Tweet
AZERI PAPER SAYS IRAN TO "HIT" AZERBAIJAN IF USA STARTS WAR
Azadliq, Baku
9 Apr 06
The Azerbaijani opposition newspaper Azadliq has detailed "three
issues" on which the Azerbaijani and US governments are to cooperate
in the possible US war against Iran. The paper looked into "principles
and interests" that the alliance between the two countries is based
upon. It added that if the USA starts war with Iran, the latter will
organize acts of sabotage in Azerbaijan. The following is text of
Qanimat Zahid's report in Azerbaijani newspaper Azadliq on 9 April
headlined "Will Iran hit Azerbaijan" and subheaded "What is the USA
demanding from Azerbaijan?"; subheadings as published:
Azerbaijan is to cooperate with Americans on three issues in the
expected US-Iranian war, according to reports we have received from
diplomatic sources.
First, Azerbaijan is to open its air space for US warplanes.
Second, US warplanes are to use Azerbaijani military aerodromes and
be provided with fuel there.
Third, Azerbaijan is to agree to the deployment on its territory of
a limited contingent of US troops in order to serve the US air force.
As we see, the conditions are not that big. In fact, it seems necessary
to regard as somewhat ordinary the conditions put forward in exchange
for statements constantly made that "the USA and Azerbaijan are
strategic allies". That is to say, the USA may start war with Iran
under the pretext of eliminating a danger capable of threatening its
strategic interests. In such a case, it may demand that its strategic
allies remain loyal to principles of alliance.
USA's strategy of alliance with us
On the basis of what principles and interests is the USA's strategy
of alliance with Azerbaijan built? It is important to clarify these
interests to see to which extent the USA's and Azerbaijan's strategic
goals match.
First, Azerbaijan needs to extract its strategic wealth - oil - in
maximum security and benefit from it. The USA has been guaranteeing
such security so far. It is another issue that the oil that is being
extracted in safe conditions has nothing to do with the Azerbaijani
people. It is also another issue how the Azerbaijani oil, which is
being extracted in completely safe conditions, and Azerbaijan itself
are divided between other parties guaranteeing security. Is it done
fairly or unfairly?
Second, Azerbaijan is to prevent Russia from completely taking
over the regional energy corridor and to protect US interests in
the corridor. This condition for strategic alliance has also been
observed by means of the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil
pipeline. Hydrocarbons from Central Asia and the South Caucasus are
being exported via the "energy road" passing through Azerbaijan to
Europe - market of hydrocarbons which the USA manages to control.
Third, Azerbaijan's existence on the basis of secular values and on
the condition of integration into Europe is to restrict Russia's and
Iran's influence on the South Caucasus.
USA's behaviour within the framework of alliance strategy
We can see clearly that the USA needs the conditions and demands of
strategic alliance between the world's superpower and Azerbaijan more
than Azerbaijan does. It is true that the USA has also taken specific
steps to reinforce these conditions. However, the positive impact of
these steps on Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijani people still cannot be
seen. What are these reinforcing steps?
US companies have invested billions [of dollars] in Azerbaijan. Even
though the bulk of the investments fall to the oil sector, these
investments could have played an exceptional role for a clever
government in order to strengthen the state.
US public institutions have also spent large amounts of money towards
formation of democratic traditions in Azerbaijan. A clever government
could have been interested in the entrance to the country of these
"investments" which could be considered irreplaceable for the
strengthening of public mechanisms. Unfortunately, the Azerbaijani
government is not clever. What is more, the Azerbaijani government is
not working on political strategies ensuring the state's interests. The
entire action strategy of this government is based on search for
ways of benefiting further and for longer from sources belonging to
the state.
The USA is also taking steps within the framework of its strategic
interests so as to ensure that totalitarianism in Azerbaijan does
not rise to a level that could disgrace the USA itself. Strategic
alliance with Azerbaijan's current half-totalitarian society and
half-authoritarian government is for the time being continuing as it
has not disgraced the USA as much as it was thought.
Karabakh is not part of the Azerbaijani government's strategic
interests
One of the important results of the US-Azerbaijani strategic alliance
for Azerbaijan could be success in making world's powers accept
its fair position in the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict resolution. The
US government should have taken specific steps in exchange for its
strategic ally's strategic demands. However, we are all observing
the fact that our strategic ally is not giving serious international
support to the Nagornyy Karabakh settlement. What is more, it is
not doing so for a very simple reason. The Azerbaijani government
does not seem to have informed its strategic ally of its vitally
important conditions at all. Azerbaijan has shaped its oil strategy
in such a way as to preserve the topicality of Heydarism with support
from US lobby organizations and potential lobbyists and also to have
Washington turn a blind eye to an even greater embezzlement of US
investments in and aid provided to Azerbaijan. The result is that
the Azerbaijani government does not expect of its strategic ally to
take steps for the sake of the Azerbaijani state, but to protect a
Mafiosi clan. Administrations that change one by one in the USA,
which is our strategic ally, are also involved in this work and
protect USA's strategic interests.
