Interview with Andrey Rayevskiy, editor-in-chief of Russian news agency Mediafax.
Q: What is needed for a breakthrough on a Karabakh settlement in 2011, after what many see as an unsuccessful year in 2010?
A: It's not only 2010 that wasn't successful. The past 18 years since the creation of the Minsk Group have been unsuccessful too. The current situation in the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict area was frozen in spring 1994 after a ceasefire agreement was signed between Baku and Yerevan. At that moment, the result of the hostilities was practically predetermined. Azerbaijan had been defeated, having lost not only Nagorno-Karabakh, but its seven adjacent regions too. Think about this: Azerbaijan is the only country in the world that has one-quarter of its lands under occupation. This gives food for thought. In the past 18 years none of the three Minsk Group co-chairs, Russia, the USA or France, has forced Armenia to liberate the occupied lands of Azerbaijan. They have not even set this objective. It is worth noting that all the three countries have a very strong Armenian lobby and the governments of these countries have to meet its interests. For this reason, I think Azerbaijan can hardly hope for pressure on Armenia from Moscow, Washington or Paris.
However, there is a positive aspect. The French Foreign Ministry made a surprising statement recently. I call it surprising because the Fifth Republic has a very influential Armenian community and its votes influence the elections in France. The French Foreign Ministry practically prohibited French citizens from visiting Nagorno-Karabakh and the seven occupied regions of Azerbaijan. It is clear that the only way to Khankandi (known as Stepanakert by the Armenians) today is via Yerevan. Naturally, after such a visit to Karabakh, a French citizen will be blacklisted by Azerbaijan and banned from entering Azerbaijan. I think the French Foreign Ministry's advice not to visit mostly targets journalists, politicians and businessmen who have to visit Yerevan for business purposes. Now they will probably respond with a polite refusal to a proposal from the Armenian authorities to pay a so-called "familiarization visit" to Artsakh [Karabakh].
Q: Do you think Moscow’s mediation, when Washington, France and the EU as a whole have been more passive, can promote a breakthrough in a resolution?
A: Moscow cannot play the role of a sole mediator, not least because Russia is Armenia’s ally in the CIS Collective Security Treaty. Within this military alliance Moscow and Yerevan are committed to provide military assistance to each other. In fact, Armenia certainly uses the strong military potential of Russia to consolidate its army. For example, Armenia buys Russian arms for a fairly notional price within the CSTO. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan has to buy the same arms at world prices. Here is the difference. Therefore, I am surprised at the talks in Baku that the military potential of Azerbaijan is greater because the economy of this country is bigger than Armenia's. It is important to get the main thing: today Armenia has a military ally in the face of Russia, while Azerbaijan has no military ally. Some may say there is Turkey, but Ataturk’s country has never signed an agreement on the creation of a military alliance with Azerbaijan.
Q: How do you assess the US position on Karabakh?
A: Washington also takes an equivocal position. On the one hand, the United States speaks in favour of strengthening partnership relations with Azerbaijan, aware of the country's important energy role. On the other hand, the US Congress allocates financial aid to the Nagorno-Karabakh separatists every year. Capitol Hill has not annulled, but just frozen Section 907 to the Freedom Support Act, which bans direct assistance to Azerbaijan [the Azerbaijani government] by the USA. These sanctions were originally introduced as an alleged response to the transport blockade of Armenia by Azerbaijan and Turkey. However, the US congressmen do not want to notice another fact: the occupation of 20% of Azerbaijan's land by Armenia. Currently, Washington puts pressure on Turkey to force it to open borders with Armenia without prerequisites and to restore diplomatic ties with this country. Washington's determined efforts to lead Armenia out of the transport blockade without the liberation of the Azerbaijani occupied lands proves that pro-Armenian sentiments dominate in the United States. Azerbaijan, therefore, cannot hope for US support in the liberation of its land.
Q: Much has been said recently about a possible resumption of ther Armenian-Azerbaijani war over Karabakh. Do you think this likely?
A: Azerbaijan alone will not be able to fight Armenia, backed by Russia. The Russian Defence Ministry will not allow Azerbaijan to start hostilities to liberate its lands (note: not alien lands).
The EU and US State Department will not allow this. They will accuse Baku of attempting to settle the Karabakh conflict by force. In this case, the US and EU may apply sanctions against Azerbaijan. All the same, if Ankara openly acts as Baku's military ally, Azerbaijan may have a definite chance to hold a blitz military operation with Turkey’s help and present a fait accompli to the world. In this case, Baku would liberate the seven regions adjacent to Nagorno-Karabakh by force. Certainly, in this case US and EU would be outraged, but Baku would be able to withstand this diplomatic attack with Ankara’s support.
Q: There are no Russian peacekeepers or Russian citizens in the Karabakh conflict area. Nonetheless, do you think possible Russian intervention in a war for Karabakh along the lines of the Georgian scenario of 2008 would be justified?
A: The war between Russia and Georgia in August 2008 significantly complicated Azerbaijani positions in the confrontation with Armenia. Russia created a precedent in the CIS area by recognizing the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia: in fact Russia refused to recognized the territorial integrity of Georgia and took military control of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The issue is: where is the guarantee that in future Russia will not take a similar step towards Azerbaijan? For example, Azerbaijan joins NATO or concludes a military treaty with Turkey. Turkish troops and NATO arms appear in Azerbaijan. The next day Russia severs ties with Azerbaijan and recognizes the independence of the so-called “Nagorno-Karabakh republic”. In this case Azerbaijan will almost have no chance to regain control of Karabakh. As for Russian peacekeepers, their appearance in the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict area is highly unlikely. Azerbaijan is against the military presence of Russian peacekeepers since its memories are still fresh about the actions of the 366 motorized infantry regiment during the tragedy in Khojaly in February 1992.
Leyla Tagiyeva
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
