PRIORITY DIRECTIONS IN THE FOREIGN POLICY OF ISRAEL: SOUTH CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA
Artak Grigoryan
"Noravank" Foundation
22 September 2009
Till recently the countries of CIS and mainly the countries of South
Caucasus and Central Asia have not been regarded as the priority
directions in the foreign policy of Israel. After the collapse of
the USSR and the establishment of the diplomatic relations with the
former Soviet republics, only in about 17-18 years the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Israel created core departments in its structure,
which from January of 2009 will purposefully deal with the issues
regarding South Caucasus and Central Asia.
Reorganization in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel Before the
creation of the aforementioned departments the working direction of the
CIS countries had been in the jurisdiction of two separate departments
– the Central Asian department and the Eurasian department, which works
were coordinated by one of the most remarkable representatives of the
Foreign Ministry of Israel, the director-general of the Ministry,
Pinhas Avivi1. The latter department, headed by the former Soviet
citizen Harry Koren, dealt with countries of the so-called post
Soviet space, naturally making the main emphasis on the countries of
the European part of the former USSR. But the structure, which had
four positions in its administration, naturally, has not been able to
provide fully the whole=2 0gradually growing scope of work in regard
to the CIS countries and mainly in regard to the countries of South
Caucasus and Central Asia against the background of the enlivening
relations in recent years. If in the 90s the main direction of the
activity of the aforementioned department was the Russian Federation,
then in 2000s the interstate relations began to develop actively
also with Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Georgia and Azerbaijan. The upsurge of
Israeli business in those countries and general interstate partnership
in the trade and economic sphere and, mainly, in the area of energy
mostly contributed to that process.
In the middle of 2008 the decision was made in the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs of Israel to boost the relations with the countries of South
Caucasus and mainly with the countries of Central Asia, to which they
had not paid special attention before.
In the next few months almost all the Israeli ambassadors accredited
in the countries of the CIS were changed. Particularly, the ambassadors
to the five former USSR Central Asian countries as well as to Belarus,
Moldova and the RA were changed. There was personnel reshuffle in
the embassies in Russia and Ukraine too. In Astana and Bishkek Israel
Mei-Amin who was born in Kazakhstan was appointed ambassador and in
Tashkent the advisor of the Foreign Minister of Israel Hilel Newman was
appointed. Shemi Tzur was appointed nonresident ambassador of Israel
to Armenia , Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. In 2008 the deputy Foreign
Minister of Israel Majali Wahaben visited Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. In
the same period the oncoming visit of the president of Israel Shimon
Peres to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan was outlined.
Being very well aware of the fact that such a small department is not
able to carry out such a large-scale work, Pinhas Avivi raised the
question of its reorganization. After the detailed scrutiny of the
issue there was a decision made by the Foreign Ministry of Israel
to reorganize the department of Central Europe and Eurasia of the
Ministry, which was carried out at the end of 2008. As a result two
new departments were settled – Eurasia-1 and Eurasia-2. The first one
– Eurasia-1 – will deal with the countries of the European part of
the former USSR and Eurasia-2 will deal with the countries of South
Caucasus and Central Asia. Thus, in the Foreign Ministry of Israel
new division was formed mainly dealing with the countries of the
aforementioned regions, which were new priority directions in the
Israeli foreign policy.
It is remarkable that all that activity in the Foreign Ministry of
Israel implying active diplomatic processes with those countries
passes almost without being noticed by the Israeli press, political
and analytical circles. Those departments are not even presented on
the web-site of the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
With what staff is Israel "embarking on the campaign" to South Caucasus
and Central Asia?
The renewed staff of the aforementioned departments is worth special
mentioning.
