Interview with Volkhart Vincentz, researcher on convergence processes in Central and Eastern Europe, the Institute for Eastern European Studies in Regensburg.
Q: Azerbaijani authorities say that Karabakh conflict is a threat not only for region of Caucasus but for all Europe. Do you agree with that? And if it is so why EU is not active in stabilization situation in the region?
A: Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) conflict belongs to the set of frozen conflicts that are of much concern also in Europe. The Georgian war shows that these conflicts can rapidly turn into a military conflict, which affects not only the region but also Europe. Therefore the EU tries to help in resolving the NK conflict.
However, there are many players who take interest in the adversaries of the conflict. Russia or e.g. Turkey with its special relations to Armenia are interested parties. The EU has still severe problems in formulating a united foreign and security policy because of conflicting views of its 27 members. With the conclusion of the Lisbon Treaty the situation might improve and more initiative in the NK conflict might arise from it in future.
Q: Azerbaijan began to export its gas to Russia in 2010. Is this cooperation threat for Nabucco project?
A: Russia tries to secure its influence on potential energy deliveries from the CIS to EU by purchasing on long-term basis energy from the CIS partners. The EU tries with the Nabucco pipeline to diversify its energy supply. In economic terms the Nabucco pipeline is about more competition that will be introduced among the suppliers of European energy. As long as Russia has a dominant position as a supplier it can charge monopoly prices from the purchaser (EU) and offer low prices to CIS suppliers because they have not other way (pipeline outside Russia) to transport their energy. Thus, the new pipeline can help both parties by limiting the Russian market power.
The EU can get a more diversified, i.e. more secure supply and the other CIS countries have an additional distribution channel without Russia as middlemen. In their own interest all parties involved will use the higher competition to benefit by reducing the profit margin of the middleman. I am sure that the countries will take these considerations into account by formulating contracts about their energy sales to Russia.
Q: Don’t you think that there is not much understanding yet from Russia’s side in its approaches to contacts of its neighbors with the West?
A: There are many legitimate or less legitimate reasons for Russia’s concern about its near abroad intensifying their relations to the West. It is plausible that the extension of NATO raises security concerns in Russia. Preserving its role of a major European energy supplier is another area in which Russia seeks support from countries of the GUS. Further, it cannot be in the interest of Russia that trade flows are diverted to the West on the expense of its own trading opportunities.
On the other hand, many politicians seem to view Russia as a superpower and consider it a historical law that Russia is dominating its surroundings. The “Putin Doctrine” became evident in Georgia and is latent in the relations to Ukraine. However, the moral and public support for Russia from its neighbours and Eastern Europe is low or at least ambiguous. The Russian soft power is weak. In addition, the rather declining military strength in the last decades and limited economic capabilities beyond energy lead to a gap between political ambitions and reality.
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
