Pipeline Politics

In the Christian Science Monitor, Yigal Schleifer takes a look at "pipeline politics [that] give Turkey the edge." Writing about the new Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline, a $4 billion, 1,093-mile project that will bring Caspian Sea oil to Turkey's Mediterranean coast, Schleifer notes that "the pipeline - built by a consortium of 11 companies, including British Petroleum, the American firm Unocal, and Turkey's national oil corporation - is designed to bring a non-Middle Eastern source of oil to the West. This would loosen Russia's and Iran's grip on the transport of Caspian and Central Asian oil by creating a new route that is friendlier to the United States and Europe."

It can be no coincidence that in the very week when the pipeline opens (the opening takes place on Wednesday), Baku has been shaken by street protests, during which demonstrators were brutally beaten and arrested. While some commentators, including Schleifer, tend to put the blame on President Bush, for "encouraging" political dissent in the region during his recent visit to Georgia, it's perhaps also appropriate to ask once again, as in the case of Uzbekistan, about the timing of the unrest.

In Andijan, the violence was ostensibly caused by "Islamists" - with President Karimov doing his utmost, with Moscow's backing, to capitalize on the "allies in the War on Terror" theme so prominently on display at the May 9 Moscow commemorations, while also causing maximum embarrassment to his "ally" the U.S. government. In Baku, the violence also embarrasses the United States, which supports the pipeline project so disliked by Moscow.