Connect with us

Eastern Europe

Can Azerbaijan fall into the Turkish pitfall?

Arman Navasardyan, Ph.D

Published

on

In July 1974, the 10,000-strong Turkish army, choosing the name of the gang leader Attila the Hun as the operation motto, invaded Cyprus and occupied almost half of the country. The Turks were going to occupy the island. The plan did not take place thanks to the “threatening warnings from the Soviet Union and the US President Lyndon Johnson’s explicit threats.”

The fact that Moscow had taken a similar position by unanimous decision of the country’s leadership is beyond a shadow of a doubt. The first line of this leadership was the USSR Supreme Council Deputy Chairman Heydar Aliyev. This is a hint, not far from the historical past.

And when in January 2018, the same Turkey attacked Syria under a more lyrical “Olive Branch” slogan, Aliyev-Junior, forgetting his father’s communist position on the Turkish aggression unlike the international community openly said to the world that he stands by Erdogan.”Baku understands Ankara’s concern over terrorism,” declares the Foreign Ministry, not forgetting, of course, to link the Turkish “sacred” war with its “liberation” struggle against the Armenian armed forces illegally operating in Karabakh, interconnected with terrorist groups”.

The aggression of Turkey against Afrin has caused a great turmoil among Azerpop scribblers. Here is a whole set of military and diplomatic prescriptions. Azeri general Jusar Aytamirov, for example, threatens. “Military operations in Karabakh can begin every second. The war will be fast, accurate, and strong. ”

In this regard, the dreaded general advises “to neutralize Russia” so that he silently agrees with such operation as it was in the case of Syria. Former Foreign Minister Tovik Zulfigarov, referring to Sergei Lavrov’s Russian Foreign Ministry’s “pro-Armenian”, thinks that “the Armenian leadership will do everything to engage Russia in possible military operations.”

In the context of Syrian events, Azerbaijan’s political line is divided into two vectors. “Treacherous” and “pro-Armenian” Moscow in the first one, in the other “fraternal Turkey”, with the “Turkish people”, who are bravely fighting against the terrorists. Most importantly, they are entitled to put their experience and their military potential to serve for the benefit of their brother   Azerbaijan’s justified struggle for liberation against the “aggressor and occupier” Armenians.

And this is where the idyllic paradigm of “One State, Two People” ends yielding place to Turkish plans on cold political and military calculations. And these are clear and non-profitable, if not dangerous for Azeris. Politics is a two-way traffic; I am for you, you for me. This is a fairly justified position by Ankara, given that 25,000 pro-Turkish militants from the Free Syrian Army are taking part in the Afrin operations, while the “pure” Turkish soldiers who provide artillery and air defense are only 6,400.Turks are skilled at pulling the chestnuts out of the fire at the hands of someone else. So, in some way, making Azerbaijan a participant of Syrian venture is not an imaginary one. Turkey is gradually being drawn into the Syrian-Kurdish swamp, with its unpredictable consequences to be expected. Then, Erdogan would be delighted to share the “mission” with Aliyev, conveying the nature of the “international” invasion against Kurds in its kind. It is a different matter whether the latter will take such step or not. Here he may face a dilemma.

First, if he enters the Syrian crater, he will have two fronts – the Middle East and Nagorno-Karabakh, will strain the relationship with Washington, will have problems with Moscow and Tehran and it is also possible with Er-Riyadh and Tel Aviv. On the other hand, if Erdogan puts pressure on Aliyev in the given situation and the latter resists, the fraternal alliance will crack. Erdogan will take a cold and passive position on the Karabakh issue, especially because there are objective reasons -Turkey’s problems in Syria. And finally, The Middle East policy of Turkey also poses a threat to Azerbaijan.Erdogan’s new -ottoman and islamist policies may also include Azerbaijan. Adding it to the turbulent situation in the region and the possible return of  bashi-bazouk Islamists to  Azerbaijan, who  have great ambitions for  Baku’s oil. Diplomat Aliyev is unlikely to be able to sleep tight   having this even hypothetical picture of the prospect. And in our opinion, in the case of Islamization of Azerbaijan, he will either rise to the echelon or change his faith and become a hectic. And will do that just as easily as his father changed Marxism with Islam.

