Tweet
AZERI PAPER SAYS BAKU TO JOIN US-LED ATTACK ON IRAN
Yeni Musavat, Baku
2 May 06
An Azerbaijani opposition newspaper has said that Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev has made a commitment during his recent visit
to Washington to take part in possible attacks on Iran. Yeni Musavat
quoted an unnamed foreign diplomat as saying that Azerbaijan would be
certainly involved in possible strikes at Iran but that this was not
spelt out to prevent any terror or other attacks on Azerbaijan. The
following is an excerpt from Teymur Turanci's report in Azerbaijani
newspaper Yeni Musavat on 2 May headlined "Washington secrets" and
subheaded "Ilham Aliyev's commitments to the USA in Yeni Musavat";
subheadings have been inserted editorially; ellipses as published
throughout the text:
They are overdoing it as if they had no feeling of humbleness or
responsibility. [Azerbaijani President] Ilham Aliyev's visit to the
USA has turned into the epic of Koroglu [an epic hero of Azerbaijani
medieval folklore] that dominates TV screens all day long.
"Apparently remarkable" meeting
It is not about disliking someone. With all of its apparent signs the
visit was indeed remarkable for Ilham Aliyev and his administration:
his greatest success during his presidency was the meeting with
Mr Bush. You may also know that Ilham Aliyev has not done anything
palpable for almost three years. What he can is to hold meetings and
demonstrate his ability to speak English to foreign leaders.
[Passage omitted: criticism of praise for the visit]
So, what is the essence of the Bush-Aliyev summit, which is apparently
remarkable, and will this meeting be important to Azerbaijan and
the region? What did the presidents talk about during that meeting
and the visit in general? Why did Bush remember Ilham Aliyev three
years later? What kind of commitments did our leader take there on
Karabakh? Were there any other commitments? Why did Mr Bush pat on
his [Aliyev's] shoulder and made a "well-done" gesture? What did that
mean? Generally, does the opposition have behind-the-scenes details
of the Bush-Aliyev meeting?
[Passage omitted: Opposition also has details of the visit]
It has emerged that Ilham Aliyev was strongly criticized at all
meetings, including the talks with George Bush. He was blamed for
failing to fulfil the commitments to the USA on democracy and human
rights and to carry out reforms, as well as for establishing special
relations with Russia and Iran against the will of the USA. It is
not accidental that immediately after the meeting with George Bush,
Azerbaijani ambassador to the USA Hafiz Pasayev told people close to
him that "the meeting with Bush was abnormal".
[Passage omitted: media mounted pressure on Aliyev in Washington]
US terms accepted
It was demanded that he [Aliyev] make big concessions.
"Aliyev agreed to everything that the USA demanded he should do. Bush
would not have patted on his shoulder if the USA had not had everything
it wanted...," a source told us.
"This meeting should be viewed in the context of Aliyev's special
relations with Russia and Iran. Of course, US officials knew that
Aliyev had received Moscow's instructions before visiting the USA. But
they explained to him there that decisions had already been made with
Russia on some global issues, as well as on where his country needed
to be strategically..."
The source said that Bush intentionally invited Aliyev to Washington
at a time when developments were at their peak.
"It was possible to 'break' him at that time and the USA did so. He
was invited to the USA at a most desperate time when he was left
face-to-face with Iran's pressure after three years' of international
humiliation. Eventually, Ilham Aliyev:
1. made a commitment to be involved in attacks on Iran;
2. agreed in principle to the deployment of NATO troops in Azerbaijan
(on the pretext of protecting the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline
[carrying oil from the Caspian to world markets through Georgia
and Turkey]);
3. wholly agreed to the US plan on Nagornyy Karabakh and accepted all
the compromises (under this plan, the occupied districts bordering
Iran are to be returned to Azerbaijan, negotiations are to continue on
other districts and Baku is to agree to a referendum on the status of
Nagornyy Karabakh. In other words, Nagornyy Karabakh actually becomes
a second Armenian state.); and
4. reaffirmed written commitments to carry out radical democratic
reforms in his country and administration, purge his team, start
dialogue with the opposition, observe human rights and release all
political prisoners."
We have other details as well, but we will not disclose them for the
time being. But I must say that Aliyev's brave statement that "I am
here not to make commitments" has made many suspicious. The muallim
[form of address] has in fact made a lot of commitments.
Washington relies on Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan will be certainly involved in [possible] attacks on Iran
as a party. This is not being spelt out in order not to worry Iran
and to prevent any terror or other attacks in Azerbaijan. Our source
said in this regard: "Once the first strikes are launched on Iran and
its central authorities are paralysed, both Baku, Tbilisi and Ankara
will have their roles in the ensuing parts of the operation...
Let us finish our article by our question to the source: "Why does the
USA have all contacts with Ilham Aliyev, the head of an antidemocratic
regime, and make him stronger?" [Passage omitted: general remarks]
Our foreign diplomat replied: "The USA needs airports at this
stage. Permission to use them is given by Ilham Aliyev..."
When saying goodbye, our respectable diplomat added a postcript to
our article.
"The work conducted with the democratic opposition will be apparent
immediately after the Iranian operation... I want you to know that the
USA actually stakes on Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijanis in the person
of Ilham Aliyev in the upcoming operation. The Azerbaijanis will be the
main reference force in the Iranian issue. We are talking here about 40
million people [Azerbaijanis living in Iran and in Azerbaijan proper]."
