Tweet
James Appathurai on Central Asia, the Caucasus, and More March 15, 2012
[image: Editorial Team]
Editorial Team: The NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Political
Affairs and Security Policy returns to answer more of your questions! In
this next round he discusses NATO's role in Central Asia, the
Armenia-Azerbaijan
conflict, and reaching out to Brazil, among other issues.
James Appathurai, the Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Political
Affairs and Security Policy, is back on atlantic-community.org with
answers to more of your questions. In case you missed it, you can
watch the videos of his first visit where he discussed global
partnerships and the Arab Spring as well as the Alliance's
partnerships in Asia, including responding to two proposals from the
Atlantic Memos.
In this playlist, he answers 5 more questions on topics such as tensions in
the Caucasus, how Central Asian partnerships relate to the Afghanistan
mission, and the changing focus of NATO's partnership frameworks in the
Middle East and North Africa. He will be back for a final 5 answers
tomorrow.
You can read more about Mr. Appathurai and his role at NATO in the
original article.
We encourage you to let us know what you think of the answers and to
contribute your reactions, comments, and ideas in the comments below.
Remember to log in when commenting. If you've forgotten your password,
click here.
A full transcript of Mr. Appathurai's answers appears below.
Elkhan Mamedov, student, Russia: Which kind of arrangements is NATO going
to carry out in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Azerbaijan and
Armenia?
James Appathurai: The bottom line is we hope that that never happens. NATO
has no intention, no plan, of getting involved in a Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict and we're not even involved in the peace process, which is being
led by, of course, the two presidents but also the Russian Federation,
theUnited
States, and France in something called the Minsk Process. That being said,
I think there is concern amongst the Allies at the state of the Minsk
Process. We heard from the two presidents here at NATO headquarters just in
the last few weeks that they are committed to the process, they're
committed to a peaceful resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis. But the
reality is that the Minsk Process has had some difficulties, especially
recently, and that there is worrying rhetoric between the two countries and
a lot of weapons being purchased by both countries.
This is a region which probably doesn't get as much attention as it
deserves from the international media. It is of critical strategic
importance for reasons of its location, for reasons of its potential, and
for reasons of its energy transit and supply role. So for many, many
reasons it's important that this conflict be resolved in a peaceful way as
soon as possible and respecting the principles of international law. So we
hope it will be solved, but to come back to the question in its most
pointed way, NATO is not involved in this crisis, except to support the
Minsk group and a peaceful resolution.
Robert Helbig, student, American University, Germany: Is Brazil on
NATO's agenda yet? If so, does NATO strive to build up a partnership with
Brazil in the medium-term? What benefits does NATO hope to get out of a
partnership with Brazil?
James Appathurai: The short answer is: Brazil has not expressed any
particular interest in a relationship with NATO and we have not sought it
out. It's relatively far away for us and the importance of Brazil is
something which we recognize. It even is part now of an informal grouping
called the BRICs, and it even leads it off. It's an emerging power and one
which we hope and expect will work constructively, of course, in the
international system. But the Alliance isn't seeking out a particular
partnership with Brazil, though we wouldn't oppose it.
What we have seen in the last little while is that a number of emerging
countries have taken an ever more prominent role at the United Nations, in
the international system, not just economically, but also politically. And
we welcome that. These countries can help bear the burden of international
security in a way that the Alliance alone cannot do. So we definitely want
to see a situation in which all the emerging economies, including Brazil,
the emerging powers, continue to play an ever more prominent, ever more
constructive role with us in the international system.
Yulia Boguslavskaya, assistant professor, St. Petersburg State University,
Russia: How does cooperation with NATO contribute to security and
stability in Central Asia? What is the proper role for the Alliance in that
region?
James Appathurai: It's a good question, and coming from Russia an even
better question. Because there are many who look at Central Asia as a sort
of battleground between the West and Russia. An area in which we are
competing for influence. And I would quite strongly reject that analogy or
that assessment.
We have common interests in Central Asia. And I mean common with the
Central Asian countries and NATO, and common between all three if we
include Russia as well. And I could list them for you.
