CC BY
12
near abroad space is for Russia a zone of its privileged interests owing to objective causes.
"Politeks", S-Pb, 2009, t.5, N 3, p. 134-145.
D. Fayzullayev,
doctor of philosophic sciences
THE USA-THE CENTRAL ASIA:
THE SHIPMENT POINT OR SPRINGBOARD?
In 2009, after the new American Administration, headed by president B. Obama, came to power the burden of the Russian-American mutual action became the slogan of "resettlement" in relations between two countries, which had deteriorated greatly in times of former leadership of the White House. The use of term "resettlement" in the sphere of foreign relations most likely implies not only mutual wish of the Russian and the American parties for discussion of urgent foreign policy problems, smiles and friendly personal relations of the leaders of both countries but also willingness to come to an agreement, i.e. to make compromise and make mutual concessions in their own geopolitical interests. And it is not an easy matter: Washington and Moscow make concessions to each other just being alive in the spheres of crossing interests.
Vice-president of the USA J.Biden was the first to declare "resettlement" on 7 February 2009 at the Munich conference on security affairs. On 21 October 2009, in Bucharest he stressed that despite "resettlement" the USA and Russia were in disagreement on basic principal matters and said that the USA came out against the perceptions of "spheres of influence", reigned in the XIX century. He said that the USA would not stand such approach.
The Central Asian region is one of the traditional directions of the Russian-American geopolitical rivalry. The changes in the situation in
this region since the end of 2008 and for the 2009 show that "resettlement" of relations goes on parallel with essential extension and growth of military presence of the USA in the Central Asia. However, the military actions of NATO coalition forces headed by the USA were intensified against talibs in neighboring Afghanistan. One should not ignore more ambitious plans of some circles in Washington, although such plans were moved aside after dismissal of neo-conservatives and its personification J. Bush.
One of the former Administration's obsessions was the reconstruction of the world with the view of determination of new borders of usual regions. This idea was incarnated inter alia in the project for creation Partnership on Cooperation and Development of Great Central Asia (PBTsA). The project was elaborated in 2005 by the Institute for Central Asia and Caucasus at Nitze High School of International Studies in J. Hopkins University in Washington with direct participation of the Institute's director professor F. Starr. The crux of the project consists in approach to the Central Asia and Afghanistan as a united military-strategic and geopolitical entity and further in inclusion of this plan in the American project of reformation of the Greater Middle East (BBV).
The Conception of the Greater Middle East (the USA State Secretary C. Rice recommended in 2006 to rename it as the New Near East), according to Washington's perception of progress and civilization, foresaw the reconstruction of the vast region, including all Arabic states, as well as Israel, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Some analysts, for instance, senior researcher of conservative fund in Washington "Heritage Foundation" A. Cohen, included also the postSoviet Central Asia in this project. The Greater Middle East project set as its objective the struggle against "Islamic" terrorism and
advancement of democracy with military and financial assistance, rendered by western countries, primarily the USA and its NATO allies.
J. Bush, as the host succeeded to include the point of the Greater Middle East into the agenda of the summit of "Big Eight" on Sea Island in 2004. But, as academician E. Primakov noted in his comments to newspaper "Asharq Al Awsat", the attempt, made by president Bush to legalize at the summit of "Big Eight" the plan for imposing democracy to countries of the Greater Middle East, i.e. to the Muslim world from Afghanistan to Morocco, resulted in failure. President of France J. Chirac supported the point of view of the politicians, who had disapproved the American plan, and declared that the Near East countries should themselves decide whether they are in need of "missionaries of democracy". It should be mentioned that Egypt and Saudi Arabia refused to support the plan, proposed by Bush, and did not participate in the summit's sitting. At the same time, prime-minister of Turkey R.T. Erdogan supported this idea and mentioned that the initiative relating to the Greater Near East, proposed by the USA, provided for economic and political reforms in the Near East countries in exchange for the essential financial assistance by western countries.
However, finally, the grandiose plans of reconstruction of Muslim countries in West Asia and North Africa, as in the Central Asia, get dusty on the shelves. By twist of fate, in the middle of the 2000s, the project of the Greater Middle East was damaged by euphoria of Washington, deceived by external signs of stabilization of the situation in Afghanistan, hurried up to make the conclusion of disappearance of the terrorist threat, coming from Afghanistan, and of consolidation and modernization of the governing institutions, creating a favorable milieu for civil society and realization of human rights.
For a short period of time, the situation in Afghanistan aggravated rapidly due to the grown military activities of talibs. In these conditions,
there disappeared the idea of the feasible participation of Afganistan and its neighbors, the Central Asian states, all being agrarian countries, in the Greater Middle East project for the sake of development of regional trade and new trade routes from the Central Asia to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghanistan succeeded only in raising for the period of 20042007 the amount of production of "specific" goods - narcotics over the record level of 1999. The main flow of narcotics goes to the Middle Asia, Russia, West Europe, to the USA, to Iran, China.
