SERGEY MARKEDONOV: "IN ALL CASES RUSSIA WILL HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON AZERBAIJAN. ALONG WITH NAGORNO KARABAKH CONFLICT, THERE ARE OTHER TOOLS OF INFLUENCE"
Today.Az
/politics/50170.html
Jan 19 2009
Azerbaijan
Day.Az interview with Sergey Markedonov, famous Russian political
scientist and chief of department of problems of international
relations under the Institute of Political and Military Analysis.
– What can you say about the free supply of armament of a total of
$800,000,000 by Russia to Armenia? Why did the Kremlin take the step,
which will undoubtedly cause escalation of tensions in the Nagorno
Karabakh conflict?
– I think it is incorrect to state this fact this way. The Defense
Ministry has rebutted the fact of supply of armament to Armenia. It
is too early to make final conclusions. Anyway, Azerbaijan’s external
policy is focused on Armenia. Therefore, any information about support
or assistance to Armenia either by Russia or any other country causes
a painful reaction of Azerbaijan. This is quite clear. I think that
it would have been expedient not to conceal this information and to
provide explanation to public. The Defense Ministry has stated that
it has nothing to do with the armament supply. The Defense Ministry
could have made a more serious statement.
– The response of the Russian Defense Ministry did not satisfy the
Azerbaijani side. On the one hand Moscow after Georgian events tends
to position itself as a peacekeeper, initiating the adoption of the
Moscow declaration and on the other hand it supplies arms to one of
the conflict parties. How can it be explained?
– It is necessary to learn the details and moments of the fact of the
free armament supply, as the scandal becomes an object of speculations
by different sides. Public explanation is needed. The position of
the Russian Defense Ministry satisfied someone and does not satisfy
others. The resolution of the Karabakh conflict does not depend on
the free delivery of arms to Armenia. There are deeper factors.
– Is it possible in this case to establish a special commission to
investigate this fact?
– It is difficult to comment on the Kremlin’s position as Moscow does
not like to justify itself in anything.
– Is the free supply of armament to Armenia possible in the CSTO
framework?
– It is difficult to say this as I am a political scientist not a
military expert. I can only give a political assessment to this fact.
– Answering the questions of the Day.Az agency during the previous
interviews you noted that the resolution of the Karabakh conflict does
not depend on the Kremlin, saying that only Azerbaijan and Armenia can
settle this issue. Yet the transfer of the Russian armament to Armenia
proves once again that Russia has never taken so modest positions in
this issue and only it can settle this conflict…
– Let’s imagine that the fact of armament supply is confirmed. If
there have not been the supply, do you seriously believe that there
is any political formula which contains the future of the conflict
solution? If the armament supply is real, Baku will state that
"you see, we have been ready for the conflict resolution but Moscow
hindered it". We can also ask why Baku creates the military-industrial
complex, why the head of the Azerbaijani state in his interview to
Italian mass medias does not rule out armed solution of the conflict,
though the Moscow declaration fixes the political resolution of this
conflict. Here, arguments can be used in different ways. In the reality
the parties are unable to get a compromised solution and if Armenia
does not get military support from Moscow, it will search it from
other countries, like Azerbaijan will. The matter is that the conflict
parties are not ready for compromise. Washington, Moscow and NATO are
complex things. Russia have definite Azerbaijani lobby groups, mostly
connected with the fuel and energy complex and it has an influential
Armenian lobby. The Kremlin’s position on Armenia and Azerbaijan is
hesitatory. However, it is inclined to support the Armenian side. The
Russian factor, despite its presence, is secondary, not key one. Most
things are defined by the unreadiness of the parties for a compromise.
– It becomes clear that today Russia is not interested in the
resolution of the Kaabakh conflict, as the frozen conflict allows it
to put pressure on Armenia and Azerbaijan. If the conflict is settled,
in this case Russia will lose the whole South Caucasus, without the
levers of influence it has created…
– Armenia and Azerbaijan are not Germany or EU. These are small
countries, which can not be self-sufficient and they will be imposed
to pressure in the framework or beyond the Karabakh conflict. This is
a myth, like if there is Nabucco, Ukraine will become a democratic and
a self-sufficient country. Russia will have an influence on Azerbaijan
in all cases, at least in the issue of split people in Dagestan. It
is latent, but still it exists. The problem is now settled in the
Baku-Makhachkala framework. There always are tools of influence along
with the Karabakh conflict.
– Do you think Moscow is on Armenian or Azerbaijani side in the
Karabakh issue?
– Moscow adheres to pro-Russian position which implies the preservation
of the quo status. Russia is against the military resolution of the
Karabakh conflict by Azerbaijan.
– In this case, why does the quo status and existence of the frozen
conflict meet the Kremlin’s interests?
– Because there are no other figures, which could replace the quo
status. For example, you throw out an old sofa to get a new one. Well,
it is clear that old one is bad but you can sleep on. It is unclear
whether the new one will also be good. It can even break as masters
are not too qualified and can not agree which sofa to produce. There
is no stable and reliable construction which could be legitimate both
in Yerevan and Baku. If not, why should we defreeze a conflict. If
we change a situation, we must benefit from it and not just to change
for changing it.