Monday, August 10 2015 14:04

After a long break the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents are to meet this autumn within the OSCE Minsk process framework. Most experts claim that the meeting will end with newer declarative statements in the “Madrid Principles” are not meticulously edited. What would you say about this?

 

The Karabakh conflict can only be settled on a regional scale. Given that global players are way too far from the conflict-smitten region the problem can be solved only on a regional scale.  I believe they do not fully understand the complexity of the region's problem; moreover, they are not interested in it.

I can say that the U.S. and its NATO allies should not come too close to the regional settlement of the conflict for their "contribution" to solving problems in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya has caused unceasing bloodshed and terrorism activation. In this light I think that South Caucasian peoples should prevent NATO from solving the Karabakh issue if they do not want to throw in lot with the aforementioned nations.

The conflict can be solely settled with the help of the regional states such as Russia, Iran and Turkey. Despite some problems these countries are in good working relations.

 

At first it seems that OSCE Minsk Group American co-chair James Warlick’s recent words evidence that the U.S. is willing to take over the Karabakh conflict settlement. Moscow, that is interested in maintaining the 1994 status-quo, remains relatively inactive. Could you please assess the rationality level of Russia’s policy?

Sooner or later other states, first of all the US and its EU allies, will take steps to settle the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict if Russia remains idle. Unfortunately, there have been no serious changes in respect of the conflict since 1994.  Even Moscow has no way contributed to some progress. Those in Moscow believe that maintaining a status-quo is in its interests, they are quite satisfied with it. However, the recent developments, mainly OSCE MG US co-chair James Warlick's words evidence that Russia should take "return" moves.

I believe that the U.S. is in quite a privileged position in South Caucasus; it is a matter of time for they will surely consolidate their spot there. The States have no time to get to the Karabakh conflict yet. Point is that the U.S. does not lack funds; it is just that there are more important geographic spots where Washington looks after its interests.

I think the time of the South Caucasus will eventually come and Nagorno-Karabakh will be in the first place. If Russia makes no attempts to solve the conflict by that time, it will be completely ousted from regional issues. Russia sways an opinion both in Armenia and Azerbaijan due to its OSCE Minsk Group co-charimanship. At the same time the authorities of the mentioned countries cannot but take into account the Russian interests when trying to hold a dialogue and take steps towards Moscow. The situation will change if Russia makes no use of it. After the U.S. and the EU will definitely fill Russia's bonnet. This will have its adverse effect both on Russia's military presence in Armenia, as well as Russia's economic presence both in Armenia and Azerbaijan. Well, it will lose its influence the whole South Caucasus.

 

 Armenia is very close to a region, which is facing a new geopolitical venture at the instigation of the U.S. and Turkey. Are the U.S. actions truly directed at supporting the so-called Syrian Army solely? As for Turkey, has it truly directed its actions against Islamic State terrorists? Do you think there is more important motivation in here?

 

I do not think it is a secret to anyone that Ankara’s air strikes are a disguise to hide its real target – Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. In reality, Turkey-ISIL relations still remain within the cold neutrality. Ankara would never venture to initiate a direct secret agreement with ISIL insurgents to simply make use of the regional chaos to cause Assad’s downfall and weaken ISIL. As for the U.S., every single conflict in the Middle East is of its traditional interest. The fact that the Turks annihilate the Kurds, while the Shia murder the Sunni prevents the region from the birth of a state with an independent policy, which will be against the U.S. interests. Therefore, it is not of the U.S. interests to combat terrorists.

 

Do you think the settlement of the Iranian nuclear problem will provide Iran and Turkey with a chance to come to accommodations regarding more disputable issues on the agenda and Karabakh conflict in the first place?

 

There have always been interest clashes between these two states. The clash has become even harsher since the Syrian conflict has started. Nevertheless, both Ankara and Tehran realize that this meaningless confrontation will only lead to a dead-end. I believe there have been some improvements in respect of Iran-Turkey relations. I do believe they can cooperate regarding conflict settlement in the Middle East and South Caucasus and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is one to deal with. I think Russia should get actively involved in the upcoming Turkey-Iran reconciliation. Our government should pay attention to the establishment of a Russia-Iran-Turkey regional alliance. This will allow our country to solve several long-term problems at once.