In the field of political analysis, it’s not very common—but sometimes it happens: a topic long considered “settled” and forgotten suddenly resurfaces. That’s exactly what is occurring now with the old idea of establishing foreign military bases in Azerbaijan—particularly Turkish or even American ones. Political analysts Eldar Namazov and Ramiz Yunus have recently brought up the possibility of Turkish bases in Azerbaijan.
This is a situation where “red lines” must be drawn immediately. First and foremost, this is merely the personal opinion of Namazov and Yunus—nothing more. Certainly, a political analyst is entitled to their personal views, especially if they do not hold any public office. But to confuse personal opinion with the official position of Azerbaijan would be a clear mistake.
Moreover, in today’s context, the idea is fundamentally flawed. The idea of hosting foreign military bases in Azerbaijan was of interest to the expert community primarily in the aftermath of the early 1990s, when Azerbaijan was still recovering from military defeats. At that time, seeking external guarantees for security was understandable. But today, the situation is completely different. The Azerbaijani Army is no longer just a concept—it is a proven force. Our Armed Forces have demonstrated their combat capability and high-level professionalism on the battlefield, achieving a brilliant victory in Karabakh. Azerbaijani military operations—especially the liberation of the city of Shusha—are now being studied in the world’s top military academies. In this context, Azerbaijan has no need to host foreign military bases or foreign troops on its territory.
Most importantly, Azerbaijan pursues an independent foreign policy and relies on its own strength and national interests. Hosting military bases simply does not align with this strategic course.
One could stop there—but there’s another side to the issue. The presence of military bases from a NATO member state on Azerbaijani territory does not automatically trigger the protections of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. Security guarantees are extended only to NATO members. Such guarantees come only with full membership in the alliance. In fact, as shown by the example of Norway, a country can receive these guarantees without hosting any foreign military bases at all. At the same time, foreign military bases bring not just supposed guarantees, but also serious risks.
Consider the recent outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East. Iran responded by publishing a map of American military bases in the region and threatened missile and bomb strikes against them. Iran didn’t threaten the civilian populations of Qatar or the UAE—but to say that those strikes wouldn’t pose a risk to civilians would be misleading. At that time, Iran did not threaten to strike Azerbaijan. And that fact alone should give pause to anyone considering hosting foreign bases.
Proponents of such an idea often recall the late 1970s and early 1980s, when the USSR deployed medium-range missiles in Eastern Europe. Those missiles couldn’t reach the United States—but they could strike American bases in Europe. That did not make Europeans feel any safer.
Finally, let’s recall another historical example. In 2004, then-U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld proposed establishing an American military base in Azerbaijan. President Ilham Aliyev declined this “tempting” offer—for obvious reasons. And by 2005, attempts were made to ignite a “color revolution” in Azerbaijan. The attempt failed—but it left food for thought.
All of this clearly indicates that the idea of hosting foreign military bases in Azerbaijan should not be revived. The matter is closed. And there are no reasons or grounds for reopening it.
