LAST NUMBER
 
 
  
Πειςθνγ@Mail.ru



 
A Train "No-Where"...
Does Anyone Really Care?

...It All Depends On Whose Ox is Getting Gored

By Jeffrey Silverman
   There are 1,000 000 IDPs in Azerbaijan alone, 400,000 in Georgia; this number growing with an influx of those refugees escaping the killing fields of Chechnya. Who really benefits from conflicts and "frozen conflicts" - first in a series on "Caucasian Imbroglio" that will highlight the economics and geopolitics of conflict and the business of conflict resolution?
   BAKU, Azerbaijan - It is easy to become inured to discussions about conflict resolution and all the benefits it will provide for the region. Peace talks have foundered in most respects and it is likely not accidental. After over a decade "in transition" there is a continuing decline in almost every indicator by which real progress is measured for majority of the people of Azerbaijan and Georgia. "Conflicts must be resolved" has a commonplace for politicians and journalist alike. Similarly pat are the explanations why nothing happens.
   The governments in power and organizations involved in resolving conflicts must accept a large measure of responsibility. Nagorno-Karabakh is used to name the conflict that eats at the very soul of the Azerbaijan Republic. "Kara" is the Turkish word for "black" and "bagh" is Azerbaijani for 'garden'. Add from the Russian, "for mountainous". Then too are Georgia's frozen conflicts (Abkhazia and South Osetia), which also remain in limbo, as do the many IDPs and refugees in both Georgia and Azerbaijan, which is further complicated by the hot war between Chechens and the Russian Federation.
   International Organizations offer solutions but many of these are really intended to serve the national interests or narrowly defined geopolitical priorities. Take for example the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. A solution has been on the agenda since 1988 years with still no end in sight. Writes Stuart Kaufman of the University of Kentucky in his book 'Modern Hatred: The Symbolic Politics of Ethnic War', -- "this conflict was fueled by a clash between an Armenian myth-symbol complex focused on fears of genocide and an Azerbaijani one emphasizing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Azerbaijani republic. Karabagh itself thus because, for both sides, a symbol of national aspirations and of the hostility of the other side." To put it in more pragmatic terms, countries like Georgia and Azerbaijan see the political and security payoff from regional cooperation whereas Armenia finds itself tied to a close relation with Russian that resulted from being isolated because of the Upper Karabakh conflict.
   Tactical prudence is something that is not fully considered and begs the question as to "who really benefited from this war and what interests are benefiting from maintaining the status quo and frozen conflicts?" It a bit late in the game to go back to who started the war in the first place but instead to look to how best to bring about real resolution. Nevertheless, conflict must be evaluated and the circumstances understood as part of the functioning of larger systems rather than taking them at face value. Too often it is the unofficial networks that decide the fact of refugees, and these links are what determine the degree to which illegal activities become real obstacles to conflict resolution and barriers to competing US and Russian foreign policy interests.

   Labels of Convenience
   One group sees the other as a threat to its existence. And too it becomes a problem of labels of convenience for zero sum games. Then there are the Chechen that both Russia and the United States would rather label as terrorists in order to strike a deal of 'hands off" in allowing political expediency to bring order and provide for the vested interests of the power players. Freedom fighters are labeled bandits, criminals in such a way to draw attention from their plight and their right of self-determination. Whenever one finds name calling commonplace it indicates that 'it is used to obscure something that is negatively valued or would prove an embarrassment if declared more forthrightly." My freedom fighter becomes your terrorist. The use of language all depends on whose ox is being gored.
   In parallel, religious intolerance and civil society is ignored for the sake of economic and political stability in the Caucasus. The pursuit of political stability and economic interests has become so prized that it is rated higher than the quality of democracy and international standards of law and morality. Thus, political expediency and frozen conflicts relieves regional governments of the responsibility that a normal government would bear. It gives an excuse for why things are not stable and there is no solution in sight for the plight of the most vulnerable, the refugees, and IDPs.

