Western Orientation in Foreign Policy of Azerbaijan

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Theoretical Background
Shift of Azerbaijan’s Foreign Policy towards the West
Cooperation of Azerbaijan and EU
Conclusion
References

Introduction

For a long time, Azerbaijan has been perceived as a country at crossroads between western and eastern orientation (Cornell 2011). Political and economic events that have surpassed two decades have reshaped Azerbaijan’s national identity and repositioned the country in the global map. Due to these events, Azerbaijan is slowly trying to find its footing on the political and economic front.

Through this analysis, it is vital to investigate the impact of foreign policy shifts in the progress and growth of Azerbaijan’s economy. This is an interesting piece of study because it is common knowledge that a country’s political and social stability is hinged on its economic stability (Cornell 2011).

Before we analyze Azerbaijan’s foreign policy inclination, it is vital to point out that the country has been under Persian, Russian, Turkish and Arabic influence over the past few decades (Cornell 2011, p. 1). Therefore, the country’s’ language, cultural and historic composition bears traces of Persian, Russian, Turkish and Arabic influence.

However, Azerbaijan’s policy orientation has been under review for the past two decades after the country gained independence from the Soviet Union. Azerbaijan is not only considered a country at crossroads because of its policy orientation but also because of its physical location.

Azerbaijan stands as a transition route of natural resources from central Asia to Europe (thereby facilitating the movement of oil to Europe without passing through Iran and Russia). Due to this fact alone, Azerbaijan is of strategic interest to Europe and a majority of Eastern countries (Cornell 2011, p. 1).

Aside from this fact, Azerbaijan is probably the most populous country in the Southern Caucasus, and its population is influenced Islamic and Christian religious beliefs.

Like most countries in the Islamic peninsular, Azerbaijan is mainly concerned with upholding peace and establishing a wider market for its exports. However, one main concern for the country is the territorial conflict it has with Armenia regarding Nagorno Karabakh (Volten 2007, p. 165).

This conflict has been a dicey affair for Azerbaijan’s foreign relations with the west because the west’s response to the conflict has been a determinant of how Azerbaijan relates to the west. Initially, Azerbaijan had no meaningful foreign relations with European states that did not support the Soviet Union.

However, after the country gained independence in 1991, Azerbaijan tried to warm up to the west by joining international bodies such as the United Nations (UN), World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the likes (Cornell 2011, p. 1).

The year 1996 marked the start of an ongoing and improving foreign relations between Azerbaijan and the EU through the EU-Azerbaijan Partnership and Cooperation Agreement that saw both parties gain (economically) from the agreement (Volten 2007, p. 165).

With the growth of the EU, many of Azerbaijan’s interests were accommodated by European states. Some of the main highlights of this relationship were the financing of Azerbaijan’s infrastructure by the EU and the integration of Azerbaijan’s economy into EU’s economy.

According to Cornell (2011), there is enough evidence to show that Western states have properly engaged with Azerbaijan regarding the energy question, but there is still a lot to be desired regarding Europe’s engagement with Azerbaijan concerning the democratic agenda and the Nagorno Karabakh conflict.

In this regard, analysts recommend that, Europe needs to strategize its foreign policy recommendations with Azerbaijan, based on the pillars of economic growth, democracy and peace in the Caucasus region (Volten 2007, p. 165).

Factoring the above intrigues (regarding Azerbaijan’s foreign policy), there are lingering questions regarding Azerbaijan’s cooperation with Europe, and if the country’s foreign policy will continue to be entrenched into European philosophies. So far, different analysts have done their research on the same issue and they have arrived at different conclusions.

However, this paper explains that, there is a strong inclination of Azerbaijan’s foreign policy to the west.

Some analysts perceive this relationship to be economically motivated because the interest of both parties (the West and Azerbaijan) is to achieve economic stability, but this paper explains that, due to the geopolitical uncertainties of the Caucus region, Azerbaijan’s foreign policy has been a careful balance between peace and economic prosperity.

