Wednesday, April 2 2014

 As a
man who is well informed of the Karabakh peace process, could you assess its
perspective given the latest processes and global changes?

It seems to me that over the last decades the
South Caucasus has generally lost many opportunities. This happens as Armenia, Georgia
and Azerbaijan wrongly think that time works for them. Actually, the latest
developments in Ukraine have once again demonstrated it. Meanwhile, the actual
refusal of the conflicting parties to support the efforts of the mediators to
find a solution to the

Karabakh conflict has affected them, first of
all. I have to reiterate that it is the parties to the conflict that are able
to achieve a real agreement on the peaceful resolution of the Karabakh
conflict. In your region they think for some unknown reason that the Caucasus
is the hub of the universe and nearly all the interests of superpowers collide
just there. South Caucasus is not even the periphery of the global policy; it
is the periphery where the interests of global actors collide.

 Generally,
looking at the South Caucasus from my point of view, I see rather a sad picture
amid USA's  falling expectations from the
region. The South Caucasus, has not become a single whole despite common
regional programs. The South Caucasus countries do not develop economically and
democratically. All this rests upon the regional conflicts that are not subject
to settlement by the efforts of foreign mediators and are not being settled.

 USA has traditionally exerted genuine efforts
to resolve the Nagorno Karabakh conflict on the basis
of a mutually acceptable concession. Everything is in vain. This is the reason
of our disappointment, concern and even discontent. The
arms race between Armenia and Azerbaijan and the frequent cross fires on the
border is what arouses utmost concern and discontent.

What is
today’s imperative for the parties to the conflict?

I think, the first thing one must and can do
now is not to allow the conflict to spiral into armed confrontation. It must be
avoided at any price. Otherwise, the price will be too high for all the parties to the conflict.  In this light, it is very important for the
governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan to support the efforts of international
mediators by all means possible. I am sure that the failed efforts of the OSCE
Minsk Group mediation mission are not personal failures of the mediators. The
peace process is hopeless, as the conflicting parties are unable to conduct
normal negotiations. Any mediation will be a success if the conflicting parties
are ready to negotiate.

The
stance of the West, Washington and your personal stance come down to the need
to lift the blockade of the Armenian-Turkish border that was closed by Ankara
in 1993. What makes it so much important for the West and the U.S.?

Speaking of Armenian-Turkish normalization, we
mean establishment of diplomatic and economic relations, first of all, and not
specifically opening of the border. Being strongly convinced that normalization
of relations meets the interests of both the countries, I cannot but say that
normalization is within Armenia's interests, first of all. Turkey, as you know,
can do without Armenia. Meanwhile, Armenia due to its political geography,
cannot overcome many restrictions without having normal relations with Turkey.
Naturally, normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations is the best vector
of developments for the United States.

 In Washington they are sure that the relations
of Armenia and Turkey should have been normalized long ago. Yerevan made a
mistake failing to take advantage of the opportunity to normalize relations
with Ankara and missing the huge foreign policy advantages possible
normalization would give. In this light, the initiative must come from
Yerevan  rather than Ankara.

 Well,
but actual failure of Turkish minister Davutoglu’s policy of “zero problem with
neighbors” and putting the Armenian-Turkish protocols off the agenda of the
Turkish parliament speaks of opposite trends…

For Turkey it is of vital importance today to
have permanent and strong ties with Iran and Russia. Naturally, Turkey should
have normal diplomatic and economic relations, I repeat, with

all the three countries in the South Caucasus.
I think, involvement of the Caucasus countries in NATO PfP is the best
instrument that helps increase the Alliance's role in the South Caucasus.
Therefore,

Ankara
should maintain and establish diplomatic relations with all the three countries
in the region.

 

Are the
processes in Ukraine also part of the everlasting confrontation of the West and
Russia or it is a domestic political process?

I think the crisis in Ukraine is both domestic
and international problem. In that country, the old domestic disputes have
transformed into an international antagonism that was mainly provoked by the EU
Eastern Partnership Project. I think there was no need
in such global rivalry and confrontation.

 All the latest processes in Ukraine have
obviously demonstrated how much restricted is the political flexibility of the
South Caucasus countries and their opportunities to maneuver, as well as how much
the region depends on the processes in other regions. The situation in Ukraine
is a serious alarm that there is need to seriously revise the political nucleus
of all the South Caucasus countries.

 Russia
has recognized Crimea’s independence on the basis of the international
principle of the peoples’ right to self-determination. Will that principle -
leaving aside Crimea’s joining Russia - work against Russia in future like it
happened in mid-90s given its federal structure? 

 Many of the huge number of the principles of
the international relations stipulated by the UN documents contradict to each
other. In this light, every time when the principle of the peoples’ right to
self-determination is applied, it is necessary to study the given principle depending
on the peculiarities of every particular case. I think it is impossible to
compare Crimea with the Balkans or Bosnia. Neither it can be compared with the
Kurile Islands, Kaliningrad region. I am sure that every case needs a special
approach.