Opinion: Stability in Georgia is crucial for Azerbaijani strategic interests

Georgia's increasing geopolitical importance in the region meant that last month's mass protests in Georgia were closely scrutinised by the international community, writes Nigar Muzaffarova for commonspace.eu. "As political stability is the basic condition of effectively regulated trade deals and economic activity, stakeholders are naturally imperilled by the unrest. Azerbaijan, the main investor in Georgia’s energy and transport infrastructure, has had its own concerns since the latter bears utmost importance for Baku’s access to global markets," she adds.

Georgia witnessed large-scale protests in early March when the ruling Georgian Dream party tried to push the so-called “foreign agents” law through parliament, which allegedly envisaged an authoritarian turn in domestic politics. Many Georgians viewed the labelling of civil society organisations funded from abroad as “foreign agents” as a major setback in the country’s EU integration process, not least because it would further derail the ongoing negotiations over Tbilisi’s fulfilment of 12 conditions to move towards obtaining candidate status.

Amid growing domestic backlash and external pressure, the Georgian Dream government backtracked and rejected the law in parliament. However, it appears that political polarisation and uncertainty will linger on for the next few months which bodes well neither for ordinary Georgians nor Tbilisi’s partners in the wider neighbourhood. 

Georgia’s increasing geopolitical importance in the region made the international community scrutinise the upheaval closely, especially those inspired by its strategic role as a pivotal transit link between the East and West against the background of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. As political stability is the basic condition of effectively regulated trade deals and economic activity, stakeholders are naturally imperilled by the unrest.

Azerbaijan, the main investor in Georgia’s energy and transport infrastructure, has had its own concerns since the latter bears utmost importance for Baku’s access to global markets. Georgia’s destabilisation in the context of the war in Ukraine would be a strategic nightmare for Azerbaijan’s currently strong regional positioning. Things can change quickly in the South Caucasus, and Baku likely finds narratives of a possible “second front” circulating in Georgia concerning.

Cooperation between Tbilisi and Baku on infrastructure is well-established and growing

Previously, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline passing through Georgia was nearly hit by Russian bombs during the Russia-Georgia war in 2008. The pipeline was also out of action for some time on the eve of that war allegedly due to a Russian cyberattack that cost Azerbaijan millions of dollars. Most recently, the pipeline stopped operations after two massive earthquakes hit southeastern Türkiye on 6 February.    

Baku already has a well-established pipeline infrastructure to ship its oil and gas resources to Türkiye and then to European markets through Georgian territory. If Western countries were not interested in the further improvement of this route before February 2022, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine they came to appreciate its strategic importance in their fight against Moscow’s weaponisation of gas supplies.

In July, the EU signed a memorandum of understanding with Azerbaijan on a strategic energy partnership that envisions doubling Baku’s gas exports to Europe in the next five years. According to President Aliyev, Azerbaijan plans to increase its gas supplies to over 24 billion cubic metres (bcm) in 2023, of which at least 12 bcm will flow to Europe. Baku expects Brussels to help to finance the improvement of pipeline capacity in Georgia and Türkiye if it is serious about eliminating its gas dependence on Russia in the long term. 

Another important deal that may reduce European dependence on Russia was reached at the quadrilateral meeting of Azerbaijani, Georgian, Hungarian, and Romanian leaders on 17 December last year. Accordingly, power originating from Azerbaijani renewable energy will be transmitted through Georgia and Romania to Hungary, via a submarine power cable under the Black Sea. Hence, Baku and Tbilisi gain major advantages, as the former establishes its image as a reliable renewable energy partner for the EU and the latter accrues benefits in terms of taxes, renewed infrastructure, and fostered labour market activities.

Georgia is critical for Eurasian land connectivity

Georgia has also long been one of the critical nodes in Eurasian land connectivity, linking its regional economic partners, Azerbaijan and Türkiye, and facilitating rail trade between its global partners, the EU and China. As part of the Middle Corridor that connects China with the EU through Central Asia and the South Caucasus, Tbilisi coordinates its connectivity policy with Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Türkiye to ensure the smooth transit of cargo along the route which not only brings economic dividends, but also helps diversify its geopolitical linkages to different power centres.

After Western sanctions crippled the Northern Corridor passing through Russia, the Middle Corridor countries increased their efforts to bolster the soft and hard infrastructure capacity of the route. In that sense, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Türkiye, and Kazakhstan signed an agreement on the establishment of the Middle Corridor joint venture with an aim to eliminate major bottlenecks and attract greater involvement from the EU and China. In November 2022, President Aliyev’s announced an additional $100 million in funding for the Georgian section of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars (BTK) railway to meet the needs of “a new geopolitical situation”. In previous years, Azerbaijan allocated $775 million in preferential loans to Georgia to build the railroad, which started operations in 2017. 

Azerbaijan’s proactive moves to strengthen the transport capacity of the Middle Corridor have not been limited to land routes but extended overseas during 2022. On 24 May, ADY Container launched a feeder vessel service in the Black Sea between the Georgian port of Poti and the Romanian port of Constanta to meet increasing cargo loads over the transit route. Shortly after, in June, the second vessel was set afloat in the Black Sea, linking Batumi port to the port of Constanta.