   Flip-flop of Mr. Bush's Caspian Diplomacy
   There was some hope when George Bush Jr. first took office that the US administration would remain engaged with troubled regions of the world but instead his administration and aggressive foreign policy has likely been a source of greater problems. Many feel that he and the US administration have turned his back on Azerbaijan by not fulfilling his earlier peace initiatives. Indeed, the inconsistency of US policy has place Azerbaijan and Georgia in a situation where they may have to deal not as equal players with the terms of Russian foreign policy. What largely escapes critical attention is just how much effort has gone into the study of regional conflict and efforts to find solutions but to no avail. Azerbaijan and Georgia teems with international representatives of organizations that are supposed to be the experts. The results of 10 years of engagement speak louder than do executive summaries and glossy reports. The impact of international organizations so far has been limited; this conclusion is not only a poor reflection on their organizations, but also negatively reflects the will of host governments to seek regional stability. It is difficult for foreign countries to read about US foreign policy, Iraq and Bush these days. There are no weapons? Paul O'Neill wrote a book that says that Bush does not, on a regular basis, have information brought to him with opposing opinions/information, so the balance is not there. That's a little scary, to that the President isn't trying to deal with all facts in getting the picture of things in the world in which we live.

   Campaign War Coffers
   Talks over Nagorno-Karabak, which is occupied by Armenian forces have gone nowhere. Moreover, it is politically impossible for the US to follow through with earlier promises to assist in moving the process forward. Many Armenian financial backers to US politicians are firmly in the camp of such a key Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican from Kentucky. He has the largest campaign war chest thanks to the deep pockets of the US Armenian Diaspora and US special interests groups. Too, it is an election year in the United States for George Bush Jr. and his minions are looking for more money to stay in office.
   Money cascade down through various levels and this is that is what drives American politics and the willingness to turn a blind eye to the illegal occupation Azeri territory. Getting to the proverbial "yes" in conflict studies is mostly connected to a political agenda, which is not always apparent to those that are actually caught up in the "frozen conflicts" and perspectives are blinded by heated emotions a lack of accurate information to make informed choices.

   Conflict is Business
   Meanwhile conflict becomes a growth industry and the constant meddling into the region by the US and Russian adds to the need for conflict resolution specialist and non-governmental organizations. At times there is hope with high-profile visits such as US Presidential Adviser, James Baker and US Secretary of State Collin Powell. Moreover, the constant back and forth of the newly elected Presidents of Azerbaijan and Georgia, Ilham Aliyev and Mikheil Saarkishvili to Moscow gives some outside hope but Russian is still in the position to play hardball. To lend a hand in pushing forward the peace process would come at a price that the US would not allow Azerbaijan and Georgia to pay. The result is frozen conflicts in both Azerbaijan and Georgia. Both countries supported the war effort in Iraq. Regardless of the ledger of right or wrong, this support was based on the need to political paybacks and to continue financial backing. Not only for the US to politically support regional energy projects but to make up for budgetary shortfalls and lack of programs for many segments of society. To put it is simple terms: "those countries with self-serving economic and political interests are willing to continue turning a blind eye to the actions of larger countries if it will somehow add to their bottom line and maintain the status quo or national interests.

   Networks of Patronage
   Regardless, this vicious cycle allows Russia to play hardball over its regional geopolitical position. Much too is connected to oil and unofficial networks of patronage that is rent seeking and benefits the elites on different sides of the regional borders. Little attention is given to the many people that are yearning for meaningful social change; the stakes are high and nationalistic symbolism is subtly (and sometimes blatantly) exploited by the various opposition groupings for their own interests rather than those of their fellow countrymen. More is needed - principally accountability. But instead there are rich pickings for those well connected to the top.

   Boomerang and Easy Money
   Such was definitely the case in Georgia with the cozy relationship between Georgian officials and Chechens that was connected to the trafficking of weapons. Behind the scenes are Russian intelligence interests who benefit from not only the money from the sale of weapons but from wracking havoc on the fledgling governments of the region. Take for example, Boris Yeltsin, former President of the Russian Federation helped jump-start the destabilization in region with a one billion dollars worth of weapons to Armenian in 1998. Many of these weapons were exported to hotspots around the world with the full cooperation of regional security agencies and mafia structures. The profits were substantial and the political ramifications continue to this day, not only for the countries but the "Northern Neighbor" who can't officially comprehend how the Chechen fighters are so well equipped with some of the latest Russian technology.

