TREND, Azerbaijan
July 14 2006
American co-chair of OSCE Minsk Group to pay visit to Azerbaijan and
Armenia in early August – Azeri FM
Source: Trend
Author: V.Sharifov
14.07.2006
The Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Elmar Mammadyarov doesn’t approve
the self-removal of co-chairs of OSCE Minsk Group from the process
of talks on regulation of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
Mammadyarov pointed out that co-chairs should continue their activity,
Trend reports with reference to ATV. Almost all moments have been
agreed, and several aspects have remained which don’t allow the sides
to reach a common denominator. At the moments, the sides exchange
views on this issue. The minister considers expedient the active
participation of co-chairs in the negotiations process.
According to minister, he has met in Turkey with the American co-chair
of the OSCE Minsk Group Mathew Bryza who is expected to pay a visit
to Azerbaijan and Armenia in early August and bring new ideas on
settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, because new co-chairs usually
proposes new ideas.

Defamation Cases May Harm Turkey EU Bid
By Amberin Zaman, Special to The Times
July 14, 2006
Los Angeles Times
July 14 2006
ANKARA, Turkey – Six months after internationally acclaimed author
Orhan Pamuk was cleared on charges of insulting the Turkish identity,
another best-selling novelist is facing similar charges.
Elif Shafak could serve up to three years in jail if convicted over
remarks made by a fictional character in her latest book, “The Bastard
of Istanbul.” The novel touches on one of the most sensitive subjects
in Turkey, the Armenian genocide.
Shafak’s case is likely to further tarnish the image of Turkey, which
is engaged in membership talks with the 25-member European Union. EU
politicians and diplomats are expressing concern over the number of
cases brought against Turkish writers and journalists under Article
301 of the penal code, which outlines penalties for defaming the
Turkish Republic or “Turkishness.”
Olli Rehn, the European official supervising membership talks, said
Wednesday that Turkish courts were failing to comply with EU standards.
Rehn’s statement came after a court Tuesday confirmed the conviction of
Hrant Dink, an ethnic Armenian journalist, who was given a six-month
jail sentence for writing an article in which he exhorted Armenians
to overcome their hatred of Turks. The article was construed as an
insult to Turks.
The court postponed Dink’s sentence and asked a local court to review
the case. Rehn said the ruling served as an example that could be
followed in similar cases.
According to the Turkish Publishers’ Assn., 47 writers are being
prosecuted on charges that include insulting Kemal Ataturk, the
founder of modern Turkey, and “inciting racial hatred.”
The cases fly in the face of broad reforms introduced in 2002 that
helped persuade the EU to open long-delayed membership talks with
Turkey. The EU repeatedly has warned that it could suspend the talks
if Turkey continues to breach accession requirements.
Shafak’s book is the story of an Armenian family in San Francisco and
a Turkish family in Istanbul whose lives intersect over nine decades.
Its references to the slaughter of some 1.5 million Armenians by
the Ottoman Turks during and after World War I are by Shafak’s own
admission “difficult to digest” because the overwhelming majority of
Turks deny that the genocide took place.
However, the book has topped best-seller lists, selling more than
50,000 copies since its publication in March. “The feedback I received
has been very, very positive,” Shafak, 35, said in a recent interview.
Ragip Zarakolu, president of the publishers’ association, said such
works are gaining a wider audience because more Turks are seeking to
explore their country’s past.
But the books also face a nationalist backlash.
Zarakolu is facing three court cases over books he has published. Two
of them deal with the Armenian genocide.
Kemal Kerincsiz, a right-wing lawyer, filed charges against Shafak
last month. In one of the passages, presented by Kerincsiz as evidence
against the author, an Armenian character says, “I am the grandchild
of genocide survivors who lost all their relatives in the hands of
Turkish butchers in 1915.”
Shafak argued that comments made by fictional characters could not be
used to press charges, and the case was throw out. An appeals court,
however, overruled that decision last week.
Kerincsiz and his ultra-nationalist lawyers group known as the Turkish
Jurists’ Union also filed the complaint against Pamuk for asserting
in an interview with a Swiss newspaper that “1 million Armenians
and 30,000 Kurds died in these lands, but no one but I dares talk
about it.”
Shafak says she believes the wave of prosecutions is part of a broader
campaign by those who oppose EU membership.
