Tweet
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
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