Robert Gates goes to Baku, portent of things to come?

On Sunday, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates visited Baku, a long-overdue trip by a senior administration official. The reportage from American journalists adhered to the same moltif: that the Aliyev administration feels “neglected” and that they are “peeved.”

For instance, this Washington Post article by Craig Whitlock informs the reader that Gates carried a “personal letter from President Obama, Gates told reporters that he wanted to dispel ‘concerns in Azerbaijan that we weren’t paying enough attention to them.’”

Similarly, AP National Security correspondent Anne Gearan writes that “President Ilham Aliyev has complained that he gets too little attention from Washington” and that the Gates visit was meant to “soothe the put-off president.” Apparently, this is the message that Gates or his PR people want to convey. And as I’ve written here and elsewhere, it is certainly true that the Azeris are miffed.

However, I think it’s a mistake to encourage the notion that President Aliyev is a moody child who must be placated. This sort of silly deconstruction trivializes US-Azeri relations and anchors the narrative on a superficial level.

Nevertheless, the strategy seems to have worked, at least with the Azerbaijani press, who interpreted Gates’s visit, along with a letter from President Obama he delivered to President Aliyev, as a significant step toward smoothing the rough waters between the two countries. The Azerbaijani press is also reporting that Secretary of State Clinton will be visiting Azerbaijan in the not-too-distant future, although there is nothing in the public letter nor anything from the US Department of State mentioning that Clinton will be flying to Baku.

So who knows? Wishful thinking? One positive sign is that Azerbaijan has announced that it will, after all, participate with the US military in joint operations in June. This is a reversal of a decision made in April, when US-Azerbaijani relations were in a state of disrepair.

A high-level diplomatic visit could really make a difference, but one would hope that it would be in the context of a coherent and visible Obama policy toward Azerbaijan, which would be a lot more than we have now, something I told Voice of America correspondent Erica Marat here.  Erica is a very sharp analyst of Eurasian affairs, and writes frequently for organizations such as the Jamestown Foundation. (Here, for example, is her latest piece on the political situation in Kyrgyzstan – where I will be headed later this month.)

A visit by Clinton makes sense only when it comes as part of a new and publicly communicated policy that includes components of human rights, democratization, strategic engagement and economic development. I keep hearing from Azeris who come in contact with State Department officials that (they are told) US policy in the Caucasus is based on, in descending order, stability, hydrocarbons, and democracy.

Well, the “democracy” pillar is vaporous, and when there is virtually no public discussion of human rights concerns and then we turn around and publicly snub the Azerbaijani government by not inviting them to the Washington nuclear summit in April, that, to me, is rather puzzling. And equally ill-advised would be a high-level visit without a sign that imprisoned journalists and other political targets in Azerbaijan have a friend in the United States government.

Can’t have it both ways, you’re thinking? Yes, you can.

And while we’re on the subject, Caucasian Knot reports that journalist Elman Malyev has been arrested. I don’t know Malyev, and am trying to get confirmation.