Category: Georgia

  • Nabucco as a Chess Game: Azerbaijan’s Next Move

    Nabucco as a Chess Game: Azerbaijan’s Next Move

    nabuccoOn March 27, 2009, a memorandum was signed between the Azerbaijani oil company SOCAR and Russia’s Gazprom. This memorandum includes a statement of deliveries, beginning in January 2010, of Azerbaijani natural gas to Russia on the boundary conditions, DAF Azerbaijan / Russia. In the near future the Baku – Novo Filya pipeline, part of the transmission system of Azerbaijan, which runs from Baku to the Russian border on the Caspian coast, will be inspected. The length of the pipeline is about 200 km; the diameter of the pipe is the same 1220 mm.

    On March 27, 2009, a memorandum was signed between the Azerbaijani oil company SOCAR and Russia’s Gazprom. This memorandum includes a statement of deliveries, beginning in January 2010, of Azerbaijani natural gas to Russia on the boundary conditions, DAF Azerbaijan / Russia. In the near future the Baku – Novo Filya pipeline, part of the transmission system of Azerbaijan, which runs from Baku to the Russian border on the Caspian coast, will be inspected. The length of the pipeline is about 200 km; the diameter of the pipe is the same 1220 mm.

    This agreement is important because for the first time since its independence Azerbaijan, which imported gas from Russia, has become an exporter to this country. The signing of this memorandum has led to a number of preconditions, which are the causes of events occurring in the region. The first is to note that Gazprom was particularly interested in signing such an agreement with Azerbaijan. This serves several reasons. The first reason is that in the past few years, production of natural gas in Russia has been decreased. Preferring not to invest large amounts of capital in the development of natural gas, Gazprom to date has preferred to operate with the Soviet Union deposits, although these deposits have begun to dry up over time. However, a treaty signed with European suppliers obliges Russia to search for additional volumes of gas. Therefore, first of all Russia has guaranteed the supply of gas from Central Asia, significantly increasing the price for it. Russia also extended the proposal to Azerbaijan, which opened the large Shahdeniz gas field in the late 90s.

    Russia’s second reason lies in the problems of gas supplies to southern Russia. Thus, one could guarantee the stable supply in the North Caucasus republics. But the main reason is the desire of Russia to concentrate the supply of natural gas from former Soviet republics on its territory. Actually, Azerbaijan is the only state that could supply gas to the planned Nabucco pipeline. Proposed by the EU, this pipeline would transport natural gas from Azerbaijan and the Central Asia states through Turkey to south-eastern Europe. In reality, gas may come only from Azerbaijan.

    Russia has proposed an alternative to Nabucco project, South Stream, which is also in need of Azerbaijani gas. In this case, Russia tries to prevent the realization of Nabucco.

    With regard to Azerbaijan, it is the first time, after gaining its independence, that it shifted its energy exports from west to the north. There were several reasons for this.

    The primary reason was the passive attitude of Western partners in the implementation of the project. Lack of coordination and understanding in the sphere of energy between the members countries of the EU led to the fact that this organization could not determine the strategy for the implementation of Nabucco. Paradoxically, the EU and its members are waiting for more concrete steps from potential exporters, hoping thereby to strengthen the project. However, Azerbaijan does not have a desire to pursue their own policies without the support of the West, and thereby worsen relations with Russia. This fact was especially true after the 5-day war in Georgia. Despite the fact that the political regime in Georgia came to power with broad support from the West, these countries did not provide the support it expected to receive. Azerbaijan also has the problem of separatism. In this case, in the interest of Azerbaijan is not to commit acts that could provoke Russia.

    Another reason for signing the memorandum with Russia lies in the position of Turkey. Turkey is trying to address not only the transit of Azerbaijani gas through Nabucco, but also wants to become the seller. In particular, Turkey wants to purchase natural gas at the border with Azerbaijan and resell it to Western consumers at a several-fold price increase. This situation would not benefit Azerbaijan. In addition to that, Russia’s proposal to buy Azerbaijani gas is commercially much more attractive. Azerbaijan profits more from selling gas in Russia than Turkey.

