PRIORITY DIRECTIONS IN THE FOREIGN POLICY OF ISRAEL: SOUTH CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA
Till recently the countries of CIS and mainly the countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia have not been regarded as the priority directions in the foreign policy of Israel. After the collapse of the USSR and the establishment of the diplomatic relations with the former Soviet republics, only in about 17-18 years the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel created core departments in its structure, which from January of 2009 will purposefully deal with the issues regarding South Caucasus and Central Asia.
Reorganization in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel
Before the creation of the aforementioned departments the working direction of the CIS countries had been in the jurisdiction of two separate departments – the Central Asian department and the Eurasian department, which works were coordinated by one of the most remarkable representatives of the Foreign Ministry of Israel, the director-general of the Ministry, Pinhas Avivi1. The latter department, headed by the former Soviet citizen Harry Koren, dealt with countries of the so-called post Soviet space, naturally making the main emphasis on the countries of the European part of the former USSR. But the structure, which had four positions in its administration, naturally, has not been able to provide fully the whole gradually growing scope of work in regard to the CIS countries and mainly in regard to the countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia against the background of the enlivening relations in recent years. If in the 90s the main direction of the activity of the aforementioned department was the Russian Federation, then in 2000s the interstate relations began to develop actively also with Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Georgia and Azerbaijan. The upsurge of Israeli business in those countries and general interstate partnership in the trade and economic sphere and, mainly, in the area of energy mostly contributed to that process.
In the middle of 2008 the decision was made in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Israel to boost the relations with the countries of South Caucasus and mainly with the countries of Central Asia, to which they had not paid special attention before.
In the next few months almost all the Israeli ambassadors accredited in the countries of the CIS were changed. Particularly, the ambassadors to the five former USSR Central Asian countries as well as to Belarus, Moldova and the RA were changed. There was personnel reshuffle in the embassies in Russia and Ukraine too. In Astana and Bishkek Israel Mei-Amin who was born in Kazakhstan was appointed ambassador and in Tashkent the advisor of the Foreign Minister of Israel Hilel Newman was appointed. Shemi Tzur was appointed nonresident ambassador of Israel to Armenia, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan. In 2008 the deputy Foreign Minister of Israel Majali Wahaben visited Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. In the same period the oncoming visit of the president of Israel Shimon Peres to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan was outlined.
Being very well aware of the fact that such a small department is not able to carry out such a large-scale work, Pinhas Avivi raised the question of its reorganization. After the detailed scrutiny of the issue there was a decision made by the Foreign Ministry of Israel to reorganize the department of Central Europe and Eurasia of the Ministry, which was carried out at the end of 2008. As a result two new departments were settled – Eurasia-1 and Eurasia-2. The first one – Eurasia-1 – will deal with the countries of the European part of the former USSR and Eurasia-2 will deal with the countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia. Thus, in the Foreign Ministry of Israel new division was formed mainly dealing with the countries of the aforementioned regions, which were new priority directions in the Israeli foreign policy.
It is remarkable that all that activity in the Foreign Ministry of Israel implying active diplomatic processes with those countries passes almost without being noticed by the Israeli press, political and analytical circles. Those departments are not even presented on the web-site of the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
With what staff is Israel “embarking on the campaign” to South Caucasus and Central Asia?
The renewed staff of the aforementioned departments is worth special mentioning.
As in past the Central Europe and Eurasia department will be managed by the deputy director-general of the Israeli Foreign Ministry Pinhas Avivi who today is considered to be one of the veterans and experienced figures of the Israeli diplomatic corps. The latter, besides Hebrew, also speaks five other languages. He has embarked on his diplomatic service since 1968. Since that time he has carried out his diplomatic duties, which include the service as an ambassador in more than ten countries on five continents (Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America). He headed by turn almost all the departments of the central office of the Foreign Ministry. Before being assigned to that position, he was the ambassador of Israel to Turkey in 2003-2007. The experience gained in Turkey, especially in regard to the countries of Central Asia (which are all, except Tajikistan, Turkic speaking) is considered as an important and extremely worthwhile experience. Though the “territory” of the Soviet Union is not the “native” for Pinhas Avivi and he does not speak Russian, judging by the reaction of his colleagues and other bodies of the Foreign Ministry of Israel, the latter approves himself rather efficiently in that area.
