Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eurasia Daily Monitor - 03/30/2006

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

  • Eurasia Daily Monitor - 03/30/2006

    Eurasia Daily Monitor -- The Jamestown Foundation
    Thursday, March 30, 2006 -- Volume 3, Issue 62

    IN THIS ISSUE:
    *New president fails to halt violence in Dagestan
    *Turkey's role to increase under Azerbaijan's latest Caspian gas proposal
    *World Azerbaijani Congress spoils Iranian-Azerbaijani relations

    DAGESTAN CONTINUES TO SINK INTO CHAOS DESPITE APPOINTMENT OF NEW LEADER

    More than a month has passed since the Kremlin appointed a new leader
    for Dagestan, the largest republic in the North Caucasus. On February
    20, Russian President Vladimir Putin put 65-year-old Mukhu Aliev at
    the helm of the North Caucasus republic and Dagestan's legislature
    readily confirmed the choice for president.

    Many observers in Russia favored the appointment. Some even called the
    decision to appoint Aliev "a rare example of the right decision of the
    Kremlin in its North Caucasian policy." The observers expressed hopes
    that Aliev, a long-time Communist party boss and an experienced
    administrator, would improve the Dagestani economy, fight corruption,
    and repel the growing local insurgency. In particular, Moscow regards
    Aliev as a figure who can oppose the mighty clan of Magomedali
    Magomedov, Aliev's predecessor, who had ruled Dagestan for 14 years
    (see EDM, February 23).

    However, after one month in office, doubts began to appear regarding
    his ability to change the deteriorating situation. Apparently the
    insurgency ignored the leadership change and kept to their plans to
    launch a spring campaign. On February 24 a police patrol was attacked
    in the town of Khasavyurt. Then on March 10, Magomed Magomedov,
    deputy head of the republican Criminal Investigation Department, was
    killed in Makhachkala, the republican capital, by a bomb planted
    underneath his car. Two days later, March 12, a senior officer from
    the Organized Crime Department was shot dead in Makhachkala, and
    another was killed on March 21 in the town of Buinaksk. On March 29,
    two policemen were wounded in a shoot-out with rebels in the capital.

    As reported earlier, on March 2 during a security sweep of several
    villages in Khasavyurt district, Russian troops desecrated a Koran,
    the holy book of all Muslims. This incident only added fuel to the
    fire (see EDM, March 23).

    In addition to the standoff between militancy and security officials,
    Dagestan was also hit by waves of criminal violence and unrest this
    March. On March 20, the family of a businessman was killed in the
    capital. There were three brazen robberies in Dagestan during the last
    two months, including two attacks on pension delivery vehicles in
    Khasavyurt and Makhachkala, and one robbery of a pension payment
    office in the village of Baba-Urt (Kavkazky Uzel, March 22).

    On March 20, residents from the village of Korkmaskala, in
    Kyimtorkalin district, tried to storm a local office building to
    protest what they considered to be an unfair land distribution
    scheme. The police special-task unit guarding the building opened
    fire, and 20 people were injured. Shamil Zainalov, the new prime
    minister of Dagestan, had to go to the area to personally resolve the
    conflict (Interfax, March 20).

    There were also two attacks on district administration heads. On March
    10, there was an assassination attempt on the head of the
    administration of Magarmakent district (regions.ru, March 10). On
    March 22, gunmen shot dead Ruslan Aliev, head of the mountainous
    Botlikh district, who was returning home after a meeting with
    President Aliev and other Dagestani district chiefs. Ruslan Aliyev's
    vehicle was struck by gunfire in the center of Makhachkala, on the
    city's most guarded street (Kavkazky Uzel, March 22).

    Despite the rapidly increasing rebel attacks, unrest, and criminal
    violence, there were still some hopes that the new leader of Dagestan
    could at least partly succeed with economic and political
    reforms. Aliev's first changes within the republican government
    generated a belief that he might indeed be able to shake up the
    political structure of Dagestan, which has been completely based on
    clan connections and bribery. The most odious figures in the
    government, like Umalat Nasrutdinov, the minister of agriculture, and
    Marat Ilyasov, the minister of economy, both of whom became ministers
    thanks to family ties, were replaced (Kavkazky Uzel, March 10).

    Nevertheless, the most powerful clans in Dagestan, that of former
    president Magomedali Magomedov and Makhachkala mayor Said Amirov, have
    not relinquished their positions yet. On the same day that Aliev was
    appointed, Magomed-Salam Magomedov, son of Magomedali, became chairman
    of the republican parliament. With the help of his farther,
    Magomed-Salam had become one of the richest and most powerful tycoons
    in Dagestan. A member of the Board of Elbin-Bank and a member of the
    Working Group for Offshore Oil Resources of the Dagestani Sector of
    the Caspian Sea, Magomed-Salam is also the unofficial owner of many
    local businesses and real estate. The position of parliamentarian
    leader will help Magomedov's family to legalize their control over the
    republican economy. There are rumors circulating in Dagestan that next
    year Magomedov Jr. might claim the post of prime minister of Dagestan.

    Said Amirov, an old rival of Magomedov and the deeply entrenched mayor
    of Makhachkala, also remains a strong and independent political figure
    in the region. On March 13, Amirov was elected mayor for the third
    time in elections that independent observers described as fraudulent
    (Kavkazky Uzel, March 13).

    So far the new leadership in Dagestan has not successfully implemented
    any of the tasks that the Russian authorities had entrusted to it. The
    clans remain strong while the chaos and violence in the region
    continues.

    --Andrei Smirnov and Mikhail Roshchin



    AZERBAIJAN SPEARHEADING INITIATIVE ON TRANS-CASPIAN GAS PIPELINE

    Addressing an international energy conference in progress in Baku,
    Azerbaijan's Industry and Energy Minister Natig Aliyev outlined the
    advantages of a trans-Caspian gas pipeline from Turkmenistan and
    Kazakhstan via the South Caucasus to European markets. Natig Aliyev
    underscored the project's value for diversifying supplies and
    restraining prices as well as the favorable international context for
    this project, as Western interest rebounds in the wake of this
    winter's disruption in supplies. Urging Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan to
    become part of the project without waiting for approval from other
    Caspian countries -- an allusion to Russia and Tehran -- Aliyev noted
    that any impediments to a seabed pipeline are political, not technical
    ones.

    A trans-Caspian seabed pipeline "would ensure Europe's energy security
    and protect it from Russian monopolism," Aliyev remarked. "Europe has
    understood that it is naive to place all its hopes on Russian gas. The
    events of recent months, when Russia has in effect demonstrated its
    status as a monopolist, indicate that prices will rise further." Thus,
    the timing is now ripe for starting the negotiations (AP, Turan,
    Trend, Ekho [Baku], March 29).

    The preceding week, Russia opposed the trans-Caspian pipeline proposal
    during a routine meeting of the five riparian countries on defining
    the legal status of the Caspian Sea. Russia, which happens to be the
    leading industrial polluter of that sea, cited environmental risks in
    opposing a trans-Caspian pipeline and claimed that any such project
    requires approval from all five countries. Azerbaijan took the lead in
    refuting Russia's position (RIA-Novosti, March 22). Azerbaijan,
    seconded by Kazakhstan, upholds the right of Caspian countries to make
    sovereign decisions about laying pipelines on their respective seabed
    sectors.

    Baku estimates the construction costs at billion for a pipeline with
    an annual capacity of 30 billion cubic meters that would run from the
    eastern Caspian shore, across the seabed to Azerbaijan, and further
    via Georgia into Turkey. With Turkey as a transit corridor, the gas
    could be piped to European Union member countries in southern and
    central Europe. The concept largely follows that promoted by the
    United States in 1996-2001, primarily in Europe's interest, though
    amid European indifference at that stage. Azerbaijan and Georgia were
    firmly on board the U.S.-led project, Turkmenistan prevaricated, and
    Turkey mismanaged the negotiations.

    The updated concept, now under exploratory discussion by the same
    countries with European participation for the first time, includes
    major novel elements, such as:

    a) The opportunity for Kazakhstan to joint the project;

    b) Turkey's role as transit corridor to Europe, rather than consumer
    country as had earlier been envisaged;

    c) Massive input from Azerbaijan's Shah-Deniz gas field into the
    proposed pipeline via Turkey to Europe (the offshore field's
    anticipated yield is 20 billion cubic meters annually, almost twice
    the earlier projection, and most of it available for delivery to
    Europe); and

    d) Possibly integrating the Caspian gas pipeline with the Nabucco
    project (Turkey-Bulgaria-Romania-Hungary-Austria) by connecting the
    two planned lines near Erzurum in eastern Turkey.

    Turkmen President Saparmurat Niyazov has signaled an intention to
    rejoin negotiations on the trans-Caspian pipelines. Receiving a
    Turkish delegation (unrelated to the energy sector) in Ashgabat,
    Niyazov offered on live television, "We can provide you with cheap gas
    … I had already made such an offer to you in the past, but your
    leadership was slow to act and failed to get the Turkmen gas in
    time. At present, you are purchasing expensive gas and it does not
    even match your demand" (Turkmen Television Channel One, March
    19). Niyazov was alluding to Turkish government officials who made it
    possible for Gazprom's pipeline across the Black Sea to defeat the
    U.S.-proposed trans-Caspian pipeline in the race for Turkey's gas
    market in 2001. Those Turkish officials have since been investigated
    and indicted for having secretly agreed on onerous terms of purchase
    for Russian gas.

    Turkey has recently been paying 3 per one thousand cubic meters of
    Russian gas, and Gazprom recently demanded a hike to 3, which Turkey
    finds unacceptable (Zaman, February 2). Meanwhile, the pipeline across
    the Black Sea is being underutilized while Turkey's gas market is
    oversubscribed. The initial trans-Caspian project had targeted the
    Turkish market as main downstream destination. In the new
    circumstances, Turkey's role can change from that of a potential
    consumer of Caspian gas to that of a transit country for Caspian gas
    to Europe.

    --Vladimir Socor



    NEW TENSIONS COMPLICATE RELATIONS BETWEEN BAKU AND TEHRAN

    More than 600 representatives of Azerbaijani diaspora organizations in
    49 countries assembled in Baku on March 16 for the second World
    Azerbaijani Congress. The event was organized by the State Committee
    on the Affairs of Azerbaijanis Living Abroad, which was established in
    2003 by a decree from then-President Heydar Aliyev to help unite all
    Azerbaijanis abroad.

    The event was grandiose both in scale and impact. The goal of showing
    the unity of millions of Azerbaijanis around the world for the sake of
    an independent, strong, and prosperous Azerbaijan was achieved. The
    Congress discussed issues regarding coordination among the Azerbaijani
    diaspora organizations, strengthening relations with other nations'
    diaspora organizations, promoting information about Azerbaijan around
    the world, and building relations with foreign governments.

    As a result of the Congress' work, a new strategy was developed
    regarding the activities of the Azerbaijani diaspora in other
    countries and the joint activities of the Azerbaijani and Turkish
    diaspora organizations. Moreover, Congress participants adopted a
    resolution addressed to Azerbaijanis around the world, foreign
    governments, and international organizations regarding Armenian
    aggression toward Azerbaijan.