    In addition, between Turkey and Azerbaijan, disagreements arose about the intentions of Turkey to open its border with Armenia. This border has been closed since 1993, after Armenian troops occupied the Azeri region of Kelbedzhar. Recently, however, the government of Turkey has decided to develop relations with Armenia, and the first step was the visit of President Gul to Armenia’s capital Yerevan to watch a soccer qualifying match between the two national teams. The next step in the development of relations is to be the opening of borders between the two countries in mid-April. It should be noted that the prior condition for the opening of the border was the unconditional release of Armenian-occupied Azerbaijani territories.

    This decision has received a sharp reaction in Azerbaijan. Public opinion in the country reacted negatively to the intentions of Turkey, which severely condemned the possible turn of events. Another reaction to the Turkish intention can be described with the signing of a contract between SOCAR and Gazprom. The President of SOCAR, Rovnaq Abdullayev, is also the president of the Football Federation of Azerbaijan. He arrived in Moscow on the eve of the qualifying soccer match between Azerbaijan and Russia. The signed contract has become a kind of symbolic response to Gul’s «football diplomacy» in Yerevan.

    It should be noted that the signed memorandum negotiates gas exports to Russia for 2010. In this case, there is a certain amount of time to solve the problems of the realization of Nabucco, as the second phase of gas production at Shahdeniz has not yet begun. However, if there will be no concrete steps to implement Nabucco, gas for this pipeline could go in a northerly direction.

    Rovshan İbrahimov

    International Research Club – www.interesclub.org

  • Turkish government’s policies in Caucasus are bankrupt

    Turkish government’s policies in Caucasus are bankrupt

     

     
     

    [ 07 Apr 2009 12:24 ]
    Washington. Zaur Hasanov – APA. Interview of the professor of the Middle East Center of Utah University Hakan Yavuz to APA’s US bureau

    -The relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey are tense as never before since Azerbaijan gained its independence. President Aliyev refused to visit Turkey, even after the phone conversation with Hillary Clinton. Does it mean that we are witnessing the new geopolitical shift in the region?

    -For Turkey to become an important country in the Caucasus, Turkey must work together with Azerbaijan. Armenia has only 2.5 million people, Azerbaijan has 8 million people, plus incredible energy resources and economy. It is more important the ethnicity the Turks and Azerbaijanis. They speak in the same language, they belong to the same ethnic roots, there is no way under any condition that Turkey would turn against Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is a closest country to Turkey in terms of support, culture. These are the well known facts. But Turkey is under pressure by the USA now. Even Obama during his speech in the Parliament, even during his press conference with Abdullah Gul, he made very clear that he would like to see the border to be opened between Turkey and Armenia. Not only Turkey is under pressure of the U.S., but Turkey is under pressure of the European countries as well. They all want this border be opened. I think that Turkey didn’t do a good job and Azerbaijan also didn’t do a good job in terms of explaining the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to the international community that this war was created by Armenia and large numbers of Azerbaijanis are refuges, thousands of them were killed by Armenians. In other words, we didn’t do a good job both Azeris and Turks to explain the suffering of people in Karabakh issue. That’s why somewhat the world’s public opinion and specially the European leaders and the American leadership are not fully aware or informed about this conflict.

    – How will the reopening of borders influence the image of Turkey in Azerbaijan and other Turkish-speaking countries?

    -Turkey did so bad and so wrong that tomorrow no country of the region, including Turkish republics, will accept Turkey seriously. Turkey does all this things because of European and American pressure. It is mean that Turkey is not independent country. It is nothing but puppet of either the USA or EU. In other words, if Turkey will pursue the current foreign policy that would create the problems in the Central Asia and the Caucasus. Turkey is led by wrong people, and the recent elections proved it. You also should take into account that there is a very powerful Armenia lobby inside of Turkey and specially within AKP. But I really think that the public opinion in Turkey very much against this. This will ruin the Turkey image. They already ruined the image of Turkey in the Turkish world.

