, anthropology, demography and economics). This diversity should favour a confrontation of approaches and further insight into the complexity of the itineraries followed by the countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus in the past twenty years.&#160;CONFERENCE PROGRAM&#160;Thursday, 25 August&#160;9h30-10h WelcomeMeruert Kh. Abuseitova (Director of the R.B. Suleymenov Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan), Isabelle Ohayon (CNRS (National Centre for Scientific Research) / CERCEC, France) and Silvia Serrano (Clermont-Ferrand University / CERCEC, France).&#160;10h-12h30 Colonial History, National History (10h30 &#8211; 11h00 Coffee break)Chair: G. M. Molotova, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan.        Meruert Kh. Abuseitova, Director of the R.B. Suleymenov Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. History of Central Asia: Myth and reality            Benjamin H. Loring, Fitchburg State University, Fitchburg, USA. &#8220;Colonizers with Party Cards&#8221;: Internal Colonialism in Soviet Central Asia, 1921-1941.            Tetsuro Chida, Slavic Research Centre, Hokkaido University, Japan. The decentralisation process in Central Asian Republics in the 1970s: water supply policy and cadres&#8217; policy.            Ablet K. Kamalov, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. National Historiography of Post-soviet Central Asia in the light of Post-colonial theory.            Serguey Abashin, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia. Mustakillik and Memory Policy in Uzbekistan.    Discussant: Isabelle Ohayon, CNRS / CERCEC, Paris, France.&#160;12h30-14h00 Lunch&#160;14h-16h30 Building politics and citizenship(16h-16h30 Coffee Break)Chair: Irina Chernykh, Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan        L. G. Еrekesheva, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. The Concept of &#34;South&#34; and Modernization Theories Today: the Central Asian Context.             George Tarkhan-Mouravi, Institute for Policy Studies, Tbilisi, Georgia. Similarities and Diversity in Political Trajectories of Post-Soviet South: The Georgian Case.             Nicolas Gosset, Institute of Sociology, Centre for Development Research, Universit&#233; Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. Rethinking Citizenship from Below: &#8216;Usable Selves&#8217; and Everyday Politics in Rural Uzbekistan.            Z. G. Djalilov, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Religious and Interconfessional context in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan: Sociological Aspect.            Silvia Serrano, CERCEC / Clermont-Ferrand University, France. Building politics/policies through religion in post-soviet Georgia: a Southern pattern?    Discussant: Sanat K. Kushkumbaev, Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan.&#160;16h30 &#8211; 18h30 Borrowing and disseminating norms of public action Chair: Zhulduzbek B. Abylkhozhin, Institute of History and Ethnology&#160; Ch. Valikhanov, Almaty, Kazakhstan        Mana Farooghi, SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies), London, UK. International governance agenda and its shortcomings. Geopolitical &#8220;externalities&#8221; and Development Practice in Tajikistan.             Charles Buxton, INTRAC (International NGO Training and research center) in Central Asia, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. Accountability of global financial institutions: first steps by Central Asia NGOs.            Yana Zabanova, ESI (European Stability Initiative), Berlin, Germany. Georgia&#8217;s Post-Soviet Libertarian Elite: Choosing a Development Model and Marketing the Strategy.             Amandine Regamey, Universit&#233; Paris I / CERCEC, Paris, France. Importing the Filipino Model of migration management in Tajikistan.            Ghia Nodia, Ilya University, Tbilisi, Georgia. Democratization and Modernization: The Convergence of Paradigms in the Post-Communist South-East.    Discussant: Alexandr Iskandaryan, Caucasus Institute, Yerevan, Armenia.&#160;Welcome reception at the Hotel KazzholFriday, 26 August&#160;9h-11h00 Central Asia and its neighbors(11h-11h30 Coffee break)Chair: Zh. A. Ermekbaev, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan.        G. U. Khadzhieva, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Central Asia, Kazakhstan and China. Looking for common approach to economic interaction.            