Interview withDonald N. Jensen, resident fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at the USA’s Johns Hopkins University.
Q: Do you think that Presidents Obama and Medvedev can improve political relations in the post-Soviet area or will it remain a sphere of struggle between the US and Russia?
A: The tone of bilateral relations has significantly improved in the past year, though there have been few concrete achievements so far. The post-Soviet space is less an area of struggle than a region that is geopolitically ambiguous. The US and Russia have very different hopes for its future, so an understanding is not likely to be reached anytime soon. Moreover, events there are largely out of the control of either Moscow or Washington. The potential for misunderstanding and miscalculation remains high, therefore, as we saw in the developments leading up to the 2008 war in Georgia.
Q: Is it true that after the war between Russia and Georgia the US admitted that Russia is the main power in the South Caucasus and the US is no longer as active on security issues as it used to be?
A: This is not true. The US concedes that Russia has legitimate security interests in the former Soviet space. At the same time, it opposed the 2008 Russian incursion as unjustified. Washington remains committed to preserving Georgia’s long-term territorial integrity — including eventual NATO membership. US officials would admit, however, that Georgia is far from making the internal changes it needs to make to warrant that membership. There is widespread disappointment with, and quiet criticism of, Saakashvili.
Q: The US and Russia have different views on the conflicts in Georgia. Do you think that Washington and Russia can effectively cooperate in the settlement of another conflict in the region — in Karabakh?
A: There is nothing to preclude effective cooperation on Karabakh. I think both sides realize it is in their interest to do so, though both the US and Russia sometimes have other priorities.
Q: Russia is very active now on a settlement of the Karabakh problem between Azerbaijan and Armenia. May this activity bring peace to the region?
A: It is possible that these activities will bring peace, but despite its status as a mediator, Russia is widely seen, as has been the case for a long time, as tilting toward Armenia. In any event, Russia is less interested in a settlement per se than in consolidating its influence in the region. In recent months this has meant Moscow’s supporting better ties between Turkey and Armenia, and closer Russian ties with Azerbaijan.
Q: Do you think that Azerbaijan and Georgia will become NATO members soon?
A: While the door to NATO membership remains theoretically open to both countries, the view in Washington and among its NATO allies is that this is unlikely to happen anytime soon. The Obama Administration has elevated the importance of its relationship with Moscow in the past year, believing that Russian help is vital on key issues. This has meant in practice that the White House has downplayed talk of further NATO expansion, since it alienates Moscow. Unfortunately, negative internal developments in Georgia and Ukraine have played into the hands of those here who oppose NATO expansion. They are seen as not worthy members. I hope this will eventually change, but that is the mood at the moment.
News.Az