Perhaps the definite contribution to that was also made by the former “right-hand” of Pinhas Avivi on the issues of the Soviet countries Harry Koren. The latter, as it was mentioned above, was born in the Soviet Union, to be more precise, in Latvia. Russian is his “mother” tongue. He moved to Israel in 1973. He is one of the first “Russians” who appeared in the diplomatic circles of Israel. As a diplomat Harry Koren was “formed” in the Soviet region and he is considered to be one of the best experts on that region, especially on the countries of European part of the USSR. He worked at the embassy in Moscow during quite a long period; he was the ambassador to Latvia and Lithuania. He had headed the Eurasian department of the Foreign Ministry of Israel for more than two years, and then, after the reorganization, he headed Eurasia-1 department. Olga Slov and Jacob Livnen who carried out diplomatic duties in the embassies in a number of post-Soviet countries were appointed as deputies of Harry Koren in Eurasia-1. Today Eurasia-1 is the only department in the whole Israeli state structure, which head and all his employees are former Soviet Union citizens2.
In contrast to Eurasia-1, there are no Russian speaking specialists in the staff of Eurasia-2, which, as it was already mentioned, deals with the countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia. And there is only one person, i.e. Shemi Tzur, who carried out diplomatic activity on the territory of the CIS for several months.
The creation of Eurasia-2 concurred with the war in Gaza and after that with the processes connected with the Knesset elections. Under such conditions Shemi Tzur was appointed in a caretaker role.
As it was mentioned, Shemi Tzur has been the non-resident ambassador to Armenia, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan (residence in Jerusalem) since the June 2008. Though the latter is not distinguished by the great experience, nevertheless, from the point of view of the development of the working procedures in regard to South Caucasus and Central Asia he is supposed to be rather competent. The parents of Shemi Tzur are from Tabriz and latter they repatriated to Eretz-Israel. In 1981-1983 Shemi Tzur was the consul of Israel in Turkey and in 1995-2000 was the ambassador of Israel to Cyprus. In that period in the port cities of Cyprus the non-official trade and commodity turnover between Israel and Arab countries was activated and as a result Tzur appeared in the centre of the attention of Israeli press and political authorities. In 2003-2007 Shemi Tzur was the ambassador of Israel to Finland.
Tzur is rather fluent in Turkish and Iranian languages; he is also well acquainted with Turkey and Iran, which have rather serious influence on the region from ethnic-political, religious-political and spiritual-cultural points of view. The knowledge of Turkish and Iranian languages will, of course, help Shemi Tzur during his contact with Turkish speaking Azerbaijan and at some extent Turkic speaking Central Asian countries, as well as with the Iranian speaking Tajikistan. Besides, as far as we could find out, Tzur intensively studies the Russian language too, with the intension to use it in practice. Though during his career he “did not deal” regularly with the post-Soviet and particularly mentioned regions, nevertheless, one should not regard him as a rookie in that sphere. He has already left his imprint on the history of Israeli diplomacy. In 1993 Shemi Tzur opened the embassy of Israel in Kazakhstan and managed the Israeli diplomatic mission in that country for a short period.
Naftali Tamir who carried out diplomatic activity in Tokyo, Washington, Strasburg, Helsinki (as an ambassador to Finland) and etc was appointed the deputy of Shemi Tzur in Eurasia-2. Before the recent assignment Tamir had been the ambassador of Israel to Australia. It is remarkable that he was dismissed after his interview to “Haaretz” newspaper where some of the ideas expressed by him were regarded by the Israeli government as racist ones.
Both Shemi Tzur and Naftali Tamir, while being ambassadors, exerted themselves as established, principled and consistent diplomats. They both are regarded in Israeli political and diplomatic system as persons capable of taking drastic and responsible decisions. In this respect the “prestige” of Eurasia-2 is rather high not only in the Israeli foreign policy system but also in the foreign political and diplomatic circles, which are in close contact with that system.
First processes after the foundation of Eurasia-2: the foreign policy of Lieberman
The war in Gaza became a real touchstone for newly organized Eurasia-2 structure. The latter should present serious explanations and carry out “explanatory work” with the foreign policy agencies of post-Soviet countries. Though Azerbaijan made hard statements against Israel in the connection to the war in Gaza, judging from the fact that the Muslim countries of the Central Asia remained neutral and took the balanced position in regard to Israel without even slackening and prejudicing the pace of the collaboration with Israel, one may come to the conclusion that the first challenge of the Eurasia-2 in this regard was successful.