St&#233;phane De Tapia, CNRS / Cultures et soci&#233;t&#233;s en Europe, Strasbourg, France. Economic, political and cultural tools for Turkish policy in Central Asia and the Caucasus.            Ashirbek K. Muminov, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Islam in the Relations between Central Asian States and the Countries in the Muslim World.             E. I. Rudenko, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Central Asia: View from Abroad (the case of Indian Analysts Approach).            Mirzokhid Rakhimov, Institute of History, Academy of Sciences, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Central Asia and Japan: Mutual Cooperation and Perspective on Wider Partnership.     Discussant: Julien Thorez, CNRS / Mondes iranien et indien, Paris, France.&#160;11h30-15h00 Economic resources, economic actors and the North / South border (12h30-14h00 Lunch)Chair: A. I. Orazbaeva, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan.        Zhulduzbek B. Abylhozhin, Institute of History and Ethnology Ch. Valikhanov, Almaty, Kazakhstan, and Mostafa Golam, KIMEP (Kazakhstan Institute of Management, Economy, and Strategic Research), Almaty, Kazakhstan. &#34;North-South&#8221; Dilemnas: Domestic Socio-Economic and Socio-Cultural Projection on the Central-Asian vector.            Rapha&#235;le Machet de la Martini&#232;re, Universit&#233; Paris Ouest Nanterre / AgroParisTech, Paris, France. Can Kirghiztan agriculture be qualified as post-colonial?.            H&#233;l&#232;ne Rousselot, EHESS/ CETOBAC, Paris, France. The transformation of two resource-based central Asian countries: Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, 1991-2002.            Giulia Prelz Oltramonti, CEVIPOL, Universit&#233; Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. Business through de facto states: past and present relevance of cross-border trade links and economic cooperation in the Caucasus.            Nazigul Mingisheva, Qaragandy Bolashak University, Qaragandy, Kazakhstan. Islamic Finances Building in Kazakhstan: Some Basic Aspects and Perspectives.    Discussant: Ghia Nodia, Ilya University, Tbilisi, Georgia.&#160;15h-17h30 Poverty, inequalities and social policy (16h-16h30 Coffee break)Chair: Vladimir Mukomel, Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.        Evelyne Baumann, IRD, Paris, France. Social Protection in the South: Georgia and Senegal. To compare the Uncomparable?            Saodat Olimova, Centre Sharq, Dushanbe Tajikistan. Human Capital and Inequalities in Tajikistan: Interrelation and Interaction.            Gulzhan Alimbekova, TSIOM, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Urban Versus Countryside in Kazakhstan: A Comparative Sociological Data Analysis 2001 and 2010.            C&#233;cile Lef&#232;vre, University Paris Descartes 5, Paris, France, and Sophie Hohmann, CERCEC and INED, Paris, France. Social policies in Central Asia and the Caucasus: Tranformation and interpretation.            Parvin Ahanchi, Institue of Archealogy and Ethnology, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan, New &#8220;oil boom&#8221; in Azerbaijan: social, demographic and economic consequences.    Discussant: George Tarkhan-Mouravi, Institute for Policy Studies, Tbilisi, Georgia.&#160;Saturday, 27 August&#160;9h-11h00 A gender approach to migration and poverty(11h-11h30 Coffee break)Chair: Alexandr Iskandaryan, Caucasus Institute, Yerevan, Armenia.        Jabi Kifayat Aghayeva, Azerbaijan Languages University, Baku, Azerbaijan. Migration Negative Affect on Azerbaijani Women, Feminization of Poverty.             Natalya Zotova, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Moscow, Russia, and Victor Agadjanian, Arizona State University, USA. Exploring Sexual Risks of Central Asia Female migrants in Moscow.             Anara Moldosheva, independent gender consultant, Kyrgyzstan. Gender in development: Who are the Winners and Losers?            Iulia Florinskaya, Laboratory of Migration Analysis, Institute of Economic Forecasting, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia. Strategies in Family migrations from Central Asia: with children or without?            Madeleine Reeves, Manchester University, Manchester, UK. Transnational labour migration and the outsourcing of care: a comparison of global &#8220;Souths&#8221;.     Discussant: Serguey Abashin, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Institute of Oriental Studies, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.&#160;11h30-15h00 Migration policy and migrant strategies(12h30-14h00 : Lunch)Chair: G. N. Kim, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan.        