The Voice of Mirza Xazar

Blasphemy Row Inflames Azerbaijan
Islamists say journalist who allegedly impugned Islam deserves to die.

By Kenan Guluzade in Nardaran

For the past three weeks, residents of the village of Nardaran, close to Baku, have been demonstrating every Friday to demand severe punishment of Azerbaijani journalist Rafik Taghi, who is accused of having insulted the Prophet Mohammed in an article published by the little-known Azerbaijani newspaper, Senet.

The case of the journalist, who is now serving a two-month prison sentence, demonstrates that Islamic sentiment is strong in Azerbaijan and has complicated relations with Azerbaijan’s southern neighbour, the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Nardaran, a village with strong Islamic traditions, has been leading the protests. On November 17, Haji Ali, one of the leaders of the local religious community, summoned crowds by striking a stone against a pillar in Imam Husein square in the centre of the village. Teenagers, who had climbed on a wall, joined him, banging iron rods against a gas pipe. This noisy call to action reverberated through the village.

By three o’clock, the square was teeming with devout believers, who form an overwhelming majority in the village. “Last week we, the residents of Nardaran, condemned Rafik Taghi and the editor-in-chief of the newspaper”, said Haji Ali, beginning his speech. “Our religion knows only one punishment for such people, which is execution. This is not our decision, this is what our holy book prescribes. The authorities sentenced the journalists to two weeks in custody. But that is not enough!”

Nardaran became famous after bloody clashes between its residents and police in 2002. (See Azerbaijan: Rebel Village Remains Defiant, CRS 133, June 13, 2002). Since then, the village has become a stronghold for Shia Islamists opposed to the government. All walls on its narrow streets are covered with religious inscriptions, and locals are keen to vent their anger against the authorities in Baku.

The latest row began at the beginning of this month, when Senet (Trade), a Baku-based bimonthly with a circulation of 2000 copies, published an article by Taghi entitled “Europe and us”. The author criticised Azerbaijanis’ lifestyle and made some remarks about the Prophet Mohammed, which many of the country’s Muslims interpreted as insulting. Whether Nardaran’s residents had heard about Senet before, the controversy around the article found its way into the village, causing a storm of outrage that believers from surrounding villages were quick to support.

Protesters carried banners with religious inscriptions and placards saying “Death to Israel!” All speeches were met with a loud “Allahu Akbar!” Guests from other villages spoke out to express their support for Nardaran. American and Israel flags were brought to the square just to be tramped on and burnt.

“We declare that if these people are not sentenced to life imprisonment, we will take measures to punish them by ourselves,” said Haji Ali. “It’s a pity that there’s no death penalty in our country. We are told that their houses are being guarded, but let them hear us vow - Muslims never take vengeance on women and children. No one will touch their families. We’ve heard that Rafik Taghi’s family members have asked Denmark for political asylum, but no matter how things turn out nothing bad is going to happen to them. Rafik Taghi is the only one we want to have punished.”

As well as being a journalist and publicist, Taghi is also a professional cardiologist. He is well known for voicing ideas against the current of general public opinion. In other articles, he has made scathing comments about Azerbaijan’s national poet Samed Vurgun, chairman of the Writers Union Anar and other famous people.

Taghi and his editor Samir Sadagatoglu were arrested in mid-November and sentenced to two months in jail for kindling religious intolerance.

However, the villagers of Nardaran rejected the verdict and are continuing their protests, demanding that the two journalists be punished with a life sentence at least, burning US and Israel flags and calling for “an end to all supporters of world Zionism”.

Hajiaga Nuriev, one of the village’s elders and chairman of Azerbaijan’s Islamic Party, suggested Taghi was part of a wider conspiracy. “Both domestic and foreign forces have an interest in this,” he said. “We think that people such as Rafik Taghi are acting on behalf of international Zionism and Armenia, and they have deliberately damaged Azerbaijan’s credibility with its brothers-in-faith.

“In this situation, the residents of Nardaran could not have acted otherwise…to the enemies of Islam… who discredited Azerbaijan in the eyes of the world. This blasphemy ought to be punished.”