As in past the Central Europe and Eurasia department will be managed
by the deputy director-general of the Israeli Foreign Ministry
Pinhas Avivi who today is considered to be one of the veterans and
experienced figures of the Israeli diplomatic corps. The latter,
besides Hebrew, also speaks five other languages. He has embarked on
his diplomatic service since 1968. Since that time he has carried out
his diplomatic duties, which include the service as an ambassador in
more than ten countries on five continents (Europe, Asia, Africa, and
Latin America). He headed by turn almost all the departments of the
central office of the Foreign Ministry. Before being assigned to that
position, he was the ambassador of Israel to Turkey in 2003-2007. The
experience gained in Turkey, especially in regard to the countries of
Central Asia (which are all, except Tajikistan, Turkic speaking) is
considered as an important and extremely worthwhile experience. Though
the "territory" of the Soviet Union is not the "native" for Pinhas
Avivi and he does not speak Russian, judging by the reaction of his
colleagues and other bodies of the Foreign Ministry of Israel, the
latter approves himself rather efficiently in that area.
Perhaps the definite contribution to t hat was also made by the former
"right-hand" of Pinhas Avivi on the issues of the Soviet countries
Harry Koren. The latter, as it was mentioned above, was born in the
Soviet Union, to be more precise, in Latvia. Russian is his "mother"
tongue. He moved to Israel in 1973. He is one of the first "Russians"
who appeared in the diplomatic circles of Israel.
As a diplomat Harry Koren was "formed" in the Soviet region and he is
considered to be one of the best experts on that region, especially
on the countries of European part of the USSR. He worked at the
embassy in Moscow during quite a long period; he was the ambassador
to Latvia and Lithuania. He had headed the Eurasian department of
the Foreign Ministry of Israel for more than two years, and then,
after the reorganization, he headed Eurasia-1 department. Olga Slov
and Jacob Livnen who carried out diplomatic duties in the embassies
in a number of post-Soviet countries were appointed as deputies of
Harry Koren in Eurasia-1. Today Eurasia-1 is the only department in
the whole Israeli state structure, which head and all his employees
are former Soviet Union citizens2.
In contrast to Eurasia-1, there are no Russian speaking specialists
in the staff of Eurasia-2, which, as it was already mentioned, deals
with the countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia. And there
is only one person, i.e. Shemi Tzur, who carried=2 0out diplomatic
activity on the territory of the CIS for several months.
The creation of Eurasia-2 concurred with the war in Gaza and after
that with the processes connected with the Knesset elections. Under
such conditions Shemi Tzur was appointed in a caretaker role.
As it was mentioned, Shemi Tzur has been the non-resident ambassador
to Armenia, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan (residence in Jerusalem) since
the June 2008. Though the latter is not distinguished by the great
experience, nevertheless, from the point of view of the development of
the working procedures in regard to South Caucasus and Central Asia
he is supposed to be rather competent. The parents of Shemi Tzur are
from Tabriz and latter they repatriated to Eretz-Israel. In 1981-1983
Shemi Tzur was the consul of Israel in Turkey and in 1995-2000 was the
ambassador of Israel to Cyprus. In that period in the port cities of
Cyprus the non-official trade and commodity turnover between Israel
and Arab countries was activated and as a result Tzur appeared in the
centre of the attention of Israeli press and political authorities. In
2003-2007 Shemi Tzur was the ambassador of Israel to Finland.
Tzur is rather fluent in Turkish and Iranian languages; he is also
well acquainted with Turkey and Iran, which have rather serious
influence on the region from ethnic-political, religious-political
and spiritual-cultural points of view. The knowledge of Turkish
and Iranian lang uages will, of course, help Shemi Tzur during his
contact with Turkish speaking Azerbaijan and at some extent Turkic
speaking Central Asian countries, as well as with the Iranian speaking
Tajikistan. Besides, as far as we could find out, Tzur intensively
studies the Russian language too, with the intension to use it in
practice. Though during his career he "did not deal" regularly with
the post-Soviet and particularly mentioned regions, nevertheless, one
should not regard him as a rookie in that sphere. He has already left
his imprint on the history of Israeli diplomacy. In 1993 Shemi Tzur
opened the embassy of Israel in Kazakhstan and managed the Israeli
diplomatic mission in that country for a short period.
