Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BAKU: It Is Useless To Put On An Act: After All, A Friend Of My Enem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BAKU: It Is Useless To Put On An Act: After All, A Friend Of My Enem

    IT IS USELESS TO PUT ON AN ACT: AFTER ALL, A FRIEND OF MY ENEMY CAN NEVER BE MY FRIEND
    by Rauf Mirqadirov

    Zerkalo
    June 1 2012
    Azerbaijan

    Up to now, many in Baku pretend not to understand the causes of
    deteriorating relations between Azerbaijan and Iran. They are trying to
    reassure Iranian partners that everything is allegedly in excessive
    distrust or misunderstanding of the balanced and neutral foreign
    policy of Azerbaijan by official Tehran. Tehran is expressing itself
    more clearly and distinctly. The IRI [the Islamic Republic of Iran]
    is not satisfied with Azerbaijan's cooperation with the enemies of
    Islam - that is, with the global imperialism, Zionism and the devil
    in the person of the United States. However, official Baku has begun
    cooperation with the "enemies of Islam" from the first days of the
    restoration of Azerbaijan's independence. But despite that, except
    for some moments, it was managed to maintain more or less smooth and
    working relations with Iran at the international level, and sometimes,
    even almost friendly relations, well, at least in words.

    And suddenly there has emerged a gap in the relations at the
    international level, moreover, almost irresistible. The question
    arises: why have the parties, especially Iran, whose foreign policy
    is based on cunning and hypocrisy from the earliest period, refused
    from unwritten rules of diplomacy, i.e., a "peace period", especially
    from one of them, which boils down to the following: "While embracing,
    it is possible to say words of eternal love and loyalty, but at the
    same time, to stab a dagger in the back and besides mutually." To put
    it simply, smiling at each other's face, to do nasty things to each
    other, with what official Tehran and Baku have been largely engaged
    throughout those 20 years of independence of Azerbaijan.

    And suddenly they stopped putting on an act and began playing openly,
    especially Iran. Official Baku was ready a little more, and probably
    until the last moment to adhere to "the generally accepted rules of
    civilized behaviour". But there no longer remained need for Tehran
    to put on an act. It's very simple...

    All around are making preparations for war

    Here are nuances existing in the Azerbaijani-Iranian relations,
    especially the holding of Eurovision [song contest-2012] in Baku,
    the Azerbaijani-Israeli cooperation, the presence of numerous Azeri
    minority, or small majority in Iran, is of no significance. This is
    just individual elements that creates the general picture of the big
    geopolitical game. Maybe, they are significant, but all are the same
    elements. But none of them is a supporting structure of that dramatic
    and possibly of that certain tragic geopolitical game that is played
    out before our eyes.

    The backbone of this geopolitical game is antagonistic contradictions
    that exist between Iran and the United States. The author of these
    lines believes that it is not about theocratic policy of Iran, and
    not even in Iran's nuclear project that is spoken much about. It is
    impossible to draw proper conclusions based on erroneous assumptions.

    The United States is actively cooperating with Salafis from Saudi
    Arabia. This is despite the fact that this trend in Islam is considered
    to be one of the sponsors of international terrorism. The USA and
    Russia in due time did nothing to prevent Pakistan and India from
    developing own nuclear weapons. Despite the stormy verbal protests,
    the United States is now watching with almost the Olympic serenity
    how North Korea is developing both nuclear weapon and means of its
    delivery.

    In fact, Iran's nuclear project should worry more the major
    geopolitical players, such as Russia and Turkey, not the USA. There
    is no point for such small players, like Azerbaijan, Georgia and
    Armenia even to worry about it. It is not because that the emergence of
    nuclear weapons does not threaten these countries. Quite the contrary,
    it does threaten. Simply, no one is going to pay attention to their
    concern. Washington is striving to establish a new world order in
    the region, including the control by the USA over energy sources and
    routes of shipping it to the West. Iran could have become a US ally on
    this issue as was the case under the Shah regime. However, after the
    Islamic revolution and the clergy's accession to power, and, finally,
    the emergence of the vacuum associated with the collapse of the Soviet
    Union, Iran decided it was time to play its own game. Moreover, it
    would be fair to admit that unlike the Soviet Union, Iran tried to
    use the religious ideology - in this case - Islam - for this purpose
    much more effectively, at least for the region. And not just Islam,
    but its Shi'i denomination. [Passage omitted: developments in Iraq]
    Azerbaijan completely falls out of the "Shi'i belt"

    Thus, the exacerbation of the Azerbaijani-Iranian relations is due
    to the fact that Azerbaijan is completely falling out of the "Shi'i
    belt". The worse for Tehran is that Azerbaijan is not simply falling
    out of the "Shi'i belt", but in fact is an ally of the "enemies of
    Islam," the confrontation of whom with Iran is entering a decisive
    phase. There is certainly no point to play a comedy. Here on Wednesday,
    US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton started eight-day tour of
    Scandinavian countries, the Caucasus and Turkey to discuss security
    issues (Iran and Syria), counter-terrorism, freedom of the Internet,
    as well as issues of environment and public health. Before visiting
    Georgia and Azerbaijan, Clinton made a brief address which said:
    "In a few days I will have the chance to visit Batumi to experience
    the warmth of the Georgian people and reaffirm our commitment to
    Georgia's future."