    – What is your judgment of Caucasus Peace and Cooperation Initiative?

    -It was a rash decision. It wasn’t very well thought. I am very critical of the Turkish foreign policy during the Georgian crisis and I am very critical of current Turkish foreign policy right now that they don’t consult and work together with Azerbaijan. You also need to know that not only me, but most of the opposition parties in Turkey also disagree with the policy of Justice and Development Party of Racab Tayyib Ardogan. Their policies in Caucasus are bankrupt. It doesn’t work. The relations with Georgia are not good because Turkey didn’t support Georgia properly and Turkey had supported Russia, and the same with their policy toward Azerbaijan now. Turkey is shooting itself at the foot. That’s why the countries of Caucasus don’t trust Turkey as they used to. Turkey have lost Georgia, Turkey is losing Azerbaijan. Having said that, I believe that the border will not be reopened. I think that empty talks before the 24 April.

    – What is the attitude of the Turkish society and politicians towards the border reopening issue?

    – I have heard that there is a major reaction from the military. That’s the military is not very happy with the policy of the government, specially on the border reopening issue and other issues as well. Again, in my understanding the border will not be open. On the border issue the military very and very unhappy. Turkey is getting screwed. Turkey showed that it can’t be a reliable country. I am a Turk but unfortunately they are following such stupid path that we have lost the closest state Azerbaijan. What we have in return? What Armenia has to offer to Turkey? 2.5 million hungry people in Armenia where no money and no job. It is not in the national interest of Turkey to reopen the border.

  • 2009 ANNUAL DUES, DONATIONS and Book Sales

    2009 ANNUAL DUES, DONATIONS and Book Sales

    2009 MEMBERSHIP DUES AND YOUR DONATIONS ARE NEEDED TO CONTINUE OUR POSTED PROGRAMS WITH OUT INTERUPTION

    THE FOLLOWING LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE DUES AND DONATIONS PAGE

    ÜYE AİDATLARI, BAĞIŞLAR VE KİTAP SATIŞLARI

    Dear Friends,

    The Turkish Forum (TF) is the GLOBAL organization with branches and working groups COVERING 5 CONTINENTS, working with many regional Organizations in the America, Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia and Turkey.  TF’s mission is to represent the Turkish Community in in the best way possible, to empower the people of Turkish origin and friends of Turkey to be active and assertive in the political and civic arenas, to educate the political establishments, media and the public on issues important to Turks, and cultivate the relations between the working groups located an five continents, serving the Turkish Communities needs.

    In order to achieve these goals we have performed many activities and completed many projects, THEY ARE ALL LISTED IN THE WEB PAGES OF TF, . You have been informed about these activities and projects, many of you participated voluntarily and contributed heavily and still contributing to these activates and projects. As the events happen and the major steps taken the information always reaches to you  by the TF Grassroots DAILY NEWS Distribution Service.  Needless to say, each activity and project requires a large amount of human and financial resources. TF has a  completely volunteer board, none of the board members receives any compensation or salary or even a small reimbursement. TF also has many volunteer committee members, WELL ESTABLISHED ADVISORY BOARD and project leaders. In addition to our large volunteer pool, please see them an https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/turkish-forum/ TF sustains Permanent Offices in New England, Germany and in Turkey and has a number of professional staff to upgrade its systems, and to solve the technical problems.  Please check our website at https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/turkish-forum/

    As the 2009 did begin we kindly ask you to support TF by becoming a member, if you are not already one.  You can also contribute a donation if you wish to upgrade your regular membership  to a higher level. Your financial support is critical to TF in order to pursue its mission in a professional manner. Needless to say, it is the financial support that we receive from our members and Friends of Turkey  is the backbone of our organization. As long as this support is continuous we can achieve our objectives and work for the communities across the globe.  Your contribution is tax-exempt under the full extent of the law allowed under Internal Revenue Code 501(c) (3).