“In my country there is a clash of opinions between those who want
Turkey to join the EU and to become a more open society and those
who want to keep Turkey as an insular, xenophobic, nationalist and
closed society,” she said.
Support for EU membership among Turks plunged over the last year to 43%
from 74%, according to one survey. And a 13-nation Pew Global Attitudes
report that was released in June said only 16% of Turks surveyed had
a favorable opinion of Christians and 15% had a favorable opinion
of Jews.

BTC Briefing, Like Pipeline, Skirts Troublespots, Azeri Revelations
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N
Inner City Press, NY
July 13 2006
UNITED NATIONS, July 13 — An oil pipelines gambit came to interim
fruition on Thursday. The Baku – Tblisi – Ceyhan curving route,
avoiding Armenia, breakaway parts of Georgia and most Kurdish parts
of Turkey, is a testament to its precarious position. At a briefing
at the UN, Inner City Press asked the outgoing Ambassador of Georgia
Revaz Adamia to explain BP’s funding of a 700 person defense force
for the pipeline. “They are not soldier,” Amb. Adamia answered.
“They are high tech people.”
Inner City Press asked the Ambassador of Azerbaijan Yashar Aliyev about
the avoidance of Armenia. We cannot deal with them until they stop
occupying our territory, he said. “You mean Nagorno – Karabakh?” Not
only that, Amb. Aliyev answered. That’s only four percent. Few people
know this, but Armenia has occupied twenty percent of our territory.
But we digress. The pipeline is more than a tube for oil, the
Ambassadors read from their scripts. A four-minute movie was
shown. Later the full 20-minute film was screened, as waiters served
lamp chops and salmon on a skewer. “Bill Clinton was there at the
birth,” a Georgian representative said. “He offered American guarantees
so the work would get done. It avoids this” — he pointed on a map at
Russia — “and here,” pointing to Iran and the Middle East. “If only
Turkmenistan agrees to provide its gas,” he said wistfully. He added
his view that Armenia gets away with incursions in Azerbaijan due to
U.S. support. It’s an issue rarely touched on at the United Nations.
Georgia
Inner City Press asked outgoing Georgian Ambassador Ademia where
he’s going. “Back to science and business,” he answered. “Oil,”
guess-whispered one wag — not this one — in the crowd.
Full disclosure: this reporter consumed, on the pipeline proponents’
tab, several skewers of meat and a glass of Borjomi mineral water,
named for a national park in Georgia which environmentalists say is
put at risk by the BTC pipeline.
At the UN, A Day of Resolutions on Gaza, North Korea and Iran,
Georgia as Side Dish
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED NATIONS, July 12 — Just as there are big countries and little
countries, at the UN there are big issues and then other issues,
sometimes called non-issues. On Wednesday at the UN, there were
serial stakeouts by the Ambassadors of France and the United States,
off the cuff comments by the Ambassadors of Russia, China and the UK,
and side speeches by the Palestinian Permanent Observer and the UN’s
head of peacekeeping Jean-Marie Guehenno.
Taking questions from a half-dozen journalists at the noon briefing
— where Inner City Press asked about a UNHCR conflict-of-interest
investment with Ivan Pictet, who’s on the UN Investment Committee,
click here for that article — was the Special Representative of the
Secretary General for Georgia, Heidi Tagliavini, soon to leave her
post and return to Switzerland. Still she was diplomatic, preferring
not to comment on yesterday’s outbursts from Georgia’s parliamentary
speaker and the Russian ambassador, rather referring obliquely to
“mis-information” being a problem in Abkhazia.
Inner City Press asked if she views as mis-information the allegations
of money laundering, including for terrorism, in Abkhazia.
“Thank God my mandate doesn’t include bank regulation,” she
replied. She went on to describe Abkhazia as a “dark area” where
certainly money laundering could happen. In response to Inner City
Press’ second question, about South Ossetia, she described the
Abkhazians as more professional, and having a longer independent
history, than is the case in South Ossetia. Asked if Georgia should
be allowed to speak before the Security Council when it is on the
agenda, she respond that she personally thinks that’s right, but it is
of course up to the Security Council. In the hall outside Room 226,
the Georgia ambassador noted that Russia should not be able to block
Georgia’s attendance and speaking, since these are procedural and
not substantive matters. That and a token, a New York wag replied.
