The Moscow Times, Russia
Jan 26 2009
Choke Points and Bedfellows
26 January 2009
By Richard Lourie
The computer may have freed communication from space and time, but
geopolitics still rule the world.
The Russian-Ukrainian gas crisis has raised a cry for alternate
"reliable" energy sources, but they are very limited. Apart from
Russia, there are only two countries on the Caspian Sea’s western
shore through which gas and oil can flow to Europe. Iran is clearly
out, at least for the time being. That leaves Azerbaijan, a country
with large oil and gas reserves of its own. In the two decades since
the Soviet collapse, Azerbaijan has only had two leaders: a former KGB
general and now his son, who was elected president in October with a
comfortable 89 percent margin.
From Azerbaijan, energy can flow westward only through Armenia or
Georgia. But since Azerbaijan and Armenia have been at war for years
over Nagorno-Karabakh, that leaves only Georgia. That fact fed
Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili’s exaggerated sense of
self-importance, which played a major role in Tbilisi’s disastrous
August war. Russia’s incursion made the following points clear about
Georgia: It still belongs to Moscow’s sphere of influence, it should
be kept out of NATO, and it is an unreliable energy transporter.
>From Georgia, energy can move to the country’s Black Sea port or on
to Turkey. But the next alternate pipeline, the Nabucco, is already
caught up in Turkey’s increasingly unlikely bid to join the European
Union.
Paradoxically, as Washington advocates energy diversity for itself,
the United States and NATO are almost entirely dependent on Russia for
fuel supplies to fight the war in Afghanistan.
In reality, even before the inauguration, Obama was in close contact
with General David Petraeus as he traveled to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Turkmenistan and Tajikistan to secure air, trans-shipping and
refueling rights and to shore up an existing base now needed because
of attacks by militants on the Khyber Pass, which links Pakistan and
Afghanistan.
The Afghan campaign puts the United States and NATO in bed with
regimes whose human rights records can be described as various shades
of abysmal. But both sides found a way to save face: Most of the
shipping will be handled by private commercial companies, meaning that
the Central Asian nations aren’t really dealing with
U.S. imperialists, who aren’t really dealing with dictators.
Dmitry Rogozin, Moscow’s envoy to NATO, says Russia supports NATO in
Afghanistan because a NATO defeat there would mean a "strengthened
enemy [Islamic extremists], emboldened by success, standing on the
threshold of our home." James Appathurai, NATO’s chief spokesman, has
said that despite other arguments with Russia, "this area of
cooperation has been walled off and preserved."
But any wall can fall. Look at Berlin. And Rogozin exaggerates the
danger that a NATO defeat in Afghanistan would pose to the
Kremlin. And in Chechnya, Russia has already demonstrated it is able
to deal with these types of threats.
Russia is most vulnerable to Islamic nuclear terrorism. The nuclear
material is already there and need not be transported across
borders. In reality, aiding NATO and Washington can only make Russia
more susceptible to such terrorism.
Dependent on Russia for fuel, partnering with despots, Obama will
enter a land of warlords and poppy fields — a graveyard for invaders
for centuries. He will need to be very smart, very careful and very
lucky.
Richard Lourie is the author of "The Autobiography of Joseph Stalin"
and "Sakharov: A Biography."
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
