US engagement in the Caucasus.

[Eddo211]

With the US supply routes and "lines of Logistic" routed from Pakistan (Kyber region and Torkham crossing) that feeds the war against Taliban and insurgents in Afghanistan that has come under increasing attack, which could very possibly cause the defeat of US in this region………….the NATO forces are strongly looking into alternative routes of supply, more towards the same routes that USSR was using during their failed Afghanistan campaign.







Dozens of militants armed with guns and gasoline bombs attacked the truck terminal in northwestern Pakistan Thursday and burned five tanker trucks carrying fuel to NATO troops in Afghanistan, police said (AP Photo - Mohammad Sajjad).
Police say militants attacked the truck depot near the city of Peshawar before dawn on Thursday, hurling petrol bombs which set fire to the five tankers. Several truckers drove their vehicles out of the terminal to save them.




Supplies intended for NATO forces in Afghanistan were suspended Tuesday after Taliban militants blew up a highway bridge in the Khyber Pass region, a lawless northwestern tribal area straddling the border with Afghanistan.




This is an overall strategic problem faced by NATO and the U.S. They are strongly looking into the creation of a supply route from the Caucasus.
United States may even have to make concessions to win Russia’s cooperation on Afghanistan. Russia has the capability to exact a steep price for its cooperation, and it seems fairly certain that the Kremlin will do just that.

One area in which it will likely try to exact that price is in the Caucasus and Black Sea regions, specifically in seeking NATO assurances that Georgia and Ukraine will not be offered membership in the alliance for the foreseeable future, if ever. It is a mark of the strategic malpractice of past U.S. policymakers in Central Asia and Afghanistan that Moscow now finds itself in position to potentially dictate a condition that is in Russia’s best interests.

The closing of the Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan has occurred due to entirely different reasons than enemy (Taliban/Al Q) strategy. Or has it? Russia is asserting itself in what it considers to be it “Near Abroad” (Includes Armenia), and has essentially bribed the officials in Kyrgyzstan to close down the Manas Air Base. This makes the U.S. utterly dependent on logistical lines that run through Russia to Central Asia. Of course, this places the U.S. in a bad position regarding membership of Georgia and Ukraine in NATO, as well as missile programs in Poland and elsewhere. If the U.S. is dependent on Russia for logistics, then it is much more likely that Russia will be able to assert itself in the region with U.S. weakness because of dependence on Russian cooperation for logistics.

As of now it appears that US has other plans to avoid this scenario. Recommendations are to work hard for a potential logistical line through the Caucasus region, specifically, from the Mediterranean Sea through the Bosporus Strait in Turkey, and from there into the Black Sea. From the Black Sea the supplies would go through Georgia to neighboring Azerbaijan. From there the supplies would transit across the Caspian Sea to Turkmenistan, and from there South to Afghanistan with Baku as a new Airbase. Regardless to say, Russia will not be happy.

[Eddo211]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

It is Time to engage in Caucasus:

Says some US officials and the following report was put forward in March for consideration

>>>the Air Force is working on contingency plans to move the tanker fleet to bases in the Persian Gulf if it loses basing rights to Manas.
The Azeri capital, Baku, is emerging as a leading candidate to substitute for Manas, should the Kyrgyz government refuse to reconsider its withdrawal of the basing rights.
American and Azeri officials said that the focus of the discussions on Monday and Tuesday was a surface route that would move supplies from the Georgian port of Poti on the Black Sea and overland to Baku, where they would cross the Caspian Sea to Aktau, Kazakhstan, and then overland across Uzbekistan into Afghanistan.
A second potential route would land cargo at the Caspian seaport of Turkmenbashi, in Turkmenistan, for transit into Afghanistan. Talks on supply routes have also been held with officials in Tajikistan, another neighbor to the north of Afghanistan.
One American official said the first “trial run” of cargo containers on the new route was conducted within the last two weeks, with shipments of lumber sent from Turkey to Georgia to Azerbaijan, and then onward toward Afghanistan.<<<








So this report notes not one, but two potential lines of logistical supply over land, as well as the potential replacement of the Manas Air Base with Baku, Azerbaijan. At this point it might be that the Russians backpedal on disallowing Manas to continue to function, since U.S. involvement in the Caucasus (their near abroad) is the last thing Russia wants.