Continue Reading
Comments

Eastern Europe

Trump buys Lithuania, EU cannot stop it

Published

on

The US President Donald Trump is no doubt a successful businessman who rules his country as if it is a huge enterprise. And this kind of management, to his mind, should lead to success. And very often it really works. As a wise leader he uses different tools to reach his goals. Thus, the most cunning one, which the US exploits in Europe – is indirect influence on the EU countries to gain the desired aim. The EU just becomes a tool in “capable hands” of the US.

Let us give the simple example. Last week the Ministry of National Defence of Lithuania announced that the Lithuanian Air Force Base in Šiauliai would get de-icing equipment for the aircraft. It would be acquired according to an agreement signed by the Ministry of National Defence and the AF Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate (AFSACD) on behalf of the Government of the United States of America.

It is known that the new equipment is capable of removing ice from aircraft at the necessary height which allows the Šiauliai Air Base to support bigger aircraft of the Alliance, such as C-17 – one of the largest transport aircraft capable of moving a large number of soldiers and large amounts of cargo.

It is said that “the procurement for the Lithuanian Air Force Base will fill a critical capability gap and allow the Base personnel to carry out cold weather operations, as well as support the NATO Air Policing Mission. The equipment will also be used for providing servicing for the aircraft of the NATO enhanced Forward Presence Battalion Battle Group-contributing countries and other NATO allies at the Air Base.”

But according to data, only three C-17s belongs to NATO. The US, in its turn, has 222 C-17s in service as of Jan. 2018. Among EU member states the only country that has C-17A ERs is the United Kingdom with 8 C-17A ERs in use. But The United Kingdom is in the process of leaving the organization. So, it is logical to assume that the most interested country in deploying C-17 in Lithuania is the US, not the EU or even NATO. And of course Lithuania cannot even dream of having such planes.

The second issue which is even more important is the fact that the agreement of approximate value of USD 1.03 million is financed from the European Security Assistance Fund (ESAF). Lithuania is not able to share the burden.

So, nothing depends on Lithuania in this issue. It only gives permission.

In the recent years Lithuania’s procurement from the US has grown significantly. The ministry of National Defence is currently in negotiations with the US department of Defence for procuring JLTV all-terrain vehicles.

Unfortunately, being a member of the EU, Lithuania so hardly depends on the US in military and security spheres that it often mixes up its real needs, responsibilities to the EU with the US interests in the region. Such approach could seriously complicate the relations with neighbouring Russia and Belarus which Lithuania borders. These two countries are interested in Lithuania as an economic partner. But if Lithuania will pose military threat to them, deploying US military equipment, these states could terminate any economic cooperation.

Is it a cooperation or manipulation and who will benefit?

Continue Reading

Eastern Europe

Georgia & Silk Roads: Belt & Road Initiative

Published

on

The ancient Silk Road, or as it is more often called nowadays silk roads, was an ancient trade route from eastern China to various major markets of the ancient and medieval periods (Roman/Byzantine empires, Sasanian Iran, the Arab Caliphate, etc). An important aspect to those trade routes was their changeability over time. This depended mostly on the political situation in the Middle East and this necessitated the seeking out of alternative routes to get important products from Central Asia and western China.

Contrary to widespread arguments, Georgia appeared on those trade routes only from time to time as a result of political disturbances (invasions, economic problems, etc.) in the region. The trade route across Georgia passed from North to South, from Georgia itself further south to Armenia and Iran as well as from East to West. Thus it is difficult to say that Georgia was either totally absent or dominated ancient and medieval trade routes. The Russians at times opened the Georgian transit route for European products to reach Iran in the 19th century. But the success of this commercial road ultimately depended on Russian political decisions. As is also well known that in Soviet times, virtually no international trade routes ran through Georgia as the Union was a closed-border one.

Thus, for the first time in many centuries, Georgia now has the chance to become a transit corridor for trade and energy from the Caspian area, Central Asia and even from western China. Refocusing on Georgia’s transit potential is linked to China’s economic and military rise which is arguably one of the central themes in 21st century geopolitics. Like many other rising powers throughout history, China has strategic imperatives that clash with those of the US. Beijing needs to secure its procurement of oil and gas resources, which are currently most available through the Malacca Strait. In an age of US naval dominance, the Chinese imperative is to redirect its economy’s dependence, as well as its supply routes, elsewhere.

