While Turkey and Russia plow along with natural gas pipelines north and south of the Black Sea, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Romania have decided that the shortest and fastest distance between two points is a straight line.
Baku, Tbilisi and Bucharest on May 12 set up a company that will build two liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals on either side of the Black Sea to get Eastern Europe the Russia-free natural gas it reportedly craves.
LNG naysayers point to the project's technical difficulties and to its lack of financing plans to argue that the trio's expectations may be getting the best of them.
Compared with the tangled Nabucco pipeline drama, however, the LNG project partners have little in the way of outstanding political issues. The project's key to success may lie in the old Russian maxim "The fewer people, the more oxygen." ("Меньше народу, больше кислороду.")
Baku insists that the time is up for Armenia to return to Azerbaijan bits of occupied land bordering disputed Nagorno Karabakh.
“Armenia has requested two weeks with regard to the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, but several months have gone by and there has been no reaction,” said Azerbaijani presidential spokesman Novruz Mamedov on May 5. Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov said the same the day before, adding that the key mediators -- the US, France, Russia -- have proposed a timeline for the Armenian withdrawal from Lachin and Kelbacar, territory sandwiched between Armenia and Karabakh.
Yerevan has responded angrily, but did not outright deny discussions about the timeline for a potential pullout. “Some destructive people in Azerbaijan . . . are left with no other options than to offer endless lies, sable-rattling and muscle flexing,” said Armenian foreign ministry spokesperson Tigran Balaian.
The view from Baku is no less merry. Civil society activists and reporters chastise the government for what they describe as attempts to intimidate independent media.
Of all of the accusations that have recently been flying in Baku about the U.S.'s alleged pro-Armenian bias, this is perhaps the silliest:
According to MP Eldar Ibrahimov, the United States is planning to use Armenia for offensive against Iran.
“The United States intends to dislocate its military bases in Armenia”, Public TV channel reports that the due statement was made by chairman of the committee on agrarian policy of Milli Medjlis Eldar Ibrahimov at a meeting with representatives of the Iranian parliament on April 27.
Ibrahimov went on to say that the U.S. approached Azerbaijan for help in launching an attack on Iran, but was rebuffed, and thus turned to Armenia.
It's worth noting that, while his allegations have been widely reported in Azerbaijan, the English-language Iranian media -- which are usually not shy at all about speculating about American aggression against Iran -- seem not to have mentioned this in their reports about the meetings.
An Azerbaijani newspaper has a new take on the cancellation of the U.S.-Azerbaijan military exercises. Most media accounts -- and Azerbaijani analysts -- interpreted the move as Baku's signal to Washington that it was unhappy with the U.S.'s involvement in the Armenia-Turkey reconciliation process. But the Baki Xabar newspaper (via BBC Monitoring) suggests that it is not a cancellation, but merely a postponement, and that it may have had to do with Russian pressure on Azerbaijan:
The daily quoted Milaz news agency's report that talks with the USA on conducting the "Regional Response 2010" exercises are still under way. "Defence Minister Safar Abiyev and US Under Secretary of Defence for Policy Michele Flournoy discussed the matter on 17 April and agreed to continue bilateral cooperation". Milaz quoted an anonymous source in the Azerbaijani Ministry of Defence as saying that the exercises are likely to be held in June or July 2010.
Meanwhile, the Doktrina journalistic centre for military research says that the root of the problem lies in Russia's opposition to signing the second stage of the working plan between Azerbaijan and the USA, Baki Xabar reported. "There is serious pressure from Russia to prevent Azerbaijan from signing the document and this leads to certain problems for Azerbaijan's military cooperation with the USA," Casur Sumarinli, director of the Doktrina centre, said. He added that the second stage of the working plan envisages setting up radar stations along Azerbaijan's border with Russia and Iran. "I believe that the Azerbaijan-USA military exercises envisaged for 2010 will go ahead, but signing the second stage of the working plan remains questionable," Sumarinli told the newspaper.
Azerbaijan has canceled upcoming joint military exercises with the U.S., in apparent protest of the U.S. role in negotiating better relations between Armenia and Turkey. Reuters:
Azerbaijan did not specify who cancelled the exercises planned for May, or why, but the U.S. embassy said it suggested "that the question be posed to the government of Azerbaijan".
An Azeri Defence Ministry spokesman told Reuters: "The exercises are cancelled, but the reason is not known."
APA has a roundup of Azerbaijani political analysts who speculate on the reason, though, and they all agree that it is all about an alleged pro-Armenian bias in Washington.
Last year's exercise took place under NATO auspices with several other countries taking part. In addition to the U.S. Bulgaria, Georgia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Poland, Russia, Romania, Turkey and Ukraine were there. The exercise covered:
...the plans of checkpoint control, road security, preparation of confined documents, supply and materials, coordination, seizure and search of buildings, battle involving rules, preparation of regular and detailed reports.
