Interview with Eugeny Volk, chief of the Russian representative office of the Heritage Foundation.
Q: Can the Prague agreement of the US and Russian presidents on issues of global security on mutual affect the mutual understanding between these countries in the settlement of problems on the post-Soviet area and the Karabakh conflict settlement?
A: I would say that the direct impact will be insignificant. The thing is that this is just one though important sphere of the Russian-US relations against the whole importance of the bloc of issues connected with the control over nuclear armament. Here, the sides have, undoubtedly, united to maintain strategic stability and balance of strategic powers in order not to increase the threat of nuclear conflict. At the same time, there is also an important circumstance such as creation of a precedent for other countries actively striving for nuclear weapon envisioning the restriction of nuclear potential of the superpowers thus showing an example to others. But the conclusion of this important agreement does not eliminate existing differences between the United States and Russia in other spheres. This includes expansion of NATO, problem of the common European treaty that Kremlin promotes and the problems connected with independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and discrepancies in relation of sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program.On the whole, the specter of problems is quite wide and, undoubtedly, it includes differences on a number of regional issues, including on the influence of both countries in the South Caucasus.
I think the South Caucasus remains the area of clash of the US and Russian interests. The clash of interests regarding the democratic development of Georgia also has an important role. The conflict situation in the region also plays an important role. But I think none of the sides- US or Russia- has a direct interest in achieving a peace agreement by any mean. I think Russia even benefits from preserving tensions in the relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan at least because this enables it to play a role of a mediator, raise its influence on both conflict parties, maintain ties with both Yerevan and Baku. Therefore, I think this Russian-US agreement will have no direct impact on the conflict settlement.
Q: But good relations between Russia and the United States are anyway better for the conflict settlement than the differences between them which would lead each of mediator hogging the blanket…
A: On the whole, the atmosphere of the US-Russian relations has improved which promotes more favorable opportunities for a dialogue. But I would like to repeat that I do not see the conflict settlement among the top priorities of the US-Russian relations. Certainly, there are more serious problems both for the United States and Russia. I would like to mention Iran which is now growing into a serious problem especially in a relation to effective sanctions aimed at preventing Tehran’s possession of nuclear weapon. I think the negotiations will be mostly concentrated in this direction and the United States will attain Russia’s support and decisive steps in this very direction.
Q: Can there establish a situation around Iran that will demand from Azerbaijan which considers the Iranian and US direction to be a priority of its foreign policy to support the United States?
A: It is about the form of cooperation. I think we cannot rule out any forms of cooperation. But I believe official Baku’s position most depends on the context of these possible military operations, on their executers and scales. I think the decision here will depend on definite circumstances and proofs of the degree of Iran’s possession of nuclear technologies and arms.
Q: The war in Georgia has shown that no conflict can be considered frozen. Which is the possibility of a new war in the region and which of the conflicts-Armenian-Azerbaijani or Iran- do you consider to be most highly explosive?
A: I do not rule out any form of preventive strike against Iran if the United States or Israel have substantiated evidences that Iran is maximally close to the nuclear weapon and is able to use means of its transportation. This will cause hostilities between Iran and Israel or Iran and the United States in the Persian Gulf. All these are hypothetical variants but I do not rule out this script especially because Israel has quite serious sentiments in favor of a warning strike on the nuclear facilities in Iran. This has already been observed in relation to other countries.
At the same time, there is also an important circumstance such as creation of a precedent for other countries actively striving for nuclear weapon envisioning the restriction of nuclear potential of the superpowers thus showing an example to others.
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