   Anti-terrorism Operation or Joint Venture
   Roddy Scott, a killed British Journalist working for Frontline Television and Janes Intelligence Review in an encrypted correspondence to the author of this article in May 2000, "Georgian generals regularly visited Khamat Gelayev, the Chechen field commander in Pankisi. Georgian Generals would sell him weapons. Moreover, the foray in the breakaway Russian controlled breakaway zone of Abkhazia several years ago was entirely organized by the Georgians; they even sent a number of their own special forces with the Chechens. These are the same Special Forces that man the checkpoints "block posts" to Pankisi" and [later] after a Russian snipers bullet killed Roddy, some of the same collaborators then participated in rounding up suspected Al Qaeda members operating in Pankisi and handing them over to the United States for transit shipment to Cuba. Prior to September 11th the same Georgian special services were working closely together with Arabs and Chechens in transferring money and organizing joint activities on the ground.

   Naturally the Chechens had a vested that the full story never came out (in print, photo or TV). It is the kind of thing that might just provoke the Russians to do something, (or to give them an excuse). There were plenty of Chechen fighters holed up in Georgia a few years ago, [still are] … and there was a very cozy relationship between them and governmental networks. The media knew this, having the right end of the stick but not the sources to back it up.
   In short, the Georgians supported the Chechens for years and were making money off it until they realized they could make more money dancing American music.
   Meanwhile the Russian Federation maintains that it is engaged in the war against international terrorism and not separatists. Igor Ivanov Russian Foreign Minister stated in late January 2004, "There is no war in Chechnya, but a very complicated fight against international terrorism is going on against the background of the complicated political settlement." This is on the edge of being deceitful when the historic realities of the Chechen people are considered as part of the larger regional implications.

   Train and Equip Program
   And at the same time the US Government supports the Georgia military through a Train and Equip program along with technical advice. It hopes to do the same in Azerbaijan under the aegis of combating international terrorism. But in reality such links provide the convenient opportunity to gain a larger toe hole in the region in the so-called war on international terrorism. But in reality such outside help may have just the opposite effect. Security threats to the states of the Caucasus are more a homegrown creation than something coming from outside.
   The real nexus to conflict resolution and geopolitics in the region is not pockets of refugees and poverty but instead the unofficial political, security and economic networks in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia. The fact that law enforcement and border organizations are in fact involved in much of the illegal cross border trade makes conflict resolution not very interesting. There is also much that needs to done to enact and 'enforce' effective legislation on money laundering, anti-trafficking of women and weapons, external audits on regional governments to uphold the rules of law and be accountable to their own citizens and to the international community. Moreover, conflict resolution needs to focus on evaluating the extent that these illegal activities are in fact part of the functioning of various agencies and international organizations.

   OSCE, United Nations
   Every year upwards of Armenian snipers on Karabakh front kill upwards of 100 Azerbaijani soldiers. Such incidents receive little attention by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). This observation reflects that their aim is not to bring about real progressive in negotiations or mandates but to help maintain the status quo. The Armenia side takes it share of causalities in a tie for tack turkey shoot. The proposed comprised offered by the Organization OSCE in returning some occupied territory is a good case to illustrate that economic interests are more important than international law. The case history of the failure is massive in monitoring the Georgian Russian border. Moreover, even the NGO community and the United Nations High Commission, Baku office are not always neutral in how programs to help those refuges affecting by conflict are operation on a level playing field. Many refugees had their status changes, as in one recent case of Iraqi refugees since US policy is to tell the world that all is well in Iraq. As one letter reads, "the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, Baku office would like to inform you that due to organizational rules and to the limited availability of funds, financial assistance to individual refugees can only be made on a temporary nature and provided for the most needed … we have to notify you that the duration of your financial support will not be extended beyond today's payment. Such is the case in Azerbaijan and Georgia with many classes of refugees and IDPs, as if they have been forgotten in the game of political balance and expediency. As a result, a standard is set that reflects badly on the ability of international organizations and host governments to play a real role in helping people to help themselves, and to effectively deal with conflict resolution. In fact, too often it seems that activities and initiates are actually politically motivated and are carefully directed to serving larger geopolitical interest rather than in bringing about peace and stability in a hotly contested region of the world.

BY THOMAS HIRSH
High Hopes and
Big Bucks
But for Locals...
BY FUAD ALIZADEH
It's Time for Banks
To Fulfill Their
Purpose
BY RAFAEL ABBASOV
A Caspian Energy
Policy Outlook: Chinese-
Kazakh Domination