About us   Editorial Board   Advisory Board   Subscribe   Contact us  
 


CAUCASUS UPDATE

In this section, we publish the weekly analysis of the major events taking place in the Caucasus and beyond. The Caucasus Update is written by our Senior Editor Alexander Jackson. Click here to subscribe.

The Implications of the Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan Dispute, CU Issue 42, August 10, 2009

A curious disagreement developed between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan in late July. Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedov, at a cabinet meeting on July 24, announced that his government would be “taking Azerbaijan to the International Court of Arbitration” over contested Caspian Sea oil fields (APA, July 25). The news raised eyebrows in Baku and amongst Caspian-watchers, who had assumed that the difficulties in the bilateral relationship had been overcome in recent years (Jamestown Eurasia Daily Monitor, August 6).

President Berdimuhammedov’s statement came as something of a shock, given its timing. Only a few days before, representatives of Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan had finished a series of meetings to discuss a legal division of the Caspian zone which lies between the two states (Eurasianet, July 17). The meetings were fairly low-profile, and nothing much was apparently achieved towards a legal regime, but there were no outright disagreements. Baku apparently suggested a joint operating system for the Kapaz field (known as Serdar by Turkmenistan), one of the three fields – along with Azeri/Omar and Chirag/Osman – which were noted by President Berdimuhammedov.

Azeri and Chirag constitute part of the vast Azeri-Chirag-Gunashli (ACG) field, which has been operated by British Petroleum since the mid 1990s. The Kapaz/Serdar field has been the subject of disagreements between Baku and Ashgabat for years, and both sides have refrained from development until an agreement could be reached. Indeed, Kapaz/Serdar was the main cause of the breakdown in Turkmen-Azerbaijani relations in the 1990s. The atmosphere between the two sides deteriorated so much that then-Presidents Heydar Aliyev and Saparmurat Niyazov refused to talk for a while. A thaw was only reached in 2008 when the two sides realised that their mutual interests - particularly a trans-Caspian gas pipeline to the West - outweighed their differences.

Despite the lack of a final resolution of the dispute over the oil fields, it was generally assumed that all was well. Both sides, prioritising a ‘balanced’ foreign policy, are actively seeking ways to escape Russia’s political and economic influence. The Nabucco project, taking gas from the Caspian region to Europe, needs a trans-Caspian gas pipeline to become viable. So the new dispute throws yet another obstacle in the project’s path. It also raises two other issues.

Firstly, talking about the ICA President Berdimuhammedov didn’t specify which international court was implied. There are namely a number of international courts dealing with arbitration issues. The best-known among them are London Court of International Arbitration, ICC International Court of Arbitration in Paris and the Stockholm International Arbitration Court. These courts deal exclusively with issues of contract implementation. Territorial disputes, including those regarding the maritime borders are dealt with by the International Court of Justice in The Hague. In order to be able to submit the dispute to one these courts both Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan have to recognize the court’s jurisdiction in the particular case (Asia Times, July 31, 2009).

Azerbaijan seems confident that in case of any international adjudication the court will find in its favour, particularly over Azeri and Chirag, which lie not far from its Absheron peninsula: Turkmenistan’s insistence that the peninsula should be disregarded in defining the equidistant median line is unlikely to be heeded by the international court (APA, August 4). Azerbaijan’s confidence explains the restrained reaction from Baku, which has simply stated that it is willing to use all diplomatic means, including judicial ones, to resolve the dispute.

This willingness to negotiate could help to address the second major issue – the future of the Baku-Ashgabat relationship. The two countries should have much in common. Both have a complex relationship with their southern neighbour, Iran, and mistrust their former patron in Moscow. Both seek energy diversification as part of their wider foreign policy strategy. And both have a keen interest in realising the Nabucco project, which is why the timing of President Berdimuhammedov’s outburst is so strange. This renewed spat, if not halted, could potentially risk these mutual interests and lead to a return of the 1990s ‘cold war’.

The intention to take the claim to an international court is therefore encouraging. It suggests that a mutually acceptable, independent judgement could finally be made on the issue, ending years of uncertainty and mistrust. A number of analysts have noted this opportunity, and Baku’s moderate response should also be seen as a sign of relief (RFE/RL, July 27).

