Saturday, July 06, 2013
Interview: Caucasus Expert On The Armenian-Azerbaijani ‘Suicide Pact’
July 06, 2013
Thomas de Waal of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace recently
launched a revised 10th-anniversary edition of his book “The Black Garden:
Armenia And Azerbaijan Through Peace And War.” It’s widely considered the
best work in English on the conflict around the ethnic-Armenian
Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. To mark the new edition, RFE/RL
Azerbaijan Service correspondent Rovshan Gambarov spoke with de Waal about
how the situation has changed over the last decade.
RFE/RL: How has the situation regarding Karabakh changed over the last
decade?
De Waal: The main thing hasn’t changed — which is the situation of
basically post-1994, no war/no peace, as we call it. There is no active
fighting, but also no resolution of the conflict. That hasn’t changed. A
peace still looks further off than ever. People are beginning to talk about
the possibility of conflict, which I also discuss in the book.
So, unfortunately, it’s entered the phase of just being even more
difficult. But the main thing that has changed is the kind of rise of [an]
Azerbaijan, that has oil and gas power. Azerbaijan is obviously much more
powerful than it was when I first researched the book in 2000, 13 years
ago. It’s a much richer and stronger state, has a bigger presence in the
world.
[image: Thomas de Waal (file photo)]Thomas de Waal (file photo)
But the paradox is it has got nothing, nothing with regard to Karabakh. It
has not recovered any territory; no refugees have gone home. So this has
been zero success for Azerbaijan on the Karabakh issue.
RFE/RL: And how about for Armenia?
De Waal: Armenia is also a little more stable, maybe, than it was. But
obviously, Armenia, the economy is obviously not as good as Azerbaijan’s.
Better than it was 13 years ago. But I think Armenia has changed the least.
Karabakh itself has changed quite a lot. Everything has been rebuilt, and
it’s very hard to see ruins in Karabakh in the main Armenian settlements,
roads, infrastructure. So Karabakh has also changed and also I think — and
this is a worrying aspect — I think a new reality in Karabakh, it’s much
harder to see where the former NKO, the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous
Region, ends and the occupied regions begin. This was much more obvious a
few years ago. And this is obviously worrying — as time goes by, the the
distinction between Karabakh and the seven regions around it is beginning
to blur.
RFE/RL: Azerbaijan is investing heavily in its military. In fact, its
military budget is greater than Armenia’s entire state budget. But a lot of
that money is lost to corruption. Does Azerbaijan’s military spending worry
you?
De Waal: Even if a large proportion, even if half of the money spent on
the Azerbaijani military is being stolen or put into someone’s pocket,
that’s still a large amount of money that Azerbaijan is spending on the
military. I guess the problem of Azerbaijan is that the Armenians still
have two advantages on the military side. They have the terrain; they have
the landscape they are defending, which is mountainous, which is always
easier to defend than to attack. And they can also buy weapons from Russia
at reduced prices; Azerbaijan is also buying weapons from Russia, as you
know, but at full price.
So I think the result of this military buildup is that if there were to be
some new fighting, I fear that even in a few days the destruction that
could be done, on both sides, would be greater than the entire three years
of war that we saw in the 1990s. That was very much a low-technology war,
and I fear that if there is even a week of war, the cost of the destruction
would be absolutely enormous this time.
RFE/RL: And a war would be quite different now as well in the sense that
the whole region has changed, wouldn’t you agree?
De Waal: Yes, is the short answer. We are talking about two very big
armies. We are talking about a much more sensitive region, with Iran to the
south, the North Caucasus to the north, Turkey to the west. And we are also
talking about the Caspian oil and gas pipelines. Georgia is also a
neighbor. Some of the Armenian hawks talk about attacking Azerbaijani oil
and gas infrastructure. All of this means this would not be a conflict
which would just be about Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Karabakh. It would be a
conflict which would involve a wider region. And maybe this, in a sense, is
a good thing, because it means there is an interest in the neighborhood in
stopping this happening.
RFE/RL: Ever since the conflict, Azerbaijan has pursued a policy that
Armenia describes as a “blockade.” Essentially, closed borders between the
countries. Has this policy been effective?
De Waal: Yes and no. Obviously, it focuses the mind, so to say, of
Armenia. You know, it means that they cannot forget this issue. And
clearly, it doesn’t help the Armenian economy. Although it also benefits a
small group of people. In the Armenian economy you can have monopolies over
imports and exports.
But I think the big problem really is that there is just no trust between
the two sides. I think there is still quite a good agreement possible. I
think the Basic Principles [also known as the Madrid Principles, a document
agreed to in 2007 and revised in 2009] is still a good foundation for an
agreement. I think the two sides could do a deal.
But there is very, very little trust between them. They don’t really want
to work together. And so I describe the conflict as a “suicide pact.” Both
sides hurting themselves. Everyone is suffering.
RFE/RL: Tensions between the two countries always seem to be running high.
Earlier this year in Azerbaijan, there was an intense campaign of protests
and book-burnings and media smears aimed at a writer who was writing
sympathetically about Armenia. Do you think there is any possibility for
reconciliation between these two nations?
De Waal: I always believe there is possibility for reconciliation between
these two nations. For the new edition of the book, I spent some time in a
village called Khodjurni on the territory of Georgia that has a mixed
Armenian and Azerbaijani population. This shows that, outside the conflict
zone, anything is possible if you take away these political messages. I
definitely believe reconciliation is possible. But, as you say, there was
this very unpleasant campaign against Akram Aylisli, a respected
Azerbaijani writer who was talking about peace and reconciliation. So that
obviously sends a bad message.
Let’s wait and see whether this is just a phase in Azerbaijan, if this has
to do with Azerbaijani politics, or whether this is a longer-term problem.
Because if it is a longer-term problem, then I fear we are in for a very,
very long process here. We could be having this conversation in another 10
years or 20 years.
RFE/RL: Writing about Karabakh, with such high emotions around the issue,
seems like a really thankless task. Do you expect to come in for a lot of
criticism?
De Waal: I think there will be criticism. And I think that is normal,
because basically I’m trying to write a kind of third narrative which is
not the official Armenian or official Azerbaijani narrative. So, naturally,
because I am doing that, I will get criticized. That is normal. I expect
that. But I hope that I still have many friends, many professional
colleagues in both Armenia and Azerbaijan. And I also have letters of
support that people write to me — so that is also good. People say that
“we like what you write, it is helpful.” And obviously if I didn’t have
that support, I wouldn’t be happy. So that’s, I guess, the good news for me.
RFE/RL: You said you plan to come and present your new edition in
Azerbaijan and Armenia. Do you think you will find many people in these
countries who will listen to your “third narrative”?
De Waal: There are quite a lot of people who are interested. As I always
say, I think everyone has different ideas inside their head. The same
person you talk to who expresses aggression toward Armenians or
Azerbaijanis later in the conversation starts to remember his Armenian
friends or Azerbaijani friends and neighbors. It is not as though everyone
has one view. People have different views inside their heads. It is like
the weather. If the weather outside is one way, then you feel maybe
anti-Armenian or anti-Azerbaijani. But one day the sun will come out and
people may feel a bit different.
From: A. Papazian