Theoretical Background

Usually, the entire concept of foreign relations stems from the conviction by different states to safeguard their national interests( within the confines of international relations philosophy).

Ordinarily, the concept of foreign policy would be easily interpreted to be the way one state relates with another, but for purposes of this study, foreign policy will be perceived as the political attitude of one country towards another (Fischer, Miller and Sidney 2007).

Specifically, the theoretical section of this paper tries to explain Azerbaijan’s political attitude with the west. To explain this issue, this paper relies on political, economic and social theories.

The economic theories will mainly be used to comprehend the influence of Azerbaijan’s growing wealth (accumulated from petrodollars) in the formulation of its foreign policies. To explain the contribution of political theories towards the understanding of Azerbaijan’s foreign policies, geostrategic and geopolitical theories will be used.

The geostrategic and geopolitical theories will be incorporated into this analysis because it is common knowledge that Azerbaijan’s geographic positioning bears more weight in the formulation of the country’s foreign policies with the west.

By extension, this fact also has a profound impact on the way the west perceives Azerbaijan. The social component of this analysis will be explained by the international relations theory. The above theories will be explained within the context of analyzing Azerbaijan’s foreign policy with the west.

Often, the strategies adopted by different states are meant to uphold good relations with other states. However, with deepening elements of globalization and state-unification pressures, different countries have been forced to interact with other forms of non-state actors in securing their national interests (Volten 2007, p. 165).

Since the safeguard of national interests is the prime focus of international relations, states are often engaged in high stakes, high-level decision-making processes to formulate their foreign policies.

States normally formulate their foreign policies based on two criteria: exploitation and mutual relations (Weber 2009, p. 1). Previous studies done on international relations and foreign policy have come up with a growing body of theories defining international relations between states.

The international relations theory is one such theory because it strives to provide a theoretical framework to define international relations (Weber 2009, p. 1). Guided by the goal of evaluating how the international relations theory manifests the relation between Azerbaijan and EU, this paper evaluates the realism, liberalism and constructivism aspects of the international relations theory.

Contributors of the realism theory bear a lot of emphasis on the role of the state in international relations (Weber 2009, p. 1). Conversely, there is limited emphasis on non-state actors as important players in international theory. The realism theory also views the world stage as an ungoverned platform where different states express intense self-centered interests (which define how they relate with other states).

Based on this understanding, the realist theory does not recognize that states can be relied on to guarantee the survival of other states. The realist theory, therefore, views international relations as an extension of an anarchical system of governance where every state seeks to amass as much wealth and resources as possible to secure their national interests (Weber 2009, p. 1).

The liberal theory of international relations also explains foreign relations (among states) by relying on philosophies advanced by idealists (Puchala 2003, p. 189). Though the liberal theory focuses on state participation as the key determinant of international relations, it gives a lot of emphasis to state preferences as opposed to state capabilities as the main determinant of state behavior in policy formulation.

The liberal theory includes the input of other state agents in the formulation of international policies, thereby discarding the previously held belief (by realists) that the state is the only actor in the formulation of foreign policies.

The emphasis on state preferences is determinant on many state factors, including cultural influences, economic systems, governance types and other social, political or economic systems that are privy to a state (Puchala 2003, p. 189).

The liberal point of view on foreign policy formulation is also not only limited to national or security concerns but also other factors such as personal preferences, cultural associations and similar non-economic factors.

From this understanding, instead of a purely economic and anarchical system of governance, there are many other platforms for international interactions, including the development of cultural capital, expansion of export markets and similar factors. Through this cooperation, proponents of the liberal theory note that peace can be fostered among states (Puchala 2003, p. 189).

The constructivism theory is mainly concerned with the development of ideas, how the ideas are used by different states to define the internal structure of foreign policy formulation, and how these structures influence the development of different interests among different states (Weber 2009, p. 1). These interests are mainly known to outline the guidelines for foreign policy formulation.

