The Voice of Mirza Xazar

US wants to control Central Asia by establishing mobile bases in the Caucasus

Research Director of Caspian Studies Program at Harvard University, Dr. Brenda Shaffer has claimed that the US wants to control Central Asia by establishing mobile bases in the Caucasus. Defining the Caucasus as a crossroads, Shaffer indicated that a dominant power in the region would not only control Caspian energy sources but also Afghanistan and the Middle East at the same time. Speaking to Zaman, Shaffer said the US saw the Caucasus and Central Asia as a whole. Shaffer said of the region, "The Caucasus is like the Istanbul Ataturk Airport, a central point. You can go any direction you want from here. It is like a junction. It is like a gate opening to Central Asia." Shaffer focused on two basic trends in recent US military policy: "The first is the transition from permanent bases to more mobile and active bases. The second is transition to small bases in the surrounding regions just like the ones in Turkey and Southern Caucasus instead of the big ones in Europe." Referring as an example to US use of bases in Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkmenistan during the Afghan and Iraqi wars, Shaffer said, "The air corridor that the US provided with these small bases is more important than the US settling one or two thousand military forces in the same region." Explaining that any conflict to arise among the big powers in Caucasus would be due to the geo-strategic importance of the region rather than its energy sources, Shaffer said: "The energy in the region is not a target but a tool. Infrastructures such as the pipelines are just tools in the relations." Indicating that the US, Russia and even Iran and Turkey do not have any intentions to obtain the oil in the Caucasus, Shaffer claimed that formation of energy corridors through these countries in the region would bring them political benefits. Saying that Turkey was in a key position for the stability of the Caucasus, Shaffer emphasizes that Ankara should look at the region from a 'broader' perspective. To illustrate this, Shaffer gives the following example: "In the Turkish-Armenian border issue, Ankara evaluates the issue from the frame of its relations with Washington, Brussels and Armenia. It does not think of how the opening of the border will affect the conflict or negotiations in the region. Turkey should evaluate its bilateral relations with the Southern Caucasus in a more regional context, within the structure of the region." Stressing that the US also had wrong policies in Caucasus, Shaffer mentioned that Washington did not show enough interest in the problems of Karabagh, South Ossetia and Abhasia. Shaffer added that in the context of bilateral relations with Russia, the US was more interested in Georgia. Saying that the attitude of the US had changed when compared to its attitude two years ago over whether the Caucasus countries might be a member of NATO, Shaffer concluded that full membership of these countries was now a part of US regional policy. By Bahtiyar Kucuk zaman.com 2005-03-08 01:31:38