In spite of the rejected projects of the former American Administration, due the course of events in Afghanistan and owing to the long-term interests of the USA, the declared objectives of BBV and PBTsA are still being present in the policy of the present Administration. However, the new president up to present time succeeded to avoid the mistake of his predecessor and to adopt a more pragmatic approach to democracy and market reforms in the post-Soviet Central Asia.
But the American military presence tends even to be extended in this region in connection with anti-terrorist NATO operation in Afghanistan and owing to Washington's interest in transit of cargoes for the enlarged American military contingent. In their turn, the Central Asian states, especially under conditions of the world crisis, are interested in payment for provided by them transport services and in fulfillment of Washington's promises about probable participation of American companies in investment projects, which have great significance for these states.
In this regard, the intention of the leaders of the post-Soviet Central Asia to diversify and to balance their foreign policy, manoeuvring among Russia, PRC and the West, plays a great role.
Kirghizstan
The external motive for rather great intensification of the efforts, exerted by American authorities to enlarge the presence of the USA military forces in the Central Asian region was caused by the decision on denouncement of the agreement, concluded in 2001, about location of American air base on the territory of airport "Manas" in Bishkek (Kirghizstan). This decision was taken by the president of the republic K. Bakiyev in February 2009. The discussion about the need to close the base was going on for a long time. This ides was supported by the leadership of Russia, pointing out that the active phase of the antiterrorist operation in Afghanistan was considered to be terminated. Consequently, the location of American air base "Manas" in Kirghizstan for support of NATO operation in Afghanistan ceased to be urgent. Besides, there appeared the contradiction between the location of the NATO air base in Kirghizstan and the liabilities, assumed by the republic to Organization of Treaty on Collective Security (ODKB). The financial factor also plaid a significant role. Actually, in time of declared by the president of Kirghizstan intention to shut down the base, there were signed the agreements between the governments of the RF and Kirghizstan about a state credit to Kirghizstan and about partial repayment of the state debt in the property form and about writing off the rest indebtedness of Kirghizstan, as well as the agreement between the ministries of finance of the two countries about free financial assistance of the RF to Kirghizstan, namely the credit of $300 million, writing off the debt for the sum of $180 million and the free grant of $150 million.
The USA took obligation to evacuate base "Manas" by 18 August 2009, i.e. in half a year after decision on its shutting down. However, despite the declared by Bishkek as final decision, Americans did not hurry to evacuate the base. By the end of June 2009, the agreement was
achieved on replacement of the base by the center of transfer of civil cargoes. The former legal provisions on formerly adopted decisions were observed. The established center in "Manas" represents a "new" entity, although experts say that actually there are no essential differences between the base and the transit center.
The center, like the base, functions autonomously outside the civil zone of airport "Manas". It keeps under its control the infrastructure of the base. The signed agreement does not provider for any cargoes' customs clearance. Thus, the authorities of Kirghizstan are not able to control the type of cargoes - civil or military - transferred through Kirghizstan to Afghanistan. The center's staff lost the diplomatic status and immunity, having received the administrative-technical status. At the same time, it is envisaged to compose a separate list of the center's officials, who will obtain the diplomatic status. This list of officials should be adopted with participation of the Kirghiz party. Besides, despite the formal absence of diplomatic immunity, the personnel of the American center may not be subject to legal proceedings of any international court or to any other organization or any other state without agreement of the USA, which actually implies the diplomatic status. The American servicemen guard the transit center, having obtained the right to carry arms.
Thus, Kirghizstan provided for the USA a lot of legal chances for functioning of the "liquidated" military base in full measure, having changed only its title. The only essential change became the price, paid by the USA for its military presence in Kirghizsta. Formerly it accounted for $42.4 million per year, including $17.4 million - payment for the lease of the air base and $25 million - the free financial assistance to Kirghizstan. Under the new agreement, this sum was raised to $168.1 million ($60 million - the lease of the transfer center, $41.5 million - free financial assistance, $30 million - modernization of the
navigation system, $36.6 million - construction of landing ground for the American air craft) .However, the agreement was concluded for one year, and the payment sum may be augmented. Moscow, in its turn, raised the issue of great strengthening its military presence in the republic. As a result, at the unofficial summit of ODKB, held in August 2009 in Kirghizstan, the agreement was signed on location of an additional Russian military contingent, comprising one battalion and a training center for Kirghiz and Russian servicemen.