Therefore, the constructivism theory assumes that states develop their foreign policies based on a collection of their interests, values, and beliefs. There is, therefore, a lot of emphasis on social constructs as the main elements behind the creation of the material world (Weber 2009, p. 3).

Another important concept in the analysis on foreign policy is the geopolitics theory. Geopolitics tries to explain foreign policy formulation from the perspective of a country’s geographic location and size (Derluguian 2000, p. 51). Cultural and ideological factors are, therefore, excluded in this analysis because geopolitics only focuses on one material concept.

The geopolitical theory is especially crucial to the understanding of Azerbaijan’s political power because the theory observes that since the country is strategically located between Europe and part of central Asia, it stands at a strategic position of power to the European Union (EU). In this regard, the geopolitical theory would suggest that Azerbaijan derives its political power from the basis of its location.

The geopolitical theory has been used in the world war era where the “heartland” was considered of strategic importance to amassing world power and eventually controlling Eastern Europe (Derluguian 2000, p. 51).

In the world war era, Russia and Germany unsuccessfully tried to control the “heartland” so that they would increase their power in the world stage. The mere fact that both powers tried to control a strategic geographic resource manifests the importance of geopolitics in evaluating state powers.

The concept of geo-strategy also closely explains the influence of geopolitics in explaining state powers in the world stage. Geo-strategy is a component of geopolitics because it explains military planning and political influence in foreign policy development (Blouet 2005, p. 22).

Geo-strategy is different from geopolitics because geo-strategy is concerned with the “end” of geopolitics (or the use of geographical resources to achieve a country’s objectives). It is, therefore, more concerned with the goal of geopolitics as opposed to the mere application of it. Through this analysis, geo-strategy perceives geography to be the starting point of the development of foreign policy strategies.

Geo-strategy advocates for a more aggressive approach to foreign policy development, taking into consideration the geographic advantages that a nation possesses. It is, therefore, crucial to include the context of analysis when evaluating the concept of geo-strategy.

Here, “context” may include the timeline for developing strategies, the technological advancements existing during the development of military plans, the existent economic policies and the country’s goals at the time of formulating the country’s foreign policies (Blouet 2005, p. 22).

Finally, an important (economic) theory that highlights the formulation of foreign policies for Azerbaijan is the classical Marxism theory. Karl Max developed the Marxist theory through a popular concept that was later known as Marxism (Curtis 1997). Marxism notes that capitalism has created a class barrier in the society that gives a lot of power to the ruling class.

By extension, his theory has been used to explain the power that world superpowers wield in global politics. According to the Marxist concept, nations exercise their political power because they control most of the world’s factors of production. In today’s world, countries such as the US, China, UK (and the likes) are known to have a lot of power in world politics because of their control of the factors of production.

The powers of these world superpowers have been felt in many spheres of global policy development. The United Nations (UN) platform is a classic example of how world superpowers exercise their power in determining UN’s policies regarding dynamic world issues.

For instance, the decision to implement a “no-fly zone” over Libya during the middle-east uprising was a resolution arrived by the UN, but the major players who wield veto power to make such decisions rests with the world’s powerful states such as the US, France and the UK.

It is no secret that these countries control most of the world’s factors of production. However, in understanding the factors of production, it is important to include machinery, equipment, infrastructure, labor and similar factors of production.

For instance, the world’s strongest military powers are mainly found in the member states that comprise the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Since NATO has created some form of ruling class in world politics. The Marxist concept stands true because NATO members control the factors of production in the world.

This analysis can be used to understand Azerbaijan’s foreign policies because Azerbaijan has become increasingly assertive in its foreign policies because of the revenues it receives from oil exports. In this regard, Azerbaijan has demanded more respect in the international platform. For instance, the country was very vocal against Norway’s views regarding its human rights records.

This observation was made when Norway “lectured” Azerbaijan on the importance of upholding human rights. In response to this event, President Aliyev (Azerbaijan’s ruler) was quoted saying that “only the United States can treat me that way, as the United States is the only superpower” (Cornell 2011, p. 26).