Nonetheless, taking the dispute to an international court could also be harmful for the Nabucco project from the point of view of timing. It is true that the court’s judgement might help settle the dispute over the sectoral demarcation in the Caspian Sea between the two countries and accelerate the trans-Caspian gas pipeline. But international arbitration moves at a glacial pace, and a final result would not be expected for years. Nabucco is expected to start operating by 2014, so this is hardly encouraging.

Also, it cannot be ruled out that the Turkmen threats will go unfulfilled (as in 1999) and there will be no international arbitration on the dispute, and the sides will try again to settle their argument through negotiations. One can assume that the unexpected Turkmen move at this time juncture aimed specifically at attaining some more concessions from the West, especially given the current huge interest of the latter to get the Nabucco project swiftly implemented. The coming months will be crucial in terms of acquiring clarity on the prospects of the Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan relationship and the Nabucco gas pipeline.



"The Implications of the Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan Dispute, CU Issue 42, August 10, 2009" | 1 comment | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

by Anonymous on Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:25 pm
Seems to me it is not really about "Turkmenistan wishing to squeeze concessions from the West".

Tout simplement, Berdymukhammedov is done with his declared "liberalization" period and falls into classic Turkmen "haugty muscle-flexing" tyranny, Niyazov style.


PREVIOUS ISSUES

  Caspian Compromise Backfires for Russia and Iran, CU Issue 83, November 24, 2010
  Turkey in a Tight Spot on Missile Defense, CU Issue 82, November 11, 2010
  The OSCE and Kyrgyzstan’s Election, CU Issue 81, October 30, 2010
  Unblocking the US-Azerbaijan Relationship, CU Issue 80, October 07, 2010
  Nabucco Pipeline: Quo Vadis?, CU Issue 79, September 30, 2010
  Russia tightens its grip in the South Caucasus, CU Issue 78, August 23, 2010
  Armenian Politics: Rigidity Versus Flexibility, CU Issue 77, August 10, 2010
  Russia and Georgia: Ready To Talk?, CU Issue 76, July 21, 2010
  Can the US walk and chew gum at the same time?, CU Issue 75, July 9, 2010
  The Kyrgyzstan Crisis – A Qualified Success for Turkish Diplomacy?, CU Issue 74, June 24, 2010
  Brussels downgrades the Caucasus, CU Issue 73, June 07, 2010
  NATO’s New Strategic Concept and the Caspian Region, CU Issue 72, June 01, 2010
  Joe Biden and European Security, CU Issue 71, May 13, 2010
  Behind the US-Azerbaijan row, CU Issue 70, May 6, 2010
  Turkey and Iran: The risks of failure, CU Issue 69, April 30, 2010
  Kazakhstan, the OSCE, and the crisis in Kyrgyzstan, CU Issue 68, April 19, 2010
  The Implications of the Moscow Bombings, CU Issue 67, April 12, 2010
  Iran Manoeuvres for a role in Karabakh, CU Issue 66, April 5, 2010
  The EU and Abkhazia: Between a rock and a hard place, CU Issue 65, March 16, 2010
  Fallout from the US ‘Genocide’ vote, CU Issue 64, March 9, 2010
  Ukraine's elections and future of GUAM, CU Issue 63, February 10, 2010
  Less Democracy, More Security: Kazakhstan and the OSCE, CU Issue 62, January 18, 2010
  Tackling the North Caucasus Insurgency: Development or Rhetoric?, CU Issue 61, January 11, 2010
  The Caspian Region in 2010, CU Issue 60, January 4, 2010
  The Caspian Region in 2010, CU Issue 59, December 31, 2009
  The Turkmenistan-China Pipeline Changes the Energy Balance, CU Issue 58, December 21, 2009
  Russia’s European Security Treaty, CU Issue 57, December 7, 2009
  The ‘Kidnapping War’ in Georgia and its Implications, CU Issue 56, December 3, 2009
  Azerbaijan Shifts its Energy Priorities, CU Issue 55, November 23, 2009
  The South Caucasian States and Afghanistan, CU Issue 54, November 11, 2009
  Is Turkey turning East?, CU Issue 53, November 2, 2009
