Ross Wilson: Change Will Continue to Affect Central Asia and the Caucasus

WASHINGTON, DC. March 14, 2012: In the wake of the twenty year anniversary of US-Azerbaijani diplomatic relations, TURAN’s Washington DC correspondent iAlakbar Raufoglu nterviewed Ross Wilson, former US Ambassador to Azerbaijan, who currently is Director of the Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council.

March marks the twenty-year anniversary of US-Azerbaijani diplomatic relations. At the same time, it has been twenty years since the US Embassy opened in Baku. Today there is no US Ambassador in Baku, no high-level visits to Washington DC and no annual democracy dialogs, twenty years is more than enough time for either country, so how is this relationship being driven today?

The United States and Azerbaijan have developed a strong partnership that has served important interests of both countries. Key among these has been, developing Caspian basin energy resources and pipelines to international markets, providing resources for the country's development and for international energy markets. Also the partnership has Collaborated on a range of terrorism issues, in respect to US and Coalition actions in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan's regional and global security; and managing, if not, unfortunately, resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which represents the biggest threat to the future of Azerbaijan, Armenia, the Caucasus as a whole. Therefore, this partnership is important to the United States, as well.

Not having an American ambassador in Baku is obviously not helpful, but we do have adequate channels for communication and should not let this temporary absence of an ambassador unduly affect US-Azeri relations. US Charge' d'Affaires Adam Sterling, is providing outstanding leadership in managing this relationship, as is Azerbaijan's new ambassador to Washington, Emin Suleymanov.

Even though we have issues and challenges, they are not about people, so our attention should be concentrated on the issues and on using this relationship to produce results.

When the Arab uprising started last year, there were huge expectations and from post-Soviet democrats as well. They hoped that a new wave of changes would reach their countries too. But a year has passed, and we still hear dictators in Central Asia and in Caucasus are continuing to threaten democrats even more. Why is that? In Azerbaijan we witnessed a regional uprising last week, people in Guba, demanded their rights and successfully kicked the local governor out of office. What kind of messages should ordinary people and governments take away from such rear events?

I am not sure exactly who had huge expectations about an Arab Awakening-style of development in former Soviet states. Peoples, countries and regions have their own specific histories and characteristics. Even within countries, peculiarities exist, and it was very interesting to me that authorities in Azerbaijan apparently moved to sack what appeared to be an unpopular and ineffective local governor in Guba.

I expect that change will continue to affect Central Asia and the Caucasus, and I hope that this develops in a way that promotes freedom, security and stability for all those who live there.

In my view, the United States and others in the transatlantic community should be fully engaged throughout the region on behalf of transatlantic values and our other interests there.

The latest Freedom House, Human Rights Watch and other organizations' reports indicate that Azerbaijan's human rights record deteriorated in 2011. Why is the situation getting worth instead of growing? What are the reasons behind that?

I am not in a position to evaluate these human rights reports or, in any sensible way, the human rights situation in Azerbaijan; except to make the obvious point that there are serious issues and these do affect the country's future, not to mention its relationship with the United States and many others in the Euro-Atlantic community.

While speaking about the country's human rights records, Azeri officials usually deny all accusations, reasoning it, by its international success, e.g. being a 10-years member of CE, OSCE ODIHR, and UN bodies. The country was elected to the UN Security Council last year, and will host the Eurovision Song Contest this year. How would you describe Azerbaijan's real image in the world? Taking into consideration that just recently, CNBC ran reportage on Azerbaijani President's family incomes. For many in Baku there is nothing new in such coverage. But what about "outsiders"? How do such facts influence the country's international image?

I do not want to describe or explain real or perceived contrasts in how Azerbaijan is seen abroad. Azerbaijan's election to the UN Security Council, I think, reflected the view of a majority in the UN General Assembly that the country's voice would be helpful on the broad range of security and other issues before the UN. That is a good thing. Eurovision’s success similarly reflected a certain level of respect for the country's artistic success, certainly for one artist's success. That, too, is a good thing. It is possible to hold these positive views and still be concerned, as many are, about the country's long-term prospects as they relate to matters of democracy, respect for human rights, the rule of law, prosperity, stability, security, etc. Azerbaijan should be proud of its achievements, and should also be focused on the issues, challenges and problems that lie ahead.

Azerbaijan recently found itself in the middle of the Iran-Israel confrontation, as Tehran accused Baku of providing a hiding place to Israeli secret service agents who assassinated Iranian nuclear scientists. Also, the Azeri government accused Iran of sponsoring attempted acts of terrorism in Azerbaijan. What kind of policy should Baku officials pursue at this point? Do you think it will be easy for Baku officials to "keep the balance" between the West and Iran from now on?

Iran presents some very serious challenges for the entire world, and unfortunately Azerbaijan happens to be its neighbor. Authorities in Baku have the same stake, if not more, as the rest of us, in the successful outcome in current efforts negotiating a solution to the nuclear problem and to persuade Iran to behave more responsibly in the region and in the world.

If matters, come to a head, and I sincerely hope they do not, it will be important for Azerbaijan to be on the side of history and on the side of those who favor regional and global peace over confrontation, ethnic and religious strife, and instability. I am confident that is where Azerbaijan will be.

Also, why do you think Azerbaijan needs a large amount of Israeli weapons. Baku officials say it is only because of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Do you think the country is getting closer to war?

Regarding the military balance with respect to Nagorno-Karabakh, I cannot speak directly to Azerbaijan's military needs. I am certain that no military solution to the conflict is possible. Further fighting will be a serious loss for both sides. All elements of a better, more durable and reasonably positive settlement are on the table, and I would like very much to see Presidents Aliyev and Sarksian take brave steps to achieve a solution to the Karabakh problem in 2012 (Turan).