Through this assertion, clearly, economic prosperity dictates the way countries relate and more so, economic prosperity is a critical component of analyzing how Azerbaijan relates with its neighbors. However, it is no secret that Azerbaijan’s regional prestige and foreign policy assertiveness is characterized by the streaming flow of oil dollars. Marxism explains this power.

Shift of Azerbaijan’s Foreign Policy towards the West

Though Azerbaijan’s foreign relations with the EU has largely been perceived from the economic benefits EU expects to gain from Azerbaijan, the latter also has other interests, which determine its foreign policies with the EU.

Therefore, it is important to note that Azerbaijan also harbors its own interests in forging a good relationship with the EU. EU is not the only party that expects to gain from a favorable foreign policy with Azerbaijan. Consequently, the interests of Azerbaijan determine the shift in foreign policy towards the EU.

Russia has often tried to win Azerbaijan’s support as it strives to safeguard its interests and the interests of the wider communist community. Leaders from the two countries have met severally and discussed the relationship between the two countries (Cornell 2011, p. 26). The relationship between the two countries can be traced to the long history that Azerbaijan has had under Russia.

Currently, Russia is a strong trading partner with Azerbaijan. The two nations have also adopted significant military partnership programs, which have seen military transfers taking place between the two countries (Cornell 2011, p. 26). At the time of her independence, Azerbaijan warmed up to friendly relations with its neighbors, including Iran and Turkey.

In fact, the Turkish influence on Azerbaijan was so strong that experts observed that the Turkish influence underpinned Azerbaijan’s nationalism (Cornell 2011, p. 26).

The acceptance of Iran to host Azerbaijan’s foreign mission was also another indicator that Azerbaijan was strengthening its ties with its Muslim neighbors. The increased cohesiveness between Azerbaijan and its Muslim neighbors was the strongest indication that western interests were being pushed to the sideline.

However, there was a drastic shift in Azerbaijan’s foreign policies because of growing concerns between Azerbaijan and its neighbors. For instance, the main conflict underpinning the tension between Azerbaijan and Iran is the status of the Caspian Sea (Cornell 2011, p. 26).

In addition, some of the issues that underlie the tense relationship between Azerbaijan and Iran are the historical injustices done to the Azerbaijan people when their country was divided between Persia and Russia (in the 19^th century). These concerns have contributed to the shift in foreign policy orientation towards the west (which is perceived to be in bad terms with Iran) (Great Britain Parliament 2008, p. 67).

Largely, this shift in foreign policy orientation is part of Azerbaijan’s quest to uphold its independence and territorial integrity. Most importantly, Azerbaijan turned to the west to receive support for its territorial claims. The hostility Azerbaijan received from some of its neighbors (such as Armenia) was also another motivator to establishing a good relationship with the west.

In this regard, the US has constantly supported Azerbaijan in the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict. As noted in previous sections of this study, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is also another major problem for Azerbaijan. So far, the country has lost thousands of people in this conflict and some of the tension that is seen as an aftermath to the conflict has not disappeared.

Based on this fact alone, Azerbaijan has adopted a friendlier approach towards the west because it seeks support in this conflict. There is, therefore, a mutual relationship between Azerbaijan and the west, but this relationship also stretches to infrastructure developments and other capital projects undertaken in Azerbaijan by the EU (Great Britain Parliament 2008, p. 67).

Similarly, it is important to note that Azerbaijan has sought western intervention in establishing fundamental institutions that uphold democracy and human rights in the country. The US and Europe have both accorded their support in this initiative though there are existing skepticisms regarding the commitment of Azerbaijan’s government to uphold human rights in the country.

Considering the strategic shift in foreign policy towards the West, Azerbaijan and the EU have developed a common view on most policy issues. This development has cemented their relationship and both parties are currently working on several projects together.

For instance, the EU has come up with a three-year plan worth 92 million pounds, which is expected to improve Azerbaijan’s governance program by strengthening its main institutions (Great Britain Parliament 2008, p. 67). This program is financed through the National indicative program, which was expected to be completed in the year 2010/2011 (Becker 2008, p. 31).

