As more and more nations seek integration with BRICS and member institutions, the bloc must weigh politico-economic synergies against geopolitical risk and even bad faith on the part of governments. Azerbaijan presents an extreme example.
Baku just this year finalized annexation and ethnic cleansing of contested territory with Armenia. This was made possible by Zionist-Turkish arms and intelligence; ignored by most the world and sadly little opposed by BRICS members Russia and Iran. The Mossad is known to operate freely through the country. For their and local smugglers role in moving guns and drugs illegally to Iran, Baku is recognized as nearly hostile by the republic. Though the two Shiite-majority nations have pursued rapprochement since October 7 and the Gaza genocide, challenges remain.
Oil dominates the economy. Energy products account for fully 95% of total export revenues per World Bank. Further, their primary customers are in Israel—it goes without saying then that this indispensable sector rests on a broken staff. In a good faith scenario, Baku is pursuing alternative markets for energy and investment via BRICS. But is this a compelling case?
Turkiye has also applied for BRICS membership and is surely being considered with caution, if not skepticism. Ankara however does not appear as a Trojan horse. No doubt the greatest objection, Turkish NATO membership, is simply a fact. The problem here is obvious but unambiguous. Baku’s free agent status presents a potentially insurmountable concern: strategic ambiguity.
For the government’s unlawful and expansionist behavior; hostile posture to neighbors, including current BRICS members; penetration by foreign militaries; and staggering economic dependencies, Azerbaijan poses risk to any state or organization seriously considering partnership.
Azerbaijan Applies to BRICS: a Trojan Horse?
By Ned Isakoff
On August 20, 2024
In Commentary
As more and more nations seek integration with BRICS and member institutions, the bloc must weigh politico-economic synergies against geopolitical risk and even bad faith on the part of governments. Azerbaijan presents an extreme example.
Baku just this year finalized annexation and ethnic cleansing of contested territory with Armenia. This was made possible by Zionist-Turkish arms and intelligence; ignored by most the world and sadly little opposed by BRICS members Russia and Iran. The Mossad is known to operate freely through the country. For their and local smugglers role in moving guns and drugs illegally to Iran, Baku is recognized as nearly hostile by the republic. Though the two Shiite-majority nations have pursued rapprochement since October 7 and the Gaza genocide, challenges remain.
Oil dominates the economy. Energy products account for fully 95% of total export revenues per World Bank. Further, their primary customers are in Israel—it goes without saying then that this indispensable sector rests on a broken staff. In a good faith scenario, Baku is pursuing alternative markets for energy and investment via BRICS. But is this a compelling case?
Turkiye has also applied for BRICS membership and is surely being considered with caution, if not skepticism. Ankara however does not appear as a Trojan horse. No doubt the greatest objection, Turkish NATO membership, is simply a fact. The problem here is obvious but unambiguous. Baku’s free agent status presents a potentially insurmountable concern: strategic ambiguity.
For the government’s unlawful and expansionist behavior; hostile posture to neighbors, including current BRICS members; penetration by foreign militaries; and staggering economic dependencies, Azerbaijan poses risk to any state or organization seriously considering partnership.
Previous
Immolation & Embodying