One wonders: if Baku is cutting off these ties with the U.S. because it's brokering the deal, are they going to do something commensurate with Turkey, which is actually taking part?
Meanwhile, the CSTO anti-terror exercise in Tajikistan is proceeding:
An anti-terror drill for the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s (CSTO) Central Asian group, dubbed Rubezh-2010 (Frontier-2001), has opened in northern Tajikistan today.
The annual SIPRI report is out, which enumerates every (known) arms sale around the world. In our humble Eurasia region, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan all got some goodies in 2009. Russia and Israel were the top suppliers.
Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan did not receive any arms imports in 2009, the report said.
Azerbaijan got 70 armored personnel carriers (of the BTR-80A variety) from Russia, and arranged with South Africa's Paramount Groups to start producing Matador and Marauder mine-protected vehicles in Azerbaijan. Baku also bought 50 missiles from Israel for use in its Lynx Modular Rocket Launcher systems.
Georgia bought 70 Ejder armored personnel carriers from Turkey and 32 tanks from Ukraine, 20 T-72s and 12 T-84s.
Kazakhstan completed its receipt of 79 armored personnel carriers from Russia, of the same variety (BTR-80A) that Azerbaijan did, as well as three ANSAT light utility helicopters and 12 Mi-8 and Mi-17 attack helicopters, all of which were bought in 2007.
Kazakhstan also last year signed agreements with Russia for 10 S-330 surface-to-air missile air defense systems and Su-27, MiG-27 and MiG-23UB combat planes.
From Israel, Kazakhstan completed its acquisitions of weapons from Israel bought in 2006 and 2007, including 18 Lynx rocket systems, six Semser 122mm self-propelled guns, and 18 CARDOM 120mm mortars for use on armored personnel carriers.
Kazakhstan also acquired 40 uparmored Humvees from the United States.
Turkmenistan bought six Smerch multiple rocket launch systems, two Tarantul fast-attack boats and ten T-90 tanks, all from Russia.
The commander of U.S. European Command and NATO supreme allied commander Admiral James Stavridis testified before Congress on Tuesday, and said the U.S. was amenable to cooperating with Russia on missile defense:
'First, it would create a zone of cooperation with Russia [from a military standpoint]; secondly, it could technically add to the early warning time because of the location of the system; and thirdly, it creates confidence-building measures between ourselves and the Russians,' the admiral said.
News.az quotes an Azerbaijan analyst as saying that represents a "serious change" in the US position:
The head of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, Anatoly Tsyganok, said that the proposal to use the radar could be considered a serious change in Washington's position, 'which first claimed that the Gabala radar station in Azerbaijan does not meet the necessary technical requirements'.
Stavridis didn't specifically address the capability of the Gabala radar in his testimony, and other officials have in the past spoken in similar general, favorable terms about this. So I don't know how serious a change this is. But it bears watching.
The commander of U.S. European Command and NATO supreme allied commander Admiral James Stavridis testified before Congress on Tuesday, and said the U.S. was amenable to cooperating with Russia on missile defense:
'First, it would create a zone of cooperation with Russia [from a military standpoint]; secondly, it could technically add to the early warning time because of the location of the system; and thirdly, it creates confidence-building measures between ourselves and the Russians,' the admiral said.
News.az quotes an Azerbaijan analyst as saying that represents a "serious change" in the US position:
The head of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis, Anatoly Tsyganok, said that the proposal to use the radar could be considered a serious change in Washington's position, 'which first claimed that the Gabala radar station in Azerbaijan does not meet the necessary technical requirements'.
Stavridis didn't specifically address the capability of the Gabala radar in his testimony, and other officials have in the past spoken in similar general, favorable terms about this. So I don't know how serious a change this is. But it bears watching.
Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Eldar Mammadyarov has expressed concern about the opening of a direct land connection between Russia and Armenia via Georgia through the Larsi checkpoint. Azerbaijani’s concern is based on the fact that through this connection Moscow could supply Yerevan with military cargo designed for the 102nd Russian military base located in Gumri, Armenia. If Azerbaijan receives information that Armenia is being supplied with arms through this route Baku will immediately react and ask Tbilisi for explanations.
The Russian media reports that Baku is thinking of taking "adequate measures" against Georgia in response to the Upper Larsi checkpoint opening. Energy and investment projects and the issue of Abkhazia and South Ossetia may be affected by these.
For its part, Georgia says “No weapons or ordinance for Russian troops in Armenia will be allowed access” through the border checkpoint. Though, technically, that doesn't preclude allowing weapons for Armenia, that seems pretty unlikely. It seems to me more likely that this is the best pretext Azerbaijan could come up with to object to the opening of the border, whose closure was causing economic problems for Armenia. But maybe I'm missing something here?
