ISRAEL, AZERBAIJAN AND IRAN

AZERBAIJAN'S ISRAEL DIPLOMACY TESTS IRAN

Executive Summary:

• AZERBAIJAN assure IRAN that they are not going to host ISRAELI military bases or provide its territory for attacks on IRAN
• ISRAEL has another joker up its sleeve
• Relations between IRAN and AZERBAIJAN have never been rosy
• The reason why Baku would want to take a "revolutionary" step at this time remains unclear
• AZERBAIJAN supplies up to 40% of ISRAEL'S oil needs
• Officially ISRAEL emphasized that it has no interest in using AZERBAIJANI territory for military actions against IRAN

Adapted by Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring from an article written by Shahin Abbasov via EurasiaNet

BAKU - AZERBAIJAN in late April crossed a self-imposed "red line" in its relations with southern neighbor IRAN by dispatching Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov to ISRAEL, Tehran's arch-foe. (Or so we are made to believe. See: http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2013/05/iran-and-israel-improvement-in.html)

Reasons for the timing of the move are not clear, but, so far, Tehran appears to be biding its time with a response.

While ISRAEL and AZERBAIJAN - like IRAN, a majority Shi'ite Muslim country - have maintained strong diplomatic, economic and military ties for years, Mammadyarov's April 21-24 trip was the first time an AZERBAIJANI cabinet member had made such a high-profile visit to ISRAEL.

With one eye seemingly on IRAN, the AZERBAIJANI Foreign Ministry avoided attaching the word "official" to the visit. Instead, it cast the ministerial mission as undertaken within the context of AZERBAIJAN'S status as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.

AZERBAIJAN ASSURE IRAN THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HOST ISRAELI MILITARY BASES OR PROVIDE ITS TERRITORY FOR ATTACKS ON IRAN

Even so, the trip had all the markings of an official visit. No documents were signed, but Mammadyarov met with ISRAELI President Shimon Peres, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, among other senior officials. A statement that Baku would consider opening an embassy in ISRAEL concluded the mission.

"It is a matter of time," Mammadyarov said at an April 26 news conference in Baku.

 

A few days later, it was time to offer explanations to IRAN. 

On April 29, AZERBAIJANI National Security Council Secretary Ramiz Mehdiyev, who doubles as President Ilham Aliyev's influential administration chief, flew to Tehran to meet IRANIAN President Mahmud Ahmadinejad and other senior IRANIAN officials. Although the government did not specify the agenda, many AZERBAIJANIS believe the trip was taken to soothe an angry Tehran.

"Mehdiyev went to assure IRAN that Baku is not going to host ISRAELI military bases or provide its territory for attacks on IRAN" in connection with the international campaign to stop IRANIAN development of a nuclear weapon, commented Baku-based political analyst Zardusht Alizade, a Middle East specialist.

In October 2012 Geopolitical Analysis and Monitoring wrote regarding the possibility of ISRAEL using AZERBAIJAN for an airstrike against IRAN:

ISRAEL HAS ANOTHER JOKER UP ITS SLEEVE

Read the entire article at: http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/israel-azerbaijan-and-kazakhstan_6.html

RELATIONS BETWEEN IRAN AND AZERBAIJAN HAVE NEVER BEEN ROSY

Reports in US news media outlets in 2012 made just that assertion, though they could not be confirmed.

Relations between IRAN and AZERBAIJAN have never been rosy, but Baku previously has been careful not to push its powerful neighbor's patience to the breaking point.

At least since the administration of the late president Heydar Aliyev (1993-2003), for instance, Tehran's enmity toward the ISRAELI government fostered an unofficial taboo on AZERBAIJANI officials visiting ISRAEL. Against that backdrop, Vafa Guladze, a former presidential foreign-policy adviser, deemed Mammadyarov's excursion "revolutionary", the Turan news agency reported.

THE REASON WHY BAKU WOULD WANT TO TAKE A "REVOLUTIONARY" STEP AT THIS TIME REMAINS UNCLEAR.

The reason why Baku would want to take that "revolutionary" step, intensifying already close ties with ISRAEL, at this time remains unclear. Some speculate that an IRANIAN call for the annexation of AZERBAIJAN, once under PERSIAN control, raised Baku's ire.