The first months of this year were the period of intensive activity. During that period Shemi Tzur visited Armenia twice, as well as the countries of the Central Asia, mainly, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. We shall touch on his visit to Armenia later. And as for the visits to Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan in March and April, after a number of official meetings in the aforementioned countries, Shemi Tzur was present on the ceremony of presentation of the credentials by the newly appointed ambassador of Israel Mei-Ami to the president Kurmanbek Bakiev, and in Turkmenistan he presented his credentials to president Aghja Nurberdiev as a non-resident ambassador. The negotiations held in Turkmenistan most probably were very efficient, because in 1-1.5 month information about the opening of the embassy in Turkmenistan appeared in Israeli press. That fact was commented on as very important achievement in Central Asia, especially in the country, which have 1000km length border with Iran.
On March 31 of this year at the special session of the Knesset the ceremony of the administering the oath by the new government of Israel took place. The leader of “Israel is our home” party Avigdor Lieberman was appointed at the post of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The latter, being the representative of the radical right wing, in the aspect of the foreign policy building is the adherent of setting closer relations, warming and active cooperation with the CIS countries. Thus, the developments in South Caucasus and Central Asia regions, conditioned by their being new priority directions in the foreign policy of Israel, fully correspond to the political orientation of A. Lieberman.
After the accession to the office of the Foreign Minister, Lieberman very quickly and clearly formulated the following priority directions of the foreign policy of the government: the strong pressure to Iran in the foreign policy plane; the reconsideration of the negotiations processes’ principles with Palestine and multi-vector foreign policy, particularly, the deepening and strengthening of the collaboration with the CIS countries, mainly with Russia and Central Asian countries. Thereby, the formation of the political dialogue and the concentration of the efforts in the direction of the development of collaboration in the spheres of trade, economy and tourism with Russia and the countries of the aforementioned regions were considered by Lieberman as a very important task.
During several weeks, after the accession to the office, two noteworthy appointments of personnel by Lieberman were made. Yossi Gal who had been the deputy director-general and was supposed to be one of the “old guard” figures was appointed as a director-general of Foreign Ministry. The appointment of the representative of the old generation to the post of director-general of the partially renewed Foreign Ministry administration found positive response within the whole diplomatic system of Israel. The second appointment by Lieberman was rather remarkable. For the first time in the history of Israel the advisor of the Minister on the CIS countries direction was appointed. The former Soviet citizen who was born in Minsk Zeev Ben-Arien (Vladimir Flanchik) was assigned to that post. He speaks Russian perfectly and he has worked in the diplomatic system of Israel for 16 years and during that whole period he worked in the CIS countries. He was the Israeli ambassador to Belarus and he worked in the embassies in Russia and Ukraine as well. He has concentrated his activity on South Caucasus and Central Asia recently, thus after the foundation of Eurasia-2 till the recent appointment ha had worked in the said department. This appointment once more comes to prove that the territory of the CIS is in the centre of attention of Israel.
What aims does Israel pursue in South Caucasus and Central Asia?
Activating its work in South Caucasus and Central Asia Israel pursue several distinct and specific purposes.
Firstly, one of the most important problems for Israel is the “Iranian ultimate priority problem”. While building its foreign political concept Israel proceeds on the axiomatic assumption that the Iranian nuclear threat is hundred-per-cent reality and its number one aim is Israel. The neutralization of the Iranian nuclear threat is considered by Israel to be the top priority of Israeli foreign policy. And at the same time, in respect to the aforementioned problem, Israeli expert centres, special services and state competent circles think that the diplomatic arsenal of resisting to Iranian aggression is not empty yet.
Thus, in May 2009, during the conference arranged by the Centre of Iranian studies of Tel-Aviv University, in which almost the whole Israeli political elite participated, the former head of the military intelligence of Israel Zeevi Farkish stated that: “It is very important to form coalition with the moderate Sunnite countries (which are also beware of Iranian nuclear threat”. Among those countries South Caucasian and Central Asian countries were mentioned.
At the same conference the deputy director of the aforementioned centre, well-known Israeli Iranist Uzi Rabbi emphasized that Israel should display diplomatic activity in the world surrounding Iran. The latter at the same time pointed out that “…to resist Iranian aggression several coalition alliances should be formed”.
At the 9th interdisciplinary conference back in February of this year the newly assigned director-general of the Foreign Ministry of Israel Yossi Gal in his report, devoted to Iran, examined the issue of studying and taking appropriate measures against diplomatic activities of Iran in the surrounding countries as well as the activities of Iran carried out through non-diplomatic channels, as one of the most important tasks of the foreign policy agency of Israel.
“It is necessary to convince South Caucasus and Central Asia countries that Israel can give them more than Iran”, - stated the other executive employee of Israeli Foreign Ministry.