Florian M&#252;hlfried, Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology, Halle (Saale), Germany. Of Triple Winning and Simple Losing.            Lilia Sagitova, Institute for Social Research and Citizen Initiative, Tatarstan Academy of Science, Kazan, Russia. Looking for a new identity: Adaptation strategy of migrant women in Tatarstan.            Anne Le Hu&#233;rou, CERCEC, Paris, France. Diaspora as a multi-tiered resource for migration policy and its confrontation to migrant strategies: the case of Omsk.            Gulnara M. Mendikulova, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Ethnic Policy in Central Asia: How to Face Migrations Challenge.            Sergey Rumyantsev, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany. Azerbaidjani Diaspora in Europe and Russia&#8221;     Discussant: Saodat Olimova, Centre Sharq, Dushanbe, Tajikistan.&#160;15h &#8211; 17h30 Migrations and transformations of the Post-soviet space Chair: Meruert Kh. Abuseitova, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Kazakhstan.        Vladimir Mukomel, Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia. North/ South Fragmentation of Post-soviet Space: influence on migrations.            Teniz Zh. Sharipov, Expert in Finance, Osh, Kyrgyzstan. Migrations and Poverty in Independent Kirghizstan.            Natalya Kosmarskaya, Centre for Central Eurasian Studies, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia. Migrants and Old-Residents in Post-Soviet Сentral Asian Cities: Settlement, Identity, Conflict (the Case-Study of Bishkek)            Julien Thorez, CNRS / Mondes iranien et indien, Paris, France. Frontiers, discontinuities and migration: post-soviet space between South and North.            Еvgenyi Abdullaev, Independent researcher, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Figure of oblivion: labour migration in relationship with Russia and Post-soviet States of Central Asia.     Discussant: Madeleine Reeves, Manchester University, Manchester, UK.&#160;17.30 &#8211; 18.00 Concluding session&#160;Organising Institutions:        Centre d&#8217;&#233;tude des mondes russe, caucasien et centre-europ&#233;en (CERCEC) (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) / Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS), Paris;            Institute for Oriental Studies R.B. Suleymenov, Committe of Science, Ministry of Education and Science, Republic of Kazakhstan (Almaty);            ANR (French National Research Agency), Program &#8220;Sudsov&#8221;, Paris;            IFEAC (French Institute for Central Asian Studies), Tashkent;            Centre franco-russe de recherche en sciences humaines et sociales, Moscow.&#160;    Organisation committee: Sophie Hohman, CNRS-CERCEC/ INED (National Institute for Demographic Studies), Paris, Anne Le Hu&#233;rou, CNRS-CERCEC, Paris, Isabelle Ohayon, CNRS-CERCEC, Paris, Amandine Regamey, Paris I University/CERCEC, Paris, Silvia Serrano, Universit&#233; d&#8217;Auvergne, Clermont-Ferrand, CERCEC, Paris, Nazigul Shaymardanova, Institute for Oriental Studies, Almaty, Julien Thorez, CNRS, Mondes iranien et indien, Paris.&#160;International scientific committee: Sergey Abashin, Institute of ethnology and anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Alexandre Iskandaryan, Caucasus Institute, Erevan, Mohamed-Reza Djalili, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Sanat Kushkumbaev, Kazakhstan Institute for Strategic Studies, Almaty, Vladimir Mukomel, Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Claire Mouradian, CNRS-CERCEC, Paris, Ghia Nodia, Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development/Ilya University, Tbilissi, Saodat Olimova, Sharq Center, Duchanbe, Jean Radvanyi, Centre franco-russe de recherche en sciences humaines et sociales, Moscow.------------------------------ Pr&#233;sentation g&#233;n&#233;raleIl y a vingt ans, &#224; la suite de l&#8217;&#233;clatement de l&#8217;URSS, les pays d&#8217;Asie centrale (Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Ouzb&#233;kistan, Tadjikistan, Turkm&#233;nistan) et du Caucase (Arm&#233;nie, Azerba&#239;djan, G&#233;orgie) acc&#233;daient &#224; l&#8217;ind&#233;pendance. Cr&#233;&#233;es entre 1924 et 1936, les r&#233;publiques centre-asiatiques connurent alors&#160; une souverainet&#233;&#160; in&#233;dite, accept&#233;e plus que recherch&#233;e, tandis que les Etats caucasiens, o&#249; des mouvements nationalistes puissants s&#8217;&#233;taient d&#233;velopp&#233;s