Alizade, though, believes that the visit to ISRAEL has been in the works for a long time. "Relations in economic, military and diplomatic areas are so broad and have reached such a high level that it is time for actions," he said.

AZERBAIJAN SUPPLIES UP TO 40% OF ISRAEL'S OIL NEEDS,

• Or about 21.7 million barrels, according to official data; foreign trade turnover between the two countries stands at US$4 billion.
• The countries also are cooperating on weaponry and in other military-equipment areas.
•  In 2012, AZERBAIJAN bought $1.6 billion worth of ISRAELI arms.
•  ISRAELI defense firms also are advising the AZERBAIJANI defense-industry ministry on an AZERBAIJANI-made weapon.

OFFICIALLY ISRAEL EMPHASIZED THAT IT HAS NO INTEREST IN USING AZERBAIJANI TERRITORY FOR MILITARY ACTIONS AGAINST IRAN 

Conceivably with those activities in mind, Mammadyarov emphasized during his talks with ISRAELI President Peres that ISRAEL has no interest in the use of AZERBAIJANI territory "for military actions against IRAN", The Jerusalem Post reported. 

Baku also subsequently announced that, in conjunction with the Organization for Islamic Cooperation, it will host in June an international donor conference for the Palestinian territories, whose statehood IRAN aggressively supports.

Referring to IRAN as "the greatest threat to the region," Peres did not hide that the Islamic Republic had been among the topics on the table with Mammadyarov.

If Tehran had been looking for an opportunity to smack AZERBAIJAN down to size, it has not taken it yet: IRANIAN officials have not reacted publicly to Mammadyarov's ISRAEL trip.

How Mehdiyev described Mammadyarov's trip to his IRANIAN hosts also is unknown, although IRAN'S state-run IRNA news agency reported that Ahmadinejad blamed "Zionist and US intelligence" for "trying to weaken our relations".

Playing to his IRANIAN audience, the AZERBAIJANI national security chief blamed the West for "taking some steps which violate peace and stability in AZERBAIJAN", IRNA reported - an apparent reference to a series of unsanctioned anti-government protests earlier this year.
With the AZERBAIJANI courtesy call over, Baku analysts do not expect more to come from Tehran about Mammadyarov's ISRAELI visit. Distracted by other concerns, IRAN would gain little by pushing back against AZERBAIJAN, they believe.
"Relations between Baku and Tehran are already very bad. I do not think that the visit to ISRAEL will bring any real changes," Rauf Mirkadirov, a political columnist for the Russian-language Zerkalo newspaper, commented to the Vesti.az news portal.

"They do not have any options," agreed Alizade, in reference to IRAN. "What can they do?" 

ISRAEL, AZERBAIJAN AND KAZAKHSTAN 

In recent past mainstream media and ISRAEL itself, increasingly stipulated that it is pushing for a preemptive airstrike on IRAN. Looking at ISRAEL history and how it conducts its wars and covert operations, it becomes imminent that it relies heavily on the element of surprise. Such was the case during most of its wars, rescue operations such as Entebbe, UGANDA in 1976, the IRAQI nuclear reactor air strike in 1981 and the alleged SYRIAN nuclear reactor airstrike in 2007. Thus as long as ISRAEL is “threatening” to attack IRAN on a daily base, and media coverage is in full swing, one can be sure that no such strike is imminent, for the element of surprise is lost. In most likelihood, ISRAEL’S threats of attacking IRAN and at the same time urging the USA to set a red line are calculated tactics and strategies in order to obtain certain concessions from the USA and indeed other allies. In most likelihood ISRAEL pursues a much more complex goal with its warmongering rhetoric’s against IRAN, than really intending to attack IRAN, one that will give ISRAEL inevitably some significant advantage, be it geopolitical, strategically or economically.

THE KEY FACTOR FOR ISRAEL’S DECISION MAKING: IRAN’S “PRESENCE” IN SYRIA

The minute ISRAEL and the media stop mentioning air strikes against IRAN that is the time one should become concerned, for that is the time when an attack is most likely imminent. (Given that the result of such attack will provide huge geostrategical and political advantages for ISRAEL). For the time being the saber rattling are just geopolitical tactics. Nevertheless, the chances of ISRAEL launching an airstrike against IRAN’S nuclear facilities are unlikely, especially with IRAN’S “presence” in SYRIA and SYRIA’S Bio-Chemical arsenal at its disposal. Current rhetoric’s by ISRAEL, USA and IRAN are primarily here to reshuffle the geopolitical landscape as well as counteract the current geostrategical shift occurring in the region due to new findings of natural resources and increased power struggle between Sunni and Shiite  Muslims, as well as TURKEYS increased muscle flexing in order to become the key player in the region.

Israel’s “warmongering” against IRAN is a well orchestrated strategy in order to gain geopolitical and economic concessions and advantages from the USA and its allies. Under current conditions ISRAEL will never initiate a full scale attack against IRAN.  Nevertheless one should be aware that all current assumptions, analysis, opinions regarding the Israel - Iran confrontation is based on information fed to the broad public and media by the upper echelons of world politics. No one knows what wheeling and dealings regarding IRAN, SYRIA, ISRAEL, SAUDI ARABIA, the USA, TURKEY etc. are currently going on behind closed doors.

Background Information:

Why prospects of an Israel Iran conflict remain low

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/08/israel-and-iran-airstrike-unlikely.html

WAR STRATEGIES

Continues saber rattling however has prompted countless thesis and speculations how ISRAEL would go about conduct such attack, given the complexity of such operation, both tactically as well as logistically. To complicate the issues is the necessity of involving foreign countries with no official diplomatic ties to ISRAEL, to utilize their airspace in order to be able to conduct the airstrike.

In most cases military strategists and analysts believe ISRAEL would attack via SAUDI ARABIA or TURKEY, given that these two countries are in alignment with the USA and ISRAEL when it comes to the topic of IRAN and of toppling the SYRIAN government, a close ally of IRAN. (Though in the case of SYRIA, ISRAEL has refrained from voicing decisive disagreement on the current upraise, simply because the Assad regime, for more than thirty years has been the most stable entity on ISRAEL’S northern frontier. Despite the fact that the two countries are technically still at war with one another) Furthermore ISRAEL obtained permission by SAUDI ARABIA to use its airspace in 1981, in order to destroy an IRAQI nuclear reactor.

1981 Nuclear Reactor attack

Possible attack routes: See map on the right

Taking off from Paphos AF base in Cyprus would reduce the trip through Turkish airspace by about 100 km. Because of the political discrepancies between Cyprus and Turkey this option is not feasible, though it would save fuel and increase range. The other option is to take off from Haifa, follow the coast of Lebanon and Syria, enter Turkish airspace, thus lengthening the trip by 150 km and risking detection from Syrian radar.

Taking off from Israel’s most southern airbase and crossing entire Saudi Arabia only to head north after entering the Persian Gulf will stretch the fighters to their limit. Another shorter rout would be to fly via Saudi Arabia through Iraq, which would require cooperation with Iraq and the USA.

 

Background Information:

Increased Iranian influence in Syria provoked Israel to change its longstanding tactics regarding Syria

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/06/syria-israel-iran-and-usa.html

The other commonly described scenario is that of ISRAEL using TURKISH airspace in order to enter IRAN, despite the fact that the two countries political ties, (officially) have been entirely severed. Since TURKEY strongly opposes IRAN’S stance on SYRIA and envisions itself becoming a regional Sunni powerhouse, TURKEY would let Geo-strategic interests prevailed over political discourses with Israel. 

Background Information:

Israeli Exports to Turkey rise 42% to equal exports to Germany.

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/01/see-no-evil-hear-no-evil.html

Israeli Turkish economic ties

http://www.economywatch.com/economy-business-and-finance-news/turkey-israel-economic-relations-continue-despite-tensions-16-08.html

Israel's trade with Turkey worth $2b in first half

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000675654&fid=1725

Analysts then go into great details speculating where the attack force would conduct its midair refueling etc. What many analysts neglect to take into consideration is that ISRAEL has another joker up its sleeve, should it real wish to venture out attacking IRAN, namely AZERBAIJAN and KAZAKHSTAN: 

 

 ISRAEL’S GENIUSES CHESS MOVE

 

As in CYPRUS, where ISRAEL secured military cooperation agreements to utilize western Cyprus’s airbase, it is believe that the ISRAELIS have also gained access to airbases in AZERBAIJAN as well as KAZAKHSTAN.