Hajiaga said through their rejection of the court’s sentence, the people of Naradaran had rescued the country’s reputation as chairman of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and showed to the world that the Muslims of Azerbaijan were angered by the Senet article.

The affair has also triggered protests in Iran. APA news agency reported that around 50 people demonstrated in front of the Azerbaijani embassy in Tehran on November 19 to protest against the “humiliating” article. The Iranian TV-channel Seher aired calls for the overthrow of Azerbaijan’s “anti-Islamic” government.

Then news reports said that the Iranian ayatollah Morteza Bani Fazl had offered his own home as a reward for the head of the Azerbaijani journalist, who had “insulted” the founder of Islam. “I will give my house as a reward to anyone, who kills this Azerbaijani author, who insulted the Prophet Mohammed,” said the mullah who lives in the city of Tebriz in the northwest of Iran, which has a large Azerbaijani population.

The row is likely to strain further Azerbaijani-Iranian relations. Political analyst Boyukaga Agayev, who is director of the South Caucasus research centre, said, “The relations between Azerbaijan and Iran cannot be described as friendly.” He noted that the two countries already stand on opposite sides of many disputes, from the status of the Caspian Sea to relations with the US and Israel.

Vugar Aliev, press secretary for the Azerbaijani prosecutor general’s office, said, “We live in a constitutional state, and all issues should be solved in accordance with the law. What happened in Nardaran is a protest reaction to what these people did. But the law-enforcement bodies have already taken appropriate actions, and these harsh calls with regard to the two journalists are unacceptable. The police responded in a timely fashion and there remains no danger of any civilians undertaking any illegal actions against them.”

Eldar Zeynalov, director of the Human Rights Centre of Azerbaijan, commented, “The situation is of the soviet-time kind – ‘I have not read it, but I do condemn it!’”

Kenan Guluzade is editor of Zerkalo newspaper in Baku

(www.iwpr.net)

