Turkish Forum

Category: Gulnara Inandzh

  • Armenia waits for formation of a new coalition

    Armenia waits for formation of a new coalition

    Armeniya

     

     

     

     

    Gulnara İnanch,

     

    Director of Information and Analytical Center Etnoglobus (ethnoglobus.az), editor of Russian section of website www.turkishnews.com  , (mete62@inbox.ru) 

     

    Declaration of statement by the chairman of “Bargavac Ayastan” (Prospering Armenia)

     

    (PA) party Gagik Tsarukyan not to form a coalition with the ruling Republicans Party has yet proved to be a game. Upon PA party officials statement that they will not agree on coalition with the ruling party and that they will declare their decision regarding minister portfolio in the government until May 31 enables us to think that Tsaraukyan is conducting discussions with ruling party.

     

    Next year’s presidential elections and ruling party’s wining 30% against the 44% increased the pretention of PA party. Party, for the purpose of justifying the confidence of voters, attracting those hesitating for presidential elections to OY and consequently obtaining majority of votes, demonstrates its power in this way.

     

    Head of Armenian government Tigran Sarkisyan in his response to the question who can hold the post of Prime minister confirmed that OY chairman Gagik Tsarukyan can lead the new government answering that he is happy to have people to hold high posts.

     

    Afterwards, Armenian government head Tigran Sarkisyan’s statement “who said PA would go to opposition” indicate how the ruling party is aware of processes and secret negotiations are under way.

     

    G. Tsarukyan’s name is mentioned among the presidential candidates along with L.Ter-Petrosyan, R.Kocharyan and S. Sarkisyan.

     

    The fact that Tsarukyan won the votes of half million of citizens enables him to be more confident in presidential elections along with flirting with the Republicans fearlessly and being pretentious for prime minister in the newly formed government.

    To change the situation to his benefit G.Tsarukyan may form a coalition lead by himself creating a new plan for presidential elections.

     

  • South Azerbaijanis as a new bargaining chip in resolving the Iranian problem

    South Azerbaijanis as a new bargaining chip in resolving the Iranian problem

    Iran Azerbaycan

    Gulnara Inanch, director Online International Information and Analytical center Ethnoglobus.az, related info turkishnews.com, mete62@inbox.ru