This is the reason why the visit of Israeli president Shimon Peres to the region was taken as a step made in geopolitical plane. In the period previous to his visit it was logical to suppose that reception of the Israeli president at the top level in the former USSR republics could be taken negatively in Iran and Arab world. Israel, in its turn, took the visit as a barometer of the readiness of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to activate the relations with Israel.
Secondly, Israel wants to show at the example of concrete countries, i.e. the Muslim countries of South Caucasus and Central Asia, that the relations and collaboration between Israel and Muslim countries are possible. And that this collaboration can be profitable for any country, including the Muslim ones. Thus, the Jewish state tends to prove that there is no Israel-Muslim world or Jews-Muslims confrontation, and even if there is such a confrontation it is not its fault. Within that process Israel, alongside with the development and strengthening of the political dialogue, draws special attention to the planned cooperation in the sphere of economy. In Israel in recent months the experience of the deepening of the collaboration for the recent 2-3 years with Azerbaijan, which at present moment can be regarded as one of the leaders among the Muslim countries of the former USSR taking the way of strategic collaboration with Israel, has been pointed out rather often.
Thirdly, the activation of Israel in South Caucasus and Central Asia regions is also determined by one factor which is not distinguished yet. That is the Turkish factor.
Despite the evident cooling of relations between Israel and Turkey in recent period, the strategic partnership between these two states, nevertheless, maintain the same pace. But it is obvious that there is something that does not satisfy Israel any more. Today more complicated rules of game are working in the region and in the world in general than 10-15 years ago. The existing for decades strategic alliance between Turkey and Israel responded to many geopolitical issues, implying the definite scenarios of regional developments, which fully satisfied both countries. But for the recent 10-15 years in the fast changing world gradually new questions have come out and the aforementioned alliance is not able to answer them very often. Under such conditions both Israel and Turkey are forced to search for peculiar solutions, which very often contradict to the logic of strategic partnership. Let us once more emphasize that this does not mean at all that the strategic partnership between Israel and Turkey is declining, because that partnership has been strengthened and tempered for decades and even today it is of vital importance for both countries in many spheres.
For a long time for Israel Turkey has been the model of partnership, which can be between Jewish state and Muslim secular state, as opposed to radical Islam countries, mainly to Iran. This model of partnership satisfied both the West and the whole international community, which, in its turn, encouraged that partnership and created positive geopolitical atmosphere round it. The secular Turkey, which was open for the collaboration with Israel, as opposed to Iran, served as the example of the state model with the progressive and modernizing society. But at present moment Turkey seems not to satisfy either of those criteria. However, in Israel they begin to think this way. In this respect the Central Asian countries and first of all Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan can be regarded as an alternative to that. Though they both are inferior by their economic indices to Turkey, but by the total population size, their geopolitical location, by the potential in the gas and oil production and transit they can play not less important role than Turkey plays today.
It becomes clear why the visit of Shimon Peres to South Caucasus and Central Asia was of such a vital importance for Israel. Without going into the details of the visit, which we will surely do in the future, let us mention that the visit, which had been prepared for quite a long time thoroughly and which, by the way, took place in two of the three planned countries3, is the vivid evidence that South Caucasus and Central Asia are the new priority directions of the Israeli foreign policy.
The RA in the context of the regional policy of Israel
Amid such conditions the “part assigned” to the RA is of great interest. The RA is not a Muslim country of course, but it plays a key role in South Caucasus. Besides, the RA has 35km boarder and friendly relations with Iran. At the same time the RA has the military conflict with Azerbaijan and difficult historical relations with Turkey and those states are strategic partners of Israel.
The activity in regard to the RA is also determined, alongside with other factors, by some degree of cooling of the relations between Israel and Turkey. After the well-known incident between Turkish prime-minister Recep Erdogan and Israeli president Shimon Peres at the summit in Davos Israeli “Maariv” newspaper wrote that: “The Foreign Ministry of Israel, suddenly, started to speak about the possible recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Israel”. And this happens under the conditions where that theme had been tabooed till recently, in order not to spoil the relations with Turkey. It is also remarkable that just a day before the second visit of Shemi Tzur to Armenia, on March 16, the large article devoted to the Armenian Genocide, where Turkey is directly accused of the arranging “horrible massacres of the Armenians”, appeared on News1.co.il Hebrew web-site, which is under the control of the authorities. Moreover, there are references to the facts presented by the underground Zionist organization working in 1915 in Palestine in the article.
