Reports & Papers
from
BCSIA
Security in the Caucasus
February 8, 2000
A discussion with Mr. Vafa Mirzaga Ogly Quluzada, political analyst and Advisor and State Counselor to the President of the Azerbaijan Republic.
Summary by Robert Krikorian, SDI Student Associate
Vafa Quluzada, former Advisor and State Counselor to the President of Azerbaijan on foreign policy issues and chief Azerbaijani negotiator on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, spoke at the Belfer Center on Tuesday, February 08, 2000. Mr. Quluzada was a Middle Eastern specialist and high-ranking diplomat during the Soviet era and held numerous posts in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In fall 1999, he resigned from his government position and created a think-tank, "Caspian Geopolicy Research Foundation," which he directs. Accompanying Mr. Quluzada was Mr. Eldar Namazov, member of parliament in Azerbaijan, former head of the Azerbaijani president''s press service and currently Deputy Director of the "Caspian Geopolicy Research Foundation."Mr. Quluzada opened his talk with a brief overview of Azerbaijan''s geopolitical and strategic position and the challenges facing his country, listing relations with Russia and the unresolved conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh among the main challenges of Azerbaijani foreign policy. After these brief remarks, the floor was opened to discussion and a lively debate ensued.
Russia''s role in the Caucasus
Mr. Quluzada argued that the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan was primarily a drive by Russia to gain dominance in the region and force Azerbaijan into the Russian sphere of influence. He stated that during the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, first the Soviet Union and then Russia played a double game by supporting both Armenia and Azerbaijan at various times, and not wanting to see the conflict resolved because resolution would mean a diminution of Russian influence in the South Caucasus. Quluzada noted that Russia had delivered over one billion dollars worth of arms to Armenia, which has occupied large swaths of Azerbaijani territory adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh. In his opinion, Russia is misleading the Armenian people, who have suffered because of the conflict and want only to live a normal life in coexistence with their neighbors. But as long as Russia continues to support Armenia, this will not be possible. Furthermore, according to Quluzada, the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan is actually between Russia and Azerbaijan, with Armenia as Russia''s puppet.Chechnya
Quluzada termed the current Chechen war a "genocide." He argued that if Russia''s conflict with Chechnya spreads to destabilize the Caucasus, a new Cold War would begin, because of the strengths of American and Russian interests in the region.
While he maintained that the Chechens had the right to pursue self-determination, Quluzada argued that this right did not apply to the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan was willing to grant Karabakh Armenians the highest degree of autonomy within the Azerbaijani state. In comparison, Russia, as a multiethnic state that is a reduced version of the Soviet Union, has oppressive policies towards non-Russian peoples (for example, the Chechens). Russian influence in the North Caucasus; reconstructing the Soviet Union
Quluzada stressed that there were forces in Russia that were intent on reconstructing the old Soviet Union. For proof of this, he pointed to the agreement with Belarus. In Quluzada''s opinion, the CIS is an unneeded structure, which is likely to collapse and be replaced by ad-hoc summits. He also believed, however, that whenever Russia wanted to, it could force Armenia, as well as Kyrgyzstan, which was politically weak, to join in some closer union with Russia. Moreover, Russia was also pressuring Georgia and Azerbaijan and even threatening Uzbekistan with another "Nagorno-Karabakh" in the Fergana Valley if the latter did not adopt more pro-Russian policies. Despite these pressures, Quluzada thought that no country would willingly give up its sovereignty and its national interests for the sake of its relations with Russia. As for Azerbaijan, Quluzada stated that while his country was interested in maintaining a favorable trade relationship with Russia, nevertheless, "Russia is a dangerous state for us." He noted a discrepancy between symbolic affirmation about good Russian-Azerbaijani relations by both sides, and the reality of the situation.
Azerbaijan relations with Turkey and Iran
In response to a question regarding Turkish policy towards the Caucasus, Quluzada stated that Azerbaijan was a Turkic country and as such had very close relations with Ankara. He noted that throughout history, many members of the Azerbaijani intelligentsia had spent time in Turkey and that today Turkey has entered into numerous bilateral agreements with Azerbaijan. As for Turkey''s relations with Armenia, Quluzada argued that Turkey wanted to have good relations with Yerevan but that the extremists in Armenia, backed by Russia, were unwilling to accept this.
With regard to Iran, Quluzada stated that more than twenty million Azerbaijanis live in Iran and that indeed there were also extremists in Azerbaijan who wanted to unite the Azeri-populated parts of Iran to the Azerbaijan Republic. Iran is displeased with Azerbaijan''s relations with the United States and Israel, he stated. Quluzada noted that President Aliyev is interested in improving Azerbaijan-Iran relations.
In addition, Quluzada mentioned that Azerbaijan would not become an Islamic state. He referred to the country''s history both within a Christian empire and then in the atheist Soviet Union. Quluzada said that Russia''s cautioning about the Islamic fundamentalist threat false warnings intended to win American support.US/NATO role in the region
On the subject of Quluzada''s previous calls for NATO troops to be stationed in Azerbaijan, he declared that as a sovereign and independent state, Azerbaijan was free to engage in relations to enhance its security. This was especially important given the fact that Russia had military bases in Armenia. Establishing a NATO base in Azerbaijan would also be a logical move for the United States and NATO given their interests in Caspian energy resources. Quluzada compared this situation with the presence of American forces in the Persian Gulf. Answering a question about Turkey''s proposal for a new collective security arrangement in the region, Quluzada argued that it was a good idea, as it might restrict Russia''s attempts at destabilization. However, he saw the arrangement as impractical and unlikely to materialize.
Succession
In response to a question on the possibility that President Alyiev of Azerbaijan and President Kocharian of Armenia would meet in the United States to continue negotiations towards a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Quluzada was of the opinion that although such a meeting would be a hopeful sign, he did not think it likely. While suggesting that Aliyev might make a visit to the US to for a check-up at a Cleveland clinic, Quluzada nevertheless stated that questions about President Aliev''s health should be put to rest and that he appears healthy and vigorous, noting that he had a very rigorous schedule in Davos, Switzerland. When asked whether Ilham Aliyev, son of the current president, would succeed his father, Quluzada''s opinion was that Ilham Aliyev was a well-qualified candidate. Should he be able to garner the support of the people, then he would deserve to be elected president. Quluzada dismissed the possibility that a prominent Russian oil executive of Azerbaijani descent could be a credible candidate for the presidency.
Quluzada stressed that Azerbaijan was a democratic republic and not a monarchy, where succession was handed down. He cited Martha Brill Olcott, agreeing with her that the transfer of power signifies an important stage in democratic transitions. If any country experiences a normal transfer of power, then democracy will survive. If not, then it is bound to encounter disaster and destabilization.Energy Crisis
Speaking about the energy shortage faced by Azerbaijan (a country famous for its oil reserves but not having enough fuel oil to supply its power plants), Quluzada decried the situation as a scandal involving serious corruption and the stealing of oil. "We live in a time of corruption," Guluzada lamented, extending this description beyond Azerbaijan to include Armenia, Georgia, and the countries of Central Asia. He commended Aliyev''s sharp response to the crisis, by firing the officials in Azerbaijan''s gas and energy sector who were deemed responsible.