    Becoming a member and making an additional contribution are easy: You may become a member online at http://www.turkishnews.com/dagitim/lists/?p=subscribe&id=3

    I thank you for your belief in TF, and look forward to another successful year with your uninterrupted support.

    Sincerely,
    Kayaalp Büyükataman

    Dr. Kayaalp Büyükataman, President CEO
    Turkish Forum- World Turkish Coalition

  • What Were Armenian Officials Thinking,  If They Were Thinking at all?

    What Were Armenian Officials Thinking, If They Were Thinking at all?

    sassoun@pacbell.net

    Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 4:25 AM


    Two shocking announcements made by Yerevan officials have deeply troubled Armenians worldwide.

    The first statement was made by Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan in Tsakhkadzor, Armenia on February 21, during an international economic forum — “Outlook for International Economic Cooperation: Problems and Solutions.” The conference was attended by high-ranking officials and businessmen from Russia, Bulgaria, Iran and many other countries.

    In his speech titled, “International Economic Cooperation: New Policy,” the Prime Minister invited the participation of Russia and Turkey in the construction of a new nuclear power plant in Armenia. He said that the multi-billion-dollar project had not only economic but also political significance. The existing power plant, located near Yerevan, was commissioned in 1976. Several international organizations as well as neighboring Turkey have been pressing for the closure of the Medzamor power plant for several years, citing safety concerns. The new power plant is expected to be operational in 2016.

    Turkish leaders have not yet responded to Mr. Sargsyan’s invitation. However, according to Russian sources, Ankara is said to be interested. An unidentified Turkish spokesman was quoted by Nezavisimaya Gazeta as stating: “The government of Turkey is anticipating an official appeal on participation in the atomic power plant from Armenian official circles. Only after that, the Turkish side may consider the prospect of participating in the project and announce its decision. If all the issues involved are complied with, Yerevan’s proposal may be accepted.”

    Several Armenian analysts have raised serious concerns about involving Turkey in such a sensitive project. Some pointed out the risk to Armenia’s national security, given Turkey’s historical enmity. Other commentators brought up the total lack of experience of Turkish companies in constructing nuclear power plants. Ara Nranyan, an Armenian parliament member representing the ARF, a junior member of the governing coalition, stated that his party opposes Turkey’s participation in the new nuclear power plant and views it as “damaging to Armenia’s interests.”

    How can Armenian officials offer a role in constructing a nuclear power plant to a country that denies the Genocide, refuses to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, sets up a blockade to destroy its economy, and provides political and military support to Azerbaijan in the Artsakh (Karabagh) conflict?

    The second disturbing development is an invitation by Armenian officials to Turkey’s Foreign Minister to attend the Black Sea Economic Conference (BSEC) on April 16-17, just days before the 94th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. Armenia’s six-month rotating chairmanship of BSEC ends on April 30.

    Armenians were further irritated by a report in the Turkish newspaper “Today’s Zaman” that “Armenia has rescheduled a foreign ministerial meeting of Black Sea countries, apparently as a goodwill gesture to ensure Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babajan will be among the participants.” Zaman reported that Armenian authorities had moved the date of the BSEC meeting “from the previously announced April 29 to April 16. The shift is significant because April 29 is only a few days after April 24.”

    To add insult to injury, Zaman quoted unnamed Turkish officials as stating that Babajan has not confirmed his attendance, and that his participation depended on “Armenia’s commitment to the ongoing rapprochement process and the course of closed-door talks with Armenia.”

    Turkish officials make frequent statements about “rapprochement” with Armenia in order to give the false impression that the two countries are reconciling with each other, thus hoping that the Obama administration and the U.S. Congress would not take any action on the Armenian Genocide.

    While Ankara officials are constantly bombarding Washington with such fake messages, the Armenian side stays astonishingly silent, giving credence to Turkish misrepresentations which are intended to undermine the prospects of any U.S. declaration on the Armenian Genocide.