Israeli military and political circles also touched upon the Armenian Genocide theme. One of the most authoritative and influential figures in Israeli generalship, the Commander-in-Chief Land forces general Avi Mizrahi, turning to the fuss made by Turks round the war in Gaza, advised them “…to study their own history before blaming someone in military crimes”. After this statement the situation became even more aggravated and the Israeli ambassador to Turkey Habi Levy was invited to Turkish Foreign Ministry for explanations4.
It is clear that, however, at current stage Israel is not going to recognize Armenian Genocide and all this is simply done to impose a constraint on Turkey. Thus, we can see the game we know very well. Again someone uses the Armenian factor as a pressure method to “put Turkey into its place”.
If in the connection with Turkey Israel in recent period at least outwardly takes pro-Armenian stance, in connection to Azerbaijan the picture is just the contrary. As a result of the deepening relations with the latter, Israel, in regard to Armenian-Azerbaijani relations and mainly Nagorno-Karabakh issue, takes maximal pro-Azerbaijani position.
Despite the fact what method of pressure to Turkey Israel choose or its stance in regard to Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, nevertheless, judging by the activating actions in the direction of South Caucasus and Central Asia, priorities of Israel in the foreign policy and Armenian-Israeli recent relations, one can assume that Israel is inclined to boost the relations and mutually beneficial cooperation with the RA. At the same time some Israeli political analysts, speaking about new political priorities of Israel, very often instead of “South Caucasus and Central Asia” simply say “the RA and Central Asia” 5.
Two visits of Shemi Tzur to Armenia, which took place this year in quite a short period, raised serious and interesting press comments. Many of Israeli informational sources appraised those visits as historical in the relations of two countries. During his first visit Shemi Tzur was accepted by the Foreign Minister of the RA E. Nalbandyan, the Chairman of the National Assembly of the RA H. Abrahamyan, the prime-minister T. Sargsyan and Cathalicos Garegin II. Then the ambassador of Israel was accepted by the president of the RA Serj Sargsyan to whom he presented his credential.
During his second visit Shemi Tzur met the Minister of Culture of the RA H. Poghosyan and vice-prime-minister A. Gevorgyan.
An interesting reaction was also caused by the visit of the deputy Foreign Minister of the RA A. Kirakosyan to Israel on May 26-27 of this year. All the comments in Israeli press and analytical circles concerning this visit came to one conclusion: this counties need to “exchange ambassadors”.
However, today we have all the bases for the political, economic, trade and regional cooperation between the RA and Israel. Besides, today there are also preconditions, which simply make Armenia boost its foreign policy in Israel, i.e. the problems of the Armenian Quarter in the Old City in Jerusalem, the local Armenian community and monastery congregation of Saint Hakobiants, as well as the problem of preservation of our treasures, which under the conditions of the unfavourable developments (and in the recent period it is the tendency) can become really big problem.
If the RA must activate and deepen its relations with Israel, then the faster it happens the better its. If the RA have to open embassy in Israel, the faster it happens the better it is. This issue regards the vital interests of the Republic of Armenia and the Armeniancy in whole and, implying deep and comprehensive study, it demands for fast and distinct orientation with all the sequential actions.
In this issue the time is not on our side…
P.S. Changes in personnel took place in Eurasia-1 and Eurasia-2 structures of the Foreign Ministry of Israel after the publishing of the article in the 4th issue of “Globus: national security” journal for 2009. The deputy of Harry Koren Jacob Livnen was appointed as a head of Eurasia-1 department and Yuval Fouks, the deputy of the Israeli ambassador to Russian Federation Anne Azari, was assigned a head of Eurasia-2. We will touch upon the activity of the aforementioned departments of the Foreign Ministry in the future.
1In Israel the director-general of the Ministry approximately corresponds to our head of the administration.
2The similar department exists within the structure of AMAN – Israeli military intelligence, where the whole staff of the core departments dealing with the former Soviet countries consists of the former Soviet citizens.
3It is known that Shimon Peres planned to visit three countries: Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. But latter, according to diplomatic sources, the president of Uzbekistan I.Karimov, due to “extremely busy schedule” could not meet his Israeli colleague. Shimon Peres visited only Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.
4After the fuss made by Turks press service of Tzahal (Israel Defence Forces) spread a statement that the Commander-in-chief Land Forces Avi Mizrahi expressed his personal opinion.
5 The authors of such statements think there is no problem of establishing and strengthening relations with Azerbaijan and Georgia. Thus, when we speak about the activation of the policy in South Caucasus it means to speak about the activation of the relations with Armenia.
Return
Another materials of author