Still, weak infrastructure in the Black Sea causes delays and congestion, which makes it necessary to have a deep seaport. In this regard, Georgia’s proposed and postponed Anaklia project has been considered a viable choice to further develop freight capacity. Currently, the project's future seems blurry due to political speculations around the project, as the Georgian government put its implementation on hold.

Azerbaijan needs a strong and comprehensive partnership with Georgia, Türkiye, and the EU, to balance Russian and Iranian inroads into the region

Azerbaijan’s concerns about Georgia’s potential destabilisation should further be put into the context of the deteriorating geopolitical environment around its borders. Besides Georgia, Baku’s major military and economic partners, Türkiye and Israel, have also been going through hard times, with domestic protests paralysing both countries’ ability to proactively shape developments in their neighbourhoods. Taking into account how important coordinated moves with these countries have been for Azerbaijan’s independent foreign policy, Baku needs to reflect on this drawback while pushing its agenda either on Karabakh or on other crucial issues. 

The situation may look grimmer if one notes Baku’s recently worsening relations with Russia and Iran. Both countries have recently been pursuing an assertive South Caucasus policy which was mostly deleterious to Baku’s interests. In a break with the past, Moscow came to rely more on Tehran in checking Azerbaijan’s independent foreign policy, which led to an escalation of tensions along the state borders. Therefore, Azerbaijan needs a strong and comprehensive partnership with Georgia and Türkiye, and through them with the EU, to balance Russian and Iranian inroads into the region.   

Last but not the least, the Georgian Dream government has a history of making attempts at reaching out to Russia by suggesting to buy gas from Gazprom, as it was suggested in 2015 by the then-Energy Minister Kakha Kaladze. Given that Azerbaijan has long been the safe ultimate gas supplier for the Georgian market, these moves triggered certain irritation in Baku back then, so it’s natural to assume Azerbaijan is wary about the ever-existing possibility of the current government’s creeping slide towards Moscow’s orbit. 

source: Nigar Muzaffarova is a Research Fellow at the Topchubashov Center in Baku, Azerbaijan. She received her bachelor's degree in Public Administration at the Academy of Public Administration. While data visualization and economic tendencies in the Caucasus region are her major fields of interest, she is also reflecting on developments in tech industries around the world. Nigar is an alumna of the CAT program 2019-2020 edition, Conflict School 2021 organized by the Eurasia Partnership Foundation and the "Media and Information Literacy" program of Interlink Academy in 2022. Nigar is also specialized in project writing and coordination in the field of youth, especially focusing on projects regarding human rights education, non-formal learning methods and peacebuilding. She has been a part of several boot camps, training and seminars concerning the above-mentioned topics.
photo: BPI

The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

Ukraine Peace Talks Set to Expand as Russia and Europe Clash Over Post-war Security

Ukraine and Russia could see European countries join the next round of peace negotiations, following talks between US special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Thursday (November 12). However, conflicting positions over European military involvement, Ukraine’s territorial future and the continent’s security arrangements highlight the difficulties facing the diplomatic process. Speaking after the meeting, Witkoff said European participation would be an important development, describing the countries concerned as key partners. Kushner also indicated that Washington had noticed a shift in European attitudes and believed their involvement would not obstruct progress. In a statement published on X, he said the expanded discussions would address broader European security arrangements alongside territorial disputes between Russia and Ukraine. The US envoys subsequently travelled to Dublin, where they met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy during a European summit. Zelenskyy welcomed the possibility of European participation and expressed hope that the negotiations would include measures to reduce tensions and establish ceasefires. He also reiterated the importance of European representation in decisions concerning the continent’s security. Moscow, however, has offered a more cautious interpretation of the proposed expansion. Putin's aide, Yuri Ushakov, suggested that European countries should first reconsider their military assistance to Kyiv, arguing that their current actions demonstrated an unwillingness to pursue peace. Putin similarly called on Washington to work with its European allies to establish whether they genuinely wanted peace or continued confrontation with Russia. The Russian president also rejected the prospect of European peacekeeping troops being deployed to Ukraine following a potential agreement, describing such a presence as a continuation of the war. His position reflects wider disagreements over the future European security architecture, with Moscow seeking discussions on the continent's broader security arrangements, while European leaders insist that such negotiations cannot replace a settlement of the war. Simultaneously, Zelenskyy raised concerns about disruptions to Starshield, the US-made satellite communications service used by Ukrainian forces. He described Washington’s discussions with Moscow about Europe's future security as unusual and warned against decisions that could undermine Ukraine's sovereignty. Despite the diplomatic activity, fighting continued. Russian drone attacks killed two people in Ukraine's Sumy region and injured five in Rivne, while a separate attack in Russia's Belgorod region killed one person and injured four. Ukrainian agricultural company Kernel Holding also suspended operations at all its oilseed extraction facilities following repeated Russian attacks.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)