Yuri Sigov
News.Az interviews Yuri Sigov, political reviewer and chief of the Business People magazine's administration in Washington.
The resentment over the US policy on the Karabakh conflict is recently growing in Azerbaijan. What can you say about the situation? Can it be considered a crisis in the relations between the two countries that have earlier been featured as strategic?
I think Baku should not be offended with the United States regarding Karabakh. Karabakh is currently not a priority either for America, or Russia or Europe since they have their own issues and if nothing extraordinary occurs in Karabakh (that is open hostilities), no one in Washington or Moscow will display a serious concern. Meanwhile, the United States does not want the resumption of hostilities there, which is why it will further support the negotiation process without raising tensions. But there will not be any real result from the such awaiting diplomacy at least for Azerbaijan.
Azerbaijan has made it clear that in case America continues such a discriminative approach, the strategic cooperation of Baku with Washington, including on such key spheres, as energy and security, will be limited. Will the United States take this position into account?
America is not afraid of any restrictions and Baku is well aware of it. On the other hand, the Azerbaijani government can “press” on the United States by some points. There is an option of a closer cooperation with Russia, there is an opportunity to enliven ties with Iran and Turkey and trade on Nabucco with Europe when necessary. Anyway, the United States are important for Azerbaijan in all senses and I think it will not come to the significant “restrictions” in relations between the two countries.
Soon after this stiff message of Baku addressed to Washington, senior officials of the State Department started to visit Azerbaijan and for the first time Pentagon leader Gates visited the country and handed a letter from Obama to the president of the country. State Secretary Clinton is also to visit Baku soon, also for the first time in history. Some interpret this visit as the US steps to avert Azerbaijan’s rejection of the strategic ties with the United States in Russia’s favor. Do you think this opinion is justified or probably these visits are just a coincidence?
The visits of the US senior officials are never symbolic or casual. The Caspian region is important for the United States mostly not because of Azerbaijan and relations with it but rather due to the situation around Iran, closeness of Azerbaijan and large energy projects of the region where US companies are functioning. Naturally, Gates and Clinton come to Baku rather to maintain the status and reputation of the United States, to demonstrate its highly raised flag and remind the Azerbaijani leadership and America has not forgotten about this country and its importance.
The US press has recently published the statements of the US officer who said in open that US main interest in Azerbaijan is not human rights or Karabakh settlement. These are the transit capacities of the country in transporting cargo to Afghanistan. Is it true?
Afghanistan is US headache No 1 and everything related to it will be priority for the White House administration. Azerbaijan is important for America for the “Afghan issue” too but US support to Afghanistan should not be bound to other problems related to Azerbaijan (including Karabakh). Azerbaijan is now more important for the United States in the Iranian rather than Afghan direction. Here Baku can play on the US interests but it should not forget that it is not so possible to play US games with Iran. In addition, Iran is next to Azerbaijan, while the United States is on the other part of the world.
After a year of absence of the US ambassador in Azerbaijan, President Obama has finally nominated Matthew Bryza, former US mediator on the Karabakh conflict, for this post. Do you see any political subtext in the protraction of the appointment issue (like most in Baku consider) and how do you assess Bryza’s candidacy?
It should primarily be taken into account that the ambassador is a nominal figure in any country, a kind of a “senior postbox” that does not define the policy on attitude to any country and just fulfills “the instructions of the center”. As for a definite personality of the US ambassador in Azerbaijan, it does not matter whether the person knows the region well (the number of visits here at the order of the State Department has nothing to do with the really professional understanding of the country and its peculiarities). The most important is the policy to be held by the State Department and White House, while the US ambassador (whoever is confirmed) will just fulfill instructions from above. Nothing personal.
Lala B.
News.Az
0 comments:
Post a Comment