Through the strengthening of Azerbaijan’s government institutions, the level of foreign investments and business growth is likely to increase. The cooperation between Azerbaijan and the EU also stretches to financing research on renewable energy projects in Azerbaijan.

The EU INOGATE program is an example of such a program because it is aimed at improving the use of alternative and renewable energy in Azerbaijan (Becker 2008, p. 31). Comprehensively, these dynamics inform the shift in foreign policy towards the west.

Cooperation of Azerbaijan and EU

As noted in earlier sections of this paper, Azerbaijan’s physical location has facilitated the transportation of oil to Europe without passing through Russia or Iran. This has been the focus for the EU in forging a good relationship with Azerbaijan. This relationship has been characterized by different agreements arrived at by the two parties.

For instance, Amirova (2010) states, “On November 7, the EU and Azerbaijan signed a memorandum of understanding on energy partnership, and on November 14, they agreed on the action plan of European Neighborhood Policy” (p. 140).

Legally, the benchmark for EU’s cooperation with Azerbaijan was set on the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA), which provided the basic framework for political negotiations between the two parties.

Largely, on the economic front, Azerbaijan has made crucial steps towards solidifying its relationship with the EU, but on the governance front, Azerbaijan is slowly sliding into an authoritarian state (Becker 2008, p. 31). This observation was made despite reassurances by Azerbaijan that it was going to uphold the rule of law and ensure that democracy prevails within its borders.

The push towards democracy is an indication of Azerbaijan’s willingness to collaborate with the EU in areas other than economic ties (at least vocally). However, it would be false to say that the non-economic partnership with the EU is Azerbaijan’s main area of integration with the EU. Economic ties, therefore, outline the main framework for Azerbaijan’s relation with the EU.

The transportation of oil to the EU is an indicator of the inclination of Azerbaijan’s foreign policies towards the west.

The transportation of Caspian fossil energy to Europe has been facilitated by a series of pipeline projects, some of which are explained by Balamir-Coşkun (2009) that, “Azerbaijan was involved into the project of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline construction and will be in the future part of the realization of another project with geostrategic and economical importance for the region – the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline Nabucco” (p. 225).

The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline is not the only pipeline transporting oil to Europe through Azerbaijan because the Turkish-Greek pipeline is also another channel that transports oil to Europe. In reference to this pipeline, Schmidt (2009) explains that, “The Turkish-Greek pipeline got first connected to the BTE pipeline in July 2007 and it is planned that the pipeline will be extended to Italy by 2012 (p. 140).

From a non-economic point of view, it can also be said that the nationalistic sentiments in Azerbaijan are predominantly anti-Russian and not against the Europeans. Based on this understanding alone, it can be said that Azerbaijan’s pro-European sentiments are an indication to the integration of Azerbaijan in the European body of states (Wiessala 2007, p. 218).

Again, to highlight the increasing non-economic cooperation between Azerbaijan and the West, it is crucial to highlight that Azerbaijan has been an important ally of the west in fighting terrorism within the region.

For instance, GUAM has firmly been under the leadership of Azerbaijan since 2007 and so far, it has been able to decrease the terrorist threats posed by Iran and its affiliate religious organizations, which uphold radical Muslim beliefs (Wiessala 2007, p. 218). Furthermore, Azerbaijan’s link with NATO is proof that the country firmly supports the west in its international activities.

As a result, Azerbaijan joined NATO’s partnership for peace program and through military support; the country has been able to supply its troops to some of NATO’s key missions such as the Kosovo mission, Iraq mission and Afghanistan mission.

The pursuit of a favorable foreign policy with the west is perceived by Wiessala (2007), as part of a strategic relationship that Azerbaijan is striving to achieve with NATO, USA and EU. Cornell (2010) explains the pursuit of favorable foreign policies with the west as a strategy pursued by Azerbaijan during the 90s.