    In a rare display of responsiveness, Tigran Balayan, the acting spokesman of the Armenian Foreign Ministry, issued a statement denying that the BSEC conference was rescheduled to accommodate Turkish concerns. Mr. Balayan, however, provided no explanation as to why the conference was not held before the month of April.

    It is hard to believe that the Armenian government would invite the Turkish Foreign Minister to Armenia just one week before April 24. Mr. Babajan, a Genocide denialist and high-ranking official of a hostile country that is blockading Armenia, should never be welcomed in Yerevan, unless he intends to place a wreath at the Armenian Genocide Memorial Monument and offers an apology to the Armenian people!

    0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    2009 MEMBERSHIP DUES AND YOUR DONATIONS ARE NEEDED TO CONTINUE OUR POSTED PROGRAMS WITH OUT INTERUPTION

    THE FOLLOWING LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE DUES AND DONATIONS PAGE
    https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/2009/02/14/2009-yili-uye-aidatlari-ve-bagislariniz/
    Turkish ForumBiz Kimiz?Bize UlaşınProjelerimizYardımlarınız

    Hakkımızda (About Us) | Kayıt Ol (Subscribe) | Bize Yazın (Contact Us) | Bağışlarınız (Donations) | Güncelle (Update)

  • TURKEY OR RUSSIA

    TURKEY OR RUSSIA

    TURKEY OR RUSSIA, EAST OF GEORGIA:

    A STRUGGLE FOR MINDS, HEARTS AND RESOURCES – August 23, 2008

    The battle for Georgia will dominate the headlines for months, probably years to come. The new Russia can be distinguished from the old Soviet Union, but regardless is committed to regaining the influence of old empires. The dismantling of the Soviet Union has been experienced as a great tragedy by the current Putin leadership and Georgia is only the opening move in righting this perceived wrong. The real battleground for supremacy will unfold further east, the resource rich, newly independent states of the Caucuses and Central Asia.

    WHERE THE ENERGY PIPELINES END
    Georgia is the transit point for the crucial new energy pipelines from the Caspian Sea Basin and the recently exploited fields in newly independent states. The problem of transport and transit had already impeded the development of such oil and natural gas fields. Pipelines through Georgia

    to the Black Sea or linked to Turkey’s Mediterranean ports was believed

    to be the optimum strategic option. This avoided Iran as well as the Armenia and Azerbaijan conflict zone. It also was designed to detour

    Russia as not to further its potential stranglehold on oil and natural gas

    flows westward.

    United States support for the Taliban in Afghanistan in the mid 1990’s was part of a broader strategy to find an alternative to the potential Russian stranglehold as well as Iran’s central geopolitical position. In that vision, energy would flow through a stabilized even if socially unpalatable Afghanistan toward an allied Pakistan and its Indian Ocean ports. The Russians did not need the revenue as much as they resented the loss of potential influence and ability to use such as political leverage on the Euro-Atlantic alliance and more importantly upon the newly independent energy producers of the Caucuses and Central Asia.

    WHERE THE ENERGY PIPELINES BEGIN
    Lost in this strategic maneuvering and the immediacy of the Georgia conflict is the situation of the states at the source of current and planned pipelines, particularly of the Caspian Basin. The issue of transit and transport remains as a key uncertainty. However, the fate and development of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan remains the fundamental consideration in terms of the stability of these regions as producers and providers of energy and other crucial natural resources sought by an East and West with ever increasing appetites.

    These Central Asian and Caucus sovereign republics are frequently viewed in a homogeneous light. They are all newly independent from the Soviet Union. They are struggling to adapt democratic methodology to a system still very much dominated by Soviet style politics and even personalities. Most of these states are indigenous Muslim majority populations with significant a Russian minorities.

    However, there are key differences and viewing these countries as homogeneous is both racist and risky. Their level of political, economic and social evolution varies significantly and is frequently influenced by local considerations rather than some global attraction. Even the Muslim religious tradition is not homogeneous. For example, Azerbaijan is majority Shia rather than Sunni Islam prevailing in most of the other states. The wealth and development of natural resource exploitation varies due in part to capital and technology commitments from competing national and commercial interests. States such as Azerbaijan have been at the forefront, as much due to geopolitical fortunes.

