US ANALYST: “IF IT IS POSSIBLE FOR AZERBAIJAN TO REMAIN NEUTRAL BETWEEN THE WEST AND IRAN, IT WOULD NOT BE HURT”
APA
Jan 10 2012
Azerbaijan
“The question of the American invasion to Iran depends on who wins
the next election”.
Washington. Isabel Levine – APA. Xandra Kayden, a popular American
political scientist and a senior fellow at the School of Public Affairs
at the UCLA, also member of the Board of the League of Women Voters
of the US, believes that the West might be able to play a stronger
role in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process.
In an interview with APA’s correspondent she mentioned that the
biggest problem for Azerbaijan is the large and politically active
Armenian population that has lived in the US for generations.
In the meanwhile, the analyst believes that the West’s interest in
the region is to prevent the re-emergence of the Soviet Union and a
return to the Cold War climate.
“Insofar as the small republics seek to retain their independence,
they fit nicely with the West’s fear of the return to the past.
Perhaps the greatest threat is the lack of many strong partnerships,
and inter-action between the independent republics and the West”,
she said.
Speaking about the South Caucasus’s future integration into the
Euro-Atlantic structures, the analyst pointed out that there needs to
be a greater interaction between the people in the South Caucuses and
the West: students studying in the US, tours of region organized for
the leaders of relevant populations, strong business relationships
that involve partnerships for both sides.
“A stronger, wealthier, and better educated South Caucus region
would be an important buffer between the interests of Russia and its
potential allies who would seek to destabilize the Middle East. This
is suggests something of a shadow of the Cold War. Perhaps it will
take another generation to completely put it to rest. Perhaps not”,
she added.
In the meanwhile, Ms. Kayden worries about the negative sources of
potential destabilization in the region including a fundamentalist
rise to power, which doesn’t seem likely at the moment.
“A force for stabilization, on the other hand, would be greater
standing of women in the region in local economies and the general
culture”, she added.
Asked how serious the threat against Iran is at the moment, she said,
the fear of nuclear power in unstable societies keeps many Western
leaders awake at night.
“If there were an atomic attack somewhere, how would anyone really know
who was responsible, and it could be 1914 all over again in a matter
of minutes instead of a matter of months as different countries tried
to strike first before their enemies, etc. Iran – even with regime
change, should that occur – will still be hostile to the West and it
is hard to see how the slow increase of tension between Iran and the
US will subside given the absence of any apparent leader who could
lead the nation on another course”, she said.
However, she believes, the question of the American invasion to Iran
depends on who wins the next election.
“The Republican presidential candidates talk about war and taking a
strong stand, although at this point, talk is cheap and cooler heads
might prevail. If Obama is re-elected, it is highly unlikely that he
would invade Iran. There are many lessons that could be learned from
the recent past: invading tends to make local populations very uneasy,
not to say very angry; what could possibly by the plan to “take-over”
Iran; we don’t have the money or the inclination to increase the
national debt to finance a war, which would, in the end, have to
defeat a whole nation, not just a fragile elite at the top”, she added.
The analyst also reminded that Iran is too well-established as a
nation. It has a fairly strong middle class and, as a rather secular
Shia state – as is Azerbaijan – a generally more open society.
“If it is possible for Azerbaijan to remain neutral [between the West
and Iran], it would not be hurt, but I doubt that would be the case.
Both sides would press for its participation”, she added.
From: A. Papazian