    On 12 and 13 April Ankara (Turkey) hold a forum of South Azerbaijanis. Public Forum was organized by the Organization of the Azerbaijanis in Turkey.
    Director of the Center for Strategic Studies of Caucasian (Kafkassam) Dr. Hasan Oktay in an exclusive interview with AMI “News-Azerbaijan,” commented on the question of what was the purpose of this forum, and whyTurkey, afterIsrael, started paying attention to the issue ofSouth Azerbaijan.
    – What are the goals of establishing in Turkey World Azerbaijani Congress (WAC)?
    – World Azerbaijanis Congress has been active within recent years. Along with this, there are a number of similar structures. The Republic of Azerbaijan, developing close ties with the diasporas, through them, tries to promote the interests of the state. The successes of the Armenian and Jewish diasporas, which were taken as an example for Azerbaijan, has not yet borne fruit. It led to the occurrence of new organizations seeking funding proportions allocated for Azerbaijan, among them there is just a competition. This is the reason for creation of different organizations under the name of the World Azerbaijanis Congress (WAC). One can see that these different organizations, working with Jewish organizations in exchange for financial support create good relations between Jewish Organizations and southern Azerbaijanis.
    Analogical efforts are short-term efforts. Here the main goal is money.
    In order to get financing, WAC is divided into four parts. Israel also believes that through these organizations, establishes relationships with Iranian Azerbaijanis.
    – The new Congress is established in Turkey, and what do you think, does it mean that Ankara, tries to take control of the organization of Iranian Azeris, like most of the world Azerbaijanism?
    – We try to present the problem of Azerbaijan and southern Azerbaijanis to world community, in neutral and scientific manner. There are 35 million South Azerbaijanis in Iran and 9 million people live in the Republic of Azerbaijan. If we also add here the diasporas, then the number of Azeri Turks will be around 50 million people. Kafkassam, speaking more than a party, take into account the factor of this large ethnic group in the Caucasus, is trying to promote its activation and efficiency. Azerbaijan is trying to unite the world Azerbaijanis. At the same time carrying out activities in this direction not in Azerbaijan but in Turkey indicates the intention to rely on the strength of this country.
    Therefore, the union of the forces ofAzerbaijan andTurkey in the diaspora, politics will be more effective. IfTurkey does not support this initiative ofAzerbaijan,Azerbaijan can expect disappointment. This is nothing more than an initiative. Such initiatives should be involved only non-governmental organizations.
    – Jewish organizations and individuals representing Israel expanded the campaign to protect the rights of South Azerbaijanis. Do the Turkish non-governmental organizations coordinate the activities of Jewish organizations in this matter?
    – The Iran-Israel tension covers a wide geographic region. This conflict will affect non-Persian ethnic as the elements of living in Iran.
    Southern Azerbaijanis, as the most important element, coming to the first plan.
    The main factor of the war is the exclusion of war opponents and forcing it into the peace on their own terms. It can be either by force or by using other methods, including outreach to compel the enemy to the peace negotiations.
    Therefore, it is natural for Israel to use all non-military ways of forcing Iran to the peace. Southern Azerbaijanis and therefore go on the agenda.
    Unfortunately, carrying on the agenda of the Iranian Azerbaijanis, are not considered internal conditions and other factors of Iran.
    Azerbaijanis do not have to turn to the elements, such as the Kurds of Iraq, inviting Americans to the occupation of their homeland.
    As a result, the future of the Kurds in Iraq is in doubt.
    In its contacts with the Iranian Azeris we remind them of the Kurds, in what situation they were in the invasion of Americans in Iran.
    They are warned to be more attentive to the issue of military operations in Iran.
    Affirmation of Azerbaijanis as a significant element of Iranian democracy, it is very important from the perspective of the region’s future.
    – Meanwhile, an Israeli social activist Avigdor Eskin is carrying out campaign with a group of Russian experts, including ethnic Jews for the rights of Iranian Azerbaijanis. It is believed that by this way, Israel and Jewish organizations, by protecting the rights of Iran’s Azeri nationalists, are trying to manipulate them. How can you comment on this campaign?
    – We are closely watching activity of Avigdor Eskin. This is passing interest. Some Azeris are trying to capitalize on this partnership. They have no place in the South Azerbaijani politics. Azeri Turks of Iran will not get into the situation of the Kurds of Iraq. Israel should not turn into an instrument of Azeri Turks in a war with Iran. But it is a psychological operation. Israel, being in confrontation with Iran will use all non-military tools. The easiest of which are the Azerbaijani Turks.
    Can Iran be drawn into a civil war in South Azerbaijan? This is the most important point on which most anti-Iranian forces sharpened. Unfortunately, many Iranian Azerbaijanis were forced to leave the country under pressure from the authorities, not finding shelter, are drawn into these games. It comes from the frustration of South Azerbaijanis. But such attempts have no chance to share Iran.
    Southern Azerbaijanis, fighting for their basic rights and freedoms in Iran, can achieve the rule of democracy in the region. The biggest problem of Iran is the lack of democracy. Democratic Iran is a favorable country for South Azerbaijanis living here. Iran is the birthplace of South Azerbaijanis. Before the 1924 Iranian Turks were in power in Iran. Problems of Iranian Turks can be solved in a democracy.
    Iran must take this into account. IfTehran continues to use unequal policy against Azerbaijanis, then later on the agenda may withdraw part ofIran. Iran, instead of the disturbances should be made available to Azerbaijanis for their rights.
    – For a long time there are discussion on the possibility of abolishing the Committee on Diaspora in Azerbaijan and the creation of the department in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in charge of the Diaspora. Because world organizations of Azerbaijan, in contrast to diaspora organizations of other nations, equal in Baku, between the creation of the World Azerbaijanis Congress and the rumors of the Committee on the Elimination of the Diaspora can be traced some connection …
    – Azerbaijan Diaspora issues created considering Armenian activity. If Azerbaijan is going to really control the diaspora in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it is quite normal. Because Armenia under the name of Diaspora Ministry manages the Armenian Diaspora. Individual Azerbaijanis in many places, act as opponents to the Azerbaijani authorities that concerned the official Baku.
    Therefore, the intention of diaspora activities in the government structures is natural. But if we consider the terms of the diaspora and its benefits to the Azerbaijani authorities, it does not lead to a very healthy results. Providing diaspora freedom and support their activities will be more useful to Azerbaijani state.
    – How are Iranian issues seen from Turkey?
    – Iran is a large and specific country. Iran has invisible influence over Azerbaijan: no matter what angle Azerbaijan is interested in the South Azerbaijanis, Iran through the southern Azeris can create problems for Baku. Iran, by supporting Armenia in the Garabagh conflict may close the path of Azerbaijan interest in his Iranian compatriots. In the Iranian-Azerbaijani relations there are a lot of unresolved issues. Iran has every opportunity to use them in their favor.
    Settlement of status of the Caspian Sea is also in the hands ofIran andAzerbaijan can not use the pool to the fullest. InTurkey, where it is easy to operate non-governmental organizations, it is easier to carry out the activities of the South Azerbaijanis.
    – Will the World Azerbaijanis Congress be engaged in protecting the rights of South Azerbaijanis?
    – Keep in mind the sensitivity of Iran in this regard. Turkey initially experienced difficulty with the name “Friends of Syria” which has not yet dissipated.
    Excessive activity of WAC on the South-Azerbaijani issue, considering the sensitivity of Azerbaijan in the region, could prompt Iran to the use of leverage. We have to consider these issues and power of damage.
    Of course, it is necessary to maintain the democratic rights of South Azerbaijanis, but that interest should not be a tool to invade Iran.
    During a meeting with Iran on any platform, social, political and social demands of the southern Azeris should be tabled. Azerbaijan does not need to pass the constitutional framework. Features pressure Iran on Azerbaijan is based on probabilities. Do not ignore this reality, as it may become unhappy adventure.