    Yet, the Congress made news not so much for its work, but for a row
    that erupted between Azerbaijan and Iran after the Congress. The
    Iranian ambassador to Azerbaijan, Afshar Suleymani, reacted very
    angrily and emotionally to the speeches given at the World Azerbaijani
    Congress by some representatives of Azerbaijani diaspora organizations
    in Europe. These delegates called for the unification of North
    Azerbaijan (the independent Republic of Azerbaijan) and South
    Azerbaijan (in northern Iran, populated by Azerbaijanis and considered
    by Azerbaijanis as part of a once-unified Azerbaijani state). The
    speech by Javad Derekhti, an Azerbaijani from the Iranian Azerbaijan,
    was particularly provocative, because he talked about human rights
    violations suffered by ethnic Azerbaijanis in Iran (Trend News Agency,
    March 16).

    The Treaty of Turkmanchai in 1828, which ended the three-decade
    Russian-Iranian War eventually divided Azerbaijan into two parts along
    the banks of the Araz River. It is estimated that more than 25 million
    ethnic Azerbaijanis currently live in Iran, but they have no rights to
    be educated in their native language and any attempts to organize
    movements for cultural autonomy are strongly repressed by the
    authorities in Tehran. Iran is extremely touchy about this issue and
    has kept its distance from official Baku for most of the 1990s exactly
    because of the issue of Azerbaijani separatism in Iran.

    Suleymani tore into these speeches in a press release from the Iranian
    embassy on March 17. "Iran is deeply upset about the participation of
    some anti-Iranian elements in the Congress and their provocative
    statements on the issues of Iran's domestic affairs," it read. "The
    Embassy considers these steps to contradict the friendly relations
    between the brotherly nations and those commitments taken by the
    Azerbaijani government in the treaty of 2002, sighed in Tehran. The
    Embassy is very surprised about the references at the Congress to the
    Turkmanchai Treaty of 1828 and mentioning Azerbaijan as a divided
    country."

    The Iranian Foreign Ministry also sent a protest note to the
    Azerbaijani ambassador in Iran. The row intensified after remarks by
    the Iranian ambassador regarding Azerbaijani poets Nizami and
    Shahriyar, whom he called "Iranian poets." This caused an immediate
    protest from the Azerbaijani Writers Union, saying, "The Union deeply
    regrets and is surprised that the ambassador made such remarks and
    demands an immediate end to such uneducated discoveries" (APA News
    Agency, March 24).

    The Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted to the Iranian
    ambassador's complaints by asking him to calm his emotions. Speaking
    at a press conference the next day, Tahir Tagi-zadeh, the head of the
    informational department of the Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign
    Affairs said, "The speeches made at the World Azerbaijani Congress by
    representative of the public organizations are their personal
    opinions. The emotional speeches of the ambassadors might spoil the
    cooperation based on the principles of friendship and good
    neighborliness" (day.az, March 17).

    Nazim Ibrahimov, head of the State Committee on the Affairs of
    Azerbaijanis Living Abroad, also downplayed the significance of
    speeches, saying they were private opinions of Congress
    participants. "The State Committee has functioned for three years
    already, and we have never interfered in the internal issues of Iran"
    he explained (AzTV, March 20).

    The issue continues to be a hot topic of discussion in the local
    press, with a majority of Azerbaijani politicians and intelligentsia
    condemning the actions of the Iranian ambassador and calling for a
    renewed discussion of the human rights situation of Azerbaijanis in
    Iran. Yet some diplomats and experts in the country believe that the
    Iranian ambassador's remarks were intentionally aggressive, meant to
    scare off the United States from using the ethnic card to weaken the
    regime in Tehran.

    --Fariz Ismailzade



    The Eurasia Daily Monitor, a publication of the Jamestown Foundation,
    is edited by Ann E. Robertson. The opinions expressed in it are those
    of the individual authors and do not necessarily represent those of
    the Jamestown Foundation. If you have any questions regarding the
    content of EDM, or if you think that you have received this email in
    error, please respond to [email protected].

    Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution of EDM is strictly
    prohibited by law.



    The Jamestown Foundation
    4516 43rd Street, NW
    Washington, DC 20016
    202-483-8888 (phone)
    202-483-8337 (fax)
    http://www.jamestown.org



    Copyright (c) 1983-2005 The Jamestown Foundation.
Working...
X