The USA has no long-term plans to keep its military bases in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, Alexander Rahr, a German expert on the CIS countries says in an interview with the Kazakh newspaper Panorama, published on 15 November. He said Afghanistan was the reason for the US presence there and ruled out the possibility of the USA "seriously thinking" of military action against China
"which is doing its best in order not to provoke the USA to take such steps". He also urged the Central Asian countries, including the Caspian region, to step up involvement in NATO programmes and EU defence policy in order to improve ties with Europe. Speaking of Turkmenistan's possible involvement in
such international projects, Rahr described it as "a second North Korea" because of its isolation. The following is the text of the interview. Subheads have been added editorially.
Aleksandr Rahr, a well-known political scientist and expert on the CIS countries at the reputable German Foreign Policy Society, answers questions from Panorama.
Central Asia and the West
[Yaroslav Razumov, interviewer] A year ago, when troops from Western countries entered Afghanistan and set up bases in the southern CIS countries
[Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan], many in Central Asia, including Kazakhstan, thought that economic and political cooperation between the countries in the
region and the West would intensify and that investment would increase following the defeat of the [Afghan] Taleban.
[Rahr] Yes, one has the impression that the West was interested in Central Asia only as long as the war [the US-led antiterrorist operation] was under way in Afghanistan. European humanitarian aid has started to restore Afghanistan, but not to strengthen the CIS or GUUAM [Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldova]. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is aimed at combating terrorism, was not demanded by the West. I think
that many sighed with relief after [Russian President Vladimir] Putin also lost his strategic interest in Central Asia, and ceased to regard it as a sphere of his influence after he had let the Americans in there.
At least this is how these processes are assessed here. In my view, people in Europe are indifferent to what the USA will do in the region. The main thing
is that the problems that the USA will create in a new world realignment should not affect Europe - that is what people worry about.
One may regret that economic cooperation between the West and the countries of Central Asia and the Caspian region has not reached a serious stage. It is also noteworthy that the European Union is completely losing interest even in those regions that are much closer to it both geographically and historically - the Balkans and the Middle East.
There is no interest at all in a country such as Ukraine because Europe is now busy with reforms within Europe; the time has come to put an end to the illusions about building a successful "Big Europe". Everyone understands that this entails heavy financial expenditure, and people and businesses are afraid of taking risks because the economic situation is far from being the best. This is the reason why international cooperation is becoming less active. Everyone is now more interested in what America will do in Iraq.
Caspian project
[Interviewer] It follows from this that the relations of the Central Asian countries with Western Europe are doomed to fall into a state of lethargy or
go into total reverse? What should be done in order to improve the situation?
[Rahr] Perhaps, if they want to expand their relations with the European Union, these states should still try to step up their involvement in NATO programmes and cooperation in defence policy, and discussions about Western values should be started within those countries. For instance, whether Kazakhstan can see itself in the Council of Europe and people's views about that. Membership of that organization would become a precondition for economic cooperation and for strengthening mutual understanding.
I think that discussions by the regional countries of the idea of a Caspian stabilization pact could attract serious interest in Europe. For this, it should be made clear to European foreign defence policy that it could, to some extent, be applied to the Caspian region, affecting, of course, both Central Asia and the Caucasus. Such a Caspian pact could be drawn up under the auspices of Europe and, naturally, Russia and the countries in the region. That is an idea for the future because Europeans do not want geostrategically-thinking powers such as China, Russia and the USA to be in confrontation in the region. Strategic institutions are now discussing the idea of such a pact, and it is now in suspension.
European defence policy
[Interviewer] But is European foreign defence policy ready to be involved in
such a project, and is it possible to speak of the existence of such a policy at all?
[Rahr] I think it will exist not only on paper. The point at issue is that the bureaucratic process of development is very long and complicated - every
decision has to be agreed on at the level of all the EU member countries. Sometimes it seems that the working out of a European defence policy hinders
NATO's expansion processes, which is actually so; the process of working out
this [defence] policy has been slowed down, but not stopped. This [process] will continue, especially when ideas emerge about what Europe should do in order to ensure stability. And the Caspian region is just such an area for this process. Moreover, the EU does not pose any threat, as, perhaps, NATO does under the auspices of the USA, which starts commanding after coming into a region. European help as part of a foreign defence policy against terrorism could give the Europeans an opportunity to actually provide scientific and technical help to the Shanghai Cooperation organization.
Turkmenistan and the Caspian region
[Interviewer] Speaking of the Caspian region, one should pay attention to the situation in Turkmenistan. To what extent can that country be involved in such international projects?
[Rahr] It is really difficult to answer that question. Turkmenistan has completely isolated itself, and is becoming a second North Korea. No one knows what will happen there in the future. There are fears that Islam will be forced to become even more active there because there has to be a state ideology, since it is impossible to build a country based on a personality cult alone. It is unclear where Turkmenistan will go with its gas resources - so far it has failed to agree on this with both Russia and the Caucasus. It is really difficult to predict the situation there, and the country is a potential source of conflict.
China and the USA
[Interviewer] There are views, including those of German experts, that most of the geopolitical motivations behind the presence of the US military bases
in the CIS countries in Central Asian lie not so much in the situation in Afghanistan as in [wanting to] surround China and threaten it from the direction to which Beijing is sensitive. What do you think about this theory?
[Rahr] I regard it as fantasy at the moment. I cannot imagine that the USA is seriously thinking of military action against China, especially since China is doing its best in order not to provoke the USA into taking such steps. If
one looks at the map and all these [US] bases, a picture emerges that is really favourable for making such suggestions. But one should proceed realistically from the fact that it was not accidental that the bases were opened in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, but because there was a centre of tension in Afghanistan. I think that the USA will not beef up its bases in Central Asia, and it has no long-term plans to keep them there. They will leave as quickly as they came. Especially since, I think, conflict may flare
up in other regions - in Pakistan, where stability is under a big question mark, and, according to some experts, this is exactly where another international explosion may take place; as well as Yemen, Indonesia and the Philippines. A large-scale conflict may flare up in any of those regions tomorrow, and, given this, I think that the USA is keeping its bases in Central Asia only because of Afghanistan.
Iran, Europe, USA
[Interviewer] The Caspian region and the processes involving it are inconceivable without Iran. There are different views about cooperation with
that country in Europe and the USA. Given this, what is your view of the Iran situation?
[Rahr] The topic of Iran is one of the problematic ones as far as Europe's relations with America are concerned. Europe considers that positive processes are under way there, and the EU is, therefore, advocating not even
a critical dialogue but open relations with it, including cooperation in the
Caspian region. But America thinks differently and (without presenting any evidence, though) keeps saying that Iran sponsors terrorist organizations throughout the world. And that is a deadly argument against which the Europeans have little to say following the 11 September [events in the USA last year].