Naftali Tamir who carried out diplomatic activity in Tokyo, Washington,
Strasburg, Helsinki (as an ambassador to Finland) and etc was
appointed the deputy of Shemi Tzur in Eurasia-2. Before the recent
assignment Tamir had been the ambassador of Israel to Australia. It
is remarkable that he was dismissed after his interview to "Haaretz"
newspaper where some of the ideas expressed by him were regarded by
the Israeli government as racist ones.
Both Shemi Tzur and Naftali Tamir, while being ambassadors, exerted
themselves as established, principled and consistent diplomats. They
both are regarded in Israeli political and diplomatic system as
persons capable of taking drastic and responsible decisions. In th
is respect the "prestige" of Eurasia-2 is rather high not only in
the Israeli foreign policy system but also in the foreign political
and diplomatic circles, which are in close contact with that system.
First processes after the foundation of Eurasia-2: the foreign policy
of Lieberman The war in Gaza became a real touchstone for newly
organized Eurasia-2 structure. The latter should present serious
explanations and carry out "explanatory work" with the foreign
policy agencies of post-Soviet countries. Though Azerbaijan made
hard statements against Israel in the connection to the war in Gaza,
judging from the fact that the Muslim countries of the Central Asia
remained neutral and took the balanced position in regard to Israel
without even slackening and prejudicing the pace of the collaboration
with Israel, one may come to the conclusion that the first challenge
of the Eurasia-2 in this regard was successful.
The first months of this year were the period of intensive
activity. During that period Shemi Tzur visited Armenia twice, as
well as the countries of the Central Asia, mainly, Kazakhstan and
Turkmenistan. We shall touch on his visit to Armenia later. And as for
the visits to Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan in March and April, after
a number of official meetings in the aforementioned countries, Shemi
Tzur was present on the ceremony of presentation of the credentials
by the newly appointed ambassad or of Israel Mei-Ami to the president
Kurmanbek Bakiev, and in Turkmenistan he presented his credentials
to president Aghja Nurberdiev as a non-resident ambassador. The
negotiations held in Turkmenistan most probably were very efficient,
because in 1-1.5 month information about the opening of the embassy
in Turkmenistan appeared in Israeli press. That fact was commented
on as very important achievement in Central Asia, especially in the
country, which have 1000km length border with Iran.
On March 31 of this year at the special session of the Knesset the
ceremony of the administering the oath by the new government of Israel
took place.
The leader of "Israel is our home" party Avigdor Lieberman was
appointed at the post of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The
latter, being the representative of the radical right wing, in the
aspect of the foreign policy building is the adherent of setting
closer relations, warming and active cooperation with the CIS
countries. Thus, the developments in South Caucasus and Central
Asia regions, conditioned by their being new priority directions
in the foreign policy of Israel, fully correspond to the political
orientation of A. Lieberman.
After the accession to the office of the Foreign Minister, Lieberman
very quickly and clearly formulated the following priority directions
of the foreign policy of the government: the strong pressure to
Iran in the foreign policy plane; the reconsiderati on of the
negotiations processes’ principles with Palestine and multi-vector
foreign policy, particularly, the deepening and strengthening of the
collaboration with the CIS countries, mainly with Russia and Central
Asian countries. Thereby, the formation of the political dialogue and
the concentration of the efforts in the direction of the development
of collaboration in the spheres of trade, economy and tourism with
Russia and the countries of the aforementioned regions were considered
by Lieberman as a very important task.
During several weeks, after the accession to the office, two noteworthy
appointments of personnel by Lieberman were made. Yossi Gal who had
been the deputy director-general and was supposed to be one of the "old
guard" figures was appointed as a director-general of Foreign Ministry.
