Tweet
EurasiaNet Organization
April 13 2005
EURASIA INSIGHT
RUMSFELD'S BAKU TRIP STIRS CONTROVERSY
Alman Talyshli 4/13/05
"Rumsfeld is interested in oil!" read a headline in the April 12
edition of the popular daily Echo. The April 12 visit of the Pentagon
chief to Azerbaijan was a natural target for local media hungry for
sensational news. But not only the press is looking for answers.
Rumsfeld's visit took place under extreme secrecy, with limited
public information, leaving many local analysts and pundits to
speculate about the reasons for the US secretary of defense's trip,
the third such visit in the past 15 months.
Most observers look to the issue of US military bases in Azerbaijan
as a possible cause. Last year, considerable speculation focused on
the possibility that worsening relations between Washington and
Tehran would push the American military to seek bases in Azerbaijan,
Iran's northern neighbor, in preparation for any possible attack on
the Islamic Republic. Although the White House has since opted for
diplomatic negotiations to deal with Iran's nuclear energy program,
many Middle East experts continue to believe that military force
remains an ongoing option.
The Pentagon and US Azerbaijan embassy web sites contained no
information on Rumsfeld's one-day visit to Baku, and Azerbaijani
officials preferred to keep their explanations general. The purpose
of the defense secretary's visit, Ali Hasanov, head of the
presidential administration's political department, told the ANS
television news station on April 10, "is to hold new discussions on
the principles of cooperation between Azerbaijan and the USA in the
sphere of security and [to] solve problems present in this sphere."
Hasanov also emphasized Azerbaijan's role in the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization's Partnership for Peace program, citing
Rumsfeld's participation "in cooperation issues implemented within
the framework of NATO."
But, given the recent redeployment of US military forces from
Germany, some Azerbaijani observers take a different view.
Independent military expert Uzeyir Jafarov, in an April 9 interview
with Echo, stated that Rumsfeld was coming to Baku to get a final
answer about establishment of a US military base in Azerbaijan.
Jafarov added that he believed the answer would be positive, and
could come as early as mid-April. Pro-government political figures
such as Jumshid Nuriyev, former head of Azerbaijan's customs service,
however, disagree with Jafarov, and have argued that Azerbaijan would
never agree to its territory being used for an attack on Iran, a
country with which Azerbaijan shares close cultural and historical
ties.
Analysts' views on the chances for a US military presence in
Azerbaijan coincide with shifts in Pentagon plans for deployment of
US forces. In a February 2004 visit to Uzbekistan, for example,
Rumsfeld outlined the concept of "operating sites" in Asia that would
allow the US and its allies "to periodically and intermittently have
access and support." In times of crisis, these "sites," usually
manned by small groups of personnel, could be expanded to handle
larger numbers of troops and supplies.
Recent statements from Pentagon officials about strategic needs in
the Caspian Sea region appear grounded in this "rapid reaction"
strategy. General James Jones, commander of US troops in Europe,
confirmed in recent congressional testimony the Pentagon's interest
in creating a special "Caspian guard" that would protect the Caspian
Sea's oil infrastructure as well as the nearly finished
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. The Wall Street Journal on April 11
reported that the US plans to spend $100 million on such a "Caspian
guard" capable of responding to crisis situations in the Caspian Sea
region, home to one of the world's largest reservoirs of oil. This
would include the development of a command center in Baku,
responsible for monitoring ships in the Caspian Sea.
Most analysts believe any kind of American military base in
Azerbaijan would have to be only of a temporary, mobile nature. In
2004, the Azerbaijani parliament adopted a law prohibiting the
stationing of foreign troops on the country's territory, a move
widely believed to be a gesture towards Moscow and Tehran, which both
oppose any strengthening of military ties between Azerbaijan and the
US.
With that opposition in mind, President Ilham Aliyev has so far shown
restraint in addressing Azerbaijan's military cooperation with
Washington. Though expected to meet with Rumsfeld, Aliyev instead
departed April 12 on a two-day visit to Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Azerbaijani opposition parties have speculated that
Rumsfeld's visit also carried a political message. Upcoming
parliamentary elections in November 2005 promise to be heated, and
some media outlets, such as ANS TV, have argued that official
Washington would close its eyes to the Aliyev administration's
progress with democratic reforms - and with them, any potential
election falsifications - if Azerbaijan would agree to deployment of
US military forces in the country. Pro-government members of
parliament have also not stopped short of charging that recent
closed-door meetings by US Ambassador Reno L. Harnish with regional
opposition leaders make up part of the Pentagon's negotiation scheme.
In his April 12 interview with ANS, Ali Hasanov rejected these
rumors. "America is a democratic country and would never try to
impose its interests on others," Hasanov said. "We are a sovereign
state and have our own interests, too."
Editor's Note: Alman Talyshli is a freelance political analyst in
Baku.
