Tweet
US SHOULD WORK TO STRENGTHEN RELATIONS WITH AZERBAIJAN
The Hill
Nov 2 2012
DC
By Stephen Blank, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pa. -
11/02/12 11:00 AM ET
The violence plaguing the Arab world should move U.S. policy makers,
decision makers and experts to consider how and why the U.S. should
strengthen stable, pro-American governments in Muslim countries
against internal or external threats. Azerbaijan exemplifies such
states. Though it is still an emerging democracy, born from the
shadows of the Soviet Union, it has stood squarely with the U.S.
against terrorism in Afghanistan, Iraq, Central Asia and throughout
the world, all at considerable risk to itself.
It has also fended off constant Russian and Iranian threats due to
its pro-American, pro-Western and pro-Israeli policies and confronts
serious problems and local threats. Not the least of these threats
is the possibility of a renewed war in Nagorno-Karabakh, one of the
world's most implacable and dangerous frozen conflicts.
If war resumed between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Armenia's recent
military and diplomatic exercises have served notice that no doubt
with Moscow's and Tehran's encouragement and help, that it would
attack Azeri pipelines that carry much-needed oil and gas to America's
European allies. Azerbaijan's domestic policies, while not perfect,
are also under attack from Iran. In 2012 alone, three separate Iranian
plots involving incitement through religious agitation to terrorism,
gun running and plots to assassinate Israelis in Azerbaijan were
uncovered and thwarted. Iran also regularly calls Azerbaijan's
religious policies anti-Islamic and regularly threatens to attack
Azerbaijan if it hosted a U.S. base. Thus, Iran presents Azerbaijan
with a constant and genuine threat.
Moreover, Syria's civil war and Iran's deteriorating situation will
probably increase Azerbaijan's strategic importance to the West. Also,
Syria's civil war is putting enormous pressure on Turkey to intervene.
Numerous incidents between Turkey and Syria have already occurred while
this war has also spurred the deterioration of Turkey's partnership
with Russia. Should Turkey intervene, Russia could conceivably
block gas sales to Turkey since Turkey receives 2/3 of its gas
from Russia. Azerbaijan, thanks to its recently improved ties with
Turkey and the 2011 bilateral decision to build a gas pipeline from
Azerbaijan through Turkey to Europe (the Trans-Anatolian or TANAP
pipeine), could offer Turkey and Europe alternative gas sources to
resist Russian threats and blackmail.
Since 2010, if not earlier, Russia has steadily deployed large numbers
of combined forces in the Caucasus, allegedly to defend against a
projected Iranian counter offensive against the Caucasus should the
U.S. or Israel attack Iran due to its nuclear program. This argument
sounds illogical, for why should Iran add to its enemies if it is
attacked? But it represents a plausible pretext for threatening both
Azerbaijan and Georgia while entrenching Russia's military there as
Russia strives to resubordinate the Caucasus to its dictates.
Meanwhile, Russia arms Armenia and continually pressures Azerbaijan
to deflect it from its pro-Western trajectory.
Under these circumstances, what should be done? In general, the U.S.
should make clear to Azerbaijan that it has its back.
First, in the domestic sphere, we should encourage Baku to undertake
the necessary liberalizing political, social, and economic reforms that
would strengthen its internal defenses against subversion under the
guise of religious agitation and increase the government's legitimacy
and U.S. support for it.
Second, we must make clear to Moscow and Tehran that if they launch
a new aggressive conflict in the Caucasus, the costs they incur
thereby will be much more tangible and greater than in 2008. Since
Russian President Putin has admitted that the 2008 war with Georgia,
widely billed as an act of self-defense, was actually a preplanned
war of aggression from 2006 on, mere verbal warnings to Russia do
not suffice to deter further mischief here.
Third, the U.S. must inspire the EU to intensify its quest for a
dedicated pipeline to bring gas from the Caspian basin and Central Asia
to Europe and counter Moscow's widely documented efforts to use the gas
weapon to subvert European unity, democracy, and the independence of
post-Soviet states. Whether it is the EU's projected Nabucco pipeline,
the TANAP, or another worthwhile alternative there is no time to lose.
Fourth, Washington should simultaneously give unstinting support to
the Azeri-Turkish rapprochement, both for its own sake and because of
its implications for the Middle East and the Caucasus. This support
must, as a fifth point, coincides with a new, coordinated, and
truly vigorous effort to bring Armenia and Azerbaijan into a genuine
negotiation leading to an acceptable resolution of all the issues
growing out of the Nagorno-Karabakh war. All the interested parties
could guarantee this accord to reinforce regional stability. This
process, if successful, would stabilize the Caucasus, defuse Iranian
intrigues and Russian threats, open up Armenia to the world and give it
an option beyond Russia, while preventing hotheads from inadvertently
or deliberately inciting a war to impose their vision of a resolution
of Nagorno-Karabakah's many issues.
The administration has hitherto treated the South Caucasus as an
afterthought or as an overflight issue on the road to Afghanistan.
Such neglect is dangerous and misconceived. The mounting threats in
the Middle East, Iran, and the Caucasus show how vital it is that
the U.S. strengthen pro-Western regimes like Azerbaijan. For if we
continue to neglect the Caucasus, this neglect will quickly become
malign. And malign neglect invariably generates not only instability
but also protracted violence.
