Navigating the Future: NATO-South Caucasus Partnership September 20, 2012
Valentina M. Gevorgyan:
At the recent Chicago Summit, NATO made sure to prioritize partnerships
on its agenda. The South Caucasus region is one that can greatly benefit
from NATO partnership, especially where security and justice are concerned.
NATO’s efforts in the region should aim at resolving frozen conflicts,
including the Nagorno Karabagh conflict.
In May 2012, more than five dozen delegates gathered in Chicago at the
largest summit in the history of NATO to discuss the challenges of the
transatlantic community. The summit recognized the importance of existing
cooperative frameworks as well as further engagement with multiple
partners. It has become a priority to look at how partner countries
progress in their relationships and deal with significant problems,
especially when they are engaged in conflicts, seemingly unimportant,
irresolvable and thus, frozen.
NATO has been strengthening its partnerships significantly by offering
partner states cooperation in various spheres and providing each with a
range of opportunities corresponding to the countries’ needs. The same
structurehas
been applied to the South Caucasus trio: Armenia, Azerbaijan, and
Georgia, the latter of which remains enthusiastic with aspirations to be
incorporated into the official NATO family. In President Saakashvilli’s
words “there
is no more transformative role [for Georgia] than becoming a member of
NATO.” However, Georgia will need to improve its relations with Russia
first, before it can be considered as transformed and ready for official
membership into the community.
Resolving existing conflicts must be part of world leaders’ agendas,
especially for those who represent military and political alliances and,
more importantly, possess the necessary resources to positively affect
conflicts. The Nagorno Karabagh (NK) conflict is regarded as frozen because
there has been no real resolution progress following the ceasefire of 1994.
Turkey is an important member in NATO; Azerbaijan is an important partner
for Turkey, whereas Armenia’s only true ally in the region is considered to
be Russia, who is engaged in its own misunderstanding with NATO. The chain
of conditