Tweet
PROPOSED MILITARY SALE TO AZERBAIJAN RAISES CONTROVERSY IN WASHINGTON
by Joshua Kucera
EurasiaNet.org
June 4 2012
NY
The U.S. State Department is considering allowing a sale of
surveillance equipment to Azerbaijan, which supporters say is needed
to help protect against Iran. But Washington's Armenian-American lobby
and its allied members of Congress are objecting, arguiing that it
could be used against Armenian forces in the disputed territory of
Nagorno Karabakh, as well.
The equipment in question hasn't been precisely identified, but it
is some sort of surveillance equipment that would be installed in
Mi-35M attack helicopters that Azerbaijan has lately been acquiring
from Russia. The State Department and Azerbaijan are saying that
the equipment would be used by Azerbaijan's border service, and an
"action item" by the U.S. Azeris Network emphasizes that the equipment
is required to police the border with Iran:
[I]t is the moral responsibility of the U.S. Congress and Government
to show their support to their strategic ally in that turbulent
region and stand strong with Azerbaijan. Such support should start
with statements and resolutions in support of sovereign, secure and
independent Azerbaijan, to supplying it with defensive systems such
as Patriot air-defense systems (PAC3), border protection equipment,
helicopter protection systems, simulators, Command and Control gear,
and any other defensive and border-protection military hardware
and software that would protect Azerbaijan's energy infrastructure,
make it less vulnerable, and send a strong message to Iran to stop
bullying and threatening. We should show our allies that we value their
partnership and friends, and are not ignoring the threat Iran poses.
But Armenian groups aren't buying it. Congressman Howard Berman wrote
in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (released by the
Armenian National Committee of America) says the equipment could be
used against Armenians in Karabakh:
Two months ago, my staff inquired as to the possible use of this
equipment by Azerbaijan. Just last week, they were informed that it
would be used on existing helicopters to aid in border surveillance
and "police-type" activities.
As Azerbaijan shares a border with Armenia, this equipment could be
used to identify and possibly target Armenians in the border area for
surveillance or for attack. I am also concerned about the message
that such a sale would send to the regional parties, both in terms
of perceived U.S. even-handedness and in terms of our seriousness
about persuading Baku to cease its bellicose rhetoric and agree to
Minsk Group co-chair demands that it remove its snipers from the
"line of contact" in the Nagorno-Karabakh region.
The part of U.S. law that limits arms transfers to Azerbaijan, known as
Section 907, includes a provision that allows the Secretary of State
to waive the restrictions if a transfer "is important to Azerbaijan's
border security," which would seem to obtain here.
Without knowing more about which equipment specifically is under
discussion, it's hard to say what it most likely would be used for.
But the Azerbaijani appeal is an interesting one, focusing so heavily
on the threat from Iran. This was something notable on The Bug Pit's
recent visit to Baku, how government officials repeatedly emphasized
the threat from Iran. A cynic would say that Baku is ginning up
the threat to gain Western sympathy, and possibly concrete support
like arms sales. But it's also true that Iran has been rhetorically
aggressive recently, and that Azerbaijan's strategic interests in the
Caspian are potentially threatened by Iran. So what may be happening
is that Baku sees an opening, while the world is concerned about Iran,
to dovetail its strategic interests with those of the U.S. and others
who distrust Iran.
Anyway, the issue for both the Armenian and Azerbaijani sides on
this issue seems to be less about the particular equipment and more
about whether Azerbaijan should be isolated because of Karabakh or
more closely embraced by the West. Berman's letter alluded to the
"message that such a sale would send to the regional parties," and
Adil Baguirov of the U.S. Azeris Network told The Bug Pit, Azerbaijan
wants a concrete symbol of support from the West:
The truth is it can get all the virtually same hardware from elsewhere,
probably even cheaper - but the point is to get the necessary military
hardware from a partner, with whom the allied relationship has been
described as "strategic" by multiple Ambassadors (Harnish, Derse,
Bryza) and even President Bush. As Azerbaijan has been sending real
combat troops to Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, and did a bunch of
other things for and with U.S., it naturally wants to be able to get
the military and security hardware it needs from its Western partner.
by Joshua Kucera
EurasiaNet.org
June 4 2012
NY
The U.S. State Department is considering allowing a sale of
surveillance equipment to Azerbaijan, which supporters say is needed
to help protect against Iran. But Washington's Armenian-American lobby
and its allied members of Congress are objecting, arguiing that it
could be used against Armenian forces in the disputed territory of
Nagorno Karabakh, as well.
