ATLANTIC EYE: PUTIN’S BUSH-WHACK
By Marc S. Ellenbogen – UPI International Columnist
United Press International
June 14 2007
PRAGUE, Czech Republic, June 14 (UPI) — Last week in the German
resort town of Heiligendamm, U.S. President George W. Bush had a key
anchor of his strategic security policy submitted to a reality check.
At the Group of Eight Summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin
proposed a joint U.S.-Russia anti-missile shield be placed at an
existing radar station in Azerbaijan, instead of the Czech Republic
and Poland. Caught off-guard by the Russian leader’s offer, Bush
mustered a confused look into the cameras.
Putin’s offer is not just a brilliant tactical maneuver; it is a
proposal that merits serious consideration.
Putin’s proposal would put the radar warning and control system for
the missile defense in Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan was part of the Soviet
Union and shares a 268-mile (432 kilometer) border with Iran. The
idea is to use an existing radar facility installed by the old Soviet
government in Gabala, Azerbaijan. The facility is still being used
by the Russian armed forces in accordance with a special agreement
with Azerbaijan. According to Putin’s offer, the Gabala radar would
now be under the joint control of the U.S. and Russian military.
Oil-rich Azerbaijan gained independence in 1991 amid political turmoil
and against a backdrop of violence in Nagorno-Karabakh. It has been
famed for its oil springs and natural gas sources since ancient
times, when Zoroastrians, for whom fire is an important symbol,
erected temples around burning gas vents in the ground. It borders
the Caspian Sea.
Azerbaijan has a population of 8.4 million people, and is about the
size of Illinois, and somewhat larger than Austria. Its capital is
Baku and the main languages are Azeri and Russian. The major religion
is Islam. Per capita income is $1,240 (compared to the United States’
$44,200). At the beginning of the 20th century, Azerbaijan supplied
almost half of the world’s oil. Azerbaijan has vast gas reserves,
but still imports from Russia. There have been tensions with Russia
over pricing and direct transfer to the West. Azerbaijan is becoming
an alternative energy hub for Europe and is the third-largest oil
producer in the former Soviet Union. It opened oil and gas pipelines
that circumvent Russia during the past year.
Azerbaijan became a member of the Council of Europe in 2001. Ilham
Aliyev took over as president from his father, Heydar, in 2003. Often
accused of corruption and election-rigging, ruling circles walk a
tightrope between Russian and Western regional geo-strategic interests.
As the Soviet Union collapsed, the predominantly Armenian population
of the Nagorno-Karabakh region stated their intention to secede
from Azerbaijan. War broke out. Backed by troops and resources from
Armenia, the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh took control of the region
and surrounding territory. In 1994 a cease-fire was signed.
About one-seventh of Azerbaijan’s territory remains occupied, while
800,000 refugees and internally displaced persons are scattered around
the country. It is still an unsettled political issue that receives all
too little attention from the international political agenda. There’s
an urgent imperative to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict before
it flares up the southern Caucasus at the very same time the need
for stability — crucial for the development of Azerbaijan’s energy
resources — is of paramount importance for the West. The deputy
speaker of the House of Lords, Baroness Cox, is well known for taking
up the plight of Nagorno-Karabakh.
I remember a meeting one year ago with Czech Deputy Prime Minister
Alexandr Vondra, who was foreign minister-designate at the time. He
asked me what I thought of the missile shield. Sasha is an old
Washington hand — he had been Vaclav Havel’s ambassador and a young
dissident during the communist period. I told him I supported the
concept, but felt the United States had done a bad job of briefing
the alliance, never mind the Russians. I also told him I thought the
shield should be in Romania.
He gave me one of his wry grins — something he is famous for —
and asked me what I would do if the Democrats got elected in 2008. I
stated that he was making a bold presumption that I would have anything
to say — never mind the power to influence. He gave me his wry grin
again. I promised him that I would support the stationing of the system
in the Czech Republic because I am a supporter of the country and
its vested interests, not because I felt it was the best strategic
decision. For the Czechs, the shield is a good thing economically
and geo-politically.
Sasha, I would still uphold my promise, but the Azerbaijan proposal
is a good one. It brings the Russians into the fold. You and I both
agree that this is important. It places the shield in a location that
is perfect to strike at the heart of Islamists and terrorism. It would
bring a new dynamic to the relationship between the United States and
Russia, which is important and has been seriously deteriorating. But
most importantly, it makes absolute and complete strategic sense.
As I sat with UPI’s Editor Emeritus Martin Walker and Seffi Bodansky of
the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare
last week in Washington, we of course got to the topic of the Putin
proposal. We noted that it was Bush who voided the 1972 Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty, which allowed the United States and the Soviet Union
a limited number of defense installations.
Yet another presidential miscalculation; this one opened the door to
the Russians’ more aggressive economic and security parlance.
It was Walker who noted, "Yes, the president got Bush-whacked in
Prague." And so he did indeed.