  What is Russia’s Gameplan for Iran?, CU Issue 52, October 26, 2009
  Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan: Where Next?, CU Issue 51, October 19, 2009
  The Armenians of Georgia: A New Flashpoint in the Caucasus?, CU Issue 50, October 12, 2009
  Turkey’s EU Membership: Will The ‘Armenian Opening’ Help?, CU Issue 49, October 5, 2009
  The Missile Defence Shift: Implications for the Caucasus, CU Issue 48, September 22, 2009
  Rising Tensions in the Black Sea , CU Issue 47, September 14, 2009
  Armenia, Turkey, and Azerbaijan: The Clock Is Ticking, CU Issue 46, September 7, 2009
  The Battle of the Bases in Central Asia, CU Issue 45, August 31, 2009
  Russia, Israel, and the S-300s, CU Issue 44, August 24, 2009
  The motivations behind Turkey's 'Kurdish Initiative', CU Issue 43, August 17, 2009
  The Implications of the Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan Dispute, CU Issue 42, August 10, 2009
  What has changed since the August war?, CU Issue 41, August 3, 2009
  The Internal Dynamics of Armenia’s Karabakh Policy, CU Issue 40, July 20, 2009
  Gazprom’s Baku Triumph, CU Issue 39, July 06, 2009
  Ingushetia: The New Chechnya?, CU Issue 38, June 29, 2009
  Georgias Economy - A Matter for Diplomats, CU Issue 37, June 22, 2009
  ‘Progress’ In The Nagorno-Karabakh Peace Process, CU Issue 36, June 08, 2009
  Iran's Azerbaijanis and the presidential election, CU Issue 35, June 01, 2009
  Nabucco and South Stream - The Race Heats Up, CU Issue 34, May 25, 2009
  China and Central Asia, CU Issue 33, May 19, 2009
  Russia, Georgia, and NATO - A Bad Week, CU Issue 32, May 11, 2009
  The Obama Administration’s Emerging Caucasus Policy, CU Issue 31, April 27, 2009
  Integration and Division in the Caspian Sea, CU Issue 30, April 20, 2009
  The Turkish-Armenian Rapprochement - Implications for the South Caucasus, CU Issue 29, April 13, 2009
  Turkey's local elections and Armenian issue, CU Issue 28, April 6, 2009
  Is There Life Left In The Nabucco Project?, CU Issue 27, March 30, 2009
  Problems and Prospects for Russian Military Reform, CU Issue 26, March 23, 2009
  Russia and Georgia: Not back to war, CU Issue 25, March 16, 2009
  Armenia: Heading towards crisis?, CU Issue 24, March 9, 2009
  Drug trafficking in the Caucasus, CU Issue 23, February 23, 2009
  Russian-led military block: A real counterweight to NATO?, CU Issue 22, February 16, 2009
  Are the International Missions in Georgia still relevant?, CU Issue 21, February 9, 2009
  Israel and Azerbaijan: Baku’s Balancing Act, CU Issue 20, February 2, 2009
  The North Caucasus in 2009: A Bleak Forecast, CU Issue 19, January 26, 2009
  The Military Balance in Nagorno-Karabakh, CU Issue 18, January 19, 2009
  Russia, Iran, and Barack Obama in 2009, Part II, CU Issue 17, January 12, 2009
  Looking forward to 2009 in the Caucasus and beyond, Part I, CU Issue 16, January 5, 2009
  The opportunities and the risks of NATO’s new supply routes, CU Issue 15, December 22, 2008
  The Black Sea Ambitions of Armenia, CU Issue 14, December 15, 2008
  Another Small Step for Nabucco, CU Issue 13, December 8, 2008
  Will Saakashvili survive politically?, CU Issue 12, December 1, 2008
  The latest fashion: conflict mediation, CU Issue 11, November 24, 2008
  The Baku Energy Summit, CU Issue 10, November 17, 2008
  Obama and the Caucasus, CU Issue 9, November 10, 2008
  Kazakhstan's oil options, CU Issue 8, November 3, 2008
  Is the Minsk Group being sidelined?, CU Issue 7, October 27, 2008
  Gas and oil developments in the Caspian region, CU Issue 6, October 20, 2008
  Where next for the Georgian peace process?, CU Issue 5, October 8, 2008
  Unrest in the North Caucasus, CU Issue 4, September 29, 2008
  Saakashvili's future, CU Issue 3, September 22, 2008
  Iran after the Georgian War, CU Issue 2, September 15, 2008
  Football diplomacy, CU Issue 1, September 8, 2008
       
 
  © 2006-2010 CRIA
  All rights reserved

Editorial Board
Advisory Board
Our Authors

Back Issues
Caucasus Update
Current Issue

Contact Us
Subscribe
Join us on Facebook