Interviews Dmitriy Zhuravlev, general director of the Moscow-based Institute of Regional Problems.
Q: An Armenian sniper recently killed a nine-year old Azerbaijani boy, as he was playing outside his home not far from the conflict line. In the aftermath, Baku made a tough statement about a possible military solution to the conflict and held military exercises on the front line. Similar, larger-scale exercises have been held this week as well. How do you assess the possibility of a new war today?
A: I think there is no armed solution to the conflict. What is the military solution to the conflict? Does it imply deployment of troops to any area? What will it give? On the other hand, it is very difficult to find a political solution. The only form of political solution is to say "guys, let’s be friends". But how can this be done? Can people who lost their relatives and friends and homes be told "Just forget it"? You can never say that. They won’t understand.
I want to say that political formulae can be found but it is very difficult to find a political solution. It is possible even to prepare some documents, but you can never root out the pain in people’s hearts.
Q: So what can be done?
A: Going back to what you said earlier about the child’s murder, I can’t say whether it was a provocation or a stupid accident. Anyway, it is necessary to take steps to avoid conflict escalation. I can also understand the reaction of people in Baku. How can people understand a child’s killing?
First, this cannot be tolerated again. Second, people should stop accepting the front line as it is. I understand that it is easier said than done, but people should stop feeling the state of war. No sharp changes in the situation are possible. Sharp changes lie on the way to an American Iraq which will neither settle the problem nor avoid the appearance of many new ones.
Q: But if we have a new war in Karabakh, how will Moscow act?
A: I have no idea about the Kremlin’s plans, but I won’t say that Moscow will take Armenia’s side as an ally. Today Moscow is aligned to both parties, not in the sense of war but in many other issues.
Economic relations between Baku and Moscow are not always simple, but they exist and develop and in this case there is no opposition of allies and enemies.
And even if war were to start, would Russia send paratroops to the conflict area? I don’t think so. Politically, they will certainly be trying to reconcile the parties but they won’t interfere militarily. The Karabakh conflict is not the Ossetian one.
Q: 2012 will be a year of elections in the Minsk Group co-chairing states. Do you expect possible changes in the position of the countries on the Karabakh conflict as a result of these elections?
A: I can’t speak about France or the United States, but whoever wins the Russian presidential elections, Moscow’s position on the conflict will not change.
Q: Do you agree that the key to a Karabakh settlement lies with Moscow?
A: Partially, since there is also France and the United States. I am not sure about the Americans’ interest in a conflict settlement. As for France, Paris can and does want to settle the conflict but it is so strongly bound to the Armenian diaspora that it finds it difficult to pass any balanced decision. They can be understood. Russia has two strong diasporas - Azerbaijani and Armenian, while France has only Armenian.
For this reason, Russia is now the most active mediator. The conflict area is located directly on our borders. Azerbaijan and Armenia are our former friendly republics and now allies and important partners. We have Russian citizens of Azerbaijani and Armenian origin. Their number is not low. Finally, Russians lived and still live in the aforesaid republics.
So, we cannot consider Armenia or Azerbaijan alien to us.
Q: Do you think that the co-chairs are interested in a conflict settlement or do they benefit from its current state?
A: Let’s talk about Moscow. I think Russia is most interested in the settlement. I do not mean to offend Armenia but it is not a country that is difficult to put pressure upon. To keep a smoldering conflict near one’s borders in order to put pressure on Armenia is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
It is just the opposite with Azerbaijan. How can pressure be put on you with your Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline? How? Should Russia deploy troops in Armenia to fight on their side? Russia won't do it.
Therefore, it's much better for us if the conflict is resolved.
Q: How long will the status quo in Nagorno-Karabakh continue?
A: A new war today would be ethnic carnage once again. It is terrible. You will have to get used to co-existing with Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh.
Q: Baku has never been against this. We have always said that no-one is going to drive Armenians out of Nagorno Karabakh once it returns to Azerbaijan’s jurisdiction. We insist that Azerbaijanis must return to their home lands.
A: The return home is the subject of talks, but the main issue concerns legal subordination. What is Nagorno Karabakh? Is it a part of Armenia, a de-jure independent state (since de facto Nagorno-Karabakh is now sponsored by Armenia and it is not serious for such a small formation to fund an army from its own budget) or Azerbaijani land?
I felt terrible watching the first trilateral talks on Karabakh on TV. They were mediated by Gorbachev. At that time there was a real chance to settle everything easily on the spot. Now it is a problem.
Hamid Hamidov (Moscow, Russia)
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