    – From what prism does Turkey consider the rights of Iranian Azerbaijanis and how does Turkey plan to use these plans?
    – First, Turkey, in principle, rejects the interference in the internal affairs of its neighbors. Along with this, Turkey considers the rights of South Azerbaijanis in the framework of democracy and the Iranian laws, on all platforms met with Iranian officials. Thousands of Iranian Turks emigrated to Turkey, whose fate is closely interested in the Turkish authorities. South Azerbaijanis came to Turkey with some hope which facilitate the work of Turkey, and at the same time made it more difficult. It is easy, because Turkey has control over the subject, and in a lawful manner to protect the rights of Iranian Azerbaijanis, who emigrated to the country. Difficulties in the fact that Iran is afraid that Turkey by the help of Iranian Turks will try to interfere in their internal affairs. This creates a problem for Turkey.
    Turkey defends the legal rights of their fellow residents in this location, without interfering in the internal affairs of its neighbors. And this protection will continue.
    The requirement of the South Azerbaijanis allowing them to live in human conditions is a fair request. Iran can no longer delay in granting them this right. Otherwise, it will give his enemies a big trump card and this card will forever be used.

  • US will not attack Iran

    US will not attack Iran

    Глен

     

     

     

     

     

    Azerbaijan is not subject to  “Arab spring”

     

    Gulnara İnandzh,

     

    Director of Information and Analytical Center Ethnoglobus (ethnoglobus.az), editor of turkishnews.com website. Mete62@inbox.ru

     

    Israel and the US policy’s consequences in the region is mainly danger for the statehood of Azerbaijan. Despite official Baku has repeatedly declared its position towards Iran, interested international powers are still trying to cause tension in the relations between Baku and Tehran. US Jamestown Foundation president Glen Howard comments on the subject in his interview.    