First, is stability in Afghanistan. It is vital for all of us that
Afghanistan does not once again begin exporting terrorism, extremism, or
continue to export drugs, which of course hit Russia but hit all of us as
well. So we have an interest in stabilizing Afghanistan, shared by all of
us. And the best way to do that is to cooperate. We do that. NATO, Russia,
and Central Asia for example train together our counter narcotic officials,
particularly Central Asian, Afghan but also now Pakistani. Russia plays a
very important role in this joint project with NATO allies. And it works
very well. It's not solving the drug problem, and we're doing our best to
help that to happen. But it is at least helping to mitigate, to restrain
the flow of drugs out of Afghanistan.
But we have a larger interest in cooperation with Central Asia. And that is
to help the Central Asian countries reach their full potential. Including
as transit areas for trade, as production and transit areas for energy.
That's a mutual interest for everybody.
And finally, let me also say that the Allies do encourage the process that
was put in place recently in Istanbul and in Bonn, and that is to promote
economic cooperation between the Central Asian countries, and Afghanistan,
and other regional parties.
In the end, the strongest incentive for peace and stability in Afghanistan
will be economic cooperation and interdependence. Look at the EU. The EU is
the ultimate example of how economic interdependence breeds cooperation and
peace. So we're very happy to see that the Central Asians are embracing
this concept through the processes that I have mentioned, and NATO will be
there. I am committed to this, not only personally, but professionally as
NATO's Special Representative to Central Asia.
Yulia Boguslavskaya, assistant professor, St. Petersburg State University,
Russia: Should Central Asian states do more to bring about stability to
Afghanistan? Should their role increase after the Alliance's withdrawal?
James Appathurai: I sort of addressed this in the last question. But let
me make another couple of points. The Central Asian countries are concerned
that when 2014 arrives and the Alliance has a much smaller and different
presence in Afghanistan, that they will be left with a problem or a growing
problem of instability, and terrorism, and extremism, and drugs.
So it's very important that the Alliance is clear with them, including me,
that we will have a presence beyond the end of the combat mission. That we
are committed for the long term to Afghanistan's stability. And committed
not just rhetorically or politically, we will have people on the ground
doing work to help the Afghans stabilize their own country.
But we will also work with the Central Asian countries so that they can
protect themselves better, fight against and defend against these many
threats. So we're going to offer them more consultation, more exercises,
more joint training to help them beef up their own capacity to handle these
problems. And in doing that, we want to create a situation where the
Central Asian countries can engage productively with Afghanistan, and they
are trying to do that to help Afghanistan find its own feet. We don't want
to return to a situation that we hand in the past where, for reasons of
insecurity, individual nations of the region took individual approaches to
Afghanistan, which didn't do anybody in the end any good.
Olga Kolesnichenko, freelance journalist, Russia: Have NATO's frameworks
in the Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative led to
changes in the Middle East or are they a reflection of the new importance
and changing security situation in the region?
James Appathurai: In fact, these two frameworks, and put more largely
NATO's partnerships with countries in the Middle East and North Africa in
these two separate frameworks, date back many, many years. You can look up
their history on the web.
We've always believed, well it's obvious to anybody that the Middle East
and North Africa is a region of key strategic importance, and I don't need
to explain to you why. But it is true that the Allies have decided just in
the last couple of years to beef up the Mediterranean Dialogue and the
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. And right now, almost literally right now
as I'm recording this, the Allies are in discussion with our partners from
the region to see how we can do more together.
What more can we do together in terms of political consultation, in terms
of practical cooperation. Where should our priorities be. Can we provide
more support to them on their request for their reform processes? Would
Libya like to join the Mediterranean Dialogue, the seven other countries in
the MD, so that it can take advantage of all the experience and capacity
that NATO has to help them build security in their own country? To build a
defense ministry. To build an armed forces that can provide for security in
its own country.
So there is a lot NATO can offer. There's a lot we want to offer. But we
want to do it according to the priorities of our partners of the region. So
they're talking to us; we're talking to them. And what you'll see I think
at the Summit in Chicago around the 20th of May is a declaration by NATO
that will, I believe, have the endorsement of our partners in the region,
of how we are going to do more together.
And the word together is the word I want to stress. There will be no
imposition by the Alliance of anything on anyone. On the contrary, we want
to hear from them and meet their needs in a way of course that we can
afford and that meets our priorities as well. So you'll see more out of
NATO in the next little while.
http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/index.php/Open_Think_Tank_Article/James_Appathurai_on_Central_Asia%2C_the_Caucasus%2 C_and_More
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
[image: Editorial Team]
Editorial Team: The NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Political
Affairs and Security Policy returns to answer more of your questions! In
this next round he discusses NATO's role in Central Asia, the
Armenia-Azerbaijan
conflict, and reaching out to Brazil, among other issues.