According to US officials Azerbaijan is more developed than Turkmenistan (which recently opened its airspace to NATO), and is obviously the center of gravity of both of the potential logistical lines. Baku would be almost ideal for an air base to support refueling operations for U.S. aircraft supporting Operation Enduring Freedom. Turkmenistan is far less developed, and the only viable route for supplies would go through Ashgabat from the port city of Turkmenbashi, and then South to Kandahar or East to Kabul.

They also say that Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan have all expressed an interest in working with the U.S. to enable lines of logistical supply to Afghanistan. Moreover, a stronger presence in the Caucasus region is in the interests of the U.S. in both the near and long term. Stronger ties will serve to ensure continued supplies to U.S. troops in Afghanistan, cement critical relations in this region and Central Asia, and provide a counterbalance to Russia’s increasing hegemony in their near abroad. It is the right time and circumstances to engage the Caucasus.

This all sounds like bad news to me guys............

[Anoush]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

Thanks for this piece of news Eddo jan; but it does sound not so good to me either. It sounds like there's war coming about and Armenia will be amidst of all this. Other than oil that's probably the more reason of U.S.'s kissing the behinds of Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia as they want to keep these countries their allies and counteract Russia. I am afraid for Armenia's safety.

[KarotheGreat]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

I shouldn't worry much the US will never be a presence in the Caucasus, it's Russias backyard. Look what happened in Georgia who was an ally of the US. Next year it will be a neutral force in the region. Don't worry Obama can try and fail very hard.

[KanadaHye]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

I shouldn't worry much the US will never be a presence in the Caucasus, it's Russias backyard. Look what happened in Georgia who was an ally of the US. Next year it will be a neutral force in the region. Don't worry Obama can try and fail very hard.

Georgia was an ally of Israel... not the US. The US wasn't about to start WW3 over a slightly insignificant spat over Israel's satellite country. At least not yet

[Eddo211]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

The Coming War in the Caucasus

http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/05/13/the-coming-war-in-the-caucasus/

In It’s Time to Engage the Caucasus we described a potential logistics route through the Caucasus region in lieu of the problematic and troublesome Pakistan routes (especially through Khyber). The recommended route involved transit from the Mediterranean Sea through the Bosporus Strait in Turkey, and from there into the Black Sea. From the Black Sea the supplies would go through Georgia to neighboring Azerbaijan. From here the supplies would transit across the Caspian Sea to Turkmenistan, and from there South to Afghanistan.

In addition to this region being a potential viable alternative to Pakistan, we noted this region as being an up-and-coming economic power due in part to the massive quantities of energy buried beneath its soil. The engagement of the Caucasus region would potentially lead not only to logistics routes, but political and energy partnership as well. But the darker truth that accompanies this potential is that Russia is also interested.

Russia is interest for several reasons, including the fact that Russian bases in Armenia have no viable land resupply and logistics route except through Georgia. Recent NATO exercises in Georgia infuriated the Russian administration, causing the Russian ambassador to say that “Differences between Russia and U.S. on a number of issues still persist. The most recent example is NATO maneuvers in Georgia. It disappoints us as it assures Georgian government that regardless of what it did towards Russia, it will gain NATO membership. Unfortunately, no lesson was drawn from August events,” referring to their 2008 invasion of Georgia.

This is the first admission of the real reason behind the invasion of Georgia, veiled though it was. It was all about “lessons” for the U.S. and Georgia. The most recent warnings are less veiled.
A Kremlin policy paper says international relations will be shaped by battles over energy resources, which may trigger military conflicts on Russia’s borders.

The National Security Strategy also said that Russia will seek an equal “partnership” with the United States, but named U.S. missile defense plans in Europe among top threats to the national security.
The document, which has been signed by President Dmitry Medvedev, listed top challenges to national security and outlined government priorities through 2020.

“The international policy in the long run will be focused on getting hold of energy sources, including in the Middle East, the Barents Sea shelf and other Arctic regions, the Caspian and Central Asia,” said the strategy paper that was posted on the presidential Security Council’s Web site.
“Amid competitive struggle for resources, attempts to use military force to solve emerging problems can’t be excluded,” it added. “The existing balance of forces near the borders of the Russian Federation and its allies can be violated.”