     

     

    – What specific line does the US support in relation to Azerbaijan amid the serious geopolitical processes occurred in the Mideast, I mean “Arab spring”?

     

    – I do not think theUSorAzerbaijanplay any role in “Arab spring”. TheUSdoesn’t support any particular line. We don’t also support what is happening againstSyria. It does not any affect onCaucasus. It more affects onRussia.Russiais subject to Arab spring more rather than theSouthern Caucasus. Because you have theUSAmbassador who is very active in democracy promotion. He has been chased by Russian NTV TV Channel. And this is the sign thatRussiafeels more trouble with regard to Arab spring rather thanSouthern Caucasus.

     

    – What does Washington expects from Azerbaijan in its Iran policy?

     

    – TheUShas already stated that it doesn’t support attack onIran.  TheUSeven has warnedIsraelnot to attackIran. I believe thatIsraeldue to good relations with theUSwill follow the advice of President Mr. Barak Obama. I do not thinkIsraelwill attackIran. All these are rumors designed to make people scared and afraid. All these are a part of geopolitical plan by the outside powers intending to destroy stability in theSouthern Caucasus.

     

    – How would you comment on the rumors that Israel will use Azerbaijani lands in order to attack Iran? 

     

    – I hope you understand the military importance of it. This is not a military base to attackIran. Contrary, ifIsraelattacksIran, thenIsraelmilitary air forces will usePersian Gulffor it. But if it happens,Israeljets will not have enough fuel to go back and they will be obliged to useAzerbaijanlands only for the purpose of getting fuel. This doesn’t mean attack onIran, this is just air route forIsraeljets to go back.

     

    – As you see there are attempts to confront Iran and Azerbaijan. How do you think, what will be Washington’s answer if Iran acts aggressively against Azerbaijan? For example, overflying a border.   

     

     

    – Aggressive?. I thinkAzerbaijanis also ready for such aggressive reply.Iranwill not use military againstAzerbaijan,Iranwill use other methods. I believe thatIrandoesn’t want to apply military force againstAzerbaijanand even is not ready for it. Why doesIranneed it? Today whenIranhas an attack danger from the Persian gulf,Tehrandoesn’t need another problem in another border.

     

    – In the US today we hear offers about dialogue with Iran more than war. How do you think, why such dialogue offers are not voiced louder?

     

    – Because sometimesIsraelwarns the world thatIran’ nuclear program is dangerous. When official Tel-Aviv openly informs thatIran’s nuclear program is dangerous, we have to be anxious and it causes warlike atmosphere. This is useful for many sides includingIsrael. On the other side, war threats are also for threateningIran.Iranalso uses some words to threatenIsrael. So, sometimesIranmust be reminded thatIsraelhas strategic relations withAzerbaijan. This is natural and understandable.

     

    – Can we say that Israel puts pressure on the situation?

     

    -Israelputs pressure on the situation?Israelis an independent country and may have good relations with any country of the world. Therefore ifIsraelhas military relations withAzerbaijanit is good. Because,Azerbaijanis a good partner in military field.Azerbaijandoesn’t have to get the weapon only fromRussia.Azerbaijanmay buy weapons from any country of the world in order to protect its country.

    Nowadays discussions are held between theUSandIraninIstanbul. It doesn’t mean that there will be conflict between theUSandIran. If there are diplomatic relations between theUSandIran, how can we speak of warlike atmosphere? IfIranthinks that it has war danger from theUS, then why do they conduct new talks and dialogue with theUSinIstanbul?

     

     

    Source –  www. newbakupost.az

  • Ankara-Yerevan Accords Point toward Armenia’s Withdrawal from the Occupied Territories

    Ankara-Yerevan Accords Point toward Armenia’s Withdrawal from the Occupied Territories

     

    foto -geography.about.com

     

    Gulnara Inandzh
    Director
    International Online Information Analytic Center Ethnoglobus
    The emotions, whipped up by commentaries which followed the signing on October 10 of the protocols between Turkey and Armenia, have prevented a logical analysis of the situation.  In order to begin such an analysis, we need to recognize that at the roots of the signing of these accords lie a multi-sided game of significance far beyond the South Caucasus region.