James Appathurai, the Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Political
Affairs and Security Policy, is back on atlantic-community.org with
answers to more of your questions. In case you missed it, you can
watch the videos of his first visit where he discussed global
partnerships and the Arab Spring as well as the Alliance's
partnerships in Asia, including responding to two proposals from the
Atlantic Memos.
In this playlist, he answers 5 more questions on topics such as tensions in
the Caucasus, how Central Asian partnerships relate to the Afghanistan
mission, and the changing focus of NATO's partnership frameworks in the
Middle East and North Africa. He will be back for a final 5 answers
tomorrow.
You can read more about Mr. Appathurai and his role at NATO in the
original article.
We encourage you to let us know what you think of the answers and to
contribute your reactions, comments, and ideas in the comments below.
Remember to log in when commenting. If you've forgotten your password,
click here.
A full transcript of Mr. Appathurai's answers appears below.
Elkhan Mamedov, student, Russia: Which kind of arrangements is NATO going
to carry out in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Azerbaijan and
Armenia?
James Appathurai: The bottom line is we hope that that never happens. NATO
has no intention, no plan, of getting involved in a Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict and we're not even involved in the peace process, which is being
led by, of course, the two presidents but also the Russian Federation,
theUnited
States, and France in something called the Minsk Process. That being said,
I think there is concern amongst the Allies at the state of the Minsk
Process. We heard from the two presidents here at NATO headquarters just in
the last few weeks that they are committed to the process, they're
committed to a peaceful resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis. But the
reality is that the Minsk Process has had some difficulties, especially
recently, and that there is worrying rhetoric between the two countries and
a lot of weapons being purchased by both countries.
This is a region which probably doesn't get as much attention as it
deserves from the international media. It is of critical strategic
importance for reasons of its location, for reasons of its potential, and
for reasons of its energy transit and supply role. So for many, many
reasons it's important that this conflict be resolved in a peaceful way as
soon as possible and respecting the principles of international law. So we
hope it will be solved, but to come back to the question in its most
pointed way, NATO is not involved in this crisis, except to support the
Minsk group and a peaceful resolution.
Robert Helbig, student, American University, Germany: Is Brazil on
NATO's agenda yet? If so, does NATO strive to build up a partnership with
Brazil in the medium-term? What benefits does NATO hope to get out of a
partnership with Brazil?
James Appathurai: The short answer is: Brazil has not expressed any
particular interest in a relationship with NATO and we have not sought it
out. It's relatively far away for us and the importance of Brazil is
something which we recognize. It even is part now of an informal grouping
called the BRICs, and it even leads it off. It's an emerging power and one
which we hope and expect will work constructively, of course, in the
international system. But the Alliance isn't seeking out a particular
partnership with Brazil, though we wouldn't oppose it.
What we have seen in the last little while is that a number of emerging
countries have taken an ever more prominent role at the United Nations, in
the international system, not just economically, but also politically. And
we welcome that. These countries can help bear the burden of international
security in a way that the Alliance alone cannot do. So we definitely want
to see a situation in which all the emerging economies, including Brazil,
the emerging powers, continue to play an ever more prominent, ever more
constructive role with us in the international system.
Yulia Boguslavskaya, assistant professor, St. Petersburg State University,
Russia: How does cooperation with NATO contribute to security and
stability in Central Asia? What is the proper role for the Alliance in that
region?
James Appathurai: It's a good question, and coming from Russia an even
better question. Because there are many who look at Central Asia as a sort
of battleground between the West and Russia. An area in which we are
competing for influence. And I would quite strongly reject that analogy or
that assessment.
We have common interests in Central Asia. And I mean common with the
Central Asian countries and NATO, and common between all three if we
include Russia as well. And I could list them for you.