Medvedev’s predecessor Vladimir Putin, who is now Russia’s powerful prime minister, often accused the West in the past of trying to expand its clout in the ex-Soviet nations and push Russia out of its traditional sphere of influence. The Kremlin has fiercely opposed NATO’s plans to incorporate its ex-Soviet neighbors, Ukraine and Georgia.
Russia currently controls most natural gas export routes out of the former Soviet region, but that grip is coming under growing pressure from China and the West.

The European Union, which depends on Russia for about one-quarter of its gas needs, has sought alternate supply routes, including the prospective Nabucco pipeline that would carry the Caspian and Central Asian gas to Europe but skirt Russia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Baku_pipelines.svg

Intensifying rivalry for influence in the ex-Soviet region fomented tensions and helped stage the ground for last August’s war between Russia and Georgia, which sits astride a key export pipeline carrying Caspian oil to Western markets.

The war erupted when the U.S.-allied Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili sent troops to regain control over the separatist province of South Ossetia, which had close links with Russia. After routing the Georgian army in five days of fighting, Russia recognized both South Ossetia and another Georgian rebel province of Abkhazia as independent nations and permanently stationed nearly 8,000 troops there.

President Barack Obama’s administration has sought to rebuild ties with Moscow, which plummeted to a post-Cold War low under his predecessor and focus on negotiating a new nuclear arms control deal. Medvedev and other Russian officials have hailed what they called the new administration’s constructive approach and voiced hope that Washington will drop plans to deploy missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic — a top irritant in U.S.-Russian relations.
Reflecting the Kremlin’s hope for better ties with Washington, the strategy paper said Russia will seek “equal and full-fledged strategic partnership with the United States on the basis of coinciding interests.”

But it warned that missile defense plans and prospects to develop space-based weapons remain a top threat to Russia’s security, and said Russia will seek to maintain a nuclear parity with the United States. However, it added that Russia’s policy will be pragmatic and will exclude a new arms race.
The Captain’s Journal has recommended engaging the Caucasus by means of friendship, assistance and special dispensation for business partnerships. This remarkable admission by Russia, signed by Medvedev, directly admits that war is possible over energy.

The romantic notions of influence in its so-called near abroad has been dropped in favor of more honest but crass verbal bullying and threats, targeted at an administration which wants to press the “reset” button with them. The team of Putin and Medvedev intend to bloat the cash flow directly into Russia in payment for energy, this very energy being extorted by force if necessary.

Given the predisposition of the current administration to negotiate, talk, bargain and expect only the best of our supposedly erstwhile enemies, it isn’t apparent that Georgia, the Ukraine and other regional countries have any hope of continued sovereignty as it currently exists. If extortion and threats don’t pave the way towards a re-emergence of the old Soviet style government, then they have made their only other option clear. War is coming to the Caucasus.

[Eddo211]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

Moscow warns of future energy wars

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/05/2009513141243951766.html

Russia has warned that military conflicts over energy resources could erupt along its borders in the near future, as the race to secure oil and gas reserves gains momentum.
A Kremlin policy paper, which maps out Russia's main challenges to national security for the next decade, said "problems that involve the use of military force cannot be excluded" in competition for resources.

The National Security Strategy's release coincides with a deadline for countries around the world to submit sea bed ownership claims to a United Nations commission, including for the resource-rich Arctic.
The paper, signed off by Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's president, says international relations in the next 10 years will be shaped by battles over energy reserves.

"The attention of international politics in the long-term perspective will be concentrated on the acquisition of energy resources," it said.
"Amid competitive struggle for resources, attempts to use military force to solve emerging problems can't be excluded.
"The existing balance of forces near the borders of the Russian Federation and its allies can be violated," it added……………..

…………..But it added Russia would pursue a "rational and pragmatic" foreign policy and avoid a new arms race.


The document said Moscow would seek an "equal and full-fledged strategic partnership" with Washington "on the basis on coinciding interests".

Cheshme ma rochan (Persian)......mer ashke louiss (Armenian).....I feel better now (English)



Russia condemns EU's eastern pact

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/05/2009522105519932693.html

Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's president, has condemned European Union plans to strengthen ties with former Soviet states as a "partnership against Russia".
His comments came on Friday at a meeting between Russian and EU leaders in Khabarovsk, in Russia's far east, which was aimed at improving relations strained last year's Russia-Georgia war and a row over gas supplies.
But EU leaders failed to convince Medvedev that their planned partnership with Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, was intended only to promote "prosperity and stability".
"I'll put it succinctly. We tried to convince ourselves but in the end we couldn't," Medvedev said.