    If at the outset, the opening of the borders with Armenia was one of the conditions on Turkey’s path toward joining the European Union, then at the present time, the rapprochement of the two countries depends on the geopolitical situation and Ankara’s participation in these processes.  Immediately after the signing of the Turkish-Armenian accords, as one should have expected, the EU put forward some new demands for Turkey, about which the latter could not have but known about in advance.  This means that Turkey signed the agreements with Armenia not as part of its effort to join the EU, something that provides one of the points of departure for understanding why Turkey decided to reach an agreement with Armenia.

    At the same time, we must not ignore the pressures on Turkey both direct and behind the scenes.  And those came from more places than just the capitals of the countries which were represented at the signing ceremony.  (Here, we intentionally are not touching on the role of Israel in all these complicated political games, the situation around Iran, the transportation routes for Iraqi oil and the Kurdish element in Iraq, as each of these represent a distinctive subject for discussion).

    Turkey, who bear the genetic code of the Ottoman Empire as far as great power games are concerned, will not agree to play the role of a defeated country even under the pressure of world powers.  Ankara is not in such a weak geopolitical situation that it has to act in ways that harm its national interests.  Not long ago, we should remember, Turkey felt itself strong enough to refuse the United States the right to use the military base at Incirlik for the supply of the anti-Saddam operations of the coalition forces in Iraq.

    When pointing to the harm the protocols between Ankara and Yerevan create for Azerbaijan in the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, one must not forget that the Armenian diaspora has terrorized Turkey with the issue of the so-called “Armenian genocide.”  In its turn, Turkish diplomacy, which connects this question with the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict until recently took a position absolutely the same as Azerbaijan both because of their common Turkishness and because of Turkey’s own national interests.  These two issues also served as a factor which united the Azerbaijani and Turkish diaspora, which resisted recognition of “the Armenian genocide” by pointing to the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani lands.

    Viewed from that perspective, it would seem that Turkey, which has little to gain economically and politically by reaching an accord with Armenia, signed the protocols in a way that both undercut its own interests and angered its fraternal and strategic relationship with Azerbaijan.

    Of course, in contrast to the 1990s, Azerbaijan today is not the weak “younger brother” who needs support but an equal state that is confident in its own forces and demands respect on that basis.  This cannot entirely please the current Turkish powers that be, but it is not the occasion for a break with a reliable partner.  Differences in the question of the transportation of Azerbaijani gas to Turkey also cannot be the subject for speculation on such a strategic question as the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border.

    During the entire period of talks with Armenia, official representatives of Turkey at various levels repeated that the relationship Ankara sought would not harm the interests of Azerbaijan and that the Turkish-Armenian borders will not be opened until the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.  Among those who have constantly said this are Turkish President Abdulla Gul, Prime Minister Erdogan, Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu, members of the parliament, opposition figures and others both before and after the signing of the protocols.

    At the same time, every step of Armenian-Turkish negotiations was discussed with Baku, and talks about the peaceful resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh issue continued in the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group.

    And in this context, the declaration of Turkish President Gul concerning the impact in “a short time” of the Armenian-Turkish accords on “the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict” merits attention and should calm many of the concerns in Azerbaijan.

    At the present time, when Azerbaijan has acquired major geopolitical importance, ignoring its interests on such an important issue is impossible.  Consequently, the interests of Baku were taken into consideration.  Note that immediately after the signing in Switzerland of the Armenian-Turkish agreement Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev arrived in Zurich where the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was discussed.  Further, a short time after the signing of the agreement with the very same mission, Tina Kaidanow, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia arrived in Baku, and in the framework of the meetings of the foreign ministers of the Black Sea countries, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu met with President Ilham Aliyev and his foreign minister, Elmar Mammadyarov.  And the visit to Baku of General Ishyk Koshaner, commander of Turkish ground forces, to meet with Azerbaijani Defense Minister Col. Gen. Safar Abiyev is yet another confirmation of this.