First, is stability in Afghanistan. It is vital for all of us that
Afghanistan does not once again begin exporting terrorism, extremism, or
continue to export drugs, which of course hit Russia but hit all of us as
well. So we have an interest in stabilizing Afghanistan, shared by all of
us. And the best way to do that is to cooperate. We do that. NATO, Russia,
and Central Asia for example train together our counter narcotic officials,
particularly Central Asian, Afghan but also now Pakistani. Russia plays a
very important role in this joint project with NATO allies. And it works
very well. It's not solving the drug problem, and we're doing our best to
help that to happen. But it is at least helping to mitigate, to restrain
the flow of drugs out of Afghanistan.
But we have a larger interest in cooperation with Central Asia. And that is
to help the Central Asian countries reach their full potential. Including
as transit areas for trade, as production and transit areas for energy.
That's a mutual interest for everybody.
And finally, let me also say that the Allies do encourage the process that
was put in place recently in Istanbul and in Bonn, and that is to promote
economic cooperation between the Central Asian countries, and Afghanistan,
and other regional parties.
In the end, the strongest incentive for peace and stability in Afghanistan
will be economic cooperation and interdependence. Look at the EU. The EU is
the ultimate example of how economic interdependence breeds cooperation and
peace. So we're very happy to see that the Central Asians are embracing
this concept through the processes that I have mentioned, and NATO will be
there. I am committed to this, not only personally, but professionally as
NATO's Special Representative to Central Asia.
Yulia Boguslavskaya, assistant professor, St. Petersburg State University,
Russia: Should Central Asian states do more to bring about stability to
Afghanistan? Should their role increase after the Alliance's withdrawal?
James Appathurai: I sort of addressed this in the last question. But let
me make another couple of points. The Central Asian countries are concerned
that when 2014 arrives and the Alliance has a much smaller and different
presence in Afghanistan, that they will be left with a problem or a growing
problem of instability, and terrorism, and extremism, and drugs.
So it's very important that the Alliance is clear with them, including me,
that we will have a presence beyond the end of the combat mission. That we
are committed for the long term to Afghanistan's stability. And committed
not just rhetorically or politically, we will have people on the ground
doing work to help the Afghans stabilize their own country.
But we will also work with the Central Asian countries so that they can
protect themselves better, fight against and defend against these many
threats. So we're going to offer them more consultation, more exercises,
more joint training to help them beef up their own capacity to handle these
problems. And in doing that, we want to create a situation where the
Central Asian countries can engage productively with Afghanistan, and they
are trying to do that to help Afghanistan find its own feet. We don't want
to return to a situation that we hand in the past where, for reasons of
insecurity, individual nations of the region took individual approaches to
Afghanistan, which didn't do anybody in the end any good.
Olga Kolesnichenko, freelance journalist, Russia: Have NATO's frameworks
in the Mediterranean Dialogue and Istanbul Cooperation Initiative led to
changes in the Middle East or are they a reflection of the new importance
and changing security situation in the region?
James Appathurai: In fact, these two frameworks, and put more largely
NATO's partnerships with countries in the Middle East and North Africa in
these two separate frameworks, date back many, many years. You can look up
their history on the web.
We've always believed, well it's obvious to anybody that the Middle East
and North Africa is a region of key strategic importance, and I don't need
to explain to you why. But it is true that the Allies have decided just in
the last couple of years to beef up the Mediterranean Dialogue and the
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. And right now, almost literally right now
as I'm recording this, the Allies are in discussion with our partners from
the region to see how we can do more together.
What more can we do together in terms of political consultation, in terms
of practical cooperation. Where should our priorities be. Can we provide
more support to them on their request for their reform processes? Would
Libya like to join the Mediterranean Dialogue, the seven other countries in
the MD, so that it can take advantage of all the experience and capacity
that NATO has to help them build security in their own country? To build a
defense ministry. To build an armed forces that can provide for security in
its own country.
So there is a lot NATO can offer. There's a lot we want to offer. But we
want to do it according to the priorities of our partners of the region. So
they're talking to us; we're talking to them. And what you'll see I think
at the Summit in Chicago around the 20th of May is a declaration by NATO
that will, I believe, have the endorsement of our partners in the region,
of how we are going to do more together.
And the word together is the word I want to stress. There will be no
imposition by the Alliance of anything on anyone. On the contrary, we want
to hear from them and meet their needs in a way of course that we can
afford and that meets our priorities as well. So you'll see more out of
NATO in the next little while.
http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/index.php/Open_Think_Tank_Article/James_Appathurai_on_Central_Asia%2C_the_Caucasus%2 C_and_More
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress