Category: Central Asia

  • Uzbeks Targeted in South Kyrgyzstan

    Uzbeks Targeted in South Kyrgyzstan


    Destruction of Uzbek Property Systemic; Aid Distribution Difficult
    The destruction caused by rioters looting and burning their way through ethnic Uzbek neighborhoods in Osh, Kyrgyzstan, was systematic and thorough, says a Human Rights Watch team on the ground.
    In one neighborhood, the rioters – often ethnic Kyrgyz – burned down more than 400 homes, a mosque and a school. Homes owned by ethnic Kyrgyz remain standing. One man described how gangs drove through the neighborhood, torched houses, and shot at people trying to flee.
    The violence has subsided, but many ethnic Uzbeks don’t dare leave their neighborhoods. Human Rights Watch documented several cases in which ethnic Uzbeks were assaulted by men in camouflage when trying to enter a hospital or pick up humanitarian aid. This, along with the unstable security situation, makes distributing aid difficult.
    There are surprisingly few police or soldiers in the city, raising serious questions about whether government forces there could contain any flare-up of the conflict.
    Since the rioting began last Thursday, hundreds of people, mostly ethnic Uzbeks, have been killed and more than 1,000 injured. Uzbekistan has closed its border after taking in roughly 100,000 refugees. This border needs to remain open for those seeking refuge.
    The International community should work with the Kyrgyz government, which took control two months ago after protests toppled the previous leadership. They should provide for the protection and humanitarian needs of all people.
    Kyrgyzstan: Decisive Action Needed to Rein in Violence
    Urgent Need for Humanitarian Measures as Attacks Continue
    June 13, 2010

    Men walk past a burning building in the city of Osh.

    © 2010 Reuters

    Ethnic Uzbek refugees wait to cross the border to Uzbekistan near the village of Jalal-Kuduk on June 14, 2010, after fleeing the violence in Kyrgyzstan.

    © 2010 Reuters
    Related Materials:
    Kyrgyzstan: UN Should Act to Help End Violence
    Kyrgyzstan: Protect All Ethnic Groups

    People are desperate to escape the violence but without international assistance there’s no way out, and every minute of delay is costing lives.

    Andrea Berg, Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch

    (Osh) – The government of Kyrgyzstan should take immediate measures to ensure safety for people attempting to flee unchecked violence in southern Kyrgyzstan, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch reiterated its call for a UN-mandated force to assist the Kyrgyz government in providing protection and stopping ethnic violence engulfing Osh and spreading to other cities in southern Kyrgyzstan.

    “People are desperate to escape the violence but without international assistance there’s no way out, and every minute of delay is costing lives,” said Andrea Berg, Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch, who left Osh on June 13, 2010. “The Kyrgyz authorities need to set up effective measures to protect people and negotiate safe access for those who want to flee.”

    Arson and other attacks continued on June 13, with residents reporting that a school and homes were on fire. A man in one ethnic Uzbek neighborhood in the center of Osh described to Human Rights Watch how gangs would drive through the neighborhood, set houses on fire, and shoot at people trying to flee. The gangs would leave when the military arrived, but then return as soon as the military left the neighborhood.

    Eyewitnesses in Cherеmyshki, a neighborhood just west of the city center, told Human Rights Watch that gangs torched Uzbek houses and shot at people who attempted to flee. Gangs surrounded the neighborhood, preventing many from escaping.

    A Human Rights Watch researcher saw burned out neighborhoods, burned cars, and barricaded neighborhoods, with some lone buildings and cars – marked KG, presumably for “Kyrgyz” – untouched.

    The government of Kyrgyzstan sent security forces to Osh on June 12 and granted them shoot-to-kill authority, which Human Rights Watch said would inevitably lead to violations of the right to life.  A man from Cheremyshki told Human Rights Watch that uniformed personnel and others clearly identified as official forces were also involved in the shooting in the neighborhood, although it is unclear if the Uzbeks were armed or presented any threat.

    Meanwhile, ethnic violence worsened in Jalal-Abad, 50 miles from Osh, with Akipress, a Kyrgyz wire service, reporting gunfights and torching of homes, and that ethnic Uzbeks had fled.

    The humanitarian situation in Osh and at the Kyrgyz-Uzbek border has grown increasingly desperate. A Human Rights Watch staff member in Osh received a flood of telephone calls from desperate people begging for assistance with evacuation, food, and medical aid. Several callers told Human Rights Watch that vulnerable groups including children and pregnant women are in especially urgent need for food and medical assistance. Humanitarian aid groups present in the city when the attacks began have not been able to provide assistance due to the dangerous security situation.

    The poor security situation has also prevented delivery of humanitarian supplies to the thousands of ethnic Uzbeks who are fleeing the violence and massing at different points along the border with Uzbekistan.

    Human Rights Watch called on the international community to work with the Kyrgyz government to provide for the protection and humanitarian needs of ethnic Uzbeks who are fleeing the violence and massing at different points along the border with Uzbekistan.

    One source told Human Rights Watch that an Uzbek friend had said that gangs had driven toward the border and shot at people gathered there. It is not known whether any one was harmed as a result.

    “The international community urgently needs to work with the government of Kyrgyzstan to ensure that humanitarian supplies can be delivered to the border areas,” Berg said.

    Human Rights Watch also urged the government of Uzbekistan to keep the border open and allow all those seeking protection to cross. Although Uzbekistan has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention, Human Rights Watch urged the government of Uzbekistan at least to provide temporary protection to all Kyrgyz nationals seeking entry at the border and to allow the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to provide emergency assistance for them.

    Human Rights Watch also urged the Kyrgyz government to reverse its decision to give security forces powers to shoot to kill. It further urged all parties that engage in law enforcement action to adhere to the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, which call for law enforcement officials to take steps to preserve and protect human life and resort to lethal force only as a last resort.

    Photo: © 2010 Reuters
  • Turkey’s President opens Embassy, Culture Center in Kazakhstan

    Turkey’s President opens Embassy, Culture Center in Kazakhstan

    Culture CenterTurkey’s President Abdullah Gul inaugurated Turkey’s Embassy and a Turkish Culture Center in the Kazakh capital Astana on Wednesday.

    Delivering a speech in the inauguration ceremony, Gul said, “we are very happy because we are opening the new building of the Turkish embassy.”

    Gul recalled that Turkey was the first country that recognized the independence of Kazakhstan.

    Later Gul and Kazakhstan’s President Nursultan Nazarbayev visited the International Exhibition of Arms and Military-Technical Equipment KADEX-2010 in Astana.

    President Gul also met with Kazakh and Turkish businessmen over a luncheon.

    Yunus Emre Culture Center, named after a 13th century Turkish poet and Sufi mystic, has become the fifth culture center opened abroad. Yunus Emre Foundation had earlier opened centers in Sarajevo, Tirana, Cairo and Skopje. The foundation plans to open new culture centers in Cologne, London, Moscow, Paris and Damascus this year.

    President Gul also said that Yunus Emre Culture Center aims to keep Turkish language and culture alive, and also to spread it.

    He said that Turkish culture prevailed in the Balkans and Central Asia, adding that these culture centers would help those who want to learn Turkish.

    Following the inauguration ceremony, Gul also visited a Turkish-Kazakh high school in Astana.

    Later, Gul departed from Kazakhstan to return home.

    AA

  • Hundreds Dead in Earthquake in Northwest China

    Hundreds Dead in Earthquake in Northwest China

    By ANDREW JACOBS

    BEIJING — A powerful earthquake in northwest China killed at least 300 people, injured 8,000 and left many others buried under debris on Wednesday, Chinese state media reported.

    Enlarge This Image

    14quake 337 395 articleInline

    Zhang Hongshuan/Xinhua, via Reuters

    A photo taken by a mobile phone showed destroyed houses after an earthquake hit the Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Yushu, northwest China’s Qinghai province on Wednesday.

    15quake tempmap articleInline
    The New York Times
    Enlarge This Image

    15quake inline2 articleInline

    Zhang Hongshuan/Associated Press

    Rubble from destroyed houses fills the streets.

    Enlarge This Image

    15quake inline3 articleInline

    Zhang Hongshuan/Associated Press

    People gathered in open areas after the quake hit.

    The quake, which struck at 7:49 a.m. in Qinghai Province, had a magnitude of 7.1 according to China’s earthquake administration.

    According to the China Earthquake Networks Center, the earthquake struck in Yushu County, a remote and mountainous area sparsely populated by farmers and herders, most of them ethnic Tibetans. The region is pocked with copper, tin and coal mines and rich in natural gas. A government Web site said the county’s population was around 80,000.

    China National Radio said that more than 80 percent of the homes in the area had collapsed but that schools and government buildings had largely remained standing.

    Karsum Nyima, an employee of a local television station in Yushu, told the national television broadcaster, CCTV, that the quake had sent people running into the streets.

    “All of a sudden, the houses collapsed,” he said. “It was a terrible earthquake. In the park, a Buddhist pagoda fell down. Everyone is in the street in front of their houses. They are trying to find family members.”

    In the same broadcast, Wu Yong, an officer in the Chinese Army, said that the road to the airport was impassable and that soldiers were digging out people from collapsed homes by hand.

    “The most important thing now is that this place is far from everything, with few accessible rescue troops available,” Mr. Wu said. “I feel like the number of dead and injured will keep going up.”

    Local officials said that phone service was limited and that rescue efforts were stymied by a lack of heavy equipment. Medical supplies and tents, they added, were in short supply.

    State news media reported that 700 paramilitary officers were already working in the quake zone and that another 3,000 troops would be sent to the area to assist in search and rescue efforts. The civil affairs ministry said it would also send 5,000 tents and 50,000 blankets.

    Last August, Golmud was hit by a 6.2 magnitude earthquake that destroyed dozens of homes but caused no deaths. Qinghai is an ethnic melting pot of Tibetans, Mongols and Han Chinese. It is adjacent to Sichuan Province, where at least 87,000 people died in a powerful earthquake in 2008.

    Xiyun Yang contributed research.

  • Debate on Caspian Sea and future of Nabucco gas pipeline project

    Debate on Caspian Sea and future of Nabucco gas pipeline project

    Nabucco gas pipeline, which emerged in the recent history of energy, can create new opportunities for the EU countries to check the monopoly of Russia over their gas supply. This project is not only important for the diversification of gas supplies of the EU countries, but also will bring new advantages and stakes to the different countries while passing them through. Some of these countries are the post-Soviet Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan that intend to provide the natural gas resources for the following project. As obvious, these gas providers are the littoral Caspian Sea countries that legally dispute over the demarcation of the mentioned sea. Will it create difficulties for the realization of the Nabucco project? Or intentions of these states to join Nabucco will ease the dispute and push them towards concessions? 

    KEY WORDS: Nabucco gas pipeline, the Caspian Sea, demarcation, legal status, International Court of Arbitration, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, the EU

     Introduction

    The Nabucco gas pipeline is one of the hot issues among the planned projects those are on the agenda. The main problem that has been discussing till today is the natural gas sources of the following project. The first planned gas will come from Caspian Sea sources where the legal status of the sea is not solved completely yet. For that reason, all the issue of Caspian Sea legal status which related with the Nabucco project will analyze in this research paper. In the first part will analyze potential resources of the project and their opportunity in order to join the Nabucco pipeline. In this perspective there mainly will investigate Caspian Sea resources. Then in the second part will focus on the unresolved legal status of the Caspian Sea and its negotiation process. At the result of the negotiation there were signed the agreement between Caspian littoral states which also will analyze in second part. Later, in the third part will investigate sectoral dispute between two costal states of Caspian Sea –Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan around the same oil and gas fields in the sea border of the two countries. Moreover, Ashgabat decide to send the issue to International Court of Arbitration which it can influence the realization of the Nabucco gas pipeline project. On the other hand, there are also will examine the intentions of Baku and Ashgabat toward the Nabucco project.

    The thesis of this paper is that the realizing of Nabucco project mainly depends on the Central Asian gas resources. To active this project, Trans-Caspian pipeline must not be forgotten. Since, there is a strong relationship between these two lines. Nevertheless, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan could not be realized it due to possible Russian influence. Thus, they need at least one of the Western countries or US guarantee to realize it. Because of the construction of these pipelines can influence to Russian gas monopoly all over the Europe. However, problem is that today EU counters could not construct a union energy policy which they try to make it individually with Russia or others.

    In order to analyze every part of the issue, firstly it was used traditional method in which historical development is based on. Additionally, there were online resources which including official statements, and other reliable academic papers.

    Potential resources and problem overview of Nabucco project

    The Nabucco project represents a new gas pipeline connecting the Caspian region, Central Asia, Middle East via Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary with Austria and further on with the Central and Western European gas markets[1]. In order to realize the project, the Caspian Sea gas resources are very essential, as the first stage of the project gas will come from Azerbaijan, which there is only Azerbaijan gas guarantee until now. Moreover, staying of the instability in the Middle East decreases the opportunity of this region in order to join the project and increases the importance of the Caspian Sea resources. On the other hand, for connecting the Iraq gas to Nabucco gas pipeline there is a need for a new pipeline between Turkey and Iraq which is a part of the Arab Gas pipeline. Besides, Iran is one of the alternative gas providers to Nabucco project with its enormous reserves but there is a problem about its underdevelopment gas infrastructure that needs huge investment. Also, the US is against the participation of Iran in the Nabucco project until solving the nuclear problems in this country. Because of all these reasons the Caspian Sea reserves are fundamental for realizing this project.

    Despite of the expectations of the European Union, there is a problem of the legal status of the Caspian Sea, which from 1991 till today could not be solved by the littoral states in this region. There is another problem as well. The Trans-Caspian pipeline that is planned to transport Turkmen and Kazakh gas to Baku has not been constructed yet, which will be joined Nabucco gas pipeline. Additionally, on July 2009 increasing dispute between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan around the Caspian Sea oil and gas fields, where Turkmenistan has decided to send the issue to International Arbitrage, could create another difficulty for realization of the Nabucco project. This dispute stems from the unresolved legal status of the Caspian Sea that will be discussed bellow.

    The unresolved legal status of the Caspian Sea 

    The Caspian region is one of the main energy bases and one of the major economic assets in the world. There are huge oil and gas reserves here, which are currently attempted to be fully improved and be transported to the world markets. Its oil reserves estimated to be 18-35 billion barrels that near to the United States (22 billion) and the North Sea (17 billion barrels) oil reserves.[2] Additionally, the region has a huge capacity of gas reserves as well, which is approximately 236-337 trillion cubic feet[3].   

    After the establishment of the USSR, the legal status of the Caspian Sea is defined by the agreement between the Soviet Russia and Iran (Persia) without participation of the other Caspian littoral states. This agreement was signed between these two states on 26 February 1921. Another agreement on Trade and Navigation between the USSR and Iran was signed on 25 March 1940[4]. Later, in 1949, the Soviet Union began to use the Caspian Sea hydrocarbon resources in the offshore area centered in the costal part of the Caspian Sea of Azerbaijan. It is worthwhile to mention that before the exploration in the fields of Siberia of the USSR in 1960s, the most productive region was Azerbaijan in the Soviet Union[5].On the other hand, until 1970, the USSR part of the Caspian Sea was used as a common sea among Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Russia and Turkmenistan. After that in 1970 according to the new amendment, this area was divided among the Soviet littoral states[6]. According to this amendment, Kazakhstan got 29%, Azerbaijan 20%, Russia 19%, Turkmenistan 18% and Iran 14% of the Caspian Sea[7].

    After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, when the Caspian Sea littoral states got their independence, they intended to determine the new status of Caspian Sea. In this period every littoral state’s perspective was different from others and they couldn’t achieve an agreement. Because, this process took place without pre-planning and, obviously, the littoral states were not ready for that in 1991-1992.  From the beginning, Azerbaijan was an only state that proposed the sectoral division via the median line method of the Caspian Sea, which now is accepted by the all other littoral states of the Caspian Sea but only except Iran.[8]

    Despite of the disagreement between the coastal states, Azerbaijan signed the “Contract of Century” in 1994 with the largest oil companies in the world in order to corporate and explore the Caspian Sea off shore fields in the Azerbaijan sector. With this event, the Caspian Sea became one of the major geo-strategic areas and energy sources of the world. However, in this period the Caspian Sea was not a part of the economic plans of Iran and Tehran considered the fact of the occurrence of the western oil companies in the Caspian Basin as a political danger to its national security. Moreover, Russia also could not accept this agreement because of the old imperialistic ambitions in the South Caucasus[9].

    After, singeing of the “Contract of Century” the Caspian littoral states could make an agreement and it was the first phase of the negotiations period. Russia and Kazakhstan could come to the agreement on the division of the northern part of the Caspian Sea to realize sovereign rights on subsoil use from July 6, 1998[10]. Later than, Azerbaijan also joined the contract, where at the beginning of the negations process her propose was the same. The signing of this agreement was very important, because the Caspian Sea costal states found a solution to the main legal problem of the Caspian Sea about its status and ways of the using it. The basin’s sectional division was admitted by all littoral states, except Iran.  Additionally, this agreement put a quota on the fishery and bioresearches in the Caspian Sea because of the threat of extinction[11].

    With the signing of the agreement, a dispute occurred between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan because of the distribution of the Caspian three oil and gas fields – Kapaz (Turkmenistan calls it Serdar), Azeri (Omar) and Chirag (Osman).  Even, in 2001 the Embassy of Turkmenistan to Azerbaijan was closed. Nevertheless, the relationship of two states began to normalize in the time of new and current President of Turkmenistan, Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow, and there were signed some good intention documents[12]. Then, bilateral negotiations constantly started between the two sides in order to solve the problem in the sea borders of the two states.   

    The bases of the bilateral negotiations have been constructed in the middle line principle and it was taken as a basis, which is also accepted in the international practice. The middle line concludes from the last costal point of territory of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. However, the problem is that, Ashgabat suggests that “Absheron peninsula and Chilov Island should not be taken into consideration while delimitating the Caspian Sea between Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan.[13]” If the two states border are delimitated from the Absheron peninsula and Chilov Island, there are two oil and gas fields – Azeri (Omar) and Chirag (Osman), which should be included into Azerbaijani territory of the Caspian Sea. Conversely, if these territories should not be taken into consideration while delimitating the Caspian Sea borders between these two states, these two oil and gas fields will be included into Turkmenistan area of the Caspian Sea.

    Despite of these expectations of Ashgabat, there is no any international practice like this, which one territory should not be taken into consideration while delimitating the sea borders between two or more states. Besides, Absheron peninsula is not a small territory in the Caspian Sea that can be ignored while measurement. It lies down nearly 60 km towards the Caspian Sea, in which approximately 1/3 population of Azerbaijan lives. Additionally, the capital city of Azerbaijan is placed at the same area[14].

    Moreover, there is another dispute around the field of Kapaz (Turkmenistan calls it Serdar), where, according to Ashgabat, belonged to Turkmenistan sector of the Caspian Sea during the Soviet period. However, according to Baku- after the 1970 amendment in the USSR’s Caspian Sea law, the border line passed through from the center of Kapaz (Serdar) field. Furthermore, this filed is revealed by Azerbaijani oilman in the Soviet time and today Baku wants to extract it from Turkmenistan.

             The International Court of Arbitration and the intentions of Baku and Ashgabat

    On the other hand, the bilateral negotiations has been continuing from 1999 till today between two parts and last meeting was realized in Baku on July 15-17 2009. After the last meeting, President of Turkmenistan, Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow ordered to address the international experts and high-degree lawyers to learn the Azerbaijan’s claims over the disputed fields in the Caspian Sea and legality of the foreign oil-gas companies operating in those fields, and then, intent to send the documents to the International Court of Arbitration.  It should be also mentioned that before this statement, in the meeting of governments on July 10, Berdimuhamedow stressed that they (Turkmenistan) want to participate in Nabucco project[15], where there is seemed a contradiction between his two statements. Because, sending the dispute issue to an international court can cause a problem for realization of Nabucco project[16] from the point of view prestige. Since, may be an investments would not want to put investment to the project which its source in the International court.

     Nevertheless, Ashgabat decide to send issue to the International Arbitration may be there is different intention of Berdimuhamedow. Because, Turkmenistan is one of the largest global reserves and it is the largest producer of gas in the region with production of 2.0 tcf/yr, it accounts for almost two-thirds gas output of the region[17]. When Berdimuhamedow came to power, one of his priorities in the foreign policy was the diversification of energy transport roots to the world market. There is an attractive opportunity- is the Nabucco project, which completely depends on Turkmen gas to be realized at the end, because, Azerbaijani gas is not enough to fulfill the Nabucco gas pipeline.

    There is one of the main obstacles for Ashgabat to join Nabucco project is the unconstructed Trans-Caspian gas pipeline that aims to transfer Turkmen gas to Baku. Moreover, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan could not realize it together, because there are needs the Western encouragements to the both sides[18]. One can assume that the unexpected Turkmen move at this time aimed “specifically at attaining some more concessions from the West, especially given the current huge interest of the latter to get the Nabucco project swiftly implemented”[19].

    Meanwhile, there is a similarity between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in energy transportation policy toward the Nabucco project. It is a very important project for these two countries, because, both sides want to transport energy reserves to the world market without the bypassing Russia. Despite of those two Caspian littoral states’ intentions to this project, there is European Union diminished policy to realize the Nabucco project. As every EU country has its own national energy policy, as a result, they cannot construct a common and harmonized EU energy policy. At the result of inattention of EU, Baku singed the gas agreement with Gasport for selling Shah- Deniz II field’s gas to Russia .The amount of gas agreement was not huge, just 500 mil but it was the signal of Baku to the EU for to be more active. 

    On the other hand, four months ago, there was an explosion in the natural gas pipeline between Turkmenistan and Russia, where the natural gas flow has failed to resume yet[20]. Besides, as a result of the global financial crisis, there is a decrease in the natural gas demand in Europe. Thus, Russia wants to re-negotiate the volume-and-dollar terms for its gas. However, Turkmen has protested that a contract is a contract and Turkmenistan is losing $1 billion in a month in revenue[21].

    Meanwhile, the unbearable Russian position to Turkmen gas export still is in progress. In addition, there is imperceptible European Union view to Nabucco project which both of them speed up the construction of China Turkmenistan gas pipeline. The pipeline 1,833-kilometer gas pipeline starts at the gas plant near this border town in Turkmenistan and runs through central Uzbekistan and southern Kazakhstan before entering China at the border pass of Horgos in the northwest region of Xinjiang.  The pipeline, starting near a Chinese-developed gas field in eastern Turkmenistan, is expected to reach full annual capacity of 40 billion cubic metres by 2012-13 and help Beijing propel its explosive economic growth[22].

    Then again, the both of Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan want to create a center of attention of the United State’s interest to this gas pipeline project. Because, the Nabucco project is the one of the big project in the world that there need full politically and financially supporting for the supplier counters and European counters. It’s too hard for European Union countries to realize the Nabucco project without the US supporting. Moreover, the “Nabucco is an integral part of a US strategy of total energy control over both the EU and all Eurasia”[23]. On the other hand, the role of the US lobbying for successfully realizing of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline which it began from Azerbaijan to Turkey’s Mediterranean coast, which opened in 2005[24] also be a magnet for Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan.

    Eventually, the legal status of the sea should solve according to International Law and International practices with the providing of costal states interests because, the Caspian Sea is one of the major geo-strategic areas and energy sources of the world but not only for littoral states. On the other hand, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan should compromise each other in order to realizing of the Nabucco project because the both states are interest with this project.

    Conclusion

    The potential resources of the Nabucco project are under the question. There are some problems in the Middle East also Caspian Sea as well which it can influence the realization of project. On the other hand, there is unresolved legal status of the Caspian Sea that it began after the collapse of the Soviet Union until today. Moreover, at the result of negotiation process there was signed the agreement between Caspian Sea littoral states about the sartorial division of sea according to middle line principle. Nevertheless, signed agreement for sartorial division of Caspian Sea, there is no fully solution of the problem. Additionally, increasing dispute between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan around the Caspian Sea oil and gas fields, where Turkmenistan has decided to send the issue to International Arbitrage, could create another difficulty for realization of the Nabucco project.


    [1] Nabucco Gas Pipeline International GmbH, “Project Description ,Pipeline Route,” (accessed August 15,2009)

    [2]CaspEcoProject Management and Coordination Unit, Caspian Sea Environment Program  “General background”   http://www.caspianenvironment.org/NewSite/Caspian-Background.htm /  (accessed 27 August 2009)

    [3] Bernard A. Gelb, Terry Rayno Twyman, The Caspian Sea Region and energy resources (New York: Hauppauge, 2004)

    [4] Kepbanov A. Yolbar,” The New Legal Status of the Caspian Sea Is The Basis of Regional Co-Operation and Stability ,” Journal  of International Affairs, Vol.2 Num. 4  (December 1997-February 1998)

    [5] Kamyar Mehdiyoun” International Law and the Dispute Over Ownership of Oil and Gas Resources in Caspian Sea”  The American Society of International Law. (2000)

    [6] Kepbanov A ..” The New Legal Status of the Caspian Sea …”

    [7] Meftun Metin”HAZAR Politik ve Bölgesel Güç”( İstanbul: IQ kültür sanat yayıncılıq 2004) 148

    [8] Yusifzade B. Khoshbakht, “The Status of the Caspian Sea Dividing Natural Resources between Five Countries,” Azerbaijan International, vol.8:3 (2000) (accessed September 10, 2009).

    [9] Rustam Mamedov “International Legal Status of the Caspian Sea: Issues of Theory and Practice” (working paper, Ankara University journals database, 32 DOI: 10.1501/Intrel_0000000041,2001)

    [10] Kazakhstan Today, “Russia ratified Russian-Kazakhstan Caspian sea division agreement” March 11.2007,   (accessed September 19, 2009).

    [11] Mamedov “International Legal Status of the Caspian Sea…

    [12] Michael P. Croissant, Bülent Aras, “Oil and geopolitics in the Caspian Sea Region‎” ( Peaeger Publisher,  Westport USA, 1999) 34.

    [13] APA , “Turkmenistan Foreign Ministry: Absheron peninsula and Chilov island should not be taken into consideration while delimitating the Caspian Sea”  August  04, 2009 (accessed September 20, 2009)

    [14]  Gennadiĭ Illarionovich Chufrin , The security of the Caspian Sea Region ,( Stockholm International Peace Research Institute OXFORD 2001) 64

    [15] APA , “Turkmenistan Foreign Ministry: Absheron peninsula and Chilov island….

    [16] Jackson Alexander, “The Implications of the Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan Dispute”, Caucasian Review of International Affairs, vol. 42, August 10, 2009 (accessed September 19.2009)

    [17] Hooman Peimani , The Caspian pipeline dilemma: political games and economic losses, (Peaeger Publisher, Westport USA, 2001) 15

    [18] Ibrahimov Rovshen, “Turkmenistan need Western encouragement”( Qafqaz University lessons  Baku, Azerbaijan August 27,/2009 )

    [19] Jackson “The Implications of the Turkmenistan…..

    [20] David Trilling” Turkmenistan: Pipeline Spat With The Kremlin Turns Into A Political Test Of Strength” EURASIA INSIGHT 4/15/09  (accessed Dismember  25, 2009).

    [21]Steve Le Vine “Nabucco and Trans-Caspian: Times Change, Pipeline Politics Goes On” JULY 30, 2009, (accessed September 23, 2009).

    [22] Xinhua reports “Chinese, Turkmen, Kazakh, Uzbek presidents unveil gas pipeline”

    [23]Hearing, Energy supplies in Eurasia and implications for U.S. energy security (Washington USA: DIANE Publishing, 2007) 60

    [24] Brenda Shaffer, Energy Politics (Pennsylvania USA: University of Pen… Press, 2009) 53

     Famil QURBANOV – Baku Qafqaz University

  • Exiled Activist Says Uyghur Issue Crucial For Central Asia

    Exiled Activist Says Uyghur Issue Crucial For Central Asia

    D2AD3AB6 883A 46AE BEBE DFCBB961140E mw270 sRebiya Kadeer, president of the World Uyghur Congress
    December 09, 2009
    PRAGUE/VIENNA — World Uyghur Congress President Rebiya Kadeer has told RFE/RL she is urging European politicians to focus on the fate of Uyghurs in China’s Xinjiang Province who continue to be persecuted and jailed, RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service reports.

    Kadeer told RFE/RL by phone from Vienna that thousands of Uyghurs have been arrested, sentenced, and jailed in Xinjiang since interethnic clashes in July in the region’s capital, Urumchi, when at least 197 people were killed.

    “[The Europeans] understand our problems very well — all the [European] politicians I met with said they would put Uyghur issues on their agenda,” Kadeer said. “Peace for Uyghurs means peace in Central Asia and peace in the world. And politicians in European governments, parliaments, and EU institutions said that’s why they think it’s important to put Uyghur problems on their agenda.”

    Kadeer, who was imprisoned by Beijing for five years before being released in 2005, is meeting with government officials and human rights activists on a tour of European capitals that includes Rome, Berlin, Vienna, Stockholm, Brussels, and Paris.

    She said that she is unable to travel to Central Asian countries because those governments are afraid of angering China with her visit.

    Kadeer, 62, told RFE/RL that the Uyghurs — who are considered the province’s indigenous people — are currently trying to leave China for other countries in order to avoid persecution, which has worsened since the riots.

    Kadeer stressed that the issue of the Uyghurs in China is important for neighboring Central Asian countries, a message she is bringing to European officials.

    Xinjiang, which means “New Frontier” in Mandarin Chinese, is called East Turkestan by Uyghurs after the republic that was established on the territory of Xinjiang in 1933 and 1944.

    In both cases the republic was dissolved and the territory was annexed by China.

    Uyghurs are a Muslim, Turkic-speaking ethnic group.

    Hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs live in Central Asia’s post-Soviet republics.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/Exiled_Activist_Says_Uyghur_Issue_Crucial_For_Central_Asia/1899753.html
  • Turkey Exposed:

    Turkey Exposed:

    Cannot Pretend to be

    Both Pro-Israeli and Pro-Palestinian

    SASSUN-2

    Publisher, The California Courier

    Playing the skillful political games of their Ottoman predecessors, Turkey’s current masters present their country under various guises — as European and Middle Eastern, Islamic and secular, pro-Arab and pro-Israeli.

    It now appears that the end is near for at least one of these Turkish charades. Israeli officials have finally awakened from their prolonged coma to discover that their erstwhile “strategic partner” is far more hostile than their Arab enemies.

    For a long time, Turkish leaders have been calling the Israelis all sorts of unsavory names and accusing Israel of committing barbaric acts, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Strangely, Israel has shown little indignation, even in the face of persistent racist and anti-Semitic outbursts by large segments of the Turkish public.

    The latest display of Turkish hostility was the exclusion of Israel from a multinational military exercise which was to start in Turkey on October 12. In protest, the United States, Italy and Holland pulled out of these maneuvers, causing their cancellation. In a move designed to further irritate the Israelis, Turkey announced that it would instead hold joint military exercises with Syria, Israel’s main adversary.

    Turkey’s Prime Minster Rejeb Erdogan told the Anatolia Press Agency last week that he had banned Israel from the military drill in response to the wishes of the Turkish public. “Turkey does not take orders from anyone in regards to its internal affairs,” Erdogan boasted. Some Turkish officials indicated that the ban was instituted because the Israeli jets assigned to the exercise had participated in the Gaza bombings earlier this year.

    This episode marks a major escalation of the long-standing Turkish bitterness towards Israel. For the first time, the Turkish military joined the civilian government in adopting an anti-Israeli position. Furthermore, Turkey went beyond mere verbal condemnation to taking concrete action. For years, the Israeli government was willing to swallow insults from Turkish officials, as long as its Air Force was permitted to make practice runs in the vast Turkish airspace, shared intelligence, and sold military hardware to Turkey.

    Making matters worse, Israelis were deeply offended by the broadcast of a Turkish show on state TV last week, depicting graphic scenes of Israeli soldiers killing Palestinian children and committing other atrocities.

    Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman reacted by summoning the Turkish ambassador and accused Turkey of inciting hatred against Israelis. Lieberman stated that not even Israel’s enemies would air such a hostile TV series. Israel’s Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom urged Turkey “to come to its senses.” Another Israeli official stated: “We need to stop accepting the Turkish dictates and humiliations. It is inconceivable that they should insult us at every opportunity, and we should continue to hold our tongues.”

    Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu categorically rejected any future mediating role for Turkey in talks with Syria. An unnamed “senior Israeli official” was quoted by Haaretz as stating that the strategic ties with Turkey may “have simply ended.” Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post quoted some Israeli defense officials as stating that “advanced weapons sales to Turkey would now be reviewed.”

    There were also widespread calls last week for the Israeli public to boycott Turkish resorts. National Public Radio (NPR) reported that Israel’s largest labor union would no longer plan for thousands of its workers organized tours of Turkey, and would direct them to go instead to Greece and Bulgaria. Since January, there has been a 47% drop in the number of Israelis spending their vacations in Turkey, according to Time magazine. An Israeli coffee shop chain expressed its displeasure by announcing that it would no longer serve Turkish coffee to its customers. In an unprecedented move, several Israeli cabinet ministers declared that they would turn down the Turkish Embassy’s invitation to attend Turkey’s Independence Day celebrations later this month.

    Many outraged Israelis advocated that, in retaliation, Israel acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Dan Margalit of “Israel Hayom” newspaper accused the Turks of not only committing Genocide, but also the “ongoing crime, which is expressed in energetic Turkish activity to deny the atrocity and to incite against any country and government and artist who wish to express their horror.”

    Ephraim Inbar, head of the BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, reminded the Turks that they are still in need of “Israeli influence in Washington to prevent the passage in Congress of a resolution declaring the killing of Armenians during World War I a genocide.”

    In an unprecedented action, the “Im Tirtzu” Israeli student movement held a protest last week in front of the Turkish Embassy in Tel Aviv. The students displayed bloody pictures of victims of the Armenian Genocide, handed out books on the Genocide to passersby, and carried signs calling on Turkey to formally recognize the Genocide.

    To atone for its past sin of siding with Turkish denialists, Israel must officially affirm the Armenian Genocide as well as actively lobby for its recognition by other states. Israel should also permit the erection of a monument at a prominent location to commemorate the victims of the Armenian Genocide and reverse its long-standing ban on TV broadcast of documentaries on this subject. It is certainly in Israel’s own interest to side with the victims of genocide rather than with its perpetrators!

    Instead of maintaining at all cost its unholy alliance with Turkey, Israel should earnestly pursue a peace settlement with the Palestinians and live in peace with its Arab neighbors, thus obviating the need to curry favors with the Turkish denialist regime.

    ==================== SUBJECT RELATED E-MAIL’S RECEIVED=

    From: Ismet Takim [[email protected]]

    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Our problems are just begining, l worned you all before, we play this game we will loose and guess who is happy???

    READ

    Turkey Exposed:

    and any of you still have any questions about this? some of our readers here is also responsiable for this and you have no idea what we will face, you just sit and watch, pro Palestenian Turkey is comitting suicide,

    Erdogan made the biggest mistake, and some of you who posts pro

    Filistin BS, tags and articles here should be ashame of themselves

    they have done a disservice and put our mainly my efforts back in

    time, and we have to fix this now, l have to go to work again and undo some of this,

    stupid stupid stupid bird brains bleeding hearts, stop your Anti Israel stands and get real, stop hurting Turkey,

    ======================================================

    From: Metin Mangir [[email protected]]
    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Are you aware of the slap to Erdogan by Obama?


    While we are all focussed on the Armenian issue (because of our

    proxomity to the diaspora) Obama invited (!) Erdogan to come to WDC on

    Oct 29 (with two weeks notice), following the cancellation of the joint

    military exercises with Israel, US, and the increasing row with Israel

    upon showing of a TV program on TRT.  (now that Turkey has good

    relations with Syria,  does it not need Israel to squeeze Syria?? which

    was what started the close military collaboration with Israel.)

    The choice of date and such short notice is VERY significant (and

    insulting)!  The big brother is calling the errant boy on the carpet?

    By the way, in general the news about the Armenian protocols are

    positive in Turkey (amazing!).  Very few voices are opposing it.  Also

    it has lost its luster as the “milli birlik acilimi” and the return of

    34 people from Irak upon Ocalan’s orders has taken the center stage.

    If the borders open the real big winner will be Russia, more than

    Armenia.  Since (rightly) Azerbeycan will be pissed off at Turkey and

    the West, and get closer to Russia (if it can dare to play with such

    danger) and the West, US will loose the Caucases.

    What I do not understand is

    1)  how come US is willing to let this happen?  What has Russia forced

    upon US following Georgia?

    2) Davutoglu, who has written in three different places in his book

    about the  crucial importance of Azerbeycan for Turkey, is going along

    with this protocols steps?

    Metin

    ==========================================

    From: Ergun [[email protected]]
    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Re: Are you aware of the slap to Erdogan by Obama?

    Metin,

    I suspect one major thing behind Obama’s sudden invitation:  Afghanistan.

    He may ask for more troops from Turkey.  Secondarily, Iraq.  O. may discuss

    strategy with E. on the mechanics of US pull out, the vacuum in Iraq, etc.

    All have to do with US involvement in unpopular, unwanted wars that are

    draining the US economy and social life.

    Israel, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and others are little more than dressing for

    the salad.

    This is one man’s opinion.  🙂

    Ergun  KIRLIKOVALI

    ===================================================

    Statement released by National Security Council that met today is below. Afghanistan issue has been discussed. Turkey will resume Kabul Area Commandership for the second time.

    Afganistan‘da son dönemde meydana gelen gelişmeler, Cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimleri dahil, değerlendirilmiş, ülkemizin Afganistan‘ın istikrarına yönelik katkı ve girişimlerinin sürdürüleceği belirtilmiştir. Bu kapsamda; Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin Kabil Bölge Komutanlığı görevini Kasım 2009 başında ikinci defa alacağı, yine önceki görevlerde olduğu gibi, Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin terörle mücadele, uyuşturucu ile mücadele, mayın temizleme görevlerinde kullanılmayacağı teyit edilmiştir.

    Fariz Huseynov [[email protected]]

    =======================================================================

    On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:52 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

    dear Ergun

    you are not alone for this opinion

    is isn’t funny while we are disgracing our man and women in uniform ( TSK)
    Obama needs our soldiers not government

    if you didn’t have one of the best army in the middle east

    O. wouldn’t care less for you

    regardas,

    vedat aslay

    ——————-

    Dear Metin

    Excellent observation and analysis

    I wonder what is going behind the close doors?

    Yes Russia it seems that  the big winner?

    how come for the US. Are we underestimating her.

    The is a big game going on over the middle east and Central Asia.

    The player are strong and Armenia, Azerbaijan, Syria, TURKEY  and even Israel is foot soldiers in this game

    Obama will make sure that Erdogan is not out of step. If he is you know in military

    SOL, SAG, SOL SAG, SOL, SOL P……. SOL
    Don’t worry this game is a long game and  we are just watching part I

    Vedat Aslay [email protected]

    ========================================================

    From: Yusif [[email protected]]
    Subject: {Pax Turcica} Re: Are you aware of the slap to Erdogan by Obama?

    That’s correct. Russia will be a winner big time.

    First, they will close the discussion on Nabucco both restricting

    other countries’ willingness to diversify their exports and preventing

    anything that could possibly harm Russia economically and

    politically.

    Second, they will realize the South Stream project, always viewed as

    an alternative to Nabucco and through that project will still control

    southern Europe and Turkey itself.

    Third, under the pretext of protection of South Stream, Russia will

    completely militarize Black Sea with additional Russian fleet and will

    henceforth prevent another proposed rival energy project White Stream

    to go from Georgia to EU through Ukraine from realization.

    Fourth, Russia will get deeper into Turkish economy through Armenia

    and through Armenian element will be able to exert pressure on Turkey

    and possibly other Middle Eastern states in the future. It benefits

    Russia to see islamization of Turkey. The practice of moderate Islam

    in the form of Gulenist ideology actually may suit Russia’s interests.

    In regards to US interests in the deal there are several factors.

    First of all, US was hoping for Russia’s support on the issues of

    nuclear threat from Iran. In general, apart from everything else, it

    is not in Russia’s interest to see containment and any sort of

    democratization of Iran. There is 25 mln Azeri minority in Iran which

    if needed could be a decisive factor in the future partition of Iran

    or a tool to bring down the current mullah regime. That’s one of the

    reasons Stalin was willing to and finally withdrew from Iran in 1946

    because he did not want a more sizeable Azeri minority within Soviet

    borders.

    Secondly, in my opinion, it’s not the US that is exerting pressure on

    Turkey. I think it’s Turkey which is using its inadequate behavior

    with Israel to pressure the United States. If we go back to 2003 we

    would see that Turkey was bold enough to withstand pressure from US

    during proposed invasion of Iraq from Turkey. To me personally, it

    doesn’t make sense to see America give up Azerbaijan and Georgia and

    the existing energy projects therefore losing both economically and

    politically.

    As far as Turkey’s position about Azerbaijan is concerned, I think

    they might have striken a deal on withdrawal of Armenian troops from 5

    occupied regions and agreed with Russia and US on joint peacekeeping

    mission. In any case, allowing any peacekeeping missions in Karabakh

    would be disastrous for Azerbaijan. If Russia’s troops are allowed to

    be stationed on Azerbaijani soil in any form, this would be the end of

    Azerbaijani independence and goodbye to Karabakh. Experience with

    Georgia is a good example.

    Presence of US troops would mean almost the same. Experience with

    Kosovo is a good example. That’s why Kaidanow is all around (http://

    www.a1plus.am/en/official/2009/10/20/nalbandian-tina-kaidanow)

    Presence of Turkish troops, if any, would mean nothing at all,

    especially if the protocols are ratified and diplomatic relations

    established and ‘good will of friendly’ Turkish government is

    recognized in Armenia and separatist regime in Karabakh.

    Any peacekeeping mission whatsoever would mean protraction of this

    conflict and interim status of NK last forever, therefore ending in

    partitioning of Azerbaijan forever.

    I guess, the original plan of these regional players is:

    1. to strike a deal, have Armenian troops withdrawn from 5 regions;

    2. bring in the peacekeeping force into those regions;

    3. ensure return of Azerbaijani refugees to those regions;

    4. re-arrange routes of energy resources from Azerbaijan and Central

    Asia through Armenia and/or through occupied Karabakh, as many allege;

    5. build confidence between people of the region

    6. hold a referendum in NK. Holding a referendum in Karabakh would

    mean complete loss.

    Opening any borders means directly benefitting Armenia economically

    which will stimulate economy and therefore human reproduction of

    Armenians in Karabakh. That’s when the numbers will matter.

    Yusif

    ================================================

    Turkey’s The policy of “zero problems” creating “new problems”
    https://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2009/10/20/turkeys-the-policy-of-zero-problems-creating-new-problems/

    From: Ergun [[email protected]]

    The policy of “zero problems” with neighbors seems to be creating “new problems” with neighbors

    Case one:  Azerbaijan.

    The U.S.-Russia-mandated protocols with murky gains but sure losses for Turkey are already costing Turkey dearly.  Check out these recent developments:

    1- Azerbaijan Looks For Gas Routes To Europe Bypassing Turkey

    2- Azerbaijan warns Turkey, West on gas exports

    3- Azeri leader slams Turkey as gas route to Europe

    https://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSLG44450320091016

    4-  Azerbaijan stops flying the Turkish flags over the Turkish martyrs’ cemetary in Baku.

    When the U.S. and Russia (an EU) forced these protocols on Turkey, they probably expected the estrangement of Azerbaijan.  If the oil and gas lines from Azerbaijan to Turkey run dry, the biggest beneficary would be, you guessed it, Russia.  Risk all you got for something in return that may or may not pan out.  We are sold this deal as “dialog, normalization, peace, and democracy” package.  Sometimes I wish an engineer was the leader in Turkey so that he would know simple math, as in addition and subtraction.

    April 24 is not far away.  We will all see if the protocols bring “normalization and peace” or ” more chaos, polarization, and stalemate”, with the net result of poorer Turkey due to weakened/lost energy lines.  (Prediction:  the latter.  Why?  Because the deal incredibly left Azerbaijan out.  Huge mistake!)

    Case two: Israel

    This one has to do with Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, although the tensions came to a head over other things like a cancelled joint military exercises and an aired TV-show:

    TV Show Deepens Split Between Israel and Turkey

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125573461255590957

    Turkey points to Israel to deflect from itself

    Netanyahu declares in Madrid that due to recent developments, Turkey is no longer an impartial mediator for peace talks between Syria ad Israel.

    My take on all this:

    I am not against dialog or peace.  I am against poor business deals, especially if they are conducted under pressure of partisans with vested interests clashing with yours.

    The foreign policy of Turkey should be updated from “zero problems with neighbors” to “zero old and new problems with neighbors”.

    Ergun KIRLIKOVALI