Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Problems and New Threats

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

  • New Problems and New Threats

    NEW PROBLEMS AND NEW THREATS
    By David Petrosyan

    The military rhetoric of the higher political circles of Azerbaijan
    has strengthened. Perhaps, we may consider as its peak the speech of
    President Ilham Aliyev made on June 22 of the current year, during
    the solemn ceremony dedicated to the regular graduation at Heydar
    Aliyev higher military school of Azerbaijan. During his speech Ilham
    Aliyev especially emphasized that:

    - the expenditures in the defence sphere have increased
    for eight times during the four years of his presidency,

    - the military expenditures take the first place in
    Azerbaijan's state budget today,

    - Azerbaijan buys up a great number of arms, ammunition,
    military equipment and military planes,

    - Azerbaijan does not want to solve the problem by war,
    but should be ready for this.

    And further some key phrases of President Ilham Aliyev characterizing
    the moods of the official Baku:

    - Nagorno Karabakh will be never given independence. If the
    international community did not recognize the independence
    of Nagorno Karabakh in mid-1990-s, when Azerbaijan was
    insufficiently strong economically and politically, it
    will never recognize its independence, when Azerbaijan
    has become a strong state. Nagorno Karabakh will be never
    joined with Armenia. The sooner they understand this in
    Armenia and in Nagorno Karabakh, the better for them,

    - No matter how hard they try in Armenia to misrepresent
    the course of the negotiations, it is no use, as everybody,
    including the Armenian party and the country-co-chairs
    of the Minsk Group immediately engaged in that issue,
    knows about the principles, on the basis of which the
    negotiations are carried on. These principles will help
    us return all occupied lands of Azerbaijan, will enable
    Azeris to return to their native hearths, including in
    Nagorno Karabakh. Only after this the future status of
    Nagorno Karabakh can be discussed,

    - the Armenian party, in the interests of its
    domestic policy, often misrepresents the content of
    the negotiations. Azerbaijan will never, neither today
    nor after 10 or 100 years give consent to the agreement,
    which may result in Nagorno Karabakh's separation from
    Azerbaijan. This will never happen. I am sure that the
    sooner they understand this in Armenia the better for them.

    There were many other interesting things further, but, in our opinion,
    in the context of the above mentioned it would be useful to return to
    the armed forces of Azerbaijan. Thus, according to the information
    of Russian military sources (for instance, A. Tsiganok, "The Levers
    of Force of States of Big Caucasus") for 2005:

    - the armed forces of Azerbaijan include personnel of
    95 thousand men, including: 85000 people in the Land
    Forces, 8000 people in the Air Forces and anti-aircraft
    defence, 2000 people in the naval forces. The National
    Guards includes 2500 people, the troops of the Ministry
    of Internal Affairs 12000 people, the frontier guards
    5000 people,

    - the land forces consist of five army corpses. The first,
    second, third army corpses are located in Nagorno Karabakh,
    the second army corps partly covers the Azeri-Iranian
    border. The fourth (Baku) corps covers the capital and
    the sea coast, the fifth is dislocated in Nakhichevan,

    The Land Forces include 292 tanks, 706 units of armoured cars
    (part of these cars belong to the Ministry of Internal Affairs,
    the National Guards and the frontier guards), 405 guns and mortars,
    reactive systems of volley fire BM-21-75, PTUR-370,

    - the Air Forces include 61 military planes and
    helicopters, 46 planes and helicopters of the auxiliary
    aviation,

    - the naval forces include 14 battleship ships and
    launches, 22 auxiliary vessels, but due to the disrepair
    of the ships and lack of specialists of the Navy, today
    they are unable to fulfil the tasks set.

    Simultaneously with Ilham Aliyev's statements, rather many publications
    appeared, which frankly intimidated Armenia and its society with
    the threat of a coming war with Azerbaijan, which currently has
    a military budget considerably exceeding the Armenian one (912m
    USD against 270m USD). In particular, extracts from the American
    Internet site Stratfor were published in a number of Armenian
    editions of pseudo-liberal orientation. These extracts, in our
    opinion, intentionally accentuate attention on the difference in
    the militray budgets of the two countries, but also draw off public
    opinion, including the American one, from the fact that Azerbaijan
    violates the provisions on quotas for offensive armament established
    by the Agreement on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. It should
    be mentioned that according to the Agreement, a peculiar quantitative
    limit (quota) on conventional offensive armament has been established
    for Azerbaijan, as well as for Armenia and Georgia. None of the three
    South Caucasian countries has the right to have in its armed forces
    more than: 220 tanks, 100 military planes, 50 military helicopters,
    220 armoured cars, and 285 artillery systems.

    After all, one can criticize Baku for its high military budget as much
    as he wants (we, in particular, mean harsh criticism of Baku in August
    last year by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the EU Commissar for Foreign
    Relations), but, in principle, this is, in essence, intervention
    into the internal affairs of that country. Everybody knows that
    Azerbaijan sells oil, and how to spend the gained petrodollars, this
    is, after all, its own business. But the violation of the Agreement
    on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe is not Azerbaijan's internal
    affair at all. The international community's reaction to this is
    rather weak yet. On the whole, unless we take into consideration
    the two statements of Robert Simmons, the Secretary General of NATO
    to the South Caucasus, who spoke about NATO leadership's anxiety
    about Azerbaijan's exceeding the Agreement's quotas, we can say that
    the position of the international structures, for the present, is
    mainly contemplative. We very much would like to hear the opinion
    on violation of Agreement's quotas, for instance, of:

    - the NATO Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer,

    - the Chairman of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly,
    Pierre Lelouch,

    - the Secretary General of CSTO, Nikolay Bordyuzha,

    - the Special Representative of the EU in the region,
    Peter Semneby,

    - the new leadership of OSCE in the person of its
    Chairman-in-Office, Mr Miguel Angel Moratinos.

    And lastly, we very much would like to learn the reaction on violation
    of the Agreement of the Russian and French Foreign Ministries, as
    well as the U.S. State Department. Everybody knows that the very
    countries are Co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group on Nagorno Karabakh
    and have been mediators at the negotiations between two out of three
    conflict parties (Armenia and Azerbaijan) for a long time. How are
    they going to persuade the leadership of Armenia and Azerbaijan to
    sign some document/ agreement on the principles of conflict settlement
    if they fail to ensure Azerbaijan's fulfilling the Agreement? Why,
    not fulfilling the commitments on the already operating Agreement
    on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe, should Azerbaijan fulfil
    its commitments on the other one (we mean a possible agreement on
    the principles of Nagorno Karabakh settlement)? Why should they in
    Yerevan and Stepanakert believe the supposed guarantors of agreement
    from Washington, Moscow and Paris, if they fail to achieve Baku's
    fulfilment of its commitments within the framework of the Agreement on
    Conventional Armed Forces in Europe? Can Yerevan and Tbilisi, making
    use of Baku's violating the Agreement, also violate the established
    quotas on offensive armament, and what results will this have in
    the end?

    We suppose that at present the Agreement on Conventional Armed Forces
    in Europe is just one of the corner stones of regional security, the
    observance of which helps keep military balance, fragile stability
    and a very bad peace, but still peace, in the South Caucasus. If in
    Brussels, Washington, Moscow, and Paris they have decided to give up
    the Agreement in favor of militarization, threat of war and threat
    to the peace in the region, let them declare this openly.

    "The Noyan Tapan Highlights" N28, July, 2007
Working...
X