Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BAKU: US Delay In Appointing An Ambassador Was Not Related To Azerba

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BAKU: US Delay In Appointing An Ambassador Was Not Related To Azerba

    US DELAY IN APPOINTING AN AMBASSADOR WAS NOT RELATED TO AZERBAIJAN PER CE
    Lala B.

    news.az
    May 31 2010
    Azerbaijan

    Tabib Huseynov News.Az interviews Tabib Huseynov, analyst of the
    International Crisis Group.

    How do you assess Bryza's appointed as ambassador in Azerbaijan?

    The obvious advantage of Matthew Bryza's candidacy as the US ambassador
    is that he knows Azerbaijan and the South Caucasus region very well and
    has an already well-established relations with Azerbaijan's political
    leadership and to some degree, the civil society. Therefore, if his
    nomination is approved by the Senate, it will take Bryza a much less
    effort and a relatively shorter period of time to assume effectively
    his responsibilities as an ambassador. In this sense, his nomination
    reflects a pragmatic choice by the Obama administration.

    Will this appointment cause the enlivening of the US-Azerbaijani ties
    that have long been stalled?

    Of course, almost a year-long absence of a functioning US ambassador
    is one of the factors which impedes more effective communication
    between the two countries. However, without underestimating the role
    of ambassadors in mitigating and improving the bilateral diplomatic
    relations, I doubt the relations between official Baku and Washington
    would develop very differently if we had a US ambassador sitting
    in Baku. There are objective factors which put some uneasiness in
    the bilateral relations regardless of the presence or absence of an
    ambassador. Broadly speaking, these are related to the recurrent US
    criticisms of the situation with political freedoms in Azerbaijan
    and Azerbaijan's grievances related to the US prioritization of the
    Turkish-Armenian normalization over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
    resolution.

    Do you think the long-term failure of Washington to appoint its
    ambassador to Azerbaijan really had a political context?

    I think the US delay in appointing an ambassador was not related
    to Azerbaijan per ce. It has more to do with the workings of the US
    internal bureaucracy and perhaps, with some criticisms over Bryza's
    handling of the situation prior to the Georgia-Russia war of August
    2008.

    Can the appointment of Matthew Bryza as the ambassador have any
    influence on the promotion of the Karabakh process considering his
    great experience in this problem?

    If approved, Bryza will be the first US Ambassador to Azerbaijan
    who served as a Nagorno-Karabakh mediator. This is a good thing,
    as it would imply that Bryza, as one of the few US diplomats with
    first-hand experience in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, would continue
    to be involved, albeit indirectly, in shaping of the US policy towards
    the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement.

    What can you say about the negative reaction of the Armenian National
    Committee of America to the possible appointment of Matthew Bryza as
    the US ambassador to Azerbaijan?

    The negative reaction of the ANCA to Bryza's nomination should
    come as no surprise. ANCA, which is effectively a US extension
    of the pan-Armenian nationalist Dashnaksutiun party, opposes the
    internationally-supported compromise solution between Armenia and
    Azerbaijan based on the Madrid proposals. Their opposition to a
    proposed compromise solution automatically translates to their
    opposition to anyone who directly or indirectly is associated with
    the ongoing talks. And Bryza, who is remembered with his activism and
    talkativeness when he was a Karabakh mediator, is a natural target
    for them.




    From: A. Papazian
Working...
X