Blank is a professor and head of the U.S. Army War College's Strategic
Studies Institute at the Carlisle Barracks, PA
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/265427-us-should-work-to-strengthen-relations-with-azerbaijan
The Hill
Nov 2 2012
DC
By Stephen Blank, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pa. -
11/02/12 11:00 AM ET
The violence plaguing the Arab world should move U.S. policy makers,
decision makers and experts to consider how and why the U.S. should
strengthen stable, pro-American governments in Muslim countries
against internal or external threats. Azerbaijan exemplifies such
states. Though it is still an emerging democracy, born from the
shadows of the Soviet Union, it has stood squarely with the U.S.
against terrorism in Afghanistan, Iraq, Central Asia and throughout
the world, all at considerable risk to itself.
It has also fended off constant Russian and Iranian threats due to
its pro-American, pro-Western and pro-Israeli policies and confronts
serious problems and local threats. Not the least of these threats
is the possibility of a renewed war in Nagorno-Karabakh, one of the
world's most implacable and dangerous frozen conflicts.
If war resumed between Armenia and Azerbaijan, Armenia's recent
military and diplomatic exercises have served notice that no doubt
with Moscow's and Tehran's encouragement and help, that it would
attack Azeri pipelines that carry much-needed oil and gas to America's
European allies. Azerbaijan's domestic policies, while not perfect,
are also under attack from Iran. In 2012 alone, three separate Iranian
plots involving incitement through religious agitation to terrorism,
gun running and plots to assassinate Israelis in Azerbaijan were
uncovered and thwarted. Iran also regularly calls Azerbaijan's
religious policies anti-Islamic and regularly threatens to attack
Azerbaijan if it hosted a U.S. base. Thus, Iran presents Azerbaijan
with a constant and genuine threat.
Moreover, Syria's civil war and Iran's deteriorating situation will
probably increase Azerbaijan's strategic importance to the West. Also,
Syria's civil war is putting enormous pressure on Turkey to intervene.
Numerous incidents between Turkey and Syria have already occurred while
this war has also spurred the deterioration of Turkey's partnership
with Russia. Should Turkey intervene, Russia could conceivably
block gas sales to Turkey since Turkey receives 2/3 of its gas
from Russia. Azerbaijan, thanks to its recently improved ties with
Turkey and the 2011 bilateral decision to build a gas pipeline from
Azerbaijan through Turkey to Europe (the Trans-Anatolian or TANAP
pipeine), could offer Turkey and Europe alternative gas sources to
resist Russian threats and blackmail.
Since 2010, if not earlier, Russia has steadily deployed large numbers
of combined forces in the Caucasus, allegedly to defend against a
projected Iranian counter offensive against the Caucasus should the
U.S. or Israel attack Iran due to its nuclear program. This argument
sounds illogical, for why should Iran add to its enemies if it is
attacked? But it represents a plausible pretext for threatening both
Azerbaijan and Georgia while entrenching Russia's military there as
Russia strives to resubordinate the Caucasus to its dictates.
Meanwhile, Russia arms Armenia and continually pressures Azerbaijan
to deflect it from its pro-Western trajectory.
Under these circumstances, what should be done? In general, the U.S.
should make clear to Azerbaijan that it has its back.
First, in the domestic sphere, we should encourage Baku to undertake
the necessary liberalizing political, social, and economic reforms that
would strengthen its internal defenses against subversion under the
guise of religious agitation and increase the government's legitimacy
and U.S. support for it.
Second, we must make clear to Moscow and Tehran that if they launch
a new aggressive conflict in the Caucasus, the costs they incur
thereby will be much more tangible and greater than in 2008. Since
Russian President Putin has admitted that the 2008 war with Georgia,
widely billed as an act of self-defense, was actually a preplanned
war of aggression from 2006 on, mere verbal warnings to Russia do
not suffice to deter further mischief here.
Third, the U.S. must inspire the EU to intensify its quest for a
dedicated pipeline to bring gas from the Caspian basin and Central Asia
to Europe and counter Moscow's widely documented efforts to use the gas
weapon to subvert European unity, democracy, and the independence of
post-Soviet states. Whether it is the EU's projected Nabucco pipeline,
the TANAP, or another worthwhile alternative there is no time to lose.
Fourth, Washington should simultaneously give unstinting support to
the Azeri-Turkish rapprochement, both for its own sake and because of
its implications for the Middle East and the Caucasus. This support
must, as a fifth point, coincides with a new, coordinated, and
truly vigorous effort to bring Armenia and Azerbaijan into a genuine
negotiation leading to an acceptable resolution of all the issues
growing out of the Nagorno-Karabakh war. All the interested parties
could guarantee this accord to reinforce regional stability. This
process, if successful, would stabilize the Caucasus, defuse Iranian
intrigues and Russian threats, open up Armenia to the world and give it
an option beyond Russia, while preventing hotheads from inadvertently
or deliberately inciting a war to impose their vision of a resolution
of Nagorno-Karabakah's many issues.
The administration has hitherto treated the South Caucasus as an
afterthought or as an overflight issue on the road to Afghanistan.
Such neglect is dangerous and misconceived. The mounting threats in
the Middle East, Iran, and the Caucasus show how vital it is that
the U.S. strengthen pro-Western regimes like Azerbaijan. For if we
continue to neglect the Caucasus, this neglect will quickly become
malign. And malign neglect invariably generates not only instability
but also protracted violence.
Blank is a professor and head of the U.S. Army War College's Strategic
Studies Institute at the Carlisle Barracks, PA
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/265427-us-should-work-to-strengthen-relations-with-azerbaijan