To affirm his stance, Cornell reiterates a previously known fact in this study that in 1994, Azerbaijan struck a major oil deal with the EU to allow the exploration of Caspian oil (a deal, which is almost exclusively perceived as a one-of-a-kind arrangement that almost exclusively supplies oil to the EU) (Wiessala 2007, p. 218).

Furthermore, Azerbaijan has not joined existing oil corporations such as OPEC and other Russian-managed unions, which manage global oil exports. Similarly, Azerbaijan has supported the west in its stance on Afghanistan oil (to maintain a strong command of the natural resources of the country as opposed to nationalizing them) (Wiessala 2007, p. 218).

Furthermore, Azerbaijan remains a strong supporter of the Nabucco project (a project that almost entirely depends on the support of Azerbaijan).

The support of Azerbaijan to divide the Caspian Sea into different segments is also another indicator of Azerbaijan’s support to the west and almost single-handedly, the country has financed the development of a railroad infrastructure that potentially links the EU with central Asia to facilitate the movement of resources across the two continents (Wiessala 2007, p. 218).

Conclusion

Weighing the facts of this study, we can see that, Azerbaijan’s formulation of favorable foreign policies towards the west is a move by Azerbaijan to institute progress on its social, economic and political platforms. The EU model of governance is, therefore perceived as an ideal model for Azerbaijan to emulate.

EU’s cooperation with Azerbaijan should not therefore be perceived as an end, but a means to an end, because Azerbaijan aims to improve most of its institutions, including the judiciary, public administration institutions and similar organs of governance.

Azerbaijan, therefore, looks up to the EU as a model to modernize different aspects of its social, political and economic composition. In addition, Azerbaijan also expects to increase the standard of living of its citizens through this partnership

However, looking into the future, Azerbaijan’s relation with the west is still a work in progress, because there are still many questions lingering regarding the future nature of this relationship. This dilemma stems from the fact that Azerbaijan has still not cut its ties (completely) with Russia and Iran.

This issue stands as a big problem for the future sustainability of Azerbaijan’s relation with the west because there is a lot of hostility between the West and Iran (and by extension, Russia).

Based on this fact alone, it is no surprise that part of the west sees Azerbaijan as an extension of Russia. However, it still remains an interesting observation to watch how Azerbaijan’s foreign policies towards the west will change (subject to the East-West tensions).

References

Amirova, S. European Neighbourhood Policy in South Caucasus: Azerbaijan as a case study. Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2010.

Balamir-Coşkun, B. Neighborhood Challenge: The European Union and Its Neighbors. London: Universal-Publishers, 2009.

Becker, J. EU and Turkish Foreign Policies – Synergies for the Southern Caucasus? London: GRIN Verlag, 2008.

Blouet, B. Global Geostrategy: Mackinder And The Defence Of The West. London: Routledge, 2005.

Cornell, S. Azerbaijan Since Independence. London: M.E. Sharpe, 2010.

Cornell, S. Azerbaijan Since Independence. Armonk : Sharpe, 2011.

Curtis, M. Marxism: The Inner Dialogues. New York: Transaction Publishers, 1997.

Derluguian, G. Questioning Geopolitics: Political Projects in a Changing World-System. London: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2000.

Fischer, F., Miller, G. J. and Sidney, M. S. Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods. New York: CRC Press, 2007.

Great Britain Parliament. The European Union and Russia. London: The Stationery Office, 2008.

Puchala, D. Theory And History In International Relations. London: Routledge, 2003.

Schmidt, S. Potential Analysis for Further Nature Conservation in Azerbaijan. London: Geozon Science Media, 2009.

Volten, P. Establishing Security And Stability In The Wider Black Sea Area: International Politics And The New And Emerging Democracies. London: IOS Press, 2007.

Weber, C. International Relations Theory: A Critical Introduction. London: Taylor & Francis, 2009.

Wiessala, G. The European Union and Asia: Reflections and Re-Orientations. London: Rodopi, 2007.

Click Here To Order Now!