At another stakeout, Inner City Press asked the UN’s head of
peacekeeping Jean-Marie Guehenno for more information on the release of
the final five of the peacekeeper in Ituri in the Democratic Republic
of the Congo. Mr. Guehenno replied that the problem in Ituri is “young
men with guns,” and that even those are disarmed can’t find a job. He
said, in a sanitized on-camera version, that those negotiated with,
Peter Karim, changed from day to day.
Inner City Press asked if in his briefing to the Council about the
African Union summit in Banjul, the issue of the Secretary-General’s
new deference to a “Mugabe-selected mediator” came up. Mr. Guehenno
replied both that it had not come up, and that he was not sure if
the mediator was Mugabe-selected. Inner City Press asked, “what
is the mediator’s mandate? Between whom is he mediating — Mugabe
and the Blair government in the UK, or Mugabe and the opposition
in Zimbabwe?” Mr. Guehenno said he is not the one to ask, that the
question should be directed to and answered by Department of Political
Affairs. Okay then.
The main action was dueling resolutions: the Qatari resolution on Gaza,
not expanded to cover Lebanon, texts and more texts on North Korea, and
forthcoming text on Iran. In the midst of these, all covered elsewhere,
French ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere let drop that he met with
the Thai candidate for Secretary-General. Inner City Press pursued
at the stakeout the fate of the Gaza electrical power plant, which
UN humanitarian chief Jan Egeland said Tuesday should be repaired
by Israel. Inner City Press asked U.S. Ambassador John Bolton if he
had any comment on this. He replied, “I don’t have any comment.” Dan
Gillerman, the Ambassador of Israel, said that his country has “no
intention to punish” civilians, but that he has “no information on
the plant.” Inner City Press asked to be updated, and asked OCHA to
amplify Jan Egeland’s reference to an “American insurance company”
now possibly barred from paying out on the policy due to sanctions
against Hamas. Who paid the premiums?
Especially, after the insurance company became arguably barred from
paying on the policy? Developing….
Feedback: editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A, UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 718-716-3540
UN’s Corporate Partnerships Will Be Reviewed, While New Teaming Up
with Microsoft, and UNDP Continues
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee at the U.N.
UNITED NATIONS, July 13 — The UN under Kofi Annan has increasingly
worked with corporations. Questions have been raised about background
checks and safeguards. A day after Inner City Press reported that the
UN’s Geneva-based refugee agency had not known that Swiss banker Ivan
Pictet is on the UN Investment Committee when the UNHCR Kashmir Relief
Note placed money with the Pictet Funds India Equity fund, the agency’s
spokesman mused, “Isn’t the UN Investment Fund based in New York?”
Inner City Press asked if it would have been helpful to UNHCR if
the UN system had a database of the companies controlled by the
outside business people who serve on bodies like the UN Investment
Committee. A Google search for that committee and Pictet found close
to nothing. It appears that there is no easy way to find who is on
the UN Investment Committee.
UNHCR’s Ron Redmond answered that that it would “have been helpful
to have that type of information… For UNHCR to look it up is labor
intensive, with all the possible company names.” He later added
in writing, “Any additional information on prospective corporate
partners is of course always welcome; it would facilitate our
screening processes.” Mr. Redmond states that UNHCR was never
required to ask SocGen to cease using the UNHCR visibility logo,
in part because the brochure that it was on was only intended to be
used for a brief period. But records show that individuals high in UN
Headquarters chided UNHCR for the use of such terms as UNHCR “teams
up” with SocGen. Despite this in-house chiding, or perhaps because
the chiders refuse in their defensiveness to comment for the record,
this practice continues in the UN system to this day, literally.
Click here to view the UN’s World Tourism Organization’s July 12,
2006 press release, “UN tourism agency teams up with Microsoft,” which
was published on the UN News Center just as UNHCR SocGen-derilab’s
April 5, 2006 press release was. They just keep teaming up.
As the UN increasingly has intercourse with corporations, basic
safeguards are still not in place. Inner City Press has previously
reported on the lack of background checks when corporations are
allowed to join the UN Global Compact, and has twice been rebuffed
in requests to interview or ask questions of corporate CEOs who have
come to meet the Secretary General or on other Global Compact business.
At Thursday’s noon briefing, spokeswoman Marie Okabe was asked if any
of the individuals in the Secretariat who were asked to comment on
the UNHCR – Pictet – Societe Generale transaction had in fact spoken
or provided guidance. We’re still working on it, Ms.
