|
|
 |
 |
|
 | | Tackling Challenges
for Azerbaijan:
Diplomacy & Social Policy |
|
|
| By Jeffrey Silverman |
|
The rise to power of Heydar Aliyev to the post of President of Azerbaijan in the early 1990s and the cease-fire agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1994 laid the framework for the oil strategy of an independent Azerbaijan. However, these factors have not guaranteed stability for these two warring nations or laid the foundation for continued and successful regional cooperation. Having said this, however, it would be a serious oversimplification to look at events in Azerbaijan, including domestic and foreign policy, separately from the regional standpoint, in order to effectively discuss the larger processes and undercurrents of progress. Little can be understood or effectively communicated in the Caucasus from the perspective of just one leader or nation-state. Many layers are involved in the outward indicators and declarations from above, which are often competing interests that do not always keep up with the situation on the ground. Keeping abreast of change is to keep up the ever-shifting networks of patronage. It is like trying to send smoke signals in high winds: the message gets seriously distorted in transmission. The controversial Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline and the redefining of the world in which we live further complicate the issues.
Nevertheless, the accession to power of Aliyev and 10 years in office mark the end of a difficult period for the region, as well as the establishment of favorable conditions for a new era of state building and economic and political development. The key beneficiaries of policies implemented under Aliyev will be the United States, Turkey and Georgia. Subsequent relative domestic stability has not come without a price, and many observers wonder what will come next and whether or not there will be a succession struggle in the future. There is thought to be a lack of wise, pragmatic and proven leadership in the top echelons of government to successfully lead the country into the next generation of transition. Many in the international community are banking on the renewal of Azerbaijan's entrepreneurial tradition and on the ability of the highest leadership to lead the country out of the mayhem that has impacted the region.
However, from the regional perspective, ongoing events and separatist movements in Georgia and rigged election results in Armenia complicate the larger role that Azerbaijan can assume in finding the right path for the future. The Georgian breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia were free-fire zones that have evolved into large "duty free" shops, where weapons and drugs are freely traded. In the context of South Caucasian regional interaction, the most productive combination for cooperation is that between Georgia and Azerbaijan, especially regarding hydrocarbons and pipelines. Despite the potential bonanza, however, it is still Russia that calls the shots in determining the flow of the region's oil trade and economic fortune. Furthermore, 70 years of economic dictation from Moscow is not easily undone, and old habits are hard to break in governmental structures.
The problems of Azerbaijan are complicated not only by old habits regarding economic growth, but also by the influence of rent-seeking Armenian foreign policy, which is closely aligned to larger Russian geopolitical interests. These matters have been discussed on frequent occasions in OSCE and UN meetings, but nothing has been decided that would actually lead to long-term regional stability and integration. Nevertheless, Azerbaijan has made considerable positive changes in its image in the international arena by fully participating in the policy and development process with an array of stakeholders, representing economic and political interests.
The timing could not be better, since Azerbaijan and its leadership have received the brunt of Armenian lobbying efforts in Washington. There, the powerful Armenian lobby tried with some success to show Azerbaijan as a barbaric Muslim nation, which exterminated and ethnically cleansed minority populations in an effort to create a nation-state. Support of regional energy projects strengthened the already developed relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey, in the framework of drawing power resources out of the Caspian Sea for the world market. As mentioned before, the relationship between Azerbaijan and the US was created by mutual misunderstandings and mistakes, until it reached the stage of strategic partnership. In this context, it is necessary to point out the first official visit of President Aliyev to the US in 1997. This visit was a crucial moment in the Azerbaijan-US collaboration. It drastically transformed the development of bilateral relations, as well as American minds, which had previously been affected by erroneous information circulated by the Armenian lobby.