"What bothers us is that for some [ex-Soviet] states this is seen as a partnership against Russia."

Moscow 'irritated'

Nicu Popescu, a research fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera that he did not believe Russia had any serious reasons to be concerned about the EU pact with the former Soviet states.
"What irritated Moscow was that the European Union put pressure on Belarus not to recognise Abkhazia and South Ossetia [breakaway Georgian regions] as well as the deal with Ukraine on the reconstruction of the Ukrainian pipeline," he said.

"These two factors mobilised Russia against the eastern partnership in a way that exaggerated it given the low-scale nature of the European policy."
The two sides also failed to agree on measures to prevent gas supplies to Europe being cut again, following a dispute between Ukraine and Russia in January that left millions of people without heat.
Medvedev insisted that Ukraine was solely to blame for the dispute, and warned that disruptions could occur again if Kiev could not pay.
"We are ready to help the Ukrainian state but we would like a significant part of that work to be perhaps taken on by the European Union," he said.

Disruption

Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, said it was up to Russia, not just Ukraine, to ensure reliable supplies to Europe.
"Disruption in the export and transport of gas must not be allowed to occur again," he said.
"We ask Russia and Ukraine to do everything in their power to prevent another crisis next year."
Despite continuining tension between the EU and Russia, the talks "increased our mutual trust, which is very much needed and very important," Vaclav Klaus, the Czech Republic president, whose country holds the EU presidency, said.

"The European Union considers Russia to be its strategic partner. We must do something to make this real and not just a formal proclamation," he said.
Barroso said Russia and the EU had made "some good progress" toward a new agreement to strengthen ties and replace a formal pact that expired in 2007.
The EU suspended talks on the deal after Russia's war with Georgia in August, but announced in November that it would return to the
table.

[Eddo211]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

Obama administration creates South Caucasus supply network

As the United States prepares to boost its military presence in Afghanistan, the Obama administration is using all means to secure alternative routes to supply U.S. and NATO forces as the security situation continues to deteriorate in Pakistan, according to U.S. officials who asked that they not be named. So far Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan have all agreed to provide new supply routes to Afghanistan, all anxious to boost their international profiles, these sources said. Teresita Schaffer, director of the South Asia program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, told The Times, “These new routes reflect a necessary fallback position since Pakistan is becoming more and more unstable. We relied on the Paks for seven years, but routes became more and more insecure.” Former CIA chief of Counterterrorism, Vince Cannistraro, described the Pakistan routes as “a mess” and “increasingly vulnerable.”

With 21,000 additional U.S. troops expected in Afghanistan, the U.S.-NATO forces will require some 3,500 tons of water per day as well as thousands of tons of jet fuel and other key goods, according to U.S. officials. A major meeting on March 9 in Baku, Azerbaijan, by the U.S. European Command, representatives from the U.S. Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, the Defense Logistics Agency and the Department of Defense, was also attended by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan, to investigate South Caucasus supply routes.
CSIS Middle East expert Tony Cordesman said that the Obama administration has also been talking to Turkey to gain permission to have flights leave from Turkish bases, pass through Iranian or Turkmenistan airspace, or depart from Navroly or Karshi-Kanabad in Uzbekistan, transiting Turkmenistan. A more economical route could originate in Turkey, stop to make purchases of goods in Azerbaijan and then ship them to Kazakhstan or Turkmenistan, U.S. officials said.

Cordesman said another possibility was a route beginning in Turkey transiting Armenia or Georgia, and Azerbaijan across the Caspian passing through Kazak or Uzbek airspace. A more direct route could pass through Turkmenistan air space, a U.S. official said.
On March 5, Armenian Defense Minister Seyran Ohayan told senior Afghanistan officials that Armenia would open its airspace for shipments of supplies to U.S. forces, according to published reports.
Some U.S. intelligence officials believe the new transit agreements and the growing closeness of fresh ties could lead to the countries allowing U.S. bases on their soil if that became necessary, using warehouses to store arms or humanitarian aid. Even Georgia has made an offer to the administration to provide a supply route and a military base, a State Dept. official said.
But the Obama administration is determined to rely on civilian, commercial purchases and avoid militarizing the program, according to Middle East analyst Pat Clawson at Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