On what "conditions" may Iran hit Azerbaijan?
The USA is now demanding that its strategic ally Azerbaijan honour, in
a standoff with Iran, commitments proceeding from alliance. Naturally,
the US government will succeed in this when necessary. These conditions
were mentioned at the beginning of this article. What steps may Iran
take against the USA's strategic ally Azerbaijan if those conditions
are fulfilled? It would be interesting to recall these.
It is clear that Iran, which has rich experience in carrying out
terrorist attacks, will plan to carry out possible acts of sabotage
on Azerbaijani territory. Moreover, Iran will maximally mobilize its
network of agents in Azerbaijan and put it into operation. However,
putting all this aside, we can also list ways in which Iran could
hit conditions of alliance with our strategic ally USA.
Under the first condition: Iran may take measures to undermine security
in Azerbaijan's air space. Iranian warplanes have invaded Azerbaijan's
air space even in peace time.
Under the second condition: Iran's state-of-the-art defence
missiles can operate within a range of 3,500 km. It would not be
particularly difficult for the Iranian armed forces to test these
arms in Azerbaijani aerodromes which are a few hundreds of kilometres
away. If we take into account the condition that US warplanes are
to be provided with fuel in Azerbaijan, we should expect that Iran
might hit our fuel sources as well. Therefore, security of onshore
and offshore oil fields may be undermined first.
Under the third condition, it is difficult to imagine military action
being carried out. The US limited military contingent might be hit
by the [Iranian] local network of agents.
Why care about the motherland? What matters is their own protection
If war does start, the Azerbaijani government should demand insurance
against these dangers from the USA, its strategic ally. Perhaps,
not for the sake of national and state interests but at least their
own interests. After all, oil and all other resources belong to these
authorities. They do not have to put forward conditions related to
Nagornyy Karabakh to the strategic ally because it is primarily the
multi-million population of Azerbaijan who needs this. But oil and
power! [as given].
We wonder if they will be able to demand security guarantees at least
on the basis of these factors.
Azadliq, Baku
9 Apr 06
The Azerbaijani opposition newspaper Azadliq has detailed "three
issues" on which the Azerbaijani and US governments are to cooperate
in the possible US war against Iran. The paper looked into "principles
and interests" that the alliance between the two countries is based
upon. It added that if the USA starts war with Iran, the latter will
organize acts of sabotage in Azerbaijan. The following is text of
Qanimat Zahid's report in Azerbaijani newspaper Azadliq on 9 April
headlined "Will Iran hit Azerbaijan" and subheaded "What is the USA
demanding from Azerbaijan?"; subheadings as published:
Azerbaijan is to cooperate with Americans on three issues in the
expected US-Iranian war, according to reports we have received from
diplomatic sources.
First, Azerbaijan is to open its air space for US warplanes.
Second, US warplanes are to use Azerbaijani military aerodromes and
be provided with fuel there.
Third, Azerbaijan is to agree to the deployment on its territory of
a limited contingent of US troops in order to serve the US air force.
As we see, the conditions are not that big. In fact, it seems necessary
to regard as somewhat ordinary the conditions put forward in exchange
for statements constantly made that "the USA and Azerbaijan are
strategic allies". That is to say, the USA may start war with Iran
under the pretext of eliminating a danger capable of threatening its
strategic interests. In such a case, it may demand that its strategic
allies remain loyal to principles of alliance.
USA's strategy of alliance with us
On the basis of what principles and interests is the USA's strategy
of alliance with Azerbaijan built? It is important to clarify these
interests to see to which extent the USA's and Azerbaijan's strategic
goals match.
First, Azerbaijan needs to extract its strategic wealth - oil - in
maximum security and benefit from it. The USA has been guaranteeing
such security so far. It is another issue that the oil that is being
extracted in safe conditions has nothing to do with the Azerbaijani
people. It is also another issue how the Azerbaijani oil, which is
being extracted in completely safe conditions, and Azerbaijan itself
are divided between other parties guaranteeing security. Is it done
fairly or unfairly?
Second, Azerbaijan is to prevent Russia from completely taking
over the regional energy corridor and to protect US interests in
the corridor. This condition for strategic alliance has also been
observed by means of the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil
pipeline. Hydrocarbons from Central Asia and the South Caucasus are
being exported via the "energy road" passing through Azerbaijan to
Europe - market of hydrocarbons which the USA manages to control.
