By Till Bruckner
Published June 19, 2015
To see how foreign interests distort reality to guide political debate and influence American foreign policy, just look at the meeting of December 5, 2012 in the US Congress headed by Dan Burton, then Indiana Republican.
The meeting was organized by the subcommittee of the House for Europe and Eurasia, and the guest of honor was Brenda Shaffer, who holds a Ph.D. specialist on the Caucasus and former director of the Caspian Studies Program at Harvard.
Burton presented it as “the cutest woman in the diners.” She then went alerting elected officials present on the fact that Iran is destabilizing the Western countries in the region, particularly Azerbaijan, its neighbor small but rich in oil.
But Burton and Shaffer both had ties with Azerbaijan they have not disclosed to the committee.
Shortly after the presentation took place, Burton resigned his seat in the House and began a new career as president of the Azerbaijan America Alliance Council, a lobby group promoting closer links between the countries and apparently funded by a close family of the president of Azerbaijan.
Shaffer for his part continued to praise Azerbaijan in other appearances in Congress, in many editorials and articles in the press, and in the work of US think tanks.
The documents submitted to the Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), [Regulations for Foreign Agents Registration] within two months after being sworn in 2012, show that the DCI Group, a pressure group under contract with the Azerbaijani Embassy in Washington gave him instructions and advice before the hearing to the commission. This firm is known to force messages to its customers by using third parties supposedly neutral and independent, to “influence the intellectual circles in which political decisions are made.”
This more subtle approach to influencing elected uses more traditional methods, such as travel expenses paid in 2013 in Baku for 10 congressmen and 32 staff members that the Washington Post has revealed.
But the goal is the same: DCI systematically identifies elected as a target group who submit information on Azerbaijan in its Foreign Agents returns.
The DCI Group’s contract with the embassy explicit how, with 20,000 dollars a month, it may prepare and publish commentaries in major online and traditional media to develop a focus group core for wear, and to “define new active projects to accompany the accession of Azerbaijan strategy.”
The Shaffer links with Azerbaijan and Israel
The leaders of DCI and Shaffer have not agreed to comment on this story for their actions, they have not agreed either to tell if Shaffer had been paid for his statement or whether it is still paid.
But under “actions to influence US policies in favor of the Embassy of the Republic of Azerbaijan,” the DCI Group has announced the joint actions with Shaffer:
“Description: email to Dr. Brenda Shaffer, Ph.D., Lecturer, Haifa University and Georgetown University, October 10, 2012, about a white paper on the footprint marked in southern Iran -Caucase on its ties with Armenia and the importance of Azerbaijan. Meeting with her 5 December 2012, to present to the media. She had with another meeting February 5, 2013 to discuss the possibility of future articles related to Azerbaijan
This is a subject that Shaffer Treaty; the written declaration it made to the subcommittee Burton was entitled: “The Iranian influence in the South Caucasus and the surrounding region.” At the end of this document, it describes itself as an independent academic expert. And in a form “Truth in Testimony” [a kind Declaration on Honour] to submit to Congress before appearance, Shaffer left the white “organization that you represent” field.
Yet the same day it was his evidence, the DCI Group went public with her a meeting “to present to the media.”
Besides the DCI, documents show that Shaffer worked as advisor Socar, the state oil company of Azerbaijan.
Neither Shaffer nor Socar not responded to emails asking for details about the relationship between her and the company, not least that the start date of the contract. She revealed nothing of his agreement to the members of Congress to which it was addressed.
Its action for the company to close notoriously corrupt ties with the regime of Azerbaijan became known to the public when the media obtained her his business card to the header of Socar and made state in September 2014.
Shaffer also advised certain government structures in Israel, including the commission of natural gas. It is also part of the steering committee that oversees the main plane of the energy sector of Israel.
The interests of Azerbaijan and Israel are so aligned that diplomats from both countries have recently organized a joint tour of Jewish communities from the US to put pressure on them in their favor. During this tour, the Israeli ambassador in Baku, echoing a theme typical of the pro-lobby groups Baku, praised Azerbaijan as a model of tolerance because its government does not persecute its small Jewish minority.
Shaffer was also silent about his links with Socar last July when she made a statement before the US Senate Foreign Affairs Committee by submitting a written report urging the support of a pipeline project in Azerbaijan. She said that this project would antagonize Moscow, improve security of supply of Europe, and create tens of thousands of jobs.
Low Declaration Requirements for Pressure Groups
The main purpose of the Congress form “Truth in Testimony” is to make public grants and federal contracts rather than highlight conflicts of interest, which releases the omission of Shaffer on its interests abroad any legal consequences.
Attempts to fill this gap to pressure groups have had only limited effect.
The California Democrat Representative Jackie Speier, recently proposed a rule requiring some reporting to Congress to declare income from foreign governments. “The American people have a justified desire that these links are transparent and can reveal conflicts of interest by disseminating publicly, has she told a House subcommittee settlement.
In early January, the House adopted the suggestions of Speier, but they are unclear and have not been tested. Under the new rules, Shaffer should have declared the money received from Socar, if she had made the statement as part of a mission “outside government field”, that is to say, as a representative of a group of pressure or NGO. But if she had filed as a university professor, probably not. As a further complication, a national company Socar is not directly a government.
To effectively address these gaps, Bill Allison, editorial director of the Sunlight Foundation, suggests that the registrant is required to list “all sources of income of more than $ 10 000 for example over the past two years.”
FARA, the Regulations for the Registration of Foreign Agents which bans lobbying for foreign clients without official registration as their agent, can also be easily bypassed. Shaffer was not registered under FARA but Socar Azerbaijan has nine different interpreters, Anar Mammadov, an oligarch with close ties to the regime of Ilham Aliyev.
Allison, when asked if Shaffer had violated FARA, said “The information is not enough to tell. It depends on the nature of his work as an advisor to Socar.
“If it makes it easier meetings between SOCAR and US government officials, if she writes articles for the interests of Socar, it must declare with FARA. If it is limited to recommend restaurants in Georgetown … That said, the fact that it has made a statement to Congress, she no doubt other contacts with congressional staff (it has not only made an appearance at a hearing), and it is paid by Socar, or Socar itself (which is recorded and payroll) should reveal their contacts with these officials. But it is unclear whether it is illegal. “
Experts have long realized that FARA is full of ambiguities and gaps. For example, the powerful Armenian lobby fly completely off the radar. Called one day by an insider of the third of the most powerful lobbies in the capital, it is largely financed by US citizens of Armenian origin, but constantly promotes what he considers the interests of Armenia. No one entity appears to have filled a form in accordance with FARA to account for the activity of pressure groups in favor of Armenia. Similarly, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) [Committee on Relations between the US States and Israel] without question the most powerful pressure group of Foreign Affairs of the capital, does not fulfill FARA form despite the injunctions of the Department of Justice to do so.
A recent letter from Republican Representative Frank R. Wolf of Virginia, called the Justice Department to review the implementation of FARA this year for possible changes.
Allison said his group would like to see “an electronic recording, better specific requirements which must be declared when contacts are made, and how to write the minutes and other improvements on the system statement. “
Reflection Groups As foreign influence Tools
Focus groups have played an important role in the strategy of lobbying of elected officials and the press. Azerbaijan has long been one of the biggest spenders in foreign countries pressure groups in the capital, with part of the money directly used in the focus groups.
“A significant change occurred in the Azerbaijani lobbyists,” said Gerald Robbins, an official of the Institute of Foreign Policy Research specializes in Turkey, the Caucasus and Central Asir. “A new generation, educated in methodology of marketing of the West took over [in Baku]. They understand that the university and focus groups are important places to get ideas. “
Pressure groups and ideas whitening are slow and gradual process, say political observers. The two both aim to change minds and open minds to new ideas – those of pressure groups, of course. But it is still difficult to accurately measure the effect of a particular action of a pressure group such as Shaffer or that of DCI group.
Translation for Gilbert Béguian Armenews
Jean Eckian © armenews.com