2024-10-08 14:54:44
Author: Elchin Alioglu
Source: Trend
US Deputy Secretary of State James O’Brien’s views on regional security issues in the South Caucasus, especially the statement that the security architecture created by Russia and Iran in this region is unstable and undesirable, opens up interesting points for many political observers. O’Brien’s words point in the right direction in a certain sense: the dominance of Russia and Iran in the South Caucasus serves to maintain tension in the region. However, this approach is somewhat contradictory and incomplete.
Azerbaijan already determined its political course 25 years ago without depending on the recommendations of the United States. A clear example of this is the tripartite strategic partnership format that the country has established with Turkey and Georgia. Within the framework of this format, Baku brought together energy security, economic cooperation and political support, and carried out the implementation of strategic projects in accordance with the interests of the West. It was in this format that Baku implemented its oil and gas export strategy, played the role of an alternative energy supply source for Europe, and at the same time maintained its independent position. The sometimes inadequate attitude of the political circles in the West, especially Washington, to such projects is due to the lack of knowledge about the realities of the region.
Statements of the US Deputy Secretary of State about security in the South Caucasus raise many strategic questions. At first glance, this statement reflects Washington’s concern about the situation in the region. But here the main question arises: the US says what is undesirable, but how does it explain what is desirable? O’Brien opposes Russia and Iran’s sphere of influence, but what alternative does he propose? Regardless of Washington’s recommendations, Azerbaijan established its own independent foreign policy and, in this context, avoided Russia’s influence and acted in accordance with the interests of the West. Nevertheless, the attitude of the USA towards Azerbaijan is sometimes not understandable.
A weapon against clean air and the future: How the US military is damaging the climate. – RESEARCH
In recent years, the policy of the United States in the South Caucasus raises serious questions and is widely criticized. The open support of Armenia and the use of pressure measures against Azerbaijan and Georgia will not bring the results expected by Washington. On the contrary, this policy will lead to disruption of peace and stability in the South Caucasus, the emergence of new tensions, and will have consequences contrary to the interests of the United States in the region.
… One of the biggest strategic mistakes made by the USA in the South Caucasus is the exclusive support of Armenia. This one-sided approach became even more obvious, especially after the Second Karabakh War. Despite the fact that Azerbaijan has restored its territorial integrity, Washington’s support for Armenia’s revanchist position disrupts the existing balance of forces in the region and has a negative impact on the peace process.
As noted political scientist Fyodor Lukyanov: “The continued support of the United States to Armenia is a dangerous policy that does not take into account the current realities in the region. It only increases the risks of new conflicts and is against the long-term strategic interests of the United States.”
The USA’s sincere belief that Armenia has a dominant position in the region is completely contrary to the geopolitical realities of the region. On the contrary, this position deepens Armenia’s security and stability problems, and instead of finding real solutions, the Armenian leadership tends to revanchist policies.
US pressures on Georgia are also accompanied by insufficient and contradictory approaches to ensure balance in the South Caucasus. Washington’s pressure on Tbilisi to define its foreign policy more clearly only increases domestic political tensions and complicates the balancing of relations with Russia.
The former prime minister of Georgia, Irakli Garibashvili, said: “US pressure on Georgia destabilizes our country and harms our efforts to establish balanced relations with Russia. This does not benefit either Georgia or the region.” Although these pressures serve Washington’s plans to fully control Georgia, Tbilisi resists this pressure and tries to protect its sovereignty.
Lithuania’s lie at the PACE session: shadows of Landsbergis’ “speech”.
The main problem of the US policy towards Azerbaijan is putting pressure on Baku’s independent, multi-vector foreign policy. As a key player of strategic importance in the South Caucasus, Azerbaijan maintains balanced relations between Russia and the West, insists on protecting its interests both on the regional and international stage. US attempts to influence Azerbaijan unilaterally have a negative impact on Baku’s cooperation potential with the West.
The words of the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, clearly reflect this position: “The generation that comes after us, the youth, they must also follow this path. First of all, they must be educated in the national spirit, they must be loyal to their culture, traditions, and moral values. They must not be influenced by anyone. they should not be deceived by various promises. This 30-year period of our occupation has shown it.”
In fact, this clearly shows that the US policy of pressure against Azerbaijan will fail. Official Baku is trying to ensure regional stability by prioritizing only its national interests, and Washington’s failure to accept this reality creates even more tension.
The well-known analyst Brian Uhit notes: “The unbalanced approach of the United States in relations with Azerbaijan will only lead to the isolation of Washington in the region. Azerbaijan is open to international cooperation, but it demands that this cooperation be built on the basis of respect for its national interests.”