Background Information:

Israel to station military jets in Cyprus

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/02/geo-strategic-dynamics-in-eastern.html

As early as 2009, speculations of increased ISRAELI and AZERBAIJANIAN and indeed KAZAKHSTAN ties emerged in US diplomatic circles prompting the U.S. embassy in Baku to inform Washington that AZERBAIJAN'S discreetly symbiosis with ISRAEL. The memo, later released by WikiLeaks, quotes AZERBAIJAN'S President Ilham Aliyev as describing his country's relationship with ISRAEL as an iceberg: "nine-tenths of it is below the surface." On the other hand, ISRAEL’S increasingly close relations, both military and economically, with KAZAKHSTAN go by virtually unnoticed.

Allegedly ISRAEL has recently been granted access to airbases on IRAN'S northern border, the purpose of which is not clear. The USA seems to be extremely agitated by ISRAEL’S alleged move, worrying that ISRAEL’S presence in the region could pivot the entire geopolitical landscape of the region and give ISRAEL an enormous strategic as well as economic advantage.

The UNITED STATES concern is that ISRAEL’S presence could spread a war scenario that includes not only the PERSIAN GULF -- but also the CAUCASUS. The burgeoning ISRAEL-AZERBAIJAN relationship has also become a flashpoint in US relationship with TURKEY, a regional heavyweight that has its own agenda in the region. Thus it comes of no surprise that TURKEY have raised their concerns with their U.S. counterparts, as well as with the AZERIS.

Background Information:

Turkey’s current Middle East policy makes enemies with everyone

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/05/turkey-everyones-enemy.html

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2011/09/seismic-shift-in-middle-east.html

In turkeys view, Israel supports Cyprus with which it shares many interests in a bid to pressurize the regional countries in different ways

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/05/cyprus-and-turkey-never-ending-story.html

As with CYPRUS, AZERBAIJAN and ISRAEL did not comment on alleged security agreements between the two countries.

Officially, AZERBAIJAN'S defense minister ruled out the use of AZERBAIJAN for a strike on IRAN. AZERBAIJAN, just as was the case in CYPRUS, officially denied that the government had granted ISRAEL access to AZERI airbases.

AZERBAIJAN’S claim that it would not grant ISRAEL to conduct an airstrike from its airbases does not mean it would bar ISRAELI bombers from landing in the country after a strike. Nor does AZERBAIJAN ruled out the basing of ISRAELI search-and-rescue units in the country. (Same official statements as was the case in CYPRUS, when speculations raised that ISRAEL would station IAF fighters permanently in CYPRUS)

Background Information:

Israel’s first state visit to Cyprus and its geo-strategic repercussion for the region

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2012/02/eastern-mediterranean-sea.html

AZERI MINORITY IN IRAN, PART OF THE EQUATION 

Proffering such landing rights -- and mounting search and rescue operations closer to IRAN -- would make an ISRAELI attack on IRAN easier.

ISRAEL'S deepening relationship with the Baku government was cemented by a $1.6 billion arms agreement that provides AZERBAIJAN with sophisticated drones and missile-defense systems. At the same time, Baku's ties with Tehran have frayed: IRAN presented a note to AZERBAIJAN'S ambassador claiming that Baku has supported ISRAELI-trained assassination squads targeting IRANIAN scientists, an accusation the AZERI government called "a slander." In February, a member of Yeni Azerbadzhan -- the ruling party – called on the government to change the country's name to "NORTH AZERBAIJAN," implicitly suggesting that the 16 million AZERIS who live in northern IRAN ("SOUTH AZERBAIJAN") are in need of liberation. 

It's clear why the ISRAELIS prize their ties to AZERBAIJAN -- and why the IRANIANS are infuriated by them. The AZERI military has four abandoned, SOVIET-era airfields that would potentially be available to the ISRAELIS, as well as four airbases for their own aircraft, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies “Military Balance 2011”.

NOT ONLY AZERBAIJAN, ALSO KAZAKHSTAN

Allegedly ISRAEL has gained access to these airbases through a series of quiet political and military understandings, because ISRAEL is deeply embedded in AZERBAIJAN, and has been for the last two decades. In addition ISRAEL’S ties with KAZAKHSTAN continue to grow.

Background Information:

Kazakhstan–Israeli Relations

http://www.kazakhemb.org.il/?CategoryID=165&ArticleID=163

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Kazakhstan_relations

Israelis to help build industry parks in Kazakhstan

http://iplanetenergynews.com/index.php/2010/04/20/israelis-to-help-build-industry-parks-in-kazakhstan/

The prospect of ISRAEL using AZERBAIJAN'S airfields for an IRANIAN attack first became public in December 2006, when retired ISRAELI Brig. Gen. Oded Tira angrily denounced the George W. Bush administration's lack of action on the IRANIAN nuclear program. "For our part," he wrote in a widely cited commentary, "we should also coordinate with AZERBAIJAN the use of airbases in its territory and also enlist the support of the AZERI minority in IRAN." 

HYPOTHETICAL STRIKE SCENARIO 

Access to such airfields is important for ISRAEL, because it would mean that ISRAELI F-15I and F-16I fighter-bombers would not have to refuel midflight during a strike on IRAN'S nuclear facilities, but could simply continue north and land in AZERBAIJAN.

The ability to use AZERI airfields are no doubt an significant asset to any ISRAEL military operation, calculating that the 4400 km trip from ISRAEL to IRAN and back again would stretch ISRAEL'S warplanes to their limits, even with auxiliary fuel tanks. Thus being allowed access to AZERI airfields or even launch attacks from there, would be crucial.

Some strategist claim that ISRAEL is capable of using its fleet of F-15I and F-16I warplanes in a strike on IRAN without refueling after the initial top-off over ISRAEL, for it seems not a weight problem but the numbers of weapons that are mounted on each aircraft. The more distance a fighter-bomber is required to travel, the more fuel it will need and the fewer weapons it can carry. Shortening the distance adds firepower, and enhances the chances for a successful strike and even engage in short aerial combat if required.

According to defense experts, the F-15s who would go in as fighters to protect the F-16 bombers and stay over the target are the problem. In the likely event that Iran scrambled its fighters to intercept the Israeli jets the F-15s would be used to engage them. Those F-15s would burn up fuel over the target, and would need to land within close proximity.  Thus AZERBAIJAN would be ideal, or if need be even KAZAKHSTAN. In view of the political implications such move would have the entire operation would have to be low profile, so that means it would have to be outside of Baku and it would have to be highly developed. One possible location for such operation could be the Sitalchay airstrip, located just over 80 km northwest of Baku and 600km from Tehran. Prior to the collapse of the SOVIET UNION, Sitalchay two tarmacs and the adjacent facilities were used by a squadron of SOVIET Sukhoi SU-25 jets -- perfect for ISRAELI fighters and bombers.

Sitalchay airstrip

Even if ISRAELI jets did not land in AZERBAIJAN or use its airbases, access to AZERI airfields holds a number of advantages for the ISRAEL Defense Forces. The airfields not only have facilities to service fighter-bombers but could be utilized to base helicopter rescue units in the days just prior to a strike for possible search and rescue missions.

In 2010, ISRAELI – ROMANIAN conducted a joint exercise that tested ISRAELI air capabilities in mountainous areas -- like those the ISRAELI Air Force would face during a bombing mission against IRANIAN nuclear facilities that the IRANIANS have buried deep into mountainsides. The USA watched the exercises closely, not least because they objected to the large number of ISRAELI fighters operating from airbases of a NATO-member country, but also because 100 ISRAELI fighters overflew GREECE as a part of a simulation of an attack on IRAN. Allegedly the ISRAELIS eventually curtailed their ROMANIAN military activities when the UNITED STATES expressed discomfort with what they believed was an alleged bombing practice of IRAN, staged from a NATO country. 

ISRAEL IS THE SECOND LARGEST CUSTOMER FOR AZERI OIL

In addition, ISRAEL could also use AZERBAIJAN as a base for ISRAELI drones, either as part of recognizance missions, follow-on attack against IRAN, or to mount aerial assessment in an attack's aftermath.