The equipment in question hasn't been precisely identified, but it
is some sort of surveillance equipment that would be installed in
Mi-35M attack helicopters that Azerbaijan has lately been acquiring
from Russia. The State Department and Azerbaijan are saying that
the equipment would be used by Azerbaijan's border service, and an
"action item" by the U.S. Azeris Network emphasizes that the equipment
is required to police the border with Iran:
[I]t is the moral responsibility of the U.S. Congress and Government
to show their support to their strategic ally in that turbulent
region and stand strong with Azerbaijan. Such support should start
with statements and resolutions in support of sovereign, secure and
independent Azerbaijan, to supplying it with defensive systems such
as Patriot air-defense systems (PAC3), border protection equipment,
helicopter protection systems, simulators, Command and Control gear,
and any other defensive and border-protection military hardware
and software that would protect Azerbaijan's energy infrastructure,
make it less vulnerable, and send a strong message to Iran to stop
bullying and threatening. We should show our allies that we value their
partnership and friends, and are not ignoring the threat Iran poses.
But Armenian groups aren't buying it. Congressman Howard Berman wrote
in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (released by the
Armenian National Committee of America) says the equipment could be
used against Armenians in Karabakh:
Two months ago, my staff inquired as to the possible use of this
equipment by Azerbaijan. Just last week, they were informed that it
would be used on existing helicopters to aid in border surveillance
and "police-type" activities.
As Azerbaijan shares a border with Armenia, this equipment could be
used to identify and possibly target Armenians in the border area for
surveillance or for attack. I am also concerned about the message
that such a sale would send to the regional parties, both in terms
of perceived U.S. even-handedness and in terms of our seriousness
about persuading Baku to cease its bellicose rhetoric and agree to
Minsk Group co-chair demands that it remove its snipers from the
"line of contact" in the Nagorno-Karabakh region.
The part of U.S. law that limits arms transfers to Azerbaijan, known as
Section 907, includes a provision that allows the Secretary of State
to waive the restrictions if a transfer "is important to Azerbaijan's
border security," which would seem to obtain here.
Without knowing more about which equipment specifically is under
discussion, it's hard to say what it most likely would be used for.
But the Azerbaijani appeal is an interesting one, focusing so heavily
on the threat from Iran. This was something notable on The Bug Pit's
recent visit to Baku, how government officials repeatedly emphasized
the threat from Iran. A cynic would say that Baku is ginning up
the threat to gain Western sympathy, and possibly concrete support
like arms sales. But it's also true that Iran has been rhetorically
aggressive recently, and that Azerbaijan's strategic interests in the
Caspian are potentially threatened by Iran. So what may be happening
is that Baku sees an opening, while the world is concerned about Iran,
to dovetail its strategic interests with those of the U.S. and others
who distrust Iran.
Anyway, the issue for both the Armenian and Azerbaijani sides on
this issue seems to be less about the particular equipment and more
about whether Azerbaijan should be isolated because of Karabakh or
more closely embraced by the West. Berman's letter alluded to the
"message that such a sale would send to the regional parties," and
Adil Baguirov of the U.S. Azeris Network told The Bug Pit, Azerbaijan
wants a concrete symbol of support from the West:
The truth is it can get all the virtually same hardware from elsewhere,
probably even cheaper - but the point is to get the necessary military
hardware from a partner, with whom the allied relationship has been
described as "strategic" by multiple Ambassadors (Harnish, Derse,
Bryza) and even President Bush. As Azerbaijan has been sending real
combat troops to Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, and did a bunch of
other things for and with U.S., it naturally wants to be able to get
the military and security hardware it needs from its Western partner.