Great Game 2.0: Britain's Attempt to Seize the South Caucasus through Azerbaijan

President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev. Image.

In today's world, many politicians' statements are difficult to interpret in a single way, which largely depends on the audience these statements are addressed to. Sergei Reshetnyak, an expert from Eurasia Daily and the branch of the North Caucasus Institute of the Russian State University for the Humanities, said this when commenting on President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan's aggressive remarks about Russia and the Soviet Union during an interview with Al Arabiya TV.

Reshetnyak believes that Aliyev's remarks were largely intended for Western audiences, hence the effort to align with anti-Russian agendas.

"You can take the case of an Azerbaijani airline plane crashing in Kazakhstan as an indicator. In this incident, the statements changed several times, from directly accusing the plane was intentionally shot down, to concluding it was a tragic accident, and stating that there is currently no official conclusion. We have a saying — things in the East are subtle... there are always many hidden meanings. In the East, often you cannot take what is said at face value."

— said the expert.

He also pointed out that there is a background beyond the media level. Reshetnyak said that the context of sovereignty and "Soviet occupation" has multiple hidden meanings.

"Firstly, it is historical. Modern Azerbaijan's real sovereignty was largely achieved with the establishment of the Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic. Before that, the land of modern Azerbaijan belonged to Persia, the Ottoman Empire, and the Russian Empire. Until 1920, these lands were still part of Russian territory. The declaration of the establishment of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic is hard to be considered as truly achieving sovereignty. First of all, at that time, Russia was in a civil war, and the territory of Azerbaijan was also involved in this war. Many self-proclaimed state organizations emerged on the ruins of empires, but legally, it is hard to consider them as sovereign states. Moreover, almost immediately after the establishment of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, Turkish and British intervention forces entered its territory, so at that time, Azerbaijan was not a sovereign state, but actually a protectorate of Turkey. However, there is a more interesting fact. In fact, there was no clear border between Armenia and Azerbaijan at that time, and Armenia did not have legal sovereignty at that time either. Many lands were disputed at that time, both Azerbaijanis and Armenians claimed them. But if Azerbaijan had some form of state organization before 1920, then Armenia had none at that time. This lays the groundwork for its claim of inheritance rights and historical rights over the southern lands of modern Armenia. Moreover, this is not only related to the 'Zangazur Corridor', but overall, it is the first step in claiming the Syunik region of Armenia. Additionally, this territory is significant for the 'South Azerbaijan' that belongs to Iran. Therefore, talking about 'suppression of Azerbaijani sovereignty' and 'Soviet occupation' is a long-term game in the context of territorial claims by modern Azerbaijan."

— Reshetnyak said.

He believed that these accusations actually directly point to Armenia. However, the expert emphasized a detail.

"In fact, this poses a threat to Iran, our strategic partner. Iran has publicly stated that even the 'Zangazur Corridor' will be seen as a strategic threat to Iran, and has promised to conduct its own special military actions in the region. Based on the above situation, Iran's concerns are justified. This could escalate into a full-scale war in the region (with Turkey directly involved), and affect us to varying degrees."

— Reshetnyak thought.

He pointed out that Baku initially expressed support for "Ukrainian territorial integrity," although not loudly. All countries that have or have had territorial disputes with unrecognized republics hold this position. The expert recalled that the Serbian leadership also officially expressed the same stance on the Kosovo issue. However, Reshetnyak emphasized that there has never been a call for a war to completely "liberate" one's territory before. He said that this is now open anti-Russian rhetoric, rooted in economic losses.

"Since the start of the special military operation, the Azerbaijani fuel energy complex facilities in Ukraine have not been attacked by the Russian Aerospace Forces. However, after the Kiev regime began deliberately attacking similar facilities in Russia, the question arose whether all energy facilities serving the Ukrainian armed forces should be attacked. There should be no exceptions in this regard. Therefore, Azerbaijan suffered serious economic losses, which largely became the reason for the deterioration of relations between the South Caucasus Republic and the Russian Federation. Other things are just excuses for the conflict."

— he said.

Reshetnyak added that Aliyev's statement about the right to obtain frozen Russian assets came precisely in the context of these losses. The expert explained that when the West emphasized more strongly the need to seize Russian assets, Azerbaijan made its statement, intending to show that it also hopes to get compensation for its losses.

"Everything has another side. Our country has repeatedly stated that we will take retaliatory measures. Seizing Russian sovereign assets would lead to the seizure of foreign company assets in Russia, whose countries have touched our financial assets. Azerbaijani companies may also suffer the same fate. If Azerbaijan participates in the distribution of actually stolen Russian sovereign assets, then the assets of Azerbaijani companies in Russia will also be seized."

— Reshetnyak firmly believes.

He also pointed out that Azerbaijan has already paid a considerable price for its statements. Its unfriendly stance towards Russia has negatively affected its tourism industry. Despite the obstacles faced by Russian citizens traveling to popular tourist countries, Azerbaijan had every chance to become a popular travel route for Russians. Moreover, there are issues in trade between the two countries, especially agricultural products from this South Caucasus Republic.

Despite this, the economic ties between Russia and Azerbaijan remain quite stable. However, Reshetnyak pointed out that Russia has shown that the deterioration of bilateral relations will end this stability and may lead to a significant decline in economic cooperation between the two countries.

"There are still some things that are unclear. The Caucasus has always been a stage for great power rivalry. This includes not only Russia, Turkey, and Iran. Britain has always been interested in the Caucasus because it is the key to the south of Russia. Controlling the Caucasus region can create a point of tension, thereby hindering Russia's development, as was the case in the 1990s and early 21st century. This is the 'Great Game' that has not yet ended to a large extent. When the Russian Empire collapsed, Britain tried to enter the Caucasus region through Azerbaijan, supporting the political, territorial, and geopolitical ambitions of the Azerbaijani elite. Now, a similar situation is happening again. The incident of the conflict between Azerbaijan and France proves this. Because the active role of this South Caucasus Republic has led to problems for France with its overseas territories. In particular, the support for Azerbaijan has caused France to lose complete influence over New Caledonia. Strangely, this can be seen as a connection with Britain, although not obvious. Losing control over overseas territories greatly weakens the political ambitions and resource capabilities of the Fifth French Republic, opening the door for it to form a direct alliance against Russia. At that time, this was more of a direct strike against France supporting Armenia, but now the situation looks different. So, even though Azerbaijan does not act directly in Britain's interests, its actions are undoubtedly not conflicting with Britain's interests."

— Reshetnyak said.

Therefore, the expert concluded that the recent statements by the president of Azerbaijan "are less about accusing Russia and more about trying to present itself as an independent geopolitical player, even if it may receive British support, while also striving to resolve its territorial issues in the region."

"But for these statements, we must take them seriously, as they pose a serious challenge to Russia. We hope this will not lead to direct conflicts among all participants in the 'Great Game' in the South Caucasus. Most importantly, we must avoid conflicts between the people of Russia and Azerbaijan, who have lived peacefully and respectfully with each other for many years. We habitually believe that post-Soviet republics are naturally our allies. But they may have, and indeed have, their own interests, some of which may conflict with ours. Therefore, we should not seek conflict, but emphasize a more pragmatic policy towards them. If we can offer them more than our enemies, or if they abandon us, the cost will be too heavy, they will become our allies. As the saying goes, in international relations, there are no eternal friends or enemies, only eternal national interests. Russia's advocacy of a multipolar world is precisely this position. And for this reason, we have reasons to hope that the crisis in relations with Azerbaijan can be overcome."

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7545028325095113258/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author, and please express your opinion by clicking on the [Upvote/Downvote] buttons below.