Yeni Musavat, Baku
2 May 06
An Azerbaijani opposition newspaper has said that Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev has made a commitment during his recent visit
to Washington to take part in possible attacks on Iran. Yeni Musavat
quoted an unnamed foreign diplomat as saying that Azerbaijan would be
certainly involved in possible strikes at Iran but that this was not
spelt out to prevent any terror or other attacks on Azerbaijan. The
following is an excerpt from Teymur Turanci's report in Azerbaijani
newspaper Yeni Musavat on 2 May headlined "Washington secrets" and
subheaded "Ilham Aliyev's commitments to the USA in Yeni Musavat";
subheadings have been inserted editorially; ellipses as published
throughout the text:
They are overdoing it as if they had no feeling of humbleness or
responsibility. [Azerbaijani President] Ilham Aliyev's visit to the
USA has turned into the epic of Koroglu [an epic hero of Azerbaijani
medieval folklore] that dominates TV screens all day long.
"Apparently remarkable" meeting
It is not about disliking someone. With all of its apparent signs the
visit was indeed remarkable for Ilham Aliyev and his administration:
his greatest success during his presidency was the meeting with
Mr Bush. You may also know that Ilham Aliyev has not done anything
palpable for almost three years. What he can is to hold meetings and
demonstrate his ability to speak English to foreign leaders.
[Passage omitted: criticism of praise for the visit]
So, what is the essence of the Bush-Aliyev summit, which is apparently
remarkable, and will this meeting be important to Azerbaijan and
the region? What did the presidents talk about during that meeting
and the visit in general? Why did Bush remember Ilham Aliyev three
years later? What kind of commitments did our leader take there on
Karabakh? Were there any other commitments? Why did Mr Bush pat on
his [Aliyev's] shoulder and made a "well-done" gesture? What did that
mean? Generally, does the opposition have behind-the-scenes details
of the Bush-Aliyev meeting?
[Passage omitted: Opposition also has details of the visit]
It has emerged that Ilham Aliyev was strongly criticized at all
meetings, including the talks with George Bush. He was blamed for
failing to fulfil the commitments to the USA on democracy and human
rights and to carry out reforms, as well as for establishing special
relations with Russia and Iran against the will of the USA. It is
not accidental that immediately after the meeting with George Bush,
Azerbaijani ambassador to the USA Hafiz Pasayev told people close to
him that "the meeting with Bush was abnormal".
[Passage omitted: media mounted pressure on Aliyev in Washington]
US terms accepted
It was demanded that he [Aliyev] make big concessions.
"Aliyev agreed to everything that the USA demanded he should do. Bush
would not have patted on his shoulder if the USA had not had everything
it wanted...," a source told us.
"This meeting should be viewed in the context of Aliyev's special
relations with Russia and Iran. Of course, US officials knew that
Aliyev had received Moscow's instructions before visiting the USA. But
they explained to him there that decisions had already been made with
Russia on some global issues, as well as on where his country needed
to be strategically..."
The source said that Bush intentionally invited Aliyev to Washington
at a time when developments were at their peak.
"It was possible to 'break' him at that time and the USA did so. He
was invited to the USA at a most desperate time when he was left
face-to-face with Iran's pressure after three years' of international
humiliation. Eventually, Ilham Aliyev:
1. made a commitment to be involved in attacks on Iran;
2. agreed in principle to the deployment of NATO troops in Azerbaijan
(on the pretext of protecting the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline
[carrying oil from the Caspian to world markets through Georgia
and Turkey]);
3. wholly agreed to the US plan on Nagornyy Karabakh and accepted all
the compromises (under this plan, the occupied districts bordering
Iran are to be returned to Azerbaijan, negotiations are to continue on
other districts and Baku is to agree to a referendum on the status of
Nagornyy Karabakh. In other words, Nagornyy Karabakh actually becomes
a second Armenian state.); and
4. reaffirmed written commitments to carry out radical democratic
reforms in his country and administration, purge his team, start
dialogue with the opposition, observe human rights and release all
political prisoners."
We have other details as well, but we will not disclose them for the
time being. But I must say that Aliyev's brave statement that "I am
here not to make commitments" has made many suspicious. The muallim
[form of address] has in fact made a lot of commitments.
Washington relies on Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan will be certainly involved in [possible] attacks on Iran
as a party. This is not being spelt out in order not to worry Iran
and to prevent any terror or other attacks in Azerbaijan. Our source
said in this regard: "Once the first strikes are launched on Iran and
its central authorities are paralysed, both Baku, Tbilisi and Ankara
will have their roles in the ensuing parts of the operation...
Let us finish our article by our question to the source: "Why does the
USA have all contacts with Ilham Aliyev, the head of an antidemocratic
regime, and make him stronger?" [Passage omitted: general remarks]
Our foreign diplomat replied: "The USA needs airports at this
stage. Permission to use them is given by Ilham Aliyev..."
When saying goodbye, our respectable diplomat added a postcript to
our article.
"The work conducted with the democratic opposition will be apparent
immediately after the Iranian operation... I want you to know that the
USA actually stakes on Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijanis in the person
of Ilham Aliyev in the upcoming operation. The Azerbaijanis will be the
main reference force in the Iranian issue. We are talking here about 40
million people [Azerbaijanis living in Iran and in Azerbaijan proper]."