Azerbaijan will not be able to supply Georgia this year with the additional gas supplies that the Georgian government is seeking in order to forestall the possibility of an energy crisis. Some experts in Baku believe that Russia’s ongoing diplomatic row with Georgia is influencing Azerbaijani policy decisions. By Rovshan Ismayilov for Eurasianet (19/10/06) Wanting to build its strategic reserves for what could prove a tense winter, Georgia sought to secure an additional 300 million cubic meters of gas from Azerbaijan’s Shah Deniz field by the end of 2006, Georgian Energy Minister Nika Gelauri told a September 30 news conference in Tbilisi. Talks held 10-11 October in Baku appeared to yield positive results. But just days later, Azerbaijani officials revised their position, saying they could not guarantee the desired gas deliveries within Georgia’s timeframe. "Azerbaijan might need the gas for itself," the Trend news agency reported Azerbaijani Energy Minister Natik Aliyev as saying. "We cannot give a concrete promise yet because we do not know yet what Azerbaijan’s energy balance will be next year." Azerbaijan itself imports between 4.0 billion and 4.5 billion cubic meters a year from Gazprom, the Russian state-controlled conglomerate that also supplies the bulk of Georgia’s gas. It is Georgia’s energy dependency on Russia that has President Mikheil Saakashvili’s administration worried in Tbilisi. A spy scandal, in which Georgia arrested Russian military officers, has placed Georgian-Russian relations in a deep freeze. In retaliation for the Georgian action, Russia has implemented punitive measures, including the closure of transport corridors and the suspension of postal service. Even before the spy scandal, Russia imposed economic sanctions against Georgia, most notably a ban on wine imports. Some experts believe that the Kremlin may in the coming months use its energy influence over Georgia as an additional instrument of retaliation against Tbilisi. Such concerns are rooted in the experience of January of this year, when pipelines running through Russian territory to Georgia inexplicably exploded, plunging the Caucasus country into an energy crisis. The Shah Deniz gas field, with estimated reserves of 400 billion cubic meters (bcm), was to have provided the means for Azerbaijan to meet Georgia’s demand. Gas from the field was originally expected to flow via the new Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum pipeline by the end of October. However, that opening was postponed after Turkey announced that its part of the pipeline would not be operational until the end of 2006 at the earliest. Georgia is supposed to receive 5 percent of the gas shipped to Turkey as a transit fee, plus the right to purchase an additional 5 percent of exports at a preferential price - $55 per thousand cubic meters. The 300 mcm of gas Tbilisi wanted to purchase would be in addition to these supplies. While Aliyev evaded giving a reason for the delay, some experts in Baku contend that the decision is political. "There are no technical problems which may cause a delay," asserted Ilham Shaban, an energy expert and editor of the Turan Energy Bulletin. "The pipeline running from Baku into Georgian territory is complete and ready for operation." Shaban contends that Azerbaijan may have unofficially asked British Petroleum, which leads the gas development and pipeline consortium, to postpone production until the end of 2006 in order to avoid offending Russia on this issue. At the same time, he added, the British energy company appears to be cognizant of problems recently encountered by other foreign oil companies in Russian oil exploration, and may wish to do nothing that might rankle the Kremlin. "It means that, most likely, we’re facing Russia’s energy blackmail again," Shaban said. The Azerbaijani government, however, denies that any hidden political motive exists for its decision. "Cooperation between Baku and Tbilisi was not affected by Russia’s position on Georgia. We [the Azerbaijani government] are not experiencing any pressure from Russia," a source within the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry told EurasiaNet. The differences between Russia and Georgia were discussed during an 6 October meeting in Moscow between the Azerbaijani and Russian Foreign Ministers, "and both sides expressed their understanding that the conflict should be solved as soon as possible," the source said. Energy Minister Aliyev has confirmed that Azerbaijan is prepared to provide transit to Georgia for Iranian gas supplies, but Shaban states that the country’s pipelines cannot transport more than 2 mcm of Iranian gas to Georgia per day, roughly 30 percent of Georgia’s needs. Ilgar Mammadov, a Baku-based political analyst, believes that other factors aside from Russia could have influenced the government’s announcement. An increase in Gazprom gas prices could mean an increase in transit fees for gas to Azerbaijani foe Armenia, a situation which could raise tensions between Moscow and Yerevan to Baku’s satisfaction, he suggested. "[D]ispleasure is growing within the government with the fact that Azerbaijan is making economic concessions to Georgia all the time," Mammadov added. After Azerbaijan made "serious concessions" to Georgia on transit tariffs for the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline, the Georgian government initially asked for compensation for the financial losses the Georgian port of Batumi would incur once the Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tbilisi-Baku railway project with Azerbaijan and Turkey is complete, he noted. Georgia later withdrew its demand, according to officials, but Mammadov contends that the request still rankles. Azerbaijan has granted credit to Georgia for the construction of a 29-kilometer railroad from Akhalkalaki, the main town in the predominantly ethnic Armenian region of Samtskhe-Javakheti, to Georgia’s border with Turkey, and to repair a 160-kilometer railroad from Akhalkalaki to the border with Azerbaijan. "I think that this situation has begun to irritate [President] Ilham Aliyev’s administration," Mammadov commented. Turan energy expert Shaban contends that the problem may just be a question of over-sized expectations. "Saakashvili often stated that the launching of gas production from Shah Deniz will solve Georgia’s all energy problems," Shaban said. "He made a mistake as we can see now: Georgia is still dependant on Russia’s gas." (Eurasianet)

The US war with Iran has already begun

by Scott Ritter

Sunday 19 June 2005 12:06 PM GMT

Americans, along with the rest of the world, are starting to wake up to the uncomfortable fact that President George Bush not only lied to them about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (the ostensible excuse for the March 2003 invasion and occupation of that country by US forces), but also about the very process that led to war. On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary." We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq. These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities. President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power. The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier. The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase. This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past. It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question. But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran. As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people. "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war. By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration. But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran. As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream. The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities. The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase. President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran. The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations. It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq. Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror. But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran. To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran. Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran. The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran. But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran. In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence. No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Persian Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated. A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran. US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan. Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan. Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003. America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere. Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States. Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003. We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran. Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005. The opinions expressed here are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position or have the endorsement of Aljazeera. Aljazeera By Scott Ritter