The appointment of the representative of the old generation to the
post of director-general of the partially renewed Foreign Ministry
administration found positive response within the whole diplomatic
system of Israel. The second appointment by Lieberman was rather
remarkable. For the first time in the history of Israel the advisor
of the Minister on the CIS countries direction was appointed. The
former Soviet citizen who was born in Minsk Zeev Ben-Arien (Vladimir
Flanchik) was assigned to that post. He speaks Russian perfectly and he
has worked in the diplomatic system of Israel for 16 years and during
that whole period20he worked in the CIS countries. He was the Israeli
ambassador to Belarus and he worked in the embassies in Russia and
Ukraine as well. He has concentrated his activity on South Caucasus
and Central Asia recently, thus after the foundation of Eurasia-2 till
the recent appointment ha had worked in the said department. This
appointment once more comes to prove that the territory of the CIS
is in the centre of attention of Israel.
What aims does Israel pursue in South Caucasus and Central Asia?
Activating its work in South Caucasus and Central Asia Israel pursue
several distinct and specific purposes.
Firstly, one of the most important problems for Israel is the "Iranian
ultimate priority problem". While building its foreign political
concept Israel proceeds on the axiomatic assumption that the Iranian
nuclear threat is hundred-per-cent reality and its number one aim is
Israel. The neutralization of the Iranian nuclear threat is considered
by Israel to be the top priority of Israeli foreign policy. And at the
same time, in respect to the aforementioned problem, Israeli expert
centres, special services and state competent circles think that the
diplomatic arsenal of resisting to Iranian aggression is not empty yet.
Thus, in May 2009, during the conference arranged by the Centre of
Iranian studies of Tel-Aviv University, in which almost the whole
Israeli political elite participated, the former head of the military
0Aintelligence of Israel Zeevi Farkish stated that: "It is very
important to form coalition with the moderate Sunnite countries
(which are also beware of Iranian nuclear threat". Among those
countries South Caucasian and Central Asian countries were mentioned.
At the same conference the deputy director of the aforementioned
centre, well-known Israeli Iranist Uzi Rabbi emphasized that Israel
should display diplomatic activity in the world surrounding Iran. The
latter at the same time pointed out that "…to resist Iranian
aggression several coalition alliances should be formed".
At the 9th interdisciplinary conference back in February of this
year the newly assigned director-general of the Foreign Ministry of
Israel Yossi Gal in his report, devoted to Iran, examined the issue of
studying and taking appropriate measures against diplomatic activities
of Iran in the surrounding countries as well as the activities of
Iran carried out through non-diplomatic channels, as one of the most
important tasks of the foreign policy agency of Israel.
"It is necessary to convince South Caucasus and Central Asia countries
that Israel can give them more than Iran", – stated the other executive
employee of Israeli Foreign Ministry.
This is the reason why the visit of Israeli president Shimon Peres
to the region was taken as a step made in geopolitical plane. In the
period previous to his visit it was logical t o suppose that reception
of the Israeli president at the top level in the former USSR republics
could be taken negatively in Iran and Arab world.
Israel, in its turn, took the visit as a barometer of the readiness
of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to activate the relations
with Israel.
Secondly, Israel wants to show at the example of concrete countries,
i.e.
the Muslim countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia, that the
relations and collaboration between Israel and Muslim countries
are possible. And that this collaboration can be profitable for
any country, including the Muslim ones. Thus, the Jewish state
tends to prove that there is no Israel-Muslim world or Jews-Muslims
confrontation, and even if there is such a confrontation it is not
its fault. Within that process Israel, alongside with the development
and strengthening of the political dialogue, draws special attention
to the planned cooperation in the sphere of economy. In Israel in
recent months the experience of the deepening of the collaboration
for the recent 2-3 years with Azerbaijan, which at present moment can
be regarded as one of the leaders among the Muslim countries of the
former USSR taking the way of strategic collaboration with Israel,
has been pointed out rather often.
