There was no crisis in US-Azerbaijan relations, claims Paul Goble

Prominent Azeri government lobbyist, former Director of Publications, but now Publications Adviser at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy – Paul Goble is in action again.

Previously, if you recall, he has called not to criticize Azerbaijan for human rights abuses, for it could leave Western sphere of influence and become Russia’s ally.

Now, in the latest issue of the biweekly newsletter of the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy, he claims that there was no crisis in US-Azerbaijan relations. No crisis at all. According to his opinion, the only problem, started with a single statement of an unnamed official in the Foreign Policy (sic!) - though he doesn’t name it explicitly) - was the fact that Azeri political commentators, mislead by this statement, had just misunderstood complicated procedures of Washington politics:

The widely reported comments in Baku by an unidentified American official that “there is only thing [the United States] really care[s] about right now, and this is Afghanistan” not only sparked a debate in Azerbaijan as to whether that means the United States cares about Azerbaijan but also revealed some fundamental misunderstandings among Baku commentators about the nature of relations between countries in general and between the United States and Azerbaijan in particular, misunderstandings that threaten the broadening and deepening of a relationship that has been growing for some years.

And he continues:

Indeed, this single statement became the occasion for Azerbaijani commentators of various stripes to compile a list of American actions that supposedly provided “proof” of what this unnamed individual had said.  The US has not had an ambassador in Baku for a year, the US did not invite President Ilham Aliyev to the counter-proliferation summit, the US has criticized Azerbaijan on human rights, and the US has failed to move in the directions Baku would like on the events of 1915 and Article 907 are all things that one or another writer has adduced as evidence that Washington is against Azerbaijan or doesn’t care about it.

But all of these are not true, says Paul Goble and exampli gratis, gives the true reason behind one of these points:

In none of these cases have the authors pointed to three other more important pieces of evidence about the relationship between Washington and Baku.  First, these writers and speakers have ignored the ways in which the policies of the US Administration as opposed to some in the Congress have underlined the importance Azerbaijan has in Washington.  Second, these commentators have ignored the reality that the United States as a variety of interests in the world and naturally views Azerbaijan in terms of these broader interests.  And third, these authors have failed to understand that many of “the facts” they adduce as evidence are in fact evidence of something else.

To give but one example: the gap between the presence of American ambassadors in Baku is not evidence of the lack of concern in Washington about Azerbaijan but just the reverse.  The complex way in which individuals are considered for such positions and the multitude of parties involved in the process often means in the American context that the more important the country is for the US and the more challenging the problems both countries face together, the more likely it is that the process of selecting, nominating and confirming a senior American representative—especially when that process starts at the beginning of a presidential administration rather than later—often is protracted.

OK, I complete understand that after high profile visits by Secretary Gates and Secretary Clinton that have amended the ties between Baku and Washington, some people is Baku have become uncomfortable with past actions, comments and “analysis” like calling for US companies to be driven out of Azerbaijan, inspection of and record fines imposed on American companies like Coca-Cola, statements about Barack Obama’s alleged inferiority complex, 24/7 anti-American hysteria at Azeri TV channels. And they are uncomfortable with the fact that they have ordered and paid for such ugly things. Now it is time to wash all this dirt away and Paul Goble is a perfect solution.

But, Mr.Goble, what about shame? What about tonnes of analysis and reports by local and foreign media and experts about the “fictional” crisis even before that famous statement in Foreign Policy? What about all those anti-American statements and hysteria of Azeri officials? And last, not least, what about your own previous article where you infamously called [US and others] not to criticize Azerbaijan for human rights abuses and amend the ties?

Really, Mr.Goble?