At the same time, at present the negotiations are being conducted on probable location in Kirghizstan of the second military bas in the city of Osh in the south-western part of Kirghizstan in addition to the air base in the city of Kant. It is supposed that the new air base will be formed under the aegis of the newly formed Collective Forces of Urgent Reaction (KSOR) of ODKB for location of Russian forces, particularly aircraft and airborne troops.
Uzbekistan
The representatives of the White House had to exert great efforts to renew cooperation with Uzbekistan after the considerable cooling the of Uzbek-American relation for 2005-2006, caused by disapproval by the USA authorities of the actions, taken by the Uzbek leadership in Andijan, where the anti-government actions of the people were suppressed by force. The American base in Kharshi-Khanabad was closed due to aggravation in 2005 of relations between Uzbekistan and the USA, and therefore the process of rapprochement between two parties was started in the military sphere. In April 2008, at the summit of NATO, held in Bucharest, president of Uzbekistan I. Karimov declared that Uzbekistan was ready to discuss and to sign with NATO the agreement on ensuring the corridor for transfer through its territory of non-military cargoes via the border point Termez-Hairaton which was actually the sole railway route for connection with Afghanistan. It
was possible to take as a basis of the future agreement, said I. Karimov, the accord reached between Uzbekistan and the FRG, signed on 4 March of 2008, on transfer by railway through the Uzbek territory of Bundeswehr cargoes. The corresponding agreements were achieved on this issue. The supplies of American military cargoes were arranged by means of international airport "Navoi", located in the south of Uzbekistan. The negotiations were started on use of the air space of Uzbekistan to transfer via this airport the American cargoes and to transport American servicemen. The location of this American military base in airport "Navoi" would allow NATO to implement its plans to create air transit bridge Navoi (Uzbekistan) - Mazari-Sharif (Afghanistan).
At the same time, Tashkent even expressed its disagreement with the plans of location of the new Russian military base in Osh (Kirghizstan). The official site of the Uzbek foreign ministry contained the information of "Zhakhon" agency. The information was as follows: the Uzbek party does not see any need and feasibility for implementation the projects for location in the south of Kirghizstan of the additional contingent of Russian military forces, provided for by the Memorandum, signed on 1 August 2008, on intentions of the RF and Kirghizstan in development and perfection of the bilateral legal basis, regulating the presence of Russian troops on the territory of Kirghizstan and on location of additional Russian military contingent on the territory of Kirghizstan.
Turkmenistan
The cooperation with Turkmenistan should be regarded as the significant steps, taken by the USA for the sake of extension of its military presence in the Central Asia. Ashghabad always stressed its neutral status, actually keeping aside from any regional economic or military-political associations. In 2005, Turkmenistan withdrew from
the CIS, preserving the status of an associated member, i.e. the state, participating in separate types of activities of the organization, under the conditions, fixed by the agreement on associated membership. In times of former leader of Turkmenistan S. Niyazov, the Turkmen-American relations were shaped with difficulties. It was explained by the categorical enmity to the idea of export of democracy, which was persistently imposed by the USA on the former Soviet republics, including the Central Asian republics. This idea threatens the authoritarian stile of governance, prevailed in this region, and president S.Niyazov understood it well.
It is impossible to assert that the new leader of Turkmenistan -president G. Berdymukhamedov is an active supporter of democratic society, although he took some steps on the way to liberalization and greater openness of the country. His intention to extend cooperation, including its military aspects, with the USA, which was difficult to imagine some years ago, is explained by the complicated economic situation in the country for the period of the world-financial-economic crisis and constant urge of post-Soviet Turkmenistan towards diversification of routes for export of Turkmen gas. Ashghabad opened its air space for transfer of non-military cargoes for the contingent of the USA in Afghanistan, and allowed American transport airplanes, flying to Afghanistan, to receive re-fueling in the airport of Ashghabad. A small group of American military specialists is settled in the Turkmen capital for servicing these airplanes. In April 2008, the president of Turkmenistan for the first time participated in the summit of NATO in Bucharest. He declared about his readiness to arrange on the Turkmen territory the training camps for peacemakers of NATO and to locate the stores and rear bases for delivery of supplies for the troops of the Alliance. The re-fueling of American aircraft may be arranged as well in
the military base Mary, which formerly was the biggest military-strategic object of the USSR in the region.
In return for this offer Ashghabad would like to receive the financial support in implementation of the project for construction of a gas processing enterprise and the financial assistance for development of gas deposits and oil fields in the shelf of the Caspian Sea.