Okabe answered.
Near six p.m., Ms. Okabe called Inner City Press and said she
had spoken about the matter, as requested, with Under Secretary
General Mark Malloch Brown. “They are aware of the issues,” Ms. Okabe
said. “This case highlights the complexities of the UN’s partnerships
with the private sector and so current guidelines and practices of
various funds and agencies and programs will be reviewed” to try to
avoid “potential conflicts of interest” and misuses of UN logos.
Great. But what about the continued “teaming up,” now with
Microsoft? There’s more work to be done.
[A note on UNHCR’s work about Uzbekistan: the agency managed to
visit in Kazakhstan with Gabdurafikh Temirbaev, the Uzbek dissident
threatened with refoulement back to Tashkent, and has, its spokesman
said, gotten a commitment to be able to review Uzbekistan’s extradition
request.]
Alongside UNHCR’s work, unlike at the UN Development Programme,
at least UNHCR answered the questions and acknowledged that things
could be better. On UNDP and human rights, on UNDP and refusal to
answer press questions, what will happen?
Zimbabweans
On the issues surrounding UNDP, the Office of the Spokesman for the
Secretary-General managed to get some response from UNDP to a question
Inner City Press asked UNDP in writing more than a week ago: why does
UNDP help the government of Uzbekistan to collect taxes, given the
UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ finding that
this government shot and killed its own people in Andijan in May
2005. Here now is UNDP’s response:
“As far as your UNDP/Uzbekistan questions from the other week,
here’s what I can tell you… in Uzbekistan and most of the 140
developing nations where UNDP operates, UNDP works with government
and civil society on a broad range of governance projects, including
economic reforms, of which tax administration and fiscal policy are a
significant component. Other governance projects in Uzbekistan focus on
gender equality, internet access, and public administration reform. It
may be worth noting that UNDP works in a wide range of political
environments, from Costa Rica to North Korea, with the belief that
UNDP’s mandate as a development agency is to work constructively on
behalf of the people of the developing world wherever and whenever
possible.”
One wag wondered if UNDP’s programs in Uzbekistan might involve
technical assistance on not putting political dissidents in boiling
water, as the U.K.’s former ambassador in Tashkent has testified takes
place. And see above, that UNHCR has managed to visit in Kazakhstan
with Gabdurafikh Temirbaev, the Uzbek dissident threatened with
refoulement back to Uzbekistan, where he would face torture —
perhaps with tax funds UNDP helped to collect. UNDP has still not
even purported to answer the week-old question about UNDP’s funding
of Robert Mugabe’s purported “Human Rights Council.” Now the Zimbabwe
Lawyers for Human Rights has called for a boycott. What was that again,
about UNDP working with civil society? To be continued.
Feedback: editorial [at] innercitypress.com
UN Office: S-453A, UN, NY 10017 USA Tel: 718-716-3540
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

Garabagh mediators ‘should not stay out’ of talks – Azeri minister
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 14 2006
Baku, July 13, AssA-Irada — Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar
Mammadyarov has said there is a need for further efforts of the OSCE
Minsk Group co-chairmen mediating settlement to the Armenia-Azerbaijan
Upper (Nagorno) Garabagh dispute and the intermediaries should not
estrange themselves from the peace process.
“The co-chairs should not stay aside from talks and just wait for
the proposals of the conflicting sides,” Mammadyarov said.
He said nearly all principles have been agreed in the negotiations
and differences remain only on one or two issues. “Discussions in
this respect are currently underway,” the minister said.
Commenting on the latest statements by the mediators, he said they
should be seen as the co-chairs’ reporting to the OSCE Permanent
Council on the work done so far.
The US co-chair of the Minsk Group Matthew Bryza said earlier that
the mediators submitted a framework accord to the sides and outlined
its key principles.*

US Garabagh mediator urges Azeri, Armenian ‘independent decisions’
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 14 2006
Baku, July 13, AssA-Irada — The US co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group
brokering settlement to the Armenia-Azerbaijan Upper (Nagorno)
Garabagh dispute has called on the two countries’ presidents to
“prepare their people for compromises”.
“If I were them, I would prepare the public for compromises to settle
the conflict. First of all, military action is out of the question.