durant la perestro&#239;ka, s&#8217;inscrivaient dans une histoire nationale plus ancienne. Au cours du XXe si&#232;cle, ces r&#233;publiques socialistes sovi&#233;tiques avaient &#233;t&#233; int&#233;gr&#233;es dans le syst&#232;me de production et d&#8217;&#233;changes unifi&#233;, organis&#233; &#224; l&#8217;&#233;chelle de l&#8217;URSS selon les principes de la planification socialiste. Dans ce cadre, elles avaient dispos&#233; des ressources et de la politique de d&#233;veloppement de l&#8217;Etat sovi&#233;tique. &#192; ce titre, malgr&#233; leurs carences, les r&#233;publiques caucasiennes et centre-asiatiques appartenaient au monde d&#233;velopp&#233; dans la partition g&#233;opolitique du monde bipolaire. Le Caucase et l&#8217;Asie centrale avaient pu faire figure de mod&#232;le sinon de vitrine pour certains pays du tiers-monde, d&#8217;autant que l&#8217;URSS apportait son aide aux pays en voie de d&#233;veloppement en lutte contre l&#8217;imp&#233;rialisme.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; Depuis la disparition de l&#8217;URSS et de la division Est-Ouest, l&#8217;opposition Nord-Sud est apparue comme une des grandes grilles de lecture de la sc&#232;ne internationale. Alors que la confrontation id&#233;ologique et strat&#233;gique entre les mondes capitaliste et socialiste structurait les r&#233;cits g&#233;opolitiques durant la guerre froide, cette appr&#233;hension des discontinuit&#233;s de l&#8217;espace mondial renvoie davantage aux in&#233;galit&#233;s de d&#233;veloppement. Apparue dans les ann&#233;es 1970, la notion de &#171;&#160;Sud&#160;&#187; avait en effet succ&#233;d&#233; aux cat&#233;gories de &#171;&#160;pays du tiers-monde&#160;&#187; ou &#171;&#160;pays en voie de d&#233;veloppement&#160;&#187; par opposition au &#171;&#160;Nord&#160;&#187;, constitu&#233; des pays d&#233;velopp&#233;s et industrialis&#233;s. Par la suite, l&#8217;expression &#171;&#160;les Suds&#160;&#187; s&#8217;est impos&#233;e, de fa&#231;on &#224; rendre compte de la diversit&#233; de cet ensemble h&#233;t&#233;rog&#232;ne qui comprend aussi bien les pays &#233;mergents que les pays les moins avanc&#233;s. Dans ces nouvelles lignes de partage du monde contemporain, mondialis&#233; et r&#233;gionalis&#233;, o&#249; se situent les Etats ind&#233;pendants d&#8217;Asie centrale et du Caucase&#160;? &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; Il existe peu de tentatives d&#8217;interroger les grilles d&#8217;analyse &#233;labor&#233;es pour &#233;tudier les Suds, dans le cadre des recherches portant sur les &#233;volutions contemporaines de l&#8217;Asie centrale et du Caucase. Pourtant, &#224; la suite de la crise survenue au tournant des ann&#233;es 1990, dont l&#8217;ampleur &#8211; &#233;conomique, sociale, politique &#8211; fut exceptionnelle, les pays centre-asiatiques et caucasiens nouvellement ind&#233;pendants ont pu &#234;tre rattach&#233;s aux &#171;&#160;Suds&#160;&#187; par les institutions internationales comme par les organisations non gouvernementales. L&#8217;assistance internationale destin&#233;e aux r&#233;publiques centre-asiatiques et, dans une moindre mesure, caucasiennes a ainsi eu tendance &#224; glisser au cours des ann&#233;es 1990 de l&#8217;aide &#224; la &#171;&#160;transition&#160;&#187; vers l&#8217;aide au d&#233;veloppement. A cet &#233;gard, l&#8217;Asie centrale et le Caucase auraient suivi une trajectoire post-sovi&#233;tique tout &#224; fait originale, leur insertion dans la mondialisation pouvant s&#8217;apparenter &#224; une forme de &#171;&#160;tiers-mondisation&#160;&#187;. Aussi la limite entre les &#171;&#160;Nords&#160;&#187; et les &#171;&#160;Suds&#160;&#187;, localis&#233;e auparavant sur la fronti&#232;re de l&#8217;URSS, serait-elle d&#233;sormais situ&#233;e sur la fronti&#232;re m&#233;ridionale de la Russie. Opposant ancienne m&#233;tropole et anciennes colonies, une approche en termes de &#171;&#160;Suds&#160;&#187; s&#8217;inscrit dans un sch&#233;ma post-colonial qui invite &#224; questionner la dimension imp&#233;riale de l&#8217;URSS et &#224; mobiliser les approches th&#233;oriques (th&#233;orie de la d&#233;pendance, post colonial studies, etc) &#224; travers lesquelles ont &#233;t&#233; pens&#233;s les &#171;&#160;Suds&#160;&#187;. &#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; Les trajectoires contemporaines de l&#8217;Asie centrale et du Caucase incitent &#233;galement &#224; articuler la probl&#233;matique du d&#233;veloppement aux questionnements sur la mondialisation. En particulier, elle