Third, Azerbaijan's existence on the basis of secular values and on
the condition of integration into Europe is to restrict Russia's and
Iran's influence on the South Caucasus.
USA's behaviour within the framework of alliance strategy
We can see clearly that the USA needs the conditions and demands of
strategic alliance between the world's superpower and Azerbaijan more
than Azerbaijan does. It is true that the USA has also taken specific
steps to reinforce these conditions. However, the positive impact of
these steps on Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijani people still cannot be
seen. What are these reinforcing steps?
US companies have invested billions [of dollars] in Azerbaijan. Even
though the bulk of the investments fall to the oil sector, these
investments could have played an exceptional role for a clever
government in order to strengthen the state.
US public institutions have also spent large amounts of money towards
formation of democratic traditions in Azerbaijan. A clever government
could have been interested in the entrance to the country of these
"investments" which could be considered irreplaceable for the
strengthening of public mechanisms. Unfortunately, the Azerbaijani
government is not clever. What is more, the Azerbaijani government is
not working on political strategies ensuring the state's interests. The
entire action strategy of this government is based on search for
ways of benefiting further and for longer from sources belonging to
the state.
The USA is also taking steps within the framework of its strategic
interests so as to ensure that totalitarianism in Azerbaijan does
not rise to a level that could disgrace the USA itself. Strategic
alliance with Azerbaijan's current half-totalitarian society and
half-authoritarian government is for the time being continuing as it
has not disgraced the USA as much as it was thought.
Karabakh is not part of the Azerbaijani government's strategic
interests
One of the important results of the US-Azerbaijani strategic alliance
for Azerbaijan could be success in making world's powers accept
its fair position in the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict resolution. The
US government should have taken specific steps in exchange for its
strategic ally's strategic demands. However, we are all observing
the fact that our strategic ally is not giving serious international
support to the Nagornyy Karabakh settlement. What is more, it is
not doing so for a very simple reason. The Azerbaijani government
does not seem to have informed its strategic ally of its vitally
important conditions at all. Azerbaijan has shaped its oil strategy
in such a way as to preserve the topicality of Heydarism with support
from US lobby organizations and potential lobbyists and also to have
Washington turn a blind eye to an even greater embezzlement of US
investments in and aid provided to Azerbaijan. The result is that
the Azerbaijani government does not expect of its strategic ally to
take steps for the sake of the Azerbaijani state, but to protect a
Mafiosi clan. Administrations that change one by one in the USA,
which is our strategic ally, are also involved in this work and
protect USA's strategic interests.
On what "conditions" may Iran hit Azerbaijan?
The USA is now demanding that its strategic ally Azerbaijan honour, in
a standoff with Iran, commitments proceeding from alliance. Naturally,
the US government will succeed in this when necessary. These conditions
were mentioned at the beginning of this article. What steps may Iran
take against the USA's strategic ally Azerbaijan if those conditions
are fulfilled? It would be interesting to recall these.
It is clear that Iran, which has rich experience in carrying out
terrorist attacks, will plan to carry out possible acts of sabotage
on Azerbaijani territory. Moreover, Iran will maximally mobilize its
network of agents in Azerbaijan and put it into operation. However,
putting all this aside, we can also list ways in which Iran could
hit conditions of alliance with our strategic ally USA.
Under the first condition: Iran may take measures to undermine security
in Azerbaijan's air space. Iranian warplanes have invaded Azerbaijan's
air space even in peace time.
Under the second condition: Iran's state-of-the-art defence
missiles can operate within a range of 3,500 km. It would not be
particularly difficult for the Iranian armed forces to test these
arms in Azerbaijani aerodromes which are a few hundreds of kilometres
away. If we take into account the condition that US warplanes are
to be provided with fuel in Azerbaijan, we should expect that Iran
might hit our fuel sources as well. Therefore, security of onshore
and offshore oil fields may be undermined first.
Under the third condition, it is difficult to imagine military action
being carried out. The US limited military contingent might be hit
by the [Iranian] local network of agents.
Why care about the motherland? What matters is their own protection
If war does start, the Azerbaijani government should demand insurance
against these dangers from the USA, its strategic ally. Perhaps,
not for the sake of national and state interests but at least their
own interests. After all, oil and all other resources belong to these
authorities. They do not have to put forward conditions related to
Nagornyy Karabakh to the strategic ally because it is primarily the
multi-million population of Azerbaijan who needs this. But oil and
power! [as given].
We wonder if they will be able to demand security guarantees at least
on the basis of these factors.