Interview with Adil Baguirov, Ph.D., Managing Director and co-founder US Azeris Network (USAN).
Q: What are your overall impressions of the US voyage of the leader of Karabakh separatists Bako Saakyan to the United States which the Armenian mass media believe to be extremely successful?
A: The U.S. Azeris Network (USAN) protested this visit on many levels, including by making inquiries with the U.S. government and writing protest letters to the World Affairs Council – Orange County (WAC-OC). It was partly successful – the U.S. government took note of the information we supplied and opened a case. Of course, these things take time – that’s all we can say at this time. Likewise, WAC-OC’s top leadership sent us this response: “Thank you for bringing the concerns of your board of directors to our attention. We have revised the flyer to ensure that our descriptions are impartial and factual.” Although we were still not satisfied, nevertheless our efforts, along with efforts of many others, did bear fruit. And of course, the local Azerbaijani and Turkish communities of Los Angeles held a significant protest in front of WAC-OC which was noted by the Armenian side, and forced Mr. Sahakyan to arrive and leave via the backdoor – which is typical for any criminal who is afraid to look truth in the eyes.
Considering that Mr. Sahakyan was unable to meet with anyone from the U.S. government, was ignored by the American press, did not have any presentations and speeches at leading think tanks, and so on, we can confidently declare the visit as very much falling short of its objectives.
However, if we judge by the money pledged (note, it is only pledged right now, not collected yet), then they did well, since they raised, from Russia, Europe and U.S., over $20 million. How much of that pledged sum would actually be given in the end, remains to be seen. More importantly, it shows that Armenian diplomacy (the whole visit was organized and coordinated by the Consulate General of Armenia, and of course Mr. Sahakyan was travelling on a passport of the Republic of Armenia) is putting major efforts, spending a lot of time and resources, on raising only this much money. Considering that the “budget” of the occupied territories is about $250 million, and another $3 million per year is given by the U.S. Congress for immunization and other humanitarian programs, this is actually not that much when we consider budget of Azerbaijan, or even budgets of any of Azerbaijani regions. And it pales in comparison to what Armenian donors could have given, but do not, due to donor fatigue and anger at the people in power in Armenia.
Q: Has this visit been highlighted in the US press together with the meetings?
A: Absolutely not, and it has never been covered by American press before. Armenia is not an important country, and the Armenian separatists present even less interest to the American public.
Q: Does the support of Armenian lobby of such initiatives on support of the separatist regime of Karabakh meets the official position of Washington?
A: It certainly does not, as the official Washington is on the record speaking against separatism and terrorism in Caucasus, in support of territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and understanding self-determination of people only within the principle of territorial integrity.
Indeed, as I have stated many times before, the United States is the only country in the world where Armenian aggression and crimes against humanity in the occupied Azerbaijani regions, such as Karabakh, received legal appraisal (specifically, in 2004 in a case against Armenian Army Lieutenant Vigen Patatanyan – for more details see USAN’s previous statements). So U.S. has an important legal precedent, where it arrests and deports those who committed crimes against innocent Azerbaijani civilians, and it is something that any country in the world, especially those that are close with Azerbaijan, should learn from.
Hence, in America, of the three branches of government – executive, judicial and legislative, the first two have clearly and unequivocally spoken against occupation of Azerbaijan, in support of its territorial integrity, in opposition to crimes against humanity. Only the third branch – legislative -- that is Congress, is divided, due to the fact that about a dozen of very active and vocal pro-Armenian members, such as Con. Frank Pallone, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Sen. Robert Menendez, etc., skew the picture and create a wrong impression.
We should also consider two other important facts which contribute to creating a wrong impression in Baku – 1) Azerbaijan has been without a U.S. Ambassador – the fault for that rests fully with the Obama Administration, 2) and many different players, including Armenia, want to worsen the U.S.-Azerbaijan relations and carry out significant propaganda and diplomatic efforts to achieve that.
Q: Armenian mass media write that Armenian President Sargsyan might not attend the OSCE summit in Astana. Do you think they mean the pressure of the Armenian lobby differing with its radicalism in the issue of compromises on Karabakh?
A: The boycott of NATO Lisbon summit and now a possible boycott of the OSCE Astana summit - it is hard to understand some of the maneuvers of President Sargsyan and his advisors. I admit that neither my top American international relations university, nor my top Russian political science university, teach such novel strategies and tactics. I guess one has to go to a school in Yerevan, or possibly Khankendi, to fully appreciate this incredible strategy.
However, I do not think it is the Armenian diaspora that does not want President Sargsyan to go to these summits. Armenian position boils down to this: “we occupied these territories (which we either call by its ancient Caucasian Albanian name “Artsakh” or by its Russian-Azerbaijani name “Nagorno-Karabakh”), and are not giving Karabakh back, your toothless resolutions are not worth the paper they are printed on, and Kosovo precedent helps our cause. So we care less about what you will adapt at these annual summits, because time is on our side, whilst you all come and go”.
Additionally, President Sargsyan and much of his surrounding were created by the whole Karabakh war, “groong”, “miatsum” – it is hard to imagine that they can somehow step back and compromise on essential elements – the very elements that made them famous and catapulted them into their positions of power. Yes, there is an example of President Dwight Eisenhower, who was a celebrated general, and who spoke against the military-industrial complex, but such examples are very rare, plus Mr. Sargsyan & Co. are no Gen. Eisenhower. So I do not expect Mr. Sargsyan or his closest advisers to willingly agree to Azerbaijan’s righteous demands.
Q: If Sargsyan anyway goes to Astana, what is the possibility of attaining progress at this meeting with the Azerbaijani president?
A: There is absolutely no such probability. Armenia is not ready for real compromise and has completely unreasonable demands. In America, in such cases, we say it wants to have one’s cake and eat it, too. Azerbaijan needs to be even stronger than it is right now, whilst also become more attractive from economic and social point of view, whilst Armenia needs more time to feel the widening gap. Indeed, it is becoming harder to dismiss the reality: while Azerbaijan is improving in such rankings as WorldBank/IFC’s Doing Business and World Economic Forum’s (WEF), Armenia is sinking in these very same rankings. Same applies to virtually every other ranking, from Transparency International, to Heritage Foundation/WSJ, to UN’s HDI and others. Likewise, more and more military analysts are noting the improvements in the Azerbaijani army whilst a degrading state of affairs in the Armenian armed forces. Thus, more time is needed.
Aliyah Fridman
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