Secondly, no one [neither side] can gain everything,” Matthew Bryza
told a local TV channel.
Bryza reiterated that he believes the sides should make independent
decisions, saying that preparing the parties for concessions is
outside the co-chairmen’s authority.
With regard to possible concessions of the Azerbaijani side, he said
the country’s territorial integrity should not be violated under
any circumstances.
“We [the co-chairs] assumed the responsibility for peace talks and
have now reached a stage that enables the presidents and the community
to make decisions.
Bryza stated that the mediators excelled in mediating the peace process
and developed a suitable “framework agreement”, and it is now up to
the presidents to make suggestions on how to improve the document.
Bryza reiterated that he binds great hope for reaching a solution to
the Garabagh conflict in 2006.
The American intermediary is expected to visit the region in August.
He is due to hold talks in Baku and then in Yerevan.*

NATO PA to submit proposals on Garabagh in October
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 14 2006
Baku, July 13, AssA-Irada — The NATO Parliamentary Assembly President
Pierre Lelouche has prepared new proposals concerning settlement to the
Armenia-Azerbaijan Upper (Nagorno) Garabagh conflict. The suggestions
will be forwarded to the two countries’ presidents during his visit
to the region in October, Russian Interfax news agency reported.
The gist of the proposals is not disclosed, but the NATO official is
expected to submit a resolution plan consisting of several provisions
to the conflicting sides, which envisions avoiding numerous obstacles
in the way of peace and acquiring economic dividends instead of
making compromises.*

Aliyev: Time running out for Armenia to pull out
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 13 2006
Baku, July 12, AssA-Irada — Azerbaijan President Ilham Aliyev visiting
Turkey on Wednesday sent a strongly-worded message to Armenia.
“We gave Armenians time to withdraw from the occupied Azerbaijani
territories on their own free will. Otherwise, we will resort to
other means,” he said addressing the opening of the monument and an
avenue named after the nationwide leader, former president Heydar
Aliyev in Istanbul.
Turks gathering in front of the monument chanted slogans saying
“Garabagh belongs and will always belong to Turks”.*

German expert sees talks as only option for Garabagh
Assa-Irada, Azerbaijan
July 13 2006
Baku, July 12, AssA-Irada — A German expert says Azerbaijan and
Armenia should refrain from military action to settle the Upper
(Nagorno) Garabagh conflict and the only solution is peace talks.
The resumption of hostilities would prove disastrous for both
countries and seriously complicate their admission to the EU and
European integration in general, the former German official, Rolf
Shteltemayer, said.
Shteltemayer said that unfortunately, both countries lack political
will to attain resolution to the long-standing dispute.
“The sides should realize that a full solution to the conflict should
not be expected,” he said.
The analyst called on Azerbaijan and Armenia to accept a stage-by-stage
settlement, saying the two countries had failed to make a final
decision on the issue.
With regard to the status of Upper Garabagh, Shteltemayer said if
the issue cannot be resolved at this stage, it should be put off
until later.
The expert said the importance of resolving the conflict is related
to the tremendous importance the South Caucasus region represents
for Europe.
“There is not only oil involved and the issue has to do with other
economic reasons as well. The region can now be seen as a gateway
to Europe. It could turn into an area of struggle of the world’s
superpowers. Iran is very close to the region and Europe does not
want a new source of threat – the Garabagh conflict – to emerge here.”*

Only receiving half of the story
Belleville Intelligencer (Ontario)
July 15, 2006 Saturday
Scott Taylor is the editor of Esprit de Corps magazine, the author
of several books, and a member of the Osprey Writers Group.
In May of this year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper made a public
statement reaffirming his support for the controversial Bill M-380.
Essentially, this motion brought forward by Bloc MP Madeleine
Dalphond-Guiral was a formal condemnation of the mass deportation of
Armenians from eastern Anatolia in 1915. According to M-380, this
tragedy was recognized as a deliberate genocide on the part of the
Ottoman Empire.
On April 21, 2004, the motion was approved after a free vote in
the House of Commons. However, as the procedure was non-binding,
the then-Liberal cabinet voted against it because it would be an
impediment to current Turkish-Canadian relations. Two years later,
Harper’s revival of the subject did indeed spark an immediate response
from the Turks, who temporarily recalled their ambassador in protest.