This is how it comes to the almost trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which is intended to reconnect the Asia-Pacific with Europe through Russia, the Middle East, and Central Asia. There are several major corridors pinpointed by the Chinese:

  1. China to Europe through the New Eurasian Land Bridge;
  2. The China-Mongolia-Russian Corridor;
  3. Central and West Asian countries.
  4. The China-Indochina Peninsula Corridor linking China with the South Pacific Ocean through the South China Sea;
  5. The China-Pakistan trade corridor;
  6. The Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar trade route.

As seen, neither Georgia nor the South Caucasus feature on the list and many analysts think that this is proof that China will unlikely be interested in the South Caucasian route. Yet, the nature of the BRI is not static; it undergoes constant changes and it is likely that Beijing will always adjust its trade routes to rising challenges and new opportunities, trying to operate through difficult geographic terrain as well as politically unstable regions. These are Beijing’s major enemies which make any routes vulnerable and susceptible to re-routing. And this is very much similar to how transcontinental trade routes operated in ancient and medieval periods.

Thus China has and is likely to have in future, an individual approach to each country, which makes the fact that Georgia does not feature on the above-mentioned list of trade routes not an obstacle per se. China is responding to rising opportunities and in that sense Georgia’s ability to develop its Black Sea ports, internal railway and highway networks will facilitate China’s decisions on the active inclusion of the South Caucasian route in its BRI or any future commercial undertakings.

Surely the Chinese also look at the security of the South Caucasus and it is difficult to imagine that Beijing will not take into account Russian moves in the region. Mitigating the Russian challenge together with opening the Georgian market to other powerful players in Eurasia is arguably a modus vivendi for the region’s successful development.

Author’s note: First published in Georgia Today

Continue Reading

Eastern Europe

Azerbaijan: Human Capital Forum Helps the Country Orient Itself for the Future

MD Staff

Published

on

Panelists and high-level participants discuss human capital investments at the forum in Baku, Azerbaijan. Photo Credit: Zaur Rzayev / World Bank

Recognizing the key role of human capital in growth and competitiveness, the Government of Azerbaijan and World Bank Group organized a three-day, high-level Human Capital Forum in Baku from December 19 to 21, 2018. Each day, approximately 150 participants including government ministers, top policy experts, academics, development and business community leaders, and media representatives gathered to discuss how best to support the Government of Azerbaijan in accelerating the development of its people.

Why now?

Over the past two decades, oil wealth has helped Azerbaijan achieve high growth rates, significant poverty reduction, and a middle-income status. However, Azerbaijan is facing new and emerging challenges such as how to achieve broad-based, private sector-led growth and make key public services and economic opportunities accessible to all citizens across the country.

Further, on the recently released Human Capital Index, Azerbaijan ranks 69th out of 157 countries. A child born in Azerbaijan today will be 60 percent as productive when she grows up as she could be if she enjoyed complete education and full health. Already, the country’s development strategy documents—the Azerbaijan 2020: Vision for the Future and the Strategic Roadmaps for Economic Reforms —envision human capital development and its effective engagement in the development of Azerbaijan.

The Forum provided a way to explore a “whole-of-government” approach to nurturing human capital by engaging ministers and officials from education, health, tax, labor and other fields.

Forum Highlights

On Day 1, with the focus on jobs, Sahil Babayev, Minister of Labor and Social Protection of Population, emphasized the country’s commitment to the formation of human capital and measures to stimulate the labor market. He particularly appreciated that human capital development is looked at through the prism of economic growth and social cohesion.

The World Bank presented the World Development Report 2019 The Changing Nature of Work, a study on how the nature of work is changing as a result of advances in technology today and how governments can best respond to these changes by investing in human capital and offering social protections to all people. Sahil Babayev was joined by Khagani Abdullayev, Adviser to the Minister of Taxes, Kestutis Jankauskas, Head of the EU delegation, and Maleyka Abbaszadeh, Chairperson of the State Examination Center of Azerbaijan, as panelists.