    Taken together, it is clear that this cycle of visits was not a matter of chance.

    And if there were any doubt about this, the reaction both within Armenian society and also in the diaspora to the accord which should allow Armenia to escape from the blockade has been negative.  Evidently, Armenian society and politicians recognize that they will have to free the occupied territories, because otherwise no one intends to save Armenia.  It is not accidental that after the signing of the Zurich agreement, all sides represented at the ceremony except for Armenian Foreign Minister Edvard Nalbandyan did not hide their satisfaction with what had taken place.

    In other words, everything shows that the Zurich agreement will have a positive consequence on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.  Judging by the presence at the signing ceremony of the representatives of the OSCE Minsk Group, it is possible to assert that all interested sides are informed about this process and about its impact on the resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.

    If under the pressure of the diaspora Armenia will not ratify the agreement, Azerbaijan and Turkey will return to where they were before.  If the Turkish and Armenian parliaments all the same give legal force to the agreement, then Armenia will have to free Azerbaijani territories in order to secure the opening of the Turkish borders.  Otherwise, Ankara, responding to public pressure in Azerbaijan and in Turkey will not be able to open the borders with Armenia.  In that case, Azerbaijani and Turkish public opinion will be in a position to increase international pressure on Yerevan and the Armenian diaspora regarding the liberation of the occupied territories.

    If Armenia does not follow through, then Turkey will always be in a position to find reasons to close the borders.  In such a case, Azerbaijan will be left with only one choice – the liberation of the occupied territories by military means; and the countries involved in the division of spheres of influence in the region will have to agree with this.  Otherwise Azerbaijan, using its status as “the most reliable country for the transportation of gas,” will have every reason for refusing to allow the Nabucco project to pass through its territory.


    Every country has its own interests and priorities, and in this case, that means that there is no chance that Turkey will sacrifice its relations with Azerbaijan for new ties with Armenia.

  • Looking beyond the Golan Heights: Baku as a possible mediator in the Middle East

    Looking beyond the Golan Heights: Baku as a possible mediator in the Middle East

    Gulnara Inandzh
    Director
    International Online Information Analytic Center Ethnoglobus,

    related info www.turkishnews.com

    mete62@inbox.ru

    Syrian President Bashar Asad’s visit to Baku, which took place immediately after Israeli President Shimon Peres visited Azerbaijan and which Asad said bore a strategic character, points to a possible mediating role for Azerbaijan in negotiations between Syria and Israel. [1] That is all the more the case because over the last several years, both Israel and the United States have pushed for the strengthening of the position of Azerbaijan in the Middle East in order to have another partner there alongside Turkey.

    Indeed, now a suitable time has arisen as a result of that effort, and consequently, Tel Aviv and Washington have offered Azerbaijan a mediating mission in the Middle East and the role of a gas transit route to Europe bypassing Russia.  For the first role, Azerbaijan is a key to American and Israeli efforts to reduce Russian influence in Iran and Syria and more precisely to cut the tie among the members of this triangle.  And consequently, Israel and the US have offered concessions and attractive proposals.

    In the dialogue between Damascus and Jerusalem, the primary focus is on the return to Syria of the Golan Heights which have been under Israeli occupation since the Six day way in 1967.  During his visit to Baku, President Peres said that “Syrian President Bashar Asad must understand that he cannot  receive on a silver platter the Golan Heights if he continues his ties with Iran and his support of Hezbollah. [2] At the same time, he sent a message to Tehran with whom a discussion on the Syrian question appears to be in the offing.