    "In Azerbaijan, I will have the chance to talk to civil society and
    government leaders about Azerbaijan's challenges and opportunities,
    and how the United States can support a brighter future for both our
    people," said the statement.

    For its part, a source at the State Department told Turan that Clinton
    will discuss "issues of regional security, democracy, economic
    development and the fight against terrorism" in the Caucasus. "A
    compulsory subject in Armenia and Azerbaijan is the Nagornyy Karabakh
    conflict," said the same source.

    Dale Hersping, an experienced diplomat, who served 33 years in the US
    Navy, believes that "the visit of the senior US official is not a sign
    of problems in bilateral relations, but on the contrary, this is a sign
    of support during the period of rising tensions with Iran and Syria."

    Talking about Washington's expectations from Baku, the analyst said
    that they concern two aspects: the region as a whole, as well as the
    assessment of Iran's actions by Baku, and especially now, when it
    has become known that the "Iranian troops are taking an active role
    in Syria". At the same time, Herspring believes that Clinton will
    raise the issues of democracy and energy cooperation. Another analyst,
    Michael Bishku, specializing in the South Caucasus, expects more from
    the visit of the state secretary. In an interview with Turan, he said
    that Hillary Clinton is one of the most travelling US Secretaries of
    State. So far she has visited 96 countries. In the South Caucasus
    Clinton intends to discuss issues related to security, democracy,
    economic development and the fight against terrorism and meet not
    only government officials, but also civil society leaders. He believes
    one cannot effectively address issues such as the Karabakh conflict,
    or issues of democracy during the one-day visits to each country. The
    USA would welcome any move towards reconciliation with Armenia and
    Azerbaijan. He stressed that at present Iran's nuclear programme is
    still a major issue for the USA (European and Israeli leaders). In
    recent years Azerbaijan has increased its security cooperation
    with Israel.

    "It seems natural that the same should happen between the USA and
    Azerbaijan. Concerns about Iran's intentions are the catalyst that
    allows these countries to cooperate. Like in all diplomatic relations,
    the US-Azerbaijani relations will continue to have its ups and downs,"
    noted the US analyst. At the same time, the expert admitted that the
    USA has some concerns about democratization in the South Caucasus. The
    absence of political reforms led to the "Arab spring" that changed
    the Middle East. The USA would like to see major reforms in the region
    and thus avoid the potential threat to political instability.

    "While the USA contributes to the further transportation of Azerbaijani
    oil and gas to the West via Turkey, Washington is aware of interest of
    Azerbaijan in cooperation with Russia, and part of the discussion will
    touch on this topic. The USA and Azerbaijan have common interests in
    combating Islamic radicalism and in promoting economic development,
    and the visit of Secretary of State Clinton will be conducive to a
    better understanding of the two countries on these issues," said
    Michael Bishku. Thus, from what American diplomats said, one can
    conclude that the USA, Azerbaijan and Israel agree completely around
    regional, geopolitical and economic interests, including energy and
    defence. And in the centre of attention during the forthcoming visit
    of Clinton to the region, including Azerbaijan, will be precisely
    those interests. So naivety will not help here. There are two warring
    sides. On the one hand, the interests of Azerbaijan as a state,
    I reiterate as a state, are the same. This means that our interests
    cannot exactly coincide with the interests of the other warring party,
    in this case - Iran. Yes, they say that "the enemy of my enemy is
    my friend". But nobody has ever said that "a friend of my enemy is
    my friend".

    Yes, indeed, the interests of official Baku and the United States in
    the sphere of democracy do not match. Well, here there is a certain
    imbalance between national and state interests and the interests of
    the ruling elite. Yes, the USA, as well as Russia, is cooperating,
    to put it mildly, with undemocratic regimes. The same Saudi Arabia
    is a glaring example. But they do it shamefully, blushingly, as one
    of the characters of "The Twelve Chairs" film. That is why from time
    to time, the USA is urging its partners to be more democratic. In
    addition, despite the coincidence of interests, the West supports
    these democratic regimes until a certain time. And to be more precise,
    as long as these regimes do not begin to yield positions for domestic
    political reasons. Once this happens, the West immediately gives up its
    "undemocratic" allies. Besides, this time they already do it without
    blushing, with a clear conscience, with particular emphasis on their
    own previous warnings. The whole tragicomic situation is that all,
    including those who should above all recognize, know perfectly well
    that the ground will sooner or later slip from under the feet of
    those regimes.

    [translated from Russian]



    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X