    Nonetheless, shared factors will have a significant sway over these states, almost as a flock just now starting to exploit untapped resources and preparing to take flight. Whether these states drift more toward Russia or even China versus Westward will be determined by economic, political and even military developments. The resolution of Afghanistan will be one factor. China’s crackdown in the neighboring traditionally Islamic majority western provinces will be another. However, perhaps the crucial, if not defining, wind will be the old sway of Soviet Russia versus the influence of the Euro-Atlantic alliance through Turkey’s deep-rooted cultural, religious and linguistic ties.

    THE TURKEY THAT BINDS
    Turkey is the core of what used to be an empire stretching from Central Europe to China. This diversity can today be seen in the melting pots that are the major Turkish metropolitan centers, such as Istanbul. Turkey seems to have been pre-absorbed with its tug and pull efforts to enter the European Union; however it has not forgotten the Ottoman roots that extended to the Caspian Basin and beyond. In fact, it is Turkey’s cultural, religious and linguistic ties to the region that give it the ability, if not necessarily the advantage to compete with old Soviet influences and potential forays from China or even Iran.

    Ironically, the Islamic elements that appear to be so undesired by some of Europe’s establishment in accepting Turkey as full partner may in the long run prove most valuable for the Euro-Atlantic families geo-strategic considerations in the Caspian Basin. Regardless, the fact that Islam may be part of the coalescing formula immediately raises wariness.

    The politics and government of Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Erdogan have come under suspicion by simply being defined as “Islamist.” However, the evidence is that this government is moving Turkey closer to aspirations and meeting the standards for European Union inclusion, notwithstanding or perhaps because of its Islamist pedigree. Turkey’s commitment and contributions to NATO have been enhanced under these so termed “Islamists.” Turkey’s relationship with Israel has not suffered.

    ANOTHER BRIC IN THE WALL
    The BRIC economic marvels, (Brazil, Russia, India and China), are the most focused upon as the up and coming economic states. However, while Turkey is geographically and by population smaller, it is perhaps even a more impressive phenomenon in view of the more limited natural resources within its own borders. The economic boom that Turkey has experienced over the last decade has been fueled by the stability afforded by Erdogan’s government and the new political force behind it. Compared to five previous decades of disruptive interventions and coups by the military establishment, it has been difficult to accredit protests of longstanding elite. Turkey’s transformation may not yet be complete, but there is a distinctly traceable trend toward greater democratic and economic inclusion.

    This egalitarian economic boom has also fueled the rise of mercantilism. The impact has been most profound in the states with historic ties to Turkey. Perhaps the Hanseatic League or the evolution of Dutch City states of Northern European are other profound examples of where social, political and economic factors amalgamated to give rise to new trade, wealth, republican ideals, social mobility and a broader Renaissance.

    Time will only tell if the comparison is remotely appropriate; however many Turks trace their new renaissance to the philosophy of Rumi, the Sufi philosopher who lived in the 13th century, the time that Ottoman rulers oversaw the further rise and expansion of their already sizable Empire. Any philosophy based upon Islam, especially with Europe’s long competition with the Ottoman Empire, may fuel unease in some quarters, even if there is recognition that the Euro-Atlantic family must enhance common ground with Muslim peoples. There is a tendency to favor those social and political leaders within the Muslim majority world who project the most non-Islamic characteristics, even beyond secularism.

    It is naïve as well as indicative of intolerance though to believe that radical Islam will be effectively confronted by anti-Islamic dogma. Rumi’s philosophy grounded both in Islamic theology and tolerant ideology justifies optimism for a new page in today’s broader Islamic world. The personification of this rejuvenated philosophy in Turkey is Fetullah Gulen, recently voted the most influential philosophic contributor globally.

    Mr. Gulen, who currently lives in the US, stands as the ideologue behind many of today’s rising social, political and mercantilist leading lights in Turkey, but also the Turkic influence in much of the Caspian Basin and Central Asia.