While discussing how investing in human capital must be a priority for governments for workers to build in-demand skills, Mr. Abdullayev said, “Experience shows that properly implemented tax policies contribute to the implementation of a mechanism for encouraging investment in human capital; in this context, Azerbaijan is paying attention to areas which require unique skills.

This year, it was proposed to introduce tax incentives for a period of ten years for investments in such areas as education, science, sports and culture. At present, educational institutions where people with disabilities study are exempted from income tax in 2019.”

Day 2 focused on education. Setting the stage for discussion, Naveed Naqvi, World Bank Country Manager for Azerbaijan, stressed that the people of Azerbaijan were the country’s only true resource and for them to fully utilize their potential, increased investment in education and skills was needed.

Jeyhun Bayramov, Minister of Education of Azerbaijan, confirmed this in his opening remarks, stating,  “Our world requires well-educated, skills-equipped graduates from our schools who will shape our today and tomorrow. And achieving this is a shared responsibility of education, business and government leaders.”The topic was further elaborated in the WB presentation on the 2018 World Development Report: Learning to Recognize Education’s Promise.

In the discussion following the presentations, Jeyhun Bayramov was joined by William Gill, U.S. Chargé d’Affaires; Edward Carwardine, UNICEF Country Coordinator; Fariz Ismailzade, Vice Rector of ADA, Maleyka Abbaszadeh (mentioned above), and Cem Mete, Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice Manager, Europe & Central Asia, World Bank, as panelists. Participants debated measures to ensure that schooling and learning went hand in hand, how to act on evidence to maximize learning outcomes, and how to align various actors in the system to make it work for learning. Mrs. Abbaszadeh said, “It is necessary to change the nature of education to make it career-oriented.”

A presentation on the changing nature of wealth and a discussion centered around The Human Capital Index and Human Capital Project set the agenda for Day 3. Panelists for the latter included Vusal Gasimli, Head of the Center for Analysis and Communication of Economic Reforms, Hijran Huseynova, Chairperson of the State Committee for Family, Women and Children Affairs, Zakiya Mustafayeva, Head of Apparatus, Ministry of Health, Zaur Aliyev, State Agency for Mandatory Health Insurance, Dr. Hande Harmanci, WHO Representative, Garay Garaybayli, Rector of Azerbaijan Medical University, and Ghulam M. Isaczai, UN Resident Coordinator.

Issues for discussion included: Why should countries invest in human capital? Can early health care and education prepare children to succeed and prosper as adults in a rapidly changing world? What are the barriers to nurturing human capital and how can countries overcome them?

Additional forum sessions included the World Bank’s analytical work on employment, higher education, health financing, and early childhood development in Azerbaijan.

Finally, at the end of the three-day forum, the main presentations, key messages and recommendations from the event were presented at the National Parliament of Azerbaijan (Milli Mejlis). Mr. Ziyad Samadzade, Chairman of the Economic Policy Committee, led an engaging discussion on the state of human development in Azerbaijan and ways to accelerate the transformation of Azerbaijan’s oil wealth into human capital.

Communications

Extensive communication, both before and during the event, helped achieve broader public conversation around the themes of the Forum. A dedicated event webpage detailed the agenda and included links to key World Bank publications and the Human Capital Project page. One-to-one meetings with key government officials ensured their participation and contribution. The event had impressive media coverage. In the run-up to the event, World Bank officials gave numerous media interviews to promote interest in it. During the Forum, presenters and experts talked extensively to the media.

What next?

One of the main conclusions of the 3-day event was that Azerbaijan needs to invest more and better to harness the potential of its human capital, and that its current human capital index is not commensurate with its income level. “With the confluence of rapid technical change and globalization and the need to engage in the global knowledge economy, Azerbaijan’s investments in human capital will be key to its ability to collaborate and compete with other nations,” said Lire Ersado, Program Leader, World Bank.

By championing human capital formation through a whole-of-government approach, Azerbaijan can prepare its citizens for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. With this in mind, the WBG is making a strategic shift to focus its support more on human development in Azerbaijan.

World Bank

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Modern Diplomacy