Interview with Alexander Krilov, doctor of history, president of the Scientific Association of Russia’s Experts on Caucasus, political scientist.
Q: Do you think the possibility of a new war in Nagorno Karabakh is high today?
A: The war in Nagorno Karabakh ended on 12 May 1994 when the reconciliation agreement came in effect. Many years have passed, but no peace has been established every since. Military actions occasionally erupt on the front line through they are local so far.
The Karabakh conflict remains an important element in the policy of foreign actors in the South Caucasus and both domestic and foreign policies of Azerbaijan and Armenia. Such a long tension and the unsettled conflict cause an understandable disappointment and annoyance in both countries. But it is necessary to realize that the conflict parties would benefit more from the frozen conflict than a new full-scale war.
Historical experience shows that talks and the search of a peace solution may last for decades. The problem of the Northern Cyprus, which I think is well known in Azerbaijan, is a classical example. It may seem, especially on the foreground of disappointment with the lack of a significant progress in talks, that it is possible to settle the problem with a one strong military blow. It is a dangerous mistake which can be proven by the events of the recent past in South Ossetia; Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Somali and many other countries of our unquiet world.
Military actions were at least protracted elsewhere. The problem was often compounded even further instead of being settled.
I think the Azerbaijani leadership realizes the high potential hazard of the attempt of the military solution for the nation and the state. On the other hand, it is the political, diplomatic, information and propagandist pressing on an enemy in order to break its moral spirit and force it to make concessions. It is clear that in this sense, Azerbaijan intensifies its political potential year by year. Thus, I link this exercise is connected with this very fact rather than the possible soonest resumption of war.
Q: By results of the recent exercises of the Azerbaijani armed forces, Armenian Defense Minister Seyran Ohanyan called for the CSTO member-states to assist Armenia in a possible war with Azerbaijan. How will Armenian allies in CSTO act, particularly Russia, in case of the possible armed conflict?
A: This request came as a reaction to Azerbaijan’s actions, as an attempt to neutralize their psychological effect on the Armenian people and certainly the way to clarify the positions of foreign actors (while they remain changeless), their possible reaction to increase tensions in the Karabakh conflict area.
I have to note that the positions of foreign actors on Karabakh conflict differ with the similarity of approach which is an exception for the modern Caucasian policy. All countries that have their interests in the Caucasus, including neighbor Iran and Turkey, are against a new war in Karabakh. Further come differences but this agreement is critical.
Certainly, war can be launched even if Azerbaijan does not see unanimous support to military solution. But in this case there emerges a real threat of internationalization of the conflict and external interference. It does not limit to the factor of Russia or Armenian membership in CSTO. Western countries also have important interests in the Caucasus, while their interest in energy sources in quite evident. Libya and Iraq show the way these interests can be manifested.
Russia’s position in case a new war can be seen in the statements of officials on this issue. According to them, Russia will not take part in military actions in Nagorno Karabakh since the security guarantees to Armenia spread only to its internationally recognized borders. Thus, not Russia but our western partners may directly interfere with the conflict area. This interference would contradict the interests of Azerbaijan, while for Armenia this interference also represents a threat to sovereignty, while its membership in CSTO is remarkably neutralizing.
Q: What do you think about the further developments around Karabakh conflict given the intensification of Russia’s mediation efforts?
A: Russia has initiated the trilateral talks and this initiative received the full support of all negotiation participants, including the Minsk Group co-chairs. It is just another form of talks and search of a mutually profitable solution, but it is evident that no new or old formats can settle the problem, since it is primarily the business of the conflict parties.
For Russia it is important to ensure the stability on its southern borders and regions, adjacent to those borders. Meanwhile, the situation there may change radically due to internal or external causes. The South Caucasus states are not secured from internal destabilization by the Arab script, the military solution of the ‘Iranian problem’ is not ruled out and there is a threat for the further destabilization south of the Caucasus and intensification of extremist forces that use Islam for political purposes. In this case, destabilization in the Karabakh conflict is extremely undesirable to Russia, hence the current intensification of Russia’s mediation efforts.
If some fateful or dramatic changes occur inside the region or in the bordering countries, this may destabilize the situation and violate the existing balance of powers. This may increase possibility of a new war in Karabakh, which may cause the bitterest implications primarily for the peoples of the two countries.
However, we do hope that the region will avoid major political cataclysms.
Q: Do the co-chairing countries have a potential to offer to the parties any new variant of the peace solution?
A: The Karabakh conflict is too complicated, which is why it has no quick solution, that may satisfy both parties. The very search of a peace solution is extremely compound and requires huge efforts of the conflict parties and mediators. In this case, the most important is the parties’ will to search a peaceful compromise and in this case the main problems lies with this, rather than the ‘inefficiency of mediators’ which they are often blamed for. Mediators do everything what they can in this specific situation when none of the parties are ready to make concessions.
For many years each of the parties demand complete capitulation of their partner in talks and expect the mediators to force the opposite side to this. Meanwhile, the matter here is even not about a specific bellicosity of the sides but the unpreparedness of the population of the two states to the very idea of concessions. The forced resignation of Armenian President Levon Ter-Petrosyan was a bright example.
To change public sentiment, one needs a long and purposeful work to overcome the negative in relations between Azerbaijanis and Armenians and to root out the image of an enemy in normalizing ties between the peoples. Only this could create a reliable basis for the compromised solution. Unfortunately, no tendency is currently observed in reconciling the nations. It devalues any new variants of peace settlement ahead of time. Unfortunately, we cannot say that it is something unusual in the contemporary world where a tendency opposite to reconciliation is too frequent in the relations between states and nations.
Q: Appeals to involve Tehran as an active mediator in Karabakh solution are growing vocal in Yerevan. Can Iran get involved in Karabakh conflict as one more mediator?
A: This would be desirable for Tehran. Iran’s interest is obvious: it is interested in neutralizing the threat of external intervention, including from the South Caucasus. Intensification of the Caucasian direction in Iran’s policy could overcome Iran’s international isolation and improve its positions on the international area.
But Iran’s complex state on the international arena does not allow it. It is clear that the United States and EU will be decisively against Iran’s intensification in the South Caucasus. So, the active role of Iran in Karabakh settlement is too improbable in the nearest future.
Hamid Hamidov (Moscow, Russia)
News.Az
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
