Interview with Rauf Rajabov, an Azerbaijani conflict expert.
Q: Last week Baku sent two notes of protest to the Russian side which seems unprecedented in bilateral relations. One note concerned Liberal Democratic Party leader Vladimir Zhirinovksy’s remarks that Russia should recognize Nagorno-Karabakh if it declares its independence. The other note was a response to the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s accusation that the Azerbaijani ambassador in Moscow is aggravating the regional situation. What do you think of this?
A: I don’t think this is anything unusual or extraordinary. It is normal practice for a country to send a note when it considers another country’s statement to be wrong or to exceed international law. It is normal practice for countries to seek a solution to the problem not through a smear campaign but through a civilized attitude towards each other.
Q: May these two notes on statements by Russian representatives on Karabakh influence Russia’s further mediation on the Karabakh conflict?
A: No, I don’t think so. Any country develops its position on any issue in the middle and long term. Expectations of [Turkish Prime Minister] Erdogan’s visit to Moscow and [Russian Foreign Minister] Lavrov’s visit to Yerevan were to some extent disappointed. These talks were expected to help overcome the deadlock in the negotiating process and bring some clarity. Unfortunately, this did not happen. Anyway, I don’t think it was really expedient to present these notes to Russia. Certainly, it would be positive if Russia understood that the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations and the settlement of the Karabakh conflict, which would mean the resolution of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, should happen in a single dialogue space, through they have a different history and nature. These issues are different but they are in a single dialogue space and no one can argue with this. I think it would be positive if this were taken into account too.
Q: Don’t you see these actions by the Russian side and the attribution of Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia by the Russian Orthodox Church as anti-Azerbaijani?
A: I don’t see anything deliberate here but some asymmetry is obvious. It is clear that Zhirinovsky is not a senior official in the executive authorities, but he is a senior official in the legislative authorities. Therefore, his statements should be treated seriously, especially because he sometimes voices ideas that have some support. If the Russian Foreign Ministry has its specific strategy, some other centres of power, for example, the State Duma, have a different vision, understanding and position. We can see asymmetry here. I think it is positive when all branches of power in a country have the same vision. Since Russia is a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, it should be more pragmatic. Or, let’s take the example of the CSTO’s reaction to the statement of the Azerbaijani ambassador to Russia. The statement can be viewed differently, but the form of the CSTO’s reaction to it causes many questions.
We should not forget that an ambassador is a representative of a country and in this case the CSTO should have clarified the issue by sending a request to the Foreign Ministry rather than by making a statement about the ambassador. I think it was uncivilized to make a statement in the way it was done. The note from the Azerbaijani side was professional diplomatic work. As for the Moscow Patriarchate attributing a church in Nagorno-Karabakh to the Orthodox Church in Armenia, this is another evidence of a lack of pragmatism on such a sensitive issue. I do not want to accuse them of a lack of professionalism or partiality, but I think that a religious person should be more balanced in their statements. We did not see any balance in the statement of the Russian church representative.
Q: Don’t you think that all this affects Russia’s image as an impartial mediator on Karabakh?
A: Naturally, it brings an element of misunderstanding to relations between Russia and Azerbaijan. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan should continue to take a balanced position in its actions. We need to remember that Russia is our neighbour, we shall be neighbours forever and we cannot do anything about it. Economic relations between our countries have actively developed over the past year and this is positive. Meanwhile, it does not mean that Azerbaijan has to be reconciled to current events. We can see that Azerbaijan is not reconciled to them and this is proven by the notes of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry. These notes show that Azerbaijan will conduct a pragmatic and consistent foreign policy. These instances certainly do cases create some problems for Russia’s image and, in this regard, our countries should think together and decide what to do to ensure that these issues do not arise again.
Q: The next round of negotiations between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia is expected under the mediation of the Russian president in late January. Before the meeting, the OSCE Minsk Group’s co-chairs will visit the region. What should we expect from these meetings?
A: I don’t expect anything extraordinary from the co-chairs’ visit. I think that whatever can be proposed has already been proposed. The OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs are unable to suggest anything new, because the basic principles of settlement have repeatedly been presented as improved, overhauled and updated. However, the order of the figures does not affect the sum. They remain unchanged. Therefore, I don’t expect anything new. I only expect the process to continue, which is positive in itself. As for a trilateral meeting of the presidents, then something interesting can be expected from it. The Moscow declaration was signed and there were other interesting meetings under Medvedev’s mediation in 2008. In addition, telephone calls were held after Erdogan’s visit to Moscow and Lavrov’s visit to Yerevan. This proves that some serious negotiations on Karabakh are under way. Certainly, I would like the issue to be clarified. I think the presidential meeting in late January might bring some clarity in this sense. It would be very said if it did not, because it would show the ineffectiveness of the very intensive negotiation process involving Russia and Turkey. I hope Ankara, Moscow, Paris, Washington, Baku and Yerevan understand this.
News.Az