The desire of the United States to become a dominant power in the South Caucasus can lead to dangerous consequences. Unilateral support of Armenia, pressures against Azerbaijan and Georgia will cause new conflicts in the region. Washington will only narrow its sphere of influence and weaken the stability of the region by unilaterally pursuing policies without taking into account the interests of various actors in the region.
Political scientist Aleksandr Krylov interprets this situation as follows: “The biggest strategic mistake made by the USA in the South Caucasus is to apply unilateral approaches instead of establishing balanced relations with all regional actors. This will prevent Washington from achieving its goals in the region and will face the region with bigger problems. will reveal.”
The consequences of this erroneous US policy are already clearly felt. While trying to increase its influence in the region, Washington only strengthens the position of its rivals – Russia and Turkey. US pressures on Azerbaijan and Georgia cause these countries to cooperate more with Russia and Turkey to protect their strategic interests. As a result, Washington’s desire to gain geopolitical influence in the South Caucasus has contradictory results against its own strategic interests.
… US policy in the South Caucasus, instead of contributing to stability and security in the region, causes new tensions. The full support of Armenia, the pressures against Azerbaijan and Georgia disrupt the balance of forces in the region and cause consequences that are contrary to the interests of Washington. It is necessary for the United States to conduct a more balanced and multi-vector policy to ensure stability in the region. Otherwise, the US’s desire for dominance will lead to greater problems in the South Caucasus and the weakening of Washington’s regional influence.
Official Baku has already decided long ago that it will not join the CSTO and will cooperate with Russia only within the framework of natural economic relations. Azerbaijan’s economic relations with Russia are normal and the trade turnover is mainly based on energy and other economic fields. However, Azerbaijan’s relations with Russia do not reach the level of strategic alliance. The clearest example of this is the early withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers from the territory of Azerbaijan as a result of the declaration of alliance cooperation signed with Russia. This is an indicator of fully independent foreign policy of Azerbaijan. That is, it is more logical and useful for Baku to maintain relations with Russia within an economic framework. Azerbaijan protects its economic and strategic interests by playing the role of a bridge between the West and the East.
Azerbaijan’s relations with Iran are more complicated. Iran’s strategic support to Armenia and opposition to regional projects deepens the contradictions between the two countries. However, despite all these difficulties, Azerbaijan continues its cooperation with Iran as part of the North-South transport corridor. This project is only economic in nature and does not form any political bloc. That is, Azerbaijan’s relations with Iran are developed only within the framework of economic interests and do not move to the political level.
Armenia is in a completely different situation. Armenia’s complete dependence on Russia deprives it of being an independent player in the region. As a member of the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) and the Customs Union, Pashinyan’s government maintains close economic and military relations with Moscow. The deployment of the Russian army in Armenia proves that Armenia is completely dependent on Russia in the field of security. At the same time, the presence of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) on Armenia’s borders with Turkey and Iran further weakens the country’s sovereignty. Pashinyan’s government is under the influence of Moscow in the economic sphere, increasing the trade turnover with Russia to 14-16 billion dollars a year. Russian influence in Armenia is not only limited to the economy, but also manifests itself in security, energy and political spheres. At the same time, Armenia has strategic partnership relations with Iran, and these relations are deepening. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan is the only leader of the region who has met Iran’s Supreme Leader Seyyed Ali Khamenei several times in recent years, and this shows the strategic importance of Yerevan-Tehran relations. Armenia plays the role of the main intermediary for the implementation of mutual relations between Iran and the Eurasian Economic Union. This clearly proves that Armenia is on the axis of Moscow and Tehran.
Contradictions and inconsistencies are evident in the political activities of the current US administration. On the one hand, Washington is trying to get closer to Armenia and evaluates its policy positively. On the other hand, it takes inadequate steps in relations with Azerbaijan. President Ilham Aliyev called this inconsistency “ingratitude”, because although Azerbaijan plays a key role in the implementation of many strategic projects in the interests of the United States, Washington sometimes does not appreciate such steps.
The South Caucasus policy of the United States is mainly aimed at deepening tension and conflict, because the main goal for Washington is to reduce the influence of Russia and Iran in the region. But this approach cannot bring long-term peace and stability. Instead of a balanced and sustainable peace strategy in the region, the US implements a policy of confrontation and does not take into account the interests of the countries of the region.
Consequently, it is necessary to change the policy of the US administration in the region, because this inconsistent and biased policy only increases the instability in the region. The main condition for peace and stability in the region is that the countries of the South Caucasus independently determine their future and develop without the interference of foreign powers.