Tweet
The Messenger, Georgia
May 13 2005
Why Armenia and Azerbaijan leaders did not attend Bush's visit
George Bush's visits to Latvia and Georgia were markedly different in
that while in Riga the U.S. president met not only the president of
Latvia, but also the leaders of Estonia and Lithuania, in Tbilisi he
was unable to meet Presidents Aliev and Kocharian.
This suggests one major difference between the Caucasus and the
Baltic - that while the three Baltic countries have managed to
coordinate their domestic and foreign political strengths, and in so
doing have achieved great success, the three South Caucasian
countries have been unable to manage such cooperation.
Aside from a lack of cooperation, there are two major reasons why
such a joint meeting was not possible - the Nogorny Karabakh
conflict, and the Georgian precedent of democratic change through
velvet revolution.
President Bush was in Georgia, he said, primarily to express support
for the democratic developments he sees taking place in the country.
Bush hailed the Rose revolution as a model for others to follow,
noting that since then there have been similar developments in
Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, and also outside the post-Soviet sphere, in
Lebanon and Iraq.
In Armenia and Azerbaijan, however, there have so far been no such
changes, although many regional analysts believe that both countries
could see similar upheavals in the near future. The Rose and Orange
revolutions have encouraged the opposition in Armenia and Azerbaijan,
and it is apparent that although Georgia enjoys good relations with
both countries, its model of velvet revolution is seen as a threat in
both Baku and Yerevan.
In Azerbaijan, parliamentary elections are to be held this autumn and
the opposition has already warned Ilham Aliev not to falsify
elections. It is notable that although President Aliev did not travel
to Tbilisi during Bush's visit, a group of students did. According to
the Liberty Institute of Georgia, the Azerbaijan organization
includes a local youth group called Iokhi - a group akin to Georgia's
Kmara - and it was their representatives who greeted Bush with
placards condemning Aliev.
While Aliev could have come to meet with Bush, however, despite the
placards, Armenian President Robert Kocharian was in little position
to do so. Armenia is highly dependent on Russia, its main strategic
partner, and given that Moscow was clearly upset by Bush's visit to
Georgia, for Kocharian to have appeared in Tbilisi would certainly
have had a negative effect on Armenian-Russian relations.
The other important issue is that of Nogorny Karabakh. Ilham Aliev
refuses to attend any event also attended by Kocharian, meaning that
while it might have been possible for one of the Armenian and
Azerbaijani presidents to visit Tbilisi, both at the same time
certainly was not. This situation seems unlikely to change unless the
Karabakh issue is resolved, something which seems even more
improbable at present, given that Armenia under Kocharian, who was de
facto president of the region before becoming president of Armenia,
is wholly opposed to returning Karabakh to Azerbaijan, something the
United States backs.
This should be of concern to the United States, as well as Russia and
other interested parties, as the continuing existence of frozen
conflicts in the South Caucasus - not only in Nogorny Karabakh but
South Ossetia and Abkhazia as well - poses a threat to the stability
of the region. Resolving all three conflicts through peaceful means
is in the interests of everybody concerned and should be a major
priority.
Increased regional cooperation should also be a priority. President
Saakashvili and others have frequently noted that the Caucasus
countries have much to learn from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia,
former Soviet countries that today boast strong economies and EU
membership. The cooperation symbolized by their three leaders
together meeting Bush is area where Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan
could learn by their example.
May 13 2005
Why Armenia and Azerbaijan leaders did not attend Bush's visit
George Bush's visits to Latvia and Georgia were markedly different in
that while in Riga the U.S. president met not only the president of
Latvia, but also the leaders of Estonia and Lithuania, in Tbilisi he
was unable to meet Presidents Aliev and Kocharian.
This suggests one major difference between the Caucasus and the
Baltic - that while the three Baltic countries have managed to
coordinate their domestic and foreign political strengths, and in so
doing have achieved great success, the three South Caucasian
countries have been unable to manage such cooperation.
Aside from a lack of cooperation, there are two major reasons why
such a joint meeting was not possible - the Nogorny Karabakh
conflict, and the Georgian precedent of democratic change through
velvet revolution.
President Bush was in Georgia, he said, primarily to express support
for the democratic developments he sees taking place in the country.
Bush hailed the Rose revolution as a model for others to follow,
noting that since then there have been similar developments in
Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan, and also outside the post-Soviet sphere, in
Lebanon and Iraq.
In Armenia and Azerbaijan, however, there have so far been no such
changes, although many regional analysts believe that both countries
could see similar upheavals in the near future. The Rose and Orange
revolutions have encouraged the opposition in Armenia and Azerbaijan,
and it is apparent that although Georgia enjoys good relations with
both countries, its model of velvet revolution is seen as a threat in
both Baku and Yerevan.
In Azerbaijan, parliamentary elections are to be held this autumn and
the opposition has already warned Ilham Aliev not to falsify
elections. It is notable that although President Aliev did not travel
to Tbilisi during Bush's visit, a group of students did. According to
the Liberty Institute of Georgia, the Azerbaijan organization
includes a local youth group called Iokhi - a group akin to Georgia's
Kmara - and it was their representatives who greeted Bush with
placards condemning Aliev.
While Aliev could have come to meet with Bush, however, despite the
placards, Armenian President Robert Kocharian was in little position
to do so. Armenia is highly dependent on Russia, its main strategic
partner, and given that Moscow was clearly upset by Bush's visit to
Georgia, for Kocharian to have appeared in Tbilisi would certainly
have had a negative effect on Armenian-Russian relations.
The other important issue is that of Nogorny Karabakh. Ilham Aliev
refuses to attend any event also attended by Kocharian, meaning that
while it might have been possible for one of the Armenian and
Azerbaijani presidents to visit Tbilisi, both at the same time
certainly was not. This situation seems unlikely to change unless the
Karabakh issue is resolved, something which seems even more
improbable at present, given that Armenia under Kocharian, who was de
facto president of the region before becoming president of Armenia,
is wholly opposed to returning Karabakh to Azerbaijan, something the
United States backs.
This should be of concern to the United States, as well as Russia and
other interested parties, as the continuing existence of frozen
conflicts in the South Caucasus - not only in Nogorny Karabakh but
South Ossetia and Abkhazia as well - poses a threat to the stability
of the region. Resolving all three conflicts through peaceful means
is in the interests of everybody concerned and should be a major
priority.
Increased regional cooperation should also be a priority. President
Saakashvili and others have frequently noted that the Caucasus
countries have much to learn from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia,
former Soviet countries that today boast strong economies and EU
membership. The cooperation symbolized by their three leaders
together meeting Bush is area where Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan
could learn by their example.