Tajikistan
Tajikistan, like other Central Asian countries, strove for receiving financial assistance both from the Russian and American parties. In April 2009, in the course of his visit to Dushanbe USA Assistant State Secretary R. Bowcher made the declaration about the concluded agreement with Tajikistan on transfer of non-military cargoes through this country to Afghanistan. In February 2009, after the visit to Moscow of the president of Kirghizstan, who succeeded to get great financial assistance and preferential credits in response to the closure of the American military base, president of Tajikistan E. Rahmon visited Moscow. The Tajik president tried to review some inter-state agreements, which determine the Russian-Tajik relations, particularly the conditions of the Russian troops' presence in Tajikistan.
In 2004, Tajikistan and Russia signed the treaty, which changed the status of the motorized infantry division N 201, located in the republic, and established the military base. Dushanbe transferred to Moscow the optical-electronic point of control over the cosmic space "Nurek" ("Window"), estimated for the amount of $242.5 million, to repay the debt of Tajikistan to Russia in size of $300 million. Russia received free of charge the land and the objects on the territory of the optical-electronic point and of the territory of location of the Russian division. In its turn, Russia agreed to make investments, which account for about $2 billion, in economy of Tajikistan for 2006-2008, including $1.5 billion provided by Russian company "Rusal" to modernize the
Tajik aluminum enterprise (TadAZ), under condition of its privatization, and to make investment into the final stage of construction of Rogunskaya hydroelectric station for the sake of ensuring energy security of the republic and providing electricity for TadAZ. However, due to some reasons, not related to Russian company "Rusal", these projects were not implemented. The parties did not come to the agreement on the technical-economic substantiation of Rogunskaya hydroelectric station, and due to this disagreement "Rusal" was refused to participate in privatization of TadAZ. Referring to this fact, Dushanbe raised the issue of review of the military agreements in order to get the rent payment for location of Russian military objects on the Tajik territory. However, it should be taken into account that the RF accomplished implementation of one of the two planned projects in the sphere of Tajik energy, and on 31 July 2009, constructed by Russian specialists Sangtudinskaya hydroelectric station GES-1 was commissioned during the visit to Tajikistan of Russian president D. Medvedev.
Tajikistan receives arms and spare parts from Russia, paying Russian internal prices as member of ODKB. The armed forces of Tajikistan are equipped with Russian arms. Hundreds of Taik officers are trained free of charge in Russian military higher education institutions. The issue of location in Tajikistan of the second military base "Aini" in the vicinity (20km) of Dushanbe is still unsettled. The corresponding agreement was signed in July 2008 but was further not ratified due to the disagreements mainly on financial matters. Meanwhile, in the course of visit to Dushanbe of Deputy State Secretary of the USA R. Blake in July 2009, the Tajik party proposed to the USA to use airdrome "Aini" for the air transit corridor to transfer cargoes to Afghanistan, since it is located near the Tajik-Afghan border. However, the matter is still at the stage of negotiations.
In the course of the state visit of the president of Tajikistan to Russia in October 2009 D. Medvedev and E. Rahmon discussed a great and complicated complex of relations between two countries. The joint declaration of the two presidents mentioned the priority of further mutual action in the hydroelectric sphere in the interests of the whole Central Asian region (implementation of the project for construction of Sangtudinskaya GES-1, being a good example), again confirmed the joint interest in implementation of other hydroelectric-energy projects in Tajikistan with due account of fulfillment of assumed obligations, the significance of implementation of mutually beneficial projects in the fuel-energy sphere, including geological works jointly with "Gasprom", exploration and development of natural gas deposits in Tajikistan. The parties confirmed their intention to strengthen reciprocal action in military and military-technical spheres. In his interview to newspaper "Kommersant" minister of defense of the RF A. Serdyukov declared that the issue of payment for the base was not discussed, and he said that it was not yet decided, whether the military base for division N 201 would function after 2014, according to the existed agreement or whether its presence would be paid. The visit of the Tajik president to Moscow lessened the tension in the relations between the RF and Tajikistan, to the mind of experts of the Institute of Open Society in New York.
* * *
Thus, it may be said that for the period of 2008-2009 the American military presence in the region was extended, as it was seen against the background of lesser presence of Russia. It is sufficient to have a look at the map of location of military objects of the RF and of the USA in the Central Asia. The reason of this, in the author's opinion, is not connected with radical change of the foreign policy course of the
CA states, but it is determined by their economic difficult situation for the period of the contemporary crisis. In other words, these states decided to use their geographic situation and to get a material benefit out of usage of their territory, their air space and military objects by the NATO countries for transfer of cargoes to Afghanistan. Taking into account the circumstance that all post-Soviet Central Asian states, except Turkmenistan, are members of ODKB, one may inevitably put the question: to what extent cooperation for extension of military presence of the USA and some other step, taken by them, correspond to the liabilities, assumed by them within the framework of this organization, particularly, in connection with the fact that NATO usually ignores ODKB.
"Aziya i Afrika segodnya", M., 2010, N1, p. 9-14.