Isolation of information from Azerbaijan was part of the Armenian policy of aggression. In this aspect, it has been very important to earn a good name in the US, because the opportunities of this powerful state can be used effectively in world policy issues. There are some specific factors in the relations between Azerbaijan and the US. On the one side, there are the vested interests of the US as a superpower with significant investment in the region. On the other side, there is the influence of the Armenian lobby, which has effectively used its ability to influence US policy with lies and the misrepresentation of facts. Regardless of Armenian efforts to prevent this friendship, Azerbaijan-US relationships are presently developing in the following spheres: political consultation on world policy issues, including combating international terrorism, the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction, drug trafficking and money laundering; cooperation in trans-regional energy projects; and broadening ties in the fields of humanitarian issues, cultural affairs and scientific collaboration.
Concerning Russia, one can note the historical visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Azerbaijan, which created new lines of Azeri-Russian cooperation and a Russian presence in South Caucasian regional processes. It is worth mentioning that during Yeltsin's administration, it was impossible to speculate about full-scale positive trends in Azeri-Russian relationships. Russia's support of Armenia, especially during its conflict with Azerbaijan, created negative feelings among Azeri people towards Russia's role in the conflict. However, many of these problems have been mitigated over the years by active and continued diplomacy of Aliyev and increased communication between Moscow and Baku. Moreover, Aliyev's visit to Iran allows us to look at real achievements on the North-South boundaries. Two main issues in the Azerbaijan-Iran dialogue are the status of the Caspian Sea (there is already an agreement among Azerbaijan, Russia and Kazakhstan) and the situation with the Azeri population in Iran.
Winners and Losers
The biggest winners in this refurbishing of the Caspian's political deck are Azerbaijan and its preferred Western investor, British Petroleum. The two are the largest stakeholders in both the Baku-Ceyhan and Shah Deniz lines. At full capacity, the BTC would pump 1 million barrels of crude oil a day, and Shah Deniz would pump 10 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year, together generating revenues of about $10 billion at current prices. That cash is essential for a country that is currently a military weakling sandwiched between the often-hostile states of Armenia, Iran and Russia. This oil dividend would also help a financially strapped Georgia, which is overextended in terms of loan payments due to international financial institutions and has few resources that can find a sustainable market in the West. Pipelines will provide transit fees and could offset the energy blackmail being applied by the Russian Federation whenever political winds shift and pressure is needed to keep Georgia in line.
The unabated activity of the Armenian lobby united Azerbaijan and mobilized its political-diplomatic resources, which is extremely critical in providing the basis for improving social and economic conditions for the average citizen. It was a difficult decade that was finally overcome by the political maneuvering and diplomatic success of President Aliyev, which led to success on the economic front because of an inflow of foreign investment. We can say that Azerbaijan will never return to the time when chaos prevailed in the country because of the lasting accomplishments of wise leadership during the last 10 years. This leadership has helped create favorable conditions for foreign investment and has been critical in increasing the economic capacity of Azerbaijan. This will be the main factor in the development of all spheres of the country's life, including defense and security. There are currently about 1 million refugees and displaced persons, which deteriorates Azerbaijan's economic situation.
The main task of our diplomacy at present should be to improve the legal base for resolving the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. Moreover, it is necessary to strengthen the capabilities of the Azeri Diaspora in the leading states of the world, which would provide a sustainable basis for diplomatic activity. The point that is often overlooked in the final analysis is that many can influence the processes in Azerbaijan and the region, but long-term peace and stability is a homegrown commodity.
Flaws and Failings
The unresolved problems facing Azerbaijan are but mental teasers in considering the larger social and economic problem resulting from the globalization of the world's economy, notwithstanding political and economic opportunity costs that are often not fully considered. The overall message that our diplomats should strive to communicate is: "mediate the flaws and failings of the negative aspects of history and move forward to create public goods that can be shared by all on an equal footing." The method and delivery do not require that all players in the "New Great Game" be angels, but the "movers and shakers" should be able to raise real expectations for progress among the people. Attention must somehow be shifted from the hot pursuit of immediate gratification to the workings of the larger system. However, this is not necessarily the case for Azerbaijan, where unresolved conflicts and instability are beneficial to a number of stakeholders who proclaim their interests in bringing about the peaceful and just settlement of several simmering or potential hotspots. Everyone should learn that it is better to sacrifice some short-term gains in order to achieve even greater long-term dividends.
|
|
|
|
|
