WHY DID GORDON BACK GEORGIA, NOT AZERBAIJAN?
Azadliq (in Azeri)
Feb 4 2010
Azerbaijan
Vafa Quluzada: `Unlike Azerbaijan, Georgia has been resolute in the
course of integration into NATO
US Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Philip H.
Gordon has come up with interesting opinions about events in the
Southern Caucasus. Focusing more on the violation of Georgia’s
territorial integrity rather than the Karabakh problem, Gordon said
that Washington does not think it should recognize independence of
South Ossetia and Abkhazia. In his opinion, the USA does not see eye
to eye with Russia on this issue.
Stressing that Russia’s current position does not contribute to
the regional stability, the assistant secretary of state added that
America does not need engagement in an active campaigning to thwart
the recognition [of Georgia’s breakaway regions] since almost all
the countries share the position of the USA to this effect.
In comments on another disputed regional issue, that is to say, the
Turkish-Armenian agreement [protocols], Gordon said that the current
uncertainty has revived attempts in the Congress for the approval of
a resolution on the "Armenian genocide".
Political expert Vafa Quluzada believes that it is not surprising
that P. Gordon spoke more about problems of Georgia in the Southern
Caucasus. Drawing attention to Georgia’s brave and resolute steps
to join NATO, Vafa Quluzada said that exactly for this reason the
USA is stepping up its efforts to resolve problems of this country:
"As Azerbaijan is afraid of Russia, it cannot make decisive steps with
regard to NATO membership. Azerbaijan is waiting for Russia to become
weak to raise the issue of integration into NATO. For this reason,
it is not surprising that Georgia is receiving so much attention. Why
not? Despite losing two regions, serious threats from Russia, Georgia
is resolute towards NATO membership and cooperation with the West.
Therefore, Georgia’s membership of NATO is already a matter of time."
As for Gordon’s remarks on Russia’s current aggressive regional policy,
Vafa Quluzada said that as soon as the economic crisis slowed down,
Russia began to pursue an aggressive policy in the Southern Caucasus:
"Russia is again a threat to former Soviet republics. As soon as the
crisis slackened, Russia renewed its efforts for armament.
Historically, this has always been a Russian policy both under the
tsar and in the Soviet period. Although the country was in the grip
of social problems, armament was a priority then."
Vafa Quluzada views Armenia’s attempts to put again on the agenda
the issue of the "Armenian genocide" as pressure on Turkey given the
current uncertainty in the Turkish-Armenian contacts. But the pundit
does not think the USA would recognize the "Armenian genocide",
adding that Washington would lose an ally like Turkey in the Middle
East if it made such a move. Actually, Hillary Clinton’s initiatives
to bring closer Turkey and Armenia were a step made hastily. Since it
is unreal to implement this plan at present. As for Armenia’s attempt
to step up the "genocide" claims, I do not think the USA would make a
serious mistake to bow to Yerevan’s caprice. If such a step was made,
Ankara would turn away from the USA as an ally and this would have
seriously damaged the US interest."