Turan news agency, Azerbaijan
April 5 2012
US analyst dismisses reports of Azerbaijan granting Israel access to airfields
Baku, 5 April: (TURAN’s Washington DC correspondent’s interview with
John Sitilides, a government relations specialist and advisor to the
State Department)
[Correspondent] A recent “Foreign Policy” article which indicates that
Azerbaijan granted Israel access to its airfields in a country
bordering Iran brought to speculations among the military and
political analysts both in the US and the region. If these news
reports are correct, then what does this mean for Azerbaijan and
Israel?
[Sitilides] On any given day, anyone can find thousands, perhaps tens
of thousands, of former military or intelligence officers. If someone
selectively chooses a small number to offer a particular perspective,
then it may sound very exciting in the context of one of the most
serious foreign policy issues that anyone will have to deal with on
the international level – the sustained aggression of Iran and its
ambition to possess nuclear weapons.
Much of what is alleged is non-credible. Azerbaijan’s primary
interests are to strengthen and develop its national economy, to
consolidate its oil and gas links to major markets around the world,
and to defend its national interests in the region and on a global
scale. We have an article that essentially lays out an argument that
Azerbaijan is willing to risk all of its strategic interests to bring
about what would surely mean serious Iranian retaliation against
Azerbaijan, against its oil and gas fields, against its military
facilities and against its economic development plans, all to serve as
a so-called “air base” for a third country.
If one ascribes rational behaviour to the Azerbaijani government, we
need to only look at the map to see that for fighter jets to reach
Azerbaijan for a military assault on Iran, they need to traverse the
airspaces of Turkey, Syria and Iraq without being shot down. The
government of Turkey is broadly hostile towards Israel in the last two
and a half years. The government of Syria has been at war with Israel
since it’s founding in 1948, and Iraq has made clear that it will not
permit airspace access for air attacks on Iran.
Again, this is a non-credible scenario played out by a handful of
former military officers and intelligence officers without
consideration for the risks Baku is willing to take on behalf of a
third country, the geostrategic challenges of a joint assault on Iran,
or the costs Azerbaijan would suffer as an essential partner in a
military attack on Iran.
[Correspondent] The US Administration didn’t comment on the FP report
in public. On the other hand, Israeli media, as well as some
Washington DC analysts are claiming the Administration itself is
leaking this classified information to dissuade Israel. How does the
fact of this leak influence US-Israel, Israel-Azerbaijan and
Azeri-Israel cooperation?
[Sitilides] There is no evidence of an administration design here.
What we have is an author who has found a select group of people who
support a particular theory. The article itself has actually very
little of what is called a rational argument, without any evidence of
an “official U.S. government position” behind these theories. Israel
and Azerbaijan are certainly forging closer relations, and it’s a very
positive development for both countries. But a scenario in which
Israel might find it necessary to stop Iran’s nuclear programme
militarily, it’s not credible to that Azerbaijan would offer air bases
to be used in a way that would invite serious and painful Iranian
retaliation.
Few if any Azeri leaders would be willing to accept that risk,
especially with any assurance from any ally to protect Azerbaijan from
Iranian bombardment or short-range missiles attacks. In the aftermath
of a possible Israeli offensive against Iranian nuclear facilities,
one could conceive of later-stage Azerbaijani air base operations
involving helicopter landings for search and rescue or reconnaissance
missions.
Azerbaijan is well-positioned to assist the US and Israel in
intelligence gathering and reconnaissance missions in Iran. Azerbaijan
is also an important military partner and hardware customer to Israel,
which has historically sought security partners in its periphery
regions. Azerbaijan also benefit from selling oil to Israel. So the
relationship is a strong and important one for both countries. The
roots of these scenarios aren’t found in Israel’s plans or
Azerbaijan’s plans, but in the nature of the Iranian regime. As long
as the regime’s behaviour doesn’t change in Teheran, Iran will
continue to be the single most dangerous agent of instability and
tension in that region, as well as other areas in the Middle East,
Persian Gulf, Caucasus and Southwest Asian regions. If the regime’s
behaviour does not change, the only realistic long-term option is
regime change in Tehran. All these other scenarios about everyone’s
plans and ambitions but Iran’s serve as distractions, intentionally or
unwittingly, from the true nature of the Iranian regime. Articles such
as this strengthen the position of the Iranian government by
fabricating scenarios and effectively dividing Iran’s adversaries.
[Correspondent] Iran is very close toArmenia. Azerbaijan in its part,
– it turns out that – gets extreme amounts of weapons from Israel. If
the tension grows in the region, how would you describe its influence
on NagornyyKarabakh?
[Sitilides] Ideally,Armeniaand Azerbaijan would find a way to
peacefully resolve the conflict. This isn’t a war that any responsible
party would like to see taking place. Unfortunately,Armeniahas
developed very close diplomatic ties with Russia, and there is a
pronounced Russian military presence inArmenia. Azerbaijan maintains
strong ties to Turkey, and enjoys a long-standing relationship with
the US and now Israel. Azerbaijan has also become a strong trading
partner with Germany and with Greece, through which Azeri natural gas
will delivered to Italy and onto European markets. Two competing blocs
seem to have been established in the Caucasus withArmeniaseemingly
in the Russian-Iranian camp and Azerbaijan, with all of its
undemocratic practices – and that remains a major problem for US-Azeri
relations – aligning it with essentially Western powers.
The main objective here should be to prevent war between Azerbaijan
andArmeniathat could be devastating for all sides in the Caspian
basin, for the societies of the two countries, and for larger hopes
and prospects for region-wide security and economic development.
[Correspondent] Interesting, whether Azerbaijan-Israel arm cooperation
as well as recent developments on Iran fit Turkey’s regional interest,
which has a very close relationship with Baku and is “at daggers
drawn” with Israel?
[Sitilides] Even as Iran continues to attack the Baku government’s
authority in Azerbaijan through its terrorist activities, espionage,
and a broader range of activities of great concern, geography has
condemned Azerbaijan to no choice but to exist as a neighbour to Iran.
Baku needs to tread carefully and in a non-provocative manner until
such time as behaviour change – or ultimately, regime change – occurs
in Teheran. Other neighbours such as Turkey, which interesting among
NATO members enjoys the warmest relations with Iran, can be supportive
of Azerbaijan’s regional balancing efforts against the backdrop of its
precarious geopolitical situation.
[Signed] Alakbar Raufoglu, Washington, DC, 04/04/2012