Thirdly, the activation of Israel in South Caucasus and Central Asia
regions is also determined by one factor which is not distinguished
yet. That is the Turkish factor.=0 D
Despite the evident cooling of relations between Israel and Turkey in
recent period, the strategic partnership between these two states,
nevertheless, maintain the same pace. But it is obvious that there
is something that does not satisfy Israel any more. Today more
complicated rules of game are working in the region and in the world
in general than 10-15 years ago. The existing for decades strategic
alliance between Turkey and Israel responded to many geopolitical
issues, implying the definite scenarios of regional developments,
which fully satisfied both countries. But for the recent 10-15
years in the fast changing world gradually new questions have come
out and the aforementioned alliance is not able to answer them very
often. Under such conditions both Israel and Turkey are forced to
search for peculiar solutions, which very often contradict to the
logic of strategic partnership. Let us once more emphasize that this
does not mean at all that the strategic partnership between Israel and
Turkey is declining, because that partnership has been strengthened
and tempered for decades and even today it is of vital importance
for both countries in many spheres.
For a long time for Israel Turkey has been the model of partnership,
which can be between Jewish state and Muslim secular state, as opposed
to radical Islam countries, mainly to Iran. This model of partnership
satisfied both the West and the whole international communit y,
which, in its turn, encouraged that partnership and created positive
geopolitical atmosphere round it. The secular Turkey, which was open
for the collaboration with Israel, as opposed to Iran, served as
the example of the state model with the progressive and modernizing
society. But at present moment Turkey seems not to satisfy either of
those criteria. However, in Israel they begin to think this way. In
this respect the Central Asian countries and first of all Uzbekistan
and Kazakhstan can be regarded as an alternative to that. Though they
both are inferior by their economic indices to Turkey, but by the total
population size, their geopolitical location, by the potential in the
gas and oil production and transit they can play not less important
role than Turkey plays today.
It becomes clear why the visit of Shimon Peres to South Caucasus and
Central Asia was of such a vital importance for Israel. Without going
into the details of the visit, which we will surely do in the future,
let us mention that the visit, which had been prepared for quite a
long time thoroughly and which, by the way, took place in two of the
three planned countries3, is the vivid evidence that South Caucasus
and Central Asia are the new priority directions of the Israeli
foreign policy.
The RA in the context of the regional policy of Israel Amid such
conditions the "part assigned" to the RA is of great inter est. The RA
is not a Muslim country of course, but it plays a key role in South
Caucasus. Besides, the RA has 35km boarder and friendly relations
with Iran. At the same time the RA has the military conflict with
Azerbaijan and difficult historical relations with Turkey and those
states are strategic partners of Israel.
The activity in regard to the RA is also determined, alongside with
other factors, by some degree of cooling of the relations between
Israel and Turkey. After the well-known incident between Turkish
prime-minister Recep Erdogan and Israeli president Shimon Peres at the
summit in Davos Israeli "Maariv" newspaper wrote that: "The Foreign
Ministry of Israel, suddenly, started to speak about the possible
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Israel". And this happens
under the conditions where that theme had been tabooed till recently,
in order not to spoil the relations with Turkey. It is also remarkable
that just a day before the second visit of Shemi Tzur to Armenia,
on March 16, the large article devoted to the Armenian Genocide,
where Turkey is directly accused of the arranging "horrible massacres
of the Armenians", appeared on News1.co.il Hebrew web-site, which is
under the control of the authorities. Moreover, there are references
to the facts presented by the underground Zionist organization working
in 1915 in Palestine in the article.
Israeli military and political cir cles also touched upon the Armenian
Genocide theme. One of the most authoritative and influential figures
in Israeli generalship, the Commander-in-Chief Land forces general
Avi Mizrahi, turning to the fuss made by Turks round the war in Gaza,
advised them "…to study their own history before blaming someone
in military crimes". After this statement the situation became even
more aggravated and the Israeli ambassador to Turkey Habi Levy was
invited to Turkish Foreign Ministry for explanations4.
It is clear that, however, at current stage Israel is not going to
recognize Armenian Genocide and all this is simply done to impose
a constraint on Turkey. Thus, we can see the game we know very
well. Again someone uses the Armenian factor as a pressure method to
"put Turkey into its place".