    If it is able to achieve its goals, Israel may return the Golan Heights, but having given up these territories, Tel Aviv must receive a security guarantee for Israel.  However, Damascus cannot completely break its ties with Teheran and its satellite Hezbollah and give a full guarantee that after the return of the strategically important Heights, Iran will not terrorize Israel.  Only Tehran can give a guarantee of non-aggression against Israel whether or not the Golan Heights are returned. [3]

    The Golan Heights are only the visible part of a game behind which stand the economic security of the Middle East and the West.  After Peres and Asad visited Baku, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg arrived, along with Philip Gordon, the assistant secretary for Europe and Eurasia.  During the visit, they discussed with Azerbaijan’s leadership the issue of US support for the diversification of energy supplies.  Stressing that the US is not seeking to exclude Russia from this process, he pointed to a variety of energy plans that would involve Azerbaijan with Syria and Iran.  At the same time, with this set of talks, conversations about the Nabucco gas pipeline, which would reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas, took off.

    And at the same time, US President Barak Obama decided to reopen the American embassy in Damascus which had been closed four years ago.

    All these statements and actions help explain why Damascus has now declared its readiness to be part of the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline and to purchase oil from Iraq.

    Of course, the US and Israel, by attracting Syria to their side, intend to isolate Iran, but since all the major Iranian gas fields remain beyond the control of the West, it is hardly possible to gain the complete isolation of Iran.  Therefore, for the US and Israel, it is important to involve Iran in a dialogue through one or another third country, including among them Azerbaijan.  But the most important link in this chain is the freeing of Iran from Russian manipulation.  For that, Iran must become involved in one of the Western gas projects, otherwise the Iranian-Armenian gas pipeline through Georgia will become tied to Russia and Iranian gas will be under the control of the Kremlin.

    In addition to this, the time has come for the development of new gas fields in the Caspian, part of which are in disputed areas.  And here too it is necessary to free Iran from Russian influence since official Iranian circles consider that not Tehran but rather Russia is preventing the resolution of the status of the Caspian.  Therefore, a mediating role for Azerbaijan among the US, Israel and Syria will require the intensification of negotiations between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Iran.

    Notes

    [1] “Azerbaijan will reconcile Syria with Israel” [in Russian], 11 July, available at: (accessed 3 August 2009).
    [2] RosBalt (2009) “Israel: Syria will not be able to both get the Golan Heights and continue its friendship with Iran” [in Russian], RosBalt, 6 July, available at: (accessed 3 August 2009).

    [3] IzRus (2009) “Azerbaijan is ready to mediate in reconciling Israel with Syria and Iran”, 19 July, available at: http://izrus.co.il/dvuhstoronka/article/2009-07-19/5372.html (accessed 3 August 2009).

  • Azerbaijani-Israeli Relations Enter a New Stage

    Azerbaijani-Israeli Relations Enter a New Stage

    Gulnara Inandzh

    Director
    International Online Information Analytic Center Ethnoglobus,

    related info

    https://www.turkishnews.com/ru/content/

    mete62@inbox.ru

    The upcoming June 28th 2009 visit to Baku by Israeli President Shimon Peres, a visit arranged during the May 6th meeting in Prague between Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, opens a new stage in Azerbaijani-Israeli relations and reflects among other things Jerusalem’s desire to strengthen relations with former Soviet republics in the aftermath of Israeli operations in Gaza.

    In support of that effort, one marked out in the middle of 2008, the Israeli foreign ministry has established separate departments to deal with the European portion of the CIS, the South Caucasus and Central Asia, regions that had been the responsibility of the ministry’s broader Central European and Eurasian Department.  The new units are provisionally called Eurasia I (dealing with the European portion of the CIS) and Eurasia II (dealing with the South Caucasus and Central Asia).  The head of Eurasia II, which will also deal with Azerbaijan, is Shemi Tsur, the son of a Jewish returnee from the Iranian province of Eastern Azerbaijan (Falkov & Kogan 2009).

    Apparently, Israeli political technologists have been working on the strengthening of official contacts with Azerbaijan intensively.  Jewish groups in the West have been playing a major role in this and have conditioned their support for Azerbaijani interests on Baku’s opening of an embassy in Israel.  As official representatives of the two countries have noted, despite the absence of an Azerbaijani embassy in Israel and of a general treaty between Azerbaijan and Israel, there exist various interagency accords which are working extremely well.  As a result, Israel receives 30 percent of the oil it needs for internal use through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, and bilateral trade is constantly expanding.