While some may question why Canadian parliamentarians would spend their
time passing historical judgment on events that transpired 90 years
ago, it is even more puzzling when you realize that a humanitarian
crisis is currently taking place in this very region that is receiving
no consideration from our government.
The ongoing situation comes in the aftermath of the Azerbaijan-
Armenia border war of 1992-1994. With the international media focused
on the break-up of the former Yugoslavia and the genocide in Rwanda,
this border dispute in the Caucasus region garnered very little press
coverage in North America. It was a brutal clash that spanned 24
months and left 30,000 killed (mostly civilians), 100, 000 wounded
and nearly one million people “ethnically cleansed.”
Armenia and Azerbaijan were both former republics of the Soviet
Union and formally granted (along with Georgia) their independence
with the signing of the Tashkent Agreement in May 1992. Under
the terms of the agreement, all three republics were allocated
the same amount of Soviet military material from which they could
constitute their own independent armies. A sizable Armenian minority
resided in a mountainous region known as Nagorno-Karabakh within the
recognized borders of Azerbaijan. Taking advantage of Azerbaijan’s
post-independence internal political disorder and using the Nagorno-
Karabakh Armenians as a pretext, the Armenian army entered the
territory in 1992.
After completely securing the Nagorno-Karabakh region, the Armenians
continued to push into the territory controlled by Azerbaijan –
securing not only a land corridor with Armenia proper, but also
extending into seven Azerbaijani provinces to create a buffer zone.
In the wake of these military operations some 800,000 Azeri citizens
were forcibly removed from the newly-occupied territories.
However, within 12 months the Azeris had managed to train and field
six full infantry brigades and their deployment to the front contained
the Armenian advances. The establishment of a balance between the
combat forces turned the campaign into a stalemate and eventually a
ceasefire agreement was signed in 1994.
Despite this, the root causes for the conflict still remained
unresolved. The Organization of Security and Co-operation in Europe
established the Minsk Group to oversee and monitor the 1994 ceasefire
agreement. The United Nations has passed a total of four resolutions
calling upon the Armenians to withdraw their military forces from the
occupied territories as a first step to resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh
self-determination question. The second phase of these resolutions
is the immediate resettlement of the 800,000 Azerbaijani displaced
residents into their former homes. However, with no realistic threat
of any international military force being deployed to enforce these
resolutions, the Armenians have steadfastly refused to pull back
their forces.
If Canada wishes to retain a reputation of neutral peace-broker,
it seems ludicrous that we would recognize an historical injustice
perpetuated against the Armenians in 1915 while ignoring the UN
violations that the Armenians are perpetrating upon the Azerbaijanis.
A first step might be for Ottawa to establish a diplomatic presence
in Azerbaijan. We presently have a permanent consulate office open
in the Armenian capital of Yerevan, but Canada has only sent two
small official delegations to visit Azerbaijan since its independence
in 1991.
Perhaps the fact that we are only getting one side of the story in
this complex conflict is leading to an apparent imbalance in our
foreign policy.
To comment please send e-mail to [email protected]

Ottawa Citizen, Canada
July 15, 2006 Saturday
Final Edition
A new Silk Road, or just a pipe dream?
Many believe the $4-billion BTC oil pipeline, meandering from
Azerbaijan to Turkey, may be the area’s salvation. Others, though,
suggest it is just another door leading to violence.
by Charles Enman, The Ottawa Citizen
It seemed like such a madcap scheme, the fodder for foolish spy movies
— building a 1,770-kilometre oil pipeline through land threatened
by earthquakes, political instability, geopolitical rivalries, and
even war. So, of the BTC pipeline that runs from Azerbaijan on the
Caspian Sea all the way to a Mediterranean seaport in Turkey, we may
say two things.
First, it did become fodder for a spy flick, the 1999 James Bond film,
The World Is Not Enough.
And second, it stepped magisterially from celluloid fantasy into
reality. After a three-year, $4-billion construction effort, the BTC
pipeline was opened officially only last Thursday.
Only the Druzhba pipeline from Russia to Europe is longer.
The pipeline takes its name from its route, beginning near Baku, the
capital of Azerbaijan, and running east and a bit north to Tbilisi,
the capital of Georgia, and finally meandering down to Ceyhan, on
Turkey’s Mediterranean coast.
It is an understatement to call this route something less than direct.
The shortest route to a seaport would be through Iran, but that
country, considered unreliable in many Western forums, was never
seriously considered.