The most controversial offer of help came from Iran which has agreed to let the United States Air Base at Al-Udeid in Qatar be the chief base from which U.S. materiel would be flown across Iran into Afghanistan, according to former senior DIA official Col. Pat Lang. The plan was presented to President Obama in early April by Secretary of Defense Bill Gates, Joint Chiefs of Staff head Adm. Mike Mullin, and transport command official, Gen. Duncan J. McNabb after numerous Iran-U.S. backdoor meetings.
According to Lang and other U.S. officials, Al Udeid in Qatar would act as the hub from which U.S. aircraft could fly weapons, supplies and troops over the Persian Gulf, and continue through southern and central Iran to the U.S. base at Kandahar in southern Afghanistan.
There is also a sea route from Iran that could be used, former and serving U.S. officials said. The Revolutionary Guards main naval base is at Chah-Bahar, on the Arabian Sea near Iran’s northern border with Pakistan and is the main base for Tehran’s submarine fleet. The argument is that it would provide the ideal port of call for U.S. provisions to reach Afghanistan by sea. From the port, U.S. ships would travel north through Iran’s Sistan-v-Baluchstan route up to the Iran- Pakistan-Afghanistan border intersection where they would head east to Kandahar.

Lang said this plan was facing strong Israeli opposition.
Schaffer said she wasn’t aware of the plan, but added: “like anything with Iran, it will have a sting in the tail.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2009/05/obama-administration-creates-south-caucasus-supply-network-.html

[Federate]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

U.S. Cuts Aid To Armenia Over ‘Democratic Governance’


The United States has effectively axed nearly one third of a $235.6 million aid program for Armenia, citing its government’s deteriorated human rights record and democratic practices.
The U.S. Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) indicated late on Wednesday that the $67 million project to reconstruct and repair about 1,000 kilometers of Armenian rural roads will not be implemented anytime soon.

The agency, which administers the U.S. Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) program, froze the project following a harsh government crackdown on the Armenian opposition sparked by the disputed presidential election of February 2008. The MCC board of directors has extended the freeze during quarterly meetings held over the past year.

In a statement issued after its latest meeting in Washington chaired by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the board said MCC “ will not resume funding for any further road construction and rehabilitation.” “The responsibility for this outcome remains with the government of Armenia, whose actions have been inconsistent with the eligibility criteria that are at the heart of the MCC program,” Rodney Bent, the corporation’s acting executive director, was quoted as saying.

“I do not anticipate that the Board will revisit this issue in the future,” added Bent.

The move came one day after the U.S. State Department reiterated its discontent with Yerevan’s human rights record in an annual report on U.S. efforts to promote freedom and democracy around the world. It again described the February 2008 ballot as “significantly flawed” and criticized the ensuing government crackdown on the opposition.

“Authorities used harassment and intrusive application of bureaucratic measures to intimidate and retaliate against government opponents,” said the report. “Police beat pretrial detainees and failed to provide due process in some cases … Courts remained subject to political pressure from the executive branch, with the selective prosecution of political opponents and absence of due process reflecting the judiciary’s lack of independence.”

“U.S. officials repeatedly have warned the government that MCC funding is contingent upon its progress in democratic practices and in meeting the MCC indicators,” added the report.

U.S. assessment of the May 31 municipal elections in Yerevan promises to be just as negative. U.S. Ambassador to Armenia Marie Yovanovitch said on Tuesday that U.S. Embassy officials who observed the vote witnessed irregularities “throughout the city.” Yovanovitch said a report based on their findings will be released shortly.

The U.S. aid suspension led the Armenian government in July 2008 to allocate about $17 million of its own funds to rural road construction envisaged by Armenia’s MCA compact. The current economic recession and a resulting major shortfall in tax revenues preclude more such funding this year. Instead, the government secured in February a $25 million loan from the World Bank for rural infrastructure rehabilitation.

The aid cut will not affect the main $160 million segment of the aid package approved by MCC in 2006. It is due to be spent on rebuilding and expanding the Armenia’s irrigation networks.

http://www.armenialiberty.org/content/article/1752097.html

[KanadaHye]

Re: US engagement in the Caucasus.

The US has money to "lend"?

I witnessed many irregularities in both elections that Bush won