    THE REMNANTS OF ROMANOV AND SOVIET EMPIRE
    The Russian influence in the Caspian Basin and Central Asia is more recent, dating back initially to the expansion of Romanov Russia and culminating with Soviet consolidation a century earlier, much at the expense of the Ottomans and its allies. The Soviet influence is evident in political and economic methodology and social custom. The Russian alphabet became dominant over Arabic or European script. Much of the population speaks Russian, and it has been the language of choice for the political elite. And, larger Russian minorities call these states home, largely as a legacy Soviet designed resettlement efforts.

    The Soviet influence has had a mixed impact, and would be judged from progressive to regressive depending on the observer’s own perspective. And, despite the historical perspective of the Russians by some as occupiers, the Russian influence remains significant, if not dominant, in style and substance. While the US has established a military as well as diplomatic presence in a few of these states, Russian sway is frequently dominant. Soviet authoritarian style still too frequently dictates, and the need for political reform is dampened by cumulative internal and external factors.

    THE NEW
    The influence of the Euro-Atlantic states is most evident through the economic development of the region’s abundant natural resources. NGO’s, such as George Soro’s Open Society, are present in promoting democratic and open society policies, although their impact is still largely undetermined.

    In a few of these states, political Islam had become the main alternative to old style authoritarian rule. These competing forces have frequently collided, a few times with thousands of casualties as the specter of radical Islam has frequently been relied upon as a pretext for crack downs and perpetuation of ruling elites. The confrontation is likely to be repeated, and the influence of radicalism could grow, without progressive alternatives for change.

    Many hold out Turkey as the hope. Future religious leaders from these traditional Turkic states are now increasingly educated in Turkey. (Many from the Balkans have also adopted Turkey as refuge). The influence of a more robust Turkish media is spreading despite differences in dialect. Turkish secular universities are hosting many of the regions future business, professional and political leaders.

    TURKEY’S TRANSFORMATION BEYOND ITS BORDERS
    Turkey’s current makeover has decisive implications for its place within the Euro-Atlantic family. However, it goes beyond whether Turkey will be accepted into the European Union. The potential rise of Turkey as economic and political power will decisively influence the development and inclinations of culturally linked states of Central Asia and the Caspian Basin.

    Turkey has been a staunch backer of Georgia and its integration into NATO. Undoubtedly Turkey is more cognizant of its ever increasing role as fronting Euro-Atlantic interests in the region, as well as its historical rivalry with first Russia and then the Soviet Union. Turkey is working on closer economic ties to the US to reflect already the integral defensive relationship through NATO and beyond.

    A resurgent Russia may or may not be reverting to cold war tendencies. The newly independent states of Central Asia and the Caspian Basin, with their abundant natural resources, are in the sway of redrawn spheres of influence. Turkey or Russia will be the two immediate polar attractions.

    Muhamed Sacirbey

    ——————–

    Mr. Muhamed Sacirbey holds B.A. degree in history and J. D. degree from Tulane University in New Orleans. He also holds M.B.A. degree from the Columbia University. He is a former foreign minister of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

    ——————–

  • Brzezinski reviews US policy towards Russia

    Brzezinski reviews US policy towards Russia

    Zbigniew Brzezinski, former US National Security Adviser under Jimmy Carter, claims that bringing the Ukraine closer to the West is the key to assuring the democratization of Russia.

    In an interview for the French paper Le Figaro said that the West must work to reopen relations with Russia and that Georgia and the Ukraine must be part of that dialogue.

    Western nations, including Poland and the United States, must rework their relations with Russia in order to `slowly limit Russia’s nostalgia for imperialism and renew disarmament negotiations.`

    Brzezinski told the paper that initiating a new dialogue with Russia cannot happen at the cost of limiting the aspirations of those countries seeking NATO membership – such as the Ukraine and Georgia – especially because the Ukraine, as a NATO member opens up a transformative path to democratize Russia.

    Source:  The Georgian Times, 02.19.2009