Interview with Janusz Bugajski, Lavrentiadis Chair at the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
There are three major challenges in the South Caucasus region. First, the territorial integrity of all states is threatened by separatist forces supported by outside powers. Second, there is a contest over the transit of hydrocarbon energy supplies across the region from the Caspian basin to Europe, with Russia seeking monopoly controls. Third, the foreign and security policies of independent states are monitored closely by Russia as the Kremlin does not recognize the sovereign choice of each country to join the international organizations that best ensure their security and prosperity.
Are Russia and the US really able to collaborate in providing peace and stability in the region despite bilateral misunderstandings on global security?
Russia and the US have differing and often conflicting national interests and national ambitions in the South Caucasus. While Washington seeks integrated and stable states to eventually enter NATO and the EU and become a valuable part of the trans-Atlantic community, Russia either wants to bring the region back under its political and economic dominance or to promote weak and divided states that do not qualify for Euro-Atlantic integration.
Azerbaijan is still arguing with Armenia on the principles of territorial integrity and self-determination for Karabakh, and there is no pressure from the international community to put an end to the conflict. What should be done to move the Karabakh settlement forward?
International attention only focuses intensely on cold conflicts when they become hot conflicts. Basically, there are one of two solutions to the Karabakh dispute. Either there is a new war between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the territory and adjoining areas resulting in new border configurations, or there is a diplomatic solution generally acceptable to both sides. The latter would require the understanding by both Yerevan and Baku that a speedy solution would be in their long-term national interests. I do not currently see a diplomatic solution on the horizon.
Russia’s been playing a more active role on the Karabakh settlement for the last two years, and the role of the US seems to be weakening. Is Karabakh not a priority for the US after the war between Russia and Georgia?
Russia has been playing an active and negative role in the Karabakh dispute since the Soviet Union collapsed. Moscow does not want a settlement and the restoration of full relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia as this would limit its “privileged interests” by moving both countries toward the Wider Europe and trans-Atlantic institutions. Russia traditionally manipulates territorial and ethnic conflicts with or between neighbours in pursuit of its expansionist agenda. The priorities for the Obama administration are in Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq and, while the Karabakh dispute remains quiet and does not endanger the security of the wider region, Washington is unlikely to become deeply engaged in an attempted resolution.
How would you assess the present role of Turkey in a Karabakh settlement?
Turkey has its distinct interests in the region that do not necessarily correspond with those of Azerbaijan. In particular its closer ties with Moscow in order to gain energy, trade and investment benefits from Russia could lessen its commitment to the territorial integrity of both Georgia and Azerbaijan. Turkey’s limited prospects for European Union accession may encourage Ankara to form some kind of Caucasian condominium with Moscow and limit the role of the US and EU.
News.az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