To go directly west would take the pipeline through Armenia, which is
still technically at war with Azerbaijan on account of its occupation,
since the early 1990s, of Nagorno-Karabakh and several adjoining
regions of Azerbaijan. No go, in other words.
One could have chosen a northern route up to the Druzhba pipeline,
but that would leave transport of Caspian oil to Europe partly up to
the whims of Moscow, a possibility craved by none of the project’s
partners.
One of the driving forces behind the pipeline’s construction was the
late Haydar Aliyev, who led Azerbaijan from 1993 to 2003. He came into
office when Azerbaijan was still suffering the political and economic
tumult that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union late in 1991.
Azerbaijan has huge offshore oil reserves in the Caspian Sea, and Mr.
Aliyev was canny at luring international oil companies in to exploit
them.
In the BTC project, British Petroleum became the lead partner, with
30.1 per cent of the shares, followed by Azerbaijan’s oil group Socar,
which holds 25 per cent. Other partners include American company
Unocal (8.9 per cent), Norway’s Statoil (8.71 per cent), Turkey’s TPAO
(6.53 per cent), and other companies from Italy, France and Japan.
There were many hesitations before proceeding. Four billion dollars
is no small sum, after all. For years, many referred to the project as
“the pipeline to nowhere.”
But oil prices in the neighbourhood of $70 per barrel have wonderful
levitating effects on the spirit, and one can be sure there were
smiles all around as Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, Georgian
President Mikhail Saakashvili, Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and
Prime Minister Recep Erdogan, and officials from 30 other countries,
inaugurated the pipeline in Ceyhan on Thursday.
Mr. Erdogan pronounced the pipeline “the Silk Road of the 21st
century.”
The pipeline has the capacity to deliver 50-million tonnes of crude oil
annually. That figure won’t be reached initially, but with Kazhakstan,
just east across the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan, having recently
agreed to use the pipeline for some of its own exports, early fears
that the pipeline would be underused are losing traction.
A Wall Street Journal article by Thomas Goltz on Thursday even
mentioned rumours that both Russia and Iran are considering the
possibility of transporting some of their oil on the new pipeline.
For the world oil market, 50-million tonnes of oil represents only
one per cent of global consumption. Still, in the Caucasus, that
figure represents big apples.
Over the next two decades, Azerbaijan alone expects to realize
$150 billion of revenue from its oil shipments. For a country of
eight-million people with per-capita GDP of $4,800 U.S., that is
a huge inflow. The government is setting up an oil fund, much like
Alberta’s Heritage Fund, to ensure that much of the revenue is saved
for future use.
Azerbaijan may have a more immediate use for the money. It remains
officially at war with Armenia over the latter country’s 13-year
occupation of 15 per cent of Azerbaijan’s land. Some 800,000 refugees
still live in mostly wretched circumstances.
In a recent interview, Maj.-Gen Ramiz Najafov spoke of the ongoing
buildup of the Azerbaijani armed forces. Next year, he said, the
country’s military budget alone will be larger than the total budget
of the Armenian government, which controls a population less than 40
per cent as large as Azerbaijan’s.
“We have shown patience in our resolve for a resolution, but our
patience is not endless,” Maj.-Gen. Najafov said.
The Azerbaijanis are encouraged in their resolve by the fact
that not one country has recognized a sovereign government in
Nagorno-Karabakh. But the world’s supportive platitudes do nothing
to change the facts on the ground.
In war, the advantage goes to the defender, and Armenia has had
13 years to entrench itself, allegedly with Russian military help,
on the land it conquered 13 years ago.
Azerbaijani oil revenues, in other words, may buy a fight, but not
a cakewalk.
Some have worried that the pipeline is vulnerable to sabotage. It runs
close to areas of secession in Russia and Turkey, and passes through
southern Georgia, which has many ethnic-Armenian residents, some of
whom fought for the independence of Nagorno-Karkabakh 13 years ago.
Against this dire possibility is the fact that the pipeline has been
buried along virtually all of its route, making things difficult
for saboteurs.
So, is the pipeline a “new Silk Road,” or a doorway to new violence?
That, like so much else, depends on human choice.
What we know today is that Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey, with a
great deal of western corporate help, and money from the World Bank
and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, have pulled
off one of the great construction projects since the beginning of
this millennium.