INTEGRATION OF THE CAUCASIAN STATES INTO A SMALL ANALOGUE OF ‘EUROPEAN UNION’ WILL BE IN FAVOR OF BOTH THE CAUCASUS AND EVEN SUPER POWERS
David Stepanyan
Arminfo
2010-11-26 13:35:00
Interview of member of the Karabakh Committee, ex-minister of the
interior, adviser to the first president of Armenia for national
security Ashot Manucharyan with ArmInfo News Agency
Mr. Manucharyan, after the war in August 8, 2008, much is spoken
about withdrawal of the USA from the South Caucasus, which happens in
parallel with strengthening of Russia’s presence in the region. How
much does it meet the actual alignment of forces, especially as
regards Armenia?
As regards Armenia, now the republic is in quite an impetuous period
of its history. Every busybody in town deals with the problems of
Armenia, one of the countries of the region that keeps on playing
the key role regardless of the persistent rumors about declining
interest in the South Caucasus. The fight for the Caucasus, which has
been conducted for over 20 years, remains one of the key positions of
the global resistance in the world and at the same time an extremely
sensitive contact point of interests. And if there is some certainly
about Georgia and Azerbaijan, which are West- oriented to a certain
extent, the fight for Armenia is more serious. At the same time,
despite the opinion that Russia allegedly controls everything in
Armenia, all the geopolitical processes are still aimed at complete
expulsion of Russia from Armenia. Taking into account the situation
with Georgia and Azerbaijan, Armenia is still the last point of
relative balance in the region. This gives grounds to the United
States and Great Britain to gain relative consolidation of forces
with the rest of Europe in this matter. Today the West’s positions
in the region are already prevailing over Russia’s positions and
are intensively strengthening. All the statements that Russia has
allegedly strengthened in the region, particularly, in Armenia,
having expelled the USA from here are actually part of the general
campaign on expulsion of Russia itself from the South Caucasus.
How does it affect the domestic political processes in Armenia?
The domestic political forces and field of Armenia have been engaged
if not by forces but at least the foreign political processes around
Armenia and the region in general. A part of politicians having joined
external forces, are conductors of the intentions of these forces in
Armenia. Another part, irrespective of their wish, has been directly
involved in these processes on providing any interests and goals. As
for the forces which are stemming only from the interests of Armenia,
are very few. For instance, at present movement is trying to become
such a force. Another point is – how much they manage to do it. But
they are trying to act just in this context. The situation is much
more difficult in other political circles of the republic. The
forces which are trying to act stemming from the interests of
Armenia, are enough in Armenian National Congress, but they are not
enough qualified. Sometimes, the forces of Armenian National Congress
engaged by external processes, display their will and correct domestic
processes and dictate their will when forming the agenda of Armenian
National Congress.
What about the authorities’ engagement?
The Armenian authorities are fully under the external influence. The
authorities pay national interests of Armenia getting the right from
outside to exploit their own population. Personal enrichment at the
expense of the country – is the only right which they are given from
outside as an exchange.
Has the power been engaged more by Moscow than the West?
The power has been engaged by Moscow as well as by the West which
differ by technologies as the West is acting a little bit more
carefully. As for their goals and means, unfortunately, they are
identical and based on pure interest which is considered to be the top
pilotage in the modern world. In such conditions, within the frames
of such a fight, of course, Russia is doomed to lose, as the Russian
culture has never be based only on pure interest.
What is Russia’s and the West’s priority interest in Armenia?
As for the priority interest of Russia and the West to Armenia,
here they mean fighting for management the Caucasus communication
corridor, which is the only neutral corridor in EurAsia. That is
to say, in order to try to connect the East to the West at present
we have to act either via Russia or Iran, which are global players,
or via Turkey which pretends to such a role.
Does the Karabakh conflict, which separates the Caucasus corridor
by a military confrontation line, go against implementation of this
provision? Is the Karabakh conflict settlement a necessary factor
for engagement of this corridor?
It is not obligatory that the communication corridor in the South
Caucasus must not have “bolts”, which are often useful. Any country
which is striving to have a control over the corridor should also
have a control over the “bolts”. Till 2008 in fact the West was the
owner of the corridor and Russia had two “bolts” – South Ossetia
and Karabakh, that is to say, any moment Moscow could initiate any
actions which would lead to closing of the corridor. For this reason,
liquidation of these “bolts” has become a global task for the West,
but their taking under control has always been the more significant
task for the West. As a result of the war in South Ossetia, Russia
gained South Ossetia but lost a “bolt” and the opportunity to conduct
the corridor at the South Ossetian direction, that is to say, that
war was beneficial to Americans. The Karabakh bolt still remains,
though Russia almost lost in 2008, as the actions plan in South
Ossetia was a global nature. In fact, Russia lost in that war,
but gained a tactical victory, as it had formed the image of force
at the post-Soviet territory, which can always put tanks forward
and nobody can confront them, as all the talks about NATO, UN,
etc. are fiction. After that Moscow started forcing the Karabakh
conflict settlement, as a result of which the “Madrid principles”
appeared and the only disagreement was regarding the peace-keepers
in Karabakh. All that lasted for a month. Then more sober times have
come and it became clear that as a result of its activeness Moscow
may lose its last “bolt” after which it will lose Armenia as an ally,
and water found its own level.
We have spoken about the interests of Russia and the West. Let us
speak about the interests of Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh being the
main tools on maintaining the status-quo…
The Nagorno Karabakh conflict has always been a dual factor for
Armenia: on one hand, it retarded the republic’s development, on the
other – it was a trump ace indicating Armenia’s global importance for
the whole world. Moreover, after the NKR small people won the war
in 1994, Karabakh turned into a very influential unit in the whole
Caucasus, being primarily a motherland of small peoples. Noteworthy,
after the Karabakh Armenians, naturally, with the support of Armenia,
won the war with Azerbaijan, that allowed the latter to bawl of the
Armenian aggression about the whole world, the US Congress passed the
907th amendment envisaging imposition of sanctions against Azerbaijan
but not Armenia. after all this, the Caucasus peoples traced such an
aerobatic flying in this which they did not even see from Israel waging
war with Arabs. In total, this should play in favour of implementation
of a long-time idea of creating a unified Caucasus. The region has
always had great economic and cultural possibilities, at least for
Armenians. Successful activity of Armenians in Tbilisi and Baku
dramatically confirms that the Caucasus has always been a place of
successful expanding of positive forces and the potential. However,
it did not happen in virtue of a number of objective and subjective
reasons.
Here I would like to ask about the recent statement by Mikheil
Saakashvili on the necessity of a confederation with Azerbaijan. Is
it from the same opera? If yes, who is the real director?
Undoubtedly. The question is who is the client of this opera,
which naturally suggests itself. The point is that one who can play
this opera will win. Naturally, making such statement Saakashvili
just repeated what Georgia had already started in 1992-1993 when it
suggested creating a “Caucasian Community” naturally with involvement
of the West. However, at the same time Armenia started the same game
with involvement of Russia but quite independently. In this light, the
process was rather intensive up to 1993 until US Assistant Secretary
of State Talbot visited Armenia and after intensive pressing by
Americans in the political and information sphere Armenia had to
refuse the Caucasian policy and the idea of integrating the Caucasus.
However, the idea of integration is still progressive and the leader of
Georgia, a country that has considered itself a European country since
1993, made quite an opposite statement. Moreover, mass media did not
trace what Saakashvili meant in reality. Actually only confederative
unity of Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Abkhazia, South Ossetia
and Nagorny Karabakh is possible today. This will resolve all the
conflicts, if the Caucasian peoples act independent of super powers.
From: A. Papazian