April 13 2005
EURASIA INSIGHT
RUMSFELD'S BAKU TRIP STIRS CONTROVERSY
Alman Talyshli 4/13/05
"Rumsfeld is interested in oil!" read a headline in the April 12
edition of the popular daily Echo. The April 12 visit of the Pentagon
chief to Azerbaijan was a natural target for local media hungry for
sensational news. But not only the press is looking for answers.
Rumsfeld's visit took place under extreme secrecy, with limited
public information, leaving many local analysts and pundits to
speculate about the reasons for the US secretary of defense's trip,
the third such visit in the past 15 months.
Most observers look to the issue of US military bases in Azerbaijan
as a possible cause. Last year, considerable speculation focused on
the possibility that worsening relations between Washington and
Tehran would push the American military to seek bases in Azerbaijan,
Iran's northern neighbor, in preparation for any possible attack on
the Islamic Republic. Although the White House has since opted for
diplomatic negotiations to deal with Iran's nuclear energy program,
many Middle East experts continue to believe that military force
remains an ongoing option.
The Pentagon and US Azerbaijan embassy web sites contained no
information on Rumsfeld's one-day visit to Baku, and Azerbaijani
officials preferred to keep their explanations general. The purpose
of the defense secretary's visit, Ali Hasanov, head of the
presidential administration's political department, told the ANS
television news station on April 10, "is to hold new discussions on
the principles of cooperation between Azerbaijan and the USA in the
sphere of security and [to] solve problems present in this sphere."
Hasanov also emphasized Azerbaijan's role in the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization's Partnership for Peace program, citing
Rumsfeld's participation "in cooperation issues implemented within
the framework of NATO."
But, given the recent redeployment of US military forces from
Germany, some Azerbaijani observers take a different view.
Independent military expert Uzeyir Jafarov, in an April 9 interview
with Echo, stated that Rumsfeld was coming to Baku to get a final
answer about establishment of a US military base in Azerbaijan.
Jafarov added that he believed the answer would be positive, and
could come as early as mid-April. Pro-government political figures
such as Jumshid Nuriyev, former head of Azerbaijan's customs service,
however, disagree with Jafarov, and have argued that Azerbaijan would
never agree to its territory being used for an attack on Iran, a
country with which Azerbaijan shares close cultural and historical
ties.
Analysts' views on the chances for a US military presence in
Azerbaijan coincide with shifts in Pentagon plans for deployment of
US forces. In a February 2004 visit to Uzbekistan, for example,
Rumsfeld outlined the concept of "operating sites" in Asia that would
allow the US and its allies "to periodically and intermittently have
access and support." In times of crisis, these "sites," usually
manned by small groups of personnel, could be expanded to handle
larger numbers of troops and supplies.
Recent statements from Pentagon officials about strategic needs in
the Caspian Sea region appear grounded in this "rapid reaction"
strategy. General James Jones, commander of US troops in Europe,
confirmed in recent congressional testimony the Pentagon's interest
in creating a special "Caspian guard" that would protect the Caspian
Sea's oil infrastructure as well as the nearly finished
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline. The Wall Street Journal on April 11
reported that the US plans to spend $100 million on such a "Caspian
guard" capable of responding to crisis situations in the Caspian Sea
region, home to one of the world's largest reservoirs of oil. This
would include the development of a command center in Baku,
responsible for monitoring ships in the Caspian Sea.
Most analysts believe any kind of American military base in
Azerbaijan would have to be only of a temporary, mobile nature. In
2004, the Azerbaijani parliament adopted a law prohibiting the
stationing of foreign troops on the country's territory, a move
widely believed to be a gesture towards Moscow and Tehran, which both
oppose any strengthening of military ties between Azerbaijan and the
US.
With that opposition in mind, President Ilham Aliyev has so far shown
restraint in addressing Azerbaijan's military cooperation with
Washington. Though expected to meet with Rumsfeld, Aliyev instead
departed April 12 on a two-day visit to Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Azerbaijani opposition parties have speculated that
Rumsfeld's visit also carried a political message. Upcoming
parliamentary elections in November 2005 promise to be heated, and
some media outlets, such as ANS TV, have argued that official
Washington would close its eyes to the Aliyev administration's
progress with democratic reforms - and with them, any potential
election falsifications - if Azerbaijan would agree to deployment of
US military forces in the country. Pro-government members of
parliament have also not stopped short of charging that recent
closed-door meetings by US Ambassador Reno L. Harnish with regional
opposition leaders make up part of the Pentagon's negotiation scheme.
In his April 12 interview with ANS, Ali Hasanov rejected these
rumors. "America is a democratic country and would never try to
impose its interests on others," Hasanov said. "We are a sovereign
state and have our own interests, too."
Editor's Note: Alman Talyshli is a freelance political analyst in
Baku.