    The absence of anti-Semitism in Azerbaijan, the good relations with Jews living in the country also help to fill the diplomatic vacuum.  At the same time, the opening of an embassy of a Muslim-majority state in Israel and the visit of the Israeli president to a Muslim country are a moral support and example for Jews of the entire world and the Jewish state itself.

    In this connection, it is worth noting that this is the second official visit of a senior Israeli official to Baku over the last decade.  In 1998, Benjamin Netanyahu, then and now the prime minister of Israel, after completing a visit to China spent the night in Baku.  After that time, no senior Israeli officials visited Azerbaijan for some years.  But beginning in 2006, when Avigdor Lieberman, the chairman of the Our Home is Israel party became minister for strategic affairs, the number of visits increased.  Lieberman himself visited Baku in the summer of 2007 just after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did.

    These efforts by Israeli and Western companies and organizations in Azerbaijan have been viewed by Iranian ideologues as part of a network directed against Iran.  One cannot deny that the overthrow of the current Tehran government or the forced change of its aggressive policy and the weakening of its position in the region are one of the key issues for Israel and the West and in particular the US.  As a result, the concern of Iran on this score cannot be considered baseless paranoia.

    On the other hand, with the assignment at the end of April 2009 of a new director of the Asian infrastructure of the Bureau for Ties with the Russian-language Jewish Diaspora Natif, Israel specified its policy concerning work with the diaspora in the CIS countries.  In that, Azerbaijan is presented as a major focus of Natif’s activities (Izrus 2009).  It could hardly be otherwise, given the Jewish communities of that country, as well as in Iran, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

    The Jewish lobby and Israel in recent years have attempted to establish contacts with their compatriots living in Iran.  In the meantime, the Southern Azerbaijanis who live in Iran represent another issue for relations between Baku and Tehran.  With the goal of removing the World Congress of Azerbaijanis out from under the influence of Iran, for example, a change in the leadership of the organization has occurred.  The Committee for work with compatriots was reformed into a structure for work with the diaspora, which thus reduced its focus on compatriots in areas adjoining Azerbaijan where Azerbaijanis have lived from time immemorial on their historical lands.

    As was already noted, if the visit of Shimon Peres to Baku bears a moral character for Jews, for Azerbaijan it is one additional opportunity to attract the attention of the world community and the entire Jewish world to Azerbaijan and to define new patterns of cooperation and the inclusion of Azerbaijan in new major trans-regional projects.  But as one might expect, Iran’s reaction has been aggressive, including overt threats to Azerbaijan.  Baku responded diplomatically but made it very clear that it did not intend to retreat from the meeting or from its expanding ties with the Jewish state.

    In spite of its threatening language, it is completely clear that Iran will not violate the borders of Azerbaijan as it did earlier.  And clearly, Azerbaijan was prepared for such an Iranian reaction, but in preparing for it, Baku recognized that neither the US nor Israel could advance an effective policy toward Iran without taking Azerbaijan into account.  Indeed, now economically and politically strong, Azerbaijan is capable of engaging itself in pro-active regional politics, as opposed to a defensive one it had adhered to before.


    References

    Falkov, Mikhail & Kogan, Alexander (2009) “Izrail’ otdel’no vzyalsya za Kavkaz I Tsentral’nuyu Aziyu” [“Israel Moved to Separately Deal with the Caucasus and Central Asia”], Izrus, 19 January, available at http://izrus.co.il/dvuhstoronka/article/2009-01-19/3449.html, accessed 13 June 2009.

    Izrus (2009) “’Nativ’ Izbral Kuratora po Tsentral’noy Azii I Kavkazu”, Izrus, 1 March, available at http://izrus.co.il/diasporaIL/article/2009-03-01/3883.html, accessed 14 June 2009.

    source  :