Tweet
Regnum, Russia
April 28 2006
Azerbaijan is ready to become mediator between the US and Iran
Read it in Russian
Izvestia daily has published an article `The American Vector of the
Azeri Policy' prepared with the help of the press service of the
Azeri President. The article is about the context and goals of the
visit of Azeri President Ilham Aliyev to the US and is, in fact, the
account of Azerbaijan's official position. The article says:
`Washington has had many chances to show its respect, to welcome in
any way the independent Azeri choice, to support the new president
Ilham Aliyev. But the visit did not take place in either 2004 or
2005. Then, the visit might, probably, seem politically and
tactically more necessary to Baku than to Washington. But now the
situation is different: we are faced with the reality of not only a
real war in nearby Iraq but also quickly growing tensions in the
Caspian region itself - over Iran. In this light, Azerbaijan is
becoming not just important for the US but even more important than
its traditional ally Turkey. The situation over Iran is really
critical for the Bush administration. And at this very moment
Washington invites the Azeri president - not just as an ally but as a
possible supporter in this complicated situation...'
Azerbaijan is Iran's closest neighbor - the countries have
centuries-old common history and even partial ethnic relationship
(multi-million Azeri community in Iran). So, Azerbaijan is exactly
the one who can help Washington out of the present stalemate, who can
prompt how to avoid the follies it made in Iraq. And Azerbaijan risks
nothing. It has nothing to ask for from the Americans (compare the
most quickly growing CIS economy, Azerbaijan, with Georgia or,
better, with Armenia, who would never be able to make up their
budgets were it not for the American money)... It's quite traditional
for the US diplomacy to use a reliable partner for making a secret
retreat in a stalemate situation. Just remember the legendary Henry
Kissinger. It was he who secretly prepared the historic meeting
between Richard Nixon and Mao Zedong. It was exactly since then
(since Kissinger's secret voyages) that we have used the term
`shuttle diplomacy.' Just like today with Iran, it was impossible
then to imagine that the enemies like the US and China might ever sit
down at the negotiating table. Why not to repeat this success in Iran
through President Aliyev? The Aliyev-Bush meeting in Washington might
be an opportunity to find such a solution."
Meanwhile, Azerbaijan is quite critical of the quality of the US'
alliance with Ukraine and Georgia: `The role of potential negotiator
between the US and Iran is sharply raising the West's interest in
Azerbaijan. Until now the most attractive objects for the US
diplomacy have been Ukraine and Georgia, where weak presidents have
paved the way for regimes loyal to the US.'
The article gives special attention to the Karabakh problem: `Now
having on hand the Iraqi catastrophe, the growing Iranian crisis,
HAMAS in Palestine and the consequent complications in the whole
Muslim world, Washington will not only try to insure Aliyev's
authority against any blows but will also search for news forms and
spheres of regional geo-political cooperation with Azerbaijan. Still
we can hardly expect any quick progress in the Karabakh peace
process: the Armenian lobby in America is too strong to be overcome
quickly even if the US actually wants to get closer with Azerbaijan.
But Armenia should not rejoice at this. In strategic terms, the
longer it persists in occupying other's territories the more it will
lose. As an active partner of big world powers, Azerbaijan is in much
better position. And this position will only grow with time. In the
present-day world, the stability of a state depends not so much on
its territory as on its balanced foreign policy - when it does not
heel to any side but frees resources for internal development.
Despite losses, Azerbaijan has got much, while Armenia has failed to
capitalize on its territorial seizures.'
April 28 2006
Azerbaijan is ready to become mediator between the US and Iran
Read it in Russian
Izvestia daily has published an article `The American Vector of the
Azeri Policy' prepared with the help of the press service of the
Azeri President. The article is about the context and goals of the
visit of Azeri President Ilham Aliyev to the US and is, in fact, the
account of Azerbaijan's official position. The article says:
`Washington has had many chances to show its respect, to welcome in
any way the independent Azeri choice, to support the new president
Ilham Aliyev. But the visit did not take place in either 2004 or
2005. Then, the visit might, probably, seem politically and
tactically more necessary to Baku than to Washington. But now the
situation is different: we are faced with the reality of not only a
real war in nearby Iraq but also quickly growing tensions in the
Caspian region itself - over Iran. In this light, Azerbaijan is
becoming not just important for the US but even more important than
its traditional ally Turkey. The situation over Iran is really
critical for the Bush administration. And at this very moment
Washington invites the Azeri president - not just as an ally but as a
possible supporter in this complicated situation...'
Azerbaijan is Iran's closest neighbor - the countries have
centuries-old common history and even partial ethnic relationship
(multi-million Azeri community in Iran). So, Azerbaijan is exactly
the one who can help Washington out of the present stalemate, who can
prompt how to avoid the follies it made in Iraq. And Azerbaijan risks
nothing. It has nothing to ask for from the Americans (compare the
most quickly growing CIS economy, Azerbaijan, with Georgia or,
better, with Armenia, who would never be able to make up their
budgets were it not for the American money)... It's quite traditional
for the US diplomacy to use a reliable partner for making a secret
retreat in a stalemate situation. Just remember the legendary Henry
Kissinger. It was he who secretly prepared the historic meeting
between Richard Nixon and Mao Zedong. It was exactly since then
(since Kissinger's secret voyages) that we have used the term
`shuttle diplomacy.' Just like today with Iran, it was impossible
then to imagine that the enemies like the US and China might ever sit
down at the negotiating table. Why not to repeat this success in Iran
through President Aliyev? The Aliyev-Bush meeting in Washington might
be an opportunity to find such a solution."
Meanwhile, Azerbaijan is quite critical of the quality of the US'
alliance with Ukraine and Georgia: `The role of potential negotiator
between the US and Iran is sharply raising the West's interest in
Azerbaijan. Until now the most attractive objects for the US
diplomacy have been Ukraine and Georgia, where weak presidents have
paved the way for regimes loyal to the US.'
The article gives special attention to the Karabakh problem: `Now
having on hand the Iraqi catastrophe, the growing Iranian crisis,
HAMAS in Palestine and the consequent complications in the whole
Muslim world, Washington will not only try to insure Aliyev's
authority against any blows but will also search for news forms and
spheres of regional geo-political cooperation with Azerbaijan. Still
we can hardly expect any quick progress in the Karabakh peace
process: the Armenian lobby in America is too strong to be overcome
quickly even if the US actually wants to get closer with Azerbaijan.
But Armenia should not rejoice at this. In strategic terms, the
longer it persists in occupying other's territories the more it will
lose. As an active partner of big world powers, Azerbaijan is in much
better position. And this position will only grow with time. In the
present-day world, the stability of a state depends not so much on
its territory as on its balanced foreign policy - when it does not
heel to any side but frees resources for internal development.
Despite losses, Azerbaijan has got much, while Armenia has failed to
capitalize on its territorial seizures.'