Baku Tibilisi Ceyhan pipeline

AZERBAIJAN clearly profits from its deepening relationship with ISRAEL. ISRAEL is the second largest customer for AZERI oil - shipped through the Baku-Tibilisi-Ceyhan pipeline -- and its military trade allows AZERBAIJAN to upgrade its military after the Organization for Cooperation and Security in EUROPE (OSCE) slapped it with an arms embargo after its six-year undeclared war with ARMENIA over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region. Finally, modernizing the AZERI military sends a clear signal to Iran that interference in AZERBAIJAN could be costly. 

The deepening AZERI-ISRAELI relationship has also escalated the TURKISH ISRAELI dispute over gas findings and extraction activities in conjunction with CYPRUS in the EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA. “Officially” and according to mainstream media, the dispute between ISRAEL and TURKEY however originated because of ISRAELI commandos boarded a TURKISH ship destined for Gaza in May 2010, killing nine TURKISH citizens.

When TURKEY demanded an apology, ISRAEL not only refused, it abruptly canceled a $150 million contract to develop and manufacture drones with the TURKISH military – then entered negotiations with AZERBAIJAN to jointly manufacture 60 ISRAELI drones of varying types. The $1.6 billion arms agreement between ISRAEL and AZERBAIJAN also left TURKISH Prime Minister Erdogan "sputtering in rage". However the true reason behind the TURKISH ISRAELI rift originates from natural resource discoveries in the EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN SEA.

Background Information:

The true reason behind the warmongering between Turkey and Israel.

http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.com.ar/2011/09/turkeys-middle-east-chess-game.html

THE CENTERPIECE OF THE RECENT ARMS DEAL IS AZERBAIJAN'S ACQUISITION OF ISRAELI DRONES, 

which has only heightened TURKISH anxieties further. In November 2011, the TURKISH government retrieved the wreckage of an ISRAELI "Heron" drone in the Mediterranean, south of the city of Adana -- well inside its maritime borders. Erdogan's government believed the drone's flight had originated in the KURDISH areas of northern IRAQ and demanded that ISRAEL provide an explanation, but got none.

ISRAEL began cultivating strong relations with Baku in 1994, when ISRAELI telecommunications firm Bezeq bought a large share of the nationally controlled telephone operating system. By 1995, AZERBAIJAN'S marketplace was awash with ISRAELI goods: 

Azerbaijan’s acquisition of Israeli drones

In March 1996, then-Health Minister Ephraim Sneh became the first senior ISRAELI official to visit Baku -- but not the last. Benjamin Netanyahu made the trip in 1997, a high-level Knesset delegation in 1998, Deputy Prime Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni in 2007, ISRAELI President Shimon Peres in 2009, and Lieberman again, as foreign minister, this last February. Accompanying Peres on his visit to Baku was  the CEO of ISRAEL'S Aeronautics Defense Systems and a former Mossad official who paved the way for the drone agreement.

In 2001, ISRAELI arms manufacturer Elbit Systems contracted with GEORGIA'S Tbilisi Aerospace Manufacturing to upgrade the SOVIET SU-25 Scorpion, a close air-support fighter, and one of its first customers was AZERBAIJAN. More recently, ISRAEL'S Elta Systems has cooperated with AZERBAIJAN in building the TecSar reconnaissance satellite system and, in 2009, the two countries began negotiations over AZERI production of the Namer infantry fighting vehicle.

ISRAELI firms built and guard the fence around Baku's international airport, monitor and help protect AZERBAIJAN'S energy infrastructure, and even provide security for AZERBAIJAN'S president on foreign visits. Allegedly AZERBAIJAN shares intelligence data on IRAN with ISRAEL and the chances of ISRAEL having set up electronic listening stations along AZERBAIJAN'S IRANIAN border are increasingly likely.

ISRAELI apparently is downplaying its military cooperation with Baku, pointing out that AZERBAIJAN is one of the few Muslim nations that makes ISRAELIS feel welcome but does not deny it is focused on AZERBAIJAN as a military ally and preserve AZERBAIJAN as an ally against IRAN in order to use it as a platform for reconnaissance and as a market for military hardware.

Since ISRAEL, in most likelihood has no intentions to launch an attack on IRAN, all above mentioned moves and speculations are part of geopolitical strategies which will benefit ISRAEL in the long run as well as give it bargaining power and tactical leeway in case of significant geopolitical changes in the region.