If in the connection with Turkey Israel in recent period at least
outwardly takes pro-Armenian stance, in connection to Azerbaijan the
picture is just the contrary. As a result of the deepening relations
with the latter, Israel, in regard to Armenian-Azerbaijani relations
and mainly Nagorno-Karabakh issue, takes maximal pro-Azerbaijani
position.
Despite the fact what method of pressure to Turkey Israel choose or
its stance in regard to Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, nevertheless,
judging by the activating actions in the direction of South Caucasus
and Central Asia, priorities of Israel in the foreign policy and Arme
nian-Israeli recent relations, one can assume that Israel is inclined
to boost the relations and mutually beneficial cooperation with the
RA. At the same time some Israeli political analysts, speaking about
new political priorities of Israel, very often instead of "South
Caucasus and Central Asia" simply say "the RA and Central Asia" 5.
Two visits of Shemi Tzur to Armenia, which took place this year
in quite a short period, raised serious and interesting press
comments. Many of Israeli informational sources appraised those
visits as historical in the relations of two countries. During his
first visit Shemi Tzur was accepted by the Foreign Minister of the
RA E. Nalbandyan, the Chairman of the National Assembly of the RA
H. Abrahamyan, the prime-minister T. Sargsyan and Cathalicos Garegin
II. Then the ambassador of Israel was accepted by the president of
the RA Serj Sargsyan to whom he presented his credential.
During his second visit Shemi Tzur met the Minister of Culture of
the RA H.
Poghosyan and vice-prime-minister A. Gevorgyan.
An interesting reaction was also caused by the visit of the deputy
Foreign Minister of the RA A. Kirakosyan to Israel on May 26-27 of
this year. All the comments in Israeli press and analytical circles
concerning this visit came to one conclusion: this counties need to
"exchange ambassadors".
However, today we have all the bases for the political, economic ,
trade and regional cooperation between the RA and Israel. Besides,
today there are also preconditions, which simply make Armenia boost
its foreign policy in Israel, i.e. the problems of the Armenian
Quarter in the Old City in Jerusalem, the local Armenian community and
monastery congregation of Saint Hakobiants, as well as the problem
of preservation of our treasures, which under the conditions of the
unfavourable developments (and in the recent period it is the tendency)
can become really big problem.
If the RA must activate and deepen its relations with Israel, then
the faster it happens the better its. If the RA have to open embassy
in Israel, the faster it happens the better it is. This issue regards
the vital interests of the Republic of Armenia and the Armeniancy in
whole and, implying deep and comprehensive study, it demands for fast
and distinct orientation with all the sequential actions.
In this issue the time is not on our side…
P.S. Changes in personnel took place in Eurasia-1 and Eurasia-2
structures of the Foreign Ministry of Israel after the publishing of
the article in the 4th issue of "Globus: national security" journal for
2009. The deputy of Harry Koren Jacob Livnen was appointed as a head
of Eurasia-1 department and Yuval Fouks, the deputy of the Israeli
ambassador to Russian Federation Anne Azari, was assigned a head
of Eurasia-2. We will touch upon the activity of the aforementioned
departments of the Foreign Ministry in the future.
1In Israel the director-general of the Ministry approximately
corresponds to our head of the administration.
2The similar department exists within the structure of AMAN – Israeli
military intelligence, where the whole staff of the core departments
dealing with the former Soviet countries consists of the former
Soviet citizens.
3It is known that Shimon Peres planned to visit three countries:
Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. But latter, according to
diplomatic sources, the president of Uzbekistan I.Karimov, due to
"extremely busy schedule" could not meet his Israeli colleague. Shimon
Peres visited only Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.
4After the fuss made by Turks press service of Tzahal (Israel Defence
Forces) spread a statement that the Commander-in-chief Land Forces
Avi Mizrahi expressed his personal opinion.
5 The authors of such statements think there is no problem of
establishing and strengthening relations with Azerbaijan and
Georgia. Thus, when we speak about the activation of the policy in
South Caucasus it means to speak about the activation of the relations
with Armenia.