Thursday, April 2 2015 10:21

 Mr. Areshev, president of Armenia has recently addressed the issue of Russian arms deals with Azerbaijan calling it a problem that needs to be settled. Do you think Armenia has any levers to influence the situation? Would you comment on the president’s statement on the issue that had not been voiced at such high level before?

 

 

I don’t think that this issue has not been voiced earlier, though, over the past few days the topic of the arms supply has been voiced more often, which is obviously explained by the escalated tension in the Karabakh conflict zone. Official Baku has obviously got its own reasons to exert constant pressure on the Armenian side and I think that the "weapon" cooperation between Moscow and Baku is not a key factor here. In this light, I would like to note that Moscow had military and technical interaction with both Yerevan and Baku over the previous years as well, however, the death toll on the frontline has sharply risen within months.

 

I think the main solution to the problems is the political dialogue between Russia and Armenia at the level of the Presidents, Governments, Parliaments, and civil society structures.  Much is still to be done in this regard, though intensification of bilateral contacts is evident. Of course, not everyone likes it.

 

One of the key motives of Armenia accessing the EEU was the security component. However, tensions on the Karabakh-Azerbaijan Line of Contact and on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border escalated in January and keep growing. This has become a bargaining card for the opponents of the EEU. What do you think about it?

 

 

Armenia has recently been experiencing an alarming trend. The authors of a number of publications are linking not only the security problems but also the imbalances in the socio-economic development with the fact of Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). However, those who think so obviously are playing cunning.

 

Those criticizing Armenia's EEU course suggest replacing the EEU membership with a closer integration into the European "neighborhood system" and the North-Atlantic security structures, which envisage partnership with Turkey. However, the possible consequences are vivid through the example of present-day Bulgaria at least.

 

 

I think it is quite obvious that the current security system in the South Caucasus may change only in case the Armenian leadership adopts a Karabakh problem resolution scheme that meets the logic of official Baku. It is impossible to say that openly, this is why they invent various kinds of unrealistic schemes.

 

Nevertheless, I am also concerned about the attempts to split the Armenian society on political or any other grounds. This runs counter to Russia's interests because it directly destabilizes the situation in the region (even via "thawing" of the Karabakh conflict).

 

Russia will keep supporting Armenia both in the framework of bilateral relations and in the process of adaptation to the EEU rules. In the meantime, Armenia remains an independent state within the EEU and contributes to formation of a favorable economic environment and implementation of joints projects, even with the western, Chinese and other investors.

 

Certainly, the participation in the macro-regional integration unions implies delegation of a certain share of state sovereignty to the supranational bodies (in the EEU to a small extent than in the EU, by the way), but Russia is unlikely to need weak allies.

 

 

U.S. Department representatives call on Armenia to display a “humanitarian gesture” and set free two Azerbaijani saboteurs. Do you see there any preconditions for exerting pressure on Yerevan?

 

The United States as usually gives various signals that can be interpreted as both support and pressure. All this is a method of manipulation. Pressure on Yerevan and Stepanakert like on Baku will continue through both ‘soft’ and tough methods depending on the specifics of a problem and the country.

 

Russia is not an exception, by the way. However, in Russia they realize that provoking the counteragent with ones own weakness is, to put it mildly, not the best way to respond. 

 

Don’t you think Russia’s stand too inert amid the upsurge in tension in the conflict zone? Moscow could join the call for release of the Azerbaijani raiders as a humanitarian gesture. Don’t you think so?

 

It appears to me that Russia could make initiatives of humanitarian nature that would at least partially stabilize the situation in the conflict zone. It could be assistance in repatriation of captives (I don’t mean saboteurs and terrorists, indeed), improvement of the ceasefire monitoring mechanisms and so on. 

 

 

Maybe, Moscow’s diplomatic efforts in the Caucasus are certainly impeded by other challenges and the status of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chair that implies actions within certain frameworks.  It is not a secret that problems are intentionally created not only along our borders, but also inside the country. Nevertheless, it is high time for a more active stand in the Karabakh peace process, at least in settlement of local problems.