demande d&#8217;analyser le paradigme de la transition, qui fut d&#233;velopp&#233; par les organisations internationales au cours des ann&#233;es 1990 pour substituer au mod&#232;le socialiste un syst&#232;me politique organis&#233; sur des bases d&#233;mocratiques, une &#233;conomie fond&#233;e selon des principes capitalistes lib&#233;raux et un positionnement g&#233;opolitique euro-atlantique, et sa mise en &#339;uvre. Les dynamiques &#233;conomiques et sociales tendent &#224; invalider cette notion t&#233;l&#233;ologique qui a conditionn&#233; le d&#233;veloppement et orient&#233; l&#8217;insertion dans les m&#233;canismes de la mondialisation des pays centre-asiatiques et caucasiens. Toutefois, questionner les politiques de la transition demeure essentiel pour &#233;valuer le glissement vers le &#171;&#160;Sud&#160;&#187; op&#233;r&#233; par les Etats d&#8217;Asie centrale et du Caucase depuis leur accession &#224; l&#8217;ind&#233;pendance.&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160;&#160; La p&#233;riode actuelle s&#8217;apparente &#224; un moment de diversification et d&#8217;individualisation des soci&#233;t&#233;s, des &#233;conomies et des territoires sur la base des Etats nouvellement ind&#233;pendants. A cet &#233;gard, interroger les transformations contemporaines dans leur complexit&#233; implique non seulement de pr&#234;ter une attention soutenue &#224; la diversit&#233; des acteurs politiques, &#233;conomiques et sociaux mais &#233;galement de tenter d&#8217;identifier les lignes de fractures qui d&#233;sormais segmentent les territoires et les soci&#233;t&#233;s d&#8217;Asie centrale et du Caucase.&#160;Le colloque &#171;&#160;Le Caucase et l&#8217;Asie centrale, vingt ans apr&#232;s les ind&#233;pendances. Questionner la notion de &#34;Sud(s)&#34;&#160;&#187; a pour ambition d&#8217;interroger la pertinence des outils heuristiques &#233;labor&#233;s &#224; partir de terrains situ&#233;s au &#171;&#160;Sud&#160;&#187;, mais aussi de la notion m&#234;me de &#171;&#160;Sud(s)&#160;&#187; pour appr&#233;hender les p&#233;riph&#233;ries m&#233;ridionales de l&#8217;espace post-sovi&#233;tique. Il entend r&#233;unir des chercheurs de toutes les disciplines des sciences sociales (sociologie, histoire, sciences politiques, g&#233;ographie, anthropologie, d&#233;mographie, &#233;conomie). Cette diversit&#233; doit permettre de confronter les approches et d&#8217;appr&#233;hender la complexit&#233; des itin&#233;raires suivis, depuis une vingtaine d&#8217;ann&#233;es, par les pays d&#8217;Asie centrale et du Caucase. -------------------------Organisation&#160;&#160; Institutions organisatrices :&#160;    Centre d&#8217;&#233;tude des mondes russe, caucasien et centre-europ&#233;en (CERCEC) (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique/Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris)     Institut d&#8217;orientalisme de l&#8217;Acad&#233;mie des sciences de la R&#233;publique du Kazakhstan, (Almaty),     Agence Nationale de la Recherche, Programme &#171; Sudsov &#187; (Paris),     Institut fran&#231;ais d&#8217;&#233;tudes sur l&#8217;Asie centrale (Tachkent),     Centre franco-russe de recherche en sciences humaines et sociales (Moscou).&#160; Comit&#233; d&#8217;organisation :&#160;    Sophie Hohmann CNRS-CERCEC/INED,&#160;     Anne Le Hu&#233;rou, CNRS-CERCEC,     Isabelle Ohayon, CNRS-CERCEC,     Amandine Regamey, Universit&#233; Paris 1/CERCEC,     Silvia Serrano, Universit&#233; d&#8217;Auvergne/ CERCEC,     Nazigul Shajmardanova, Institut d&#8217;orientalisme de l&#8217;Acad&#233;mie des Sciences du Kazakhstan,     Julien Thorez, CNRS-Mondes iranien et indien.&#160; Comit&#233; scientifique international :&#160;    Serguey Abachin, Institut d&#8217;ethnologie et d&#8217;anthropologie de l&#8217;Acad&#233;mie des sciences de Russie, Moscou,&#160;&#160;     Mohammad-Reza Djalili, Institut universitaire de Hautes Etudes Internationales et du D&#233;veloppement de Gen&#232;ve,     Alexandre Iskanderyan, Caucasus Institute, Erevan,     Sanat Kouchkoumbaev, Institut d&#8217;Etudes strat&#233;giques du Kazakhstan, Almaty,     Vladimir Mukomel&#8217;, Institut de Sociologie de l&#8217;Acad&#233;mie des sciences de Russie, Moscou,     Claire Mouradian, CNRS-CERCEC, Paris,     Ghia Nodia, Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development (CIPDD)/Universit&#233; Ilia, Tbilissi,     Saodat Olimova, Centre Sharq, Douchanbe,     Jean Radvanyi, Centre franco-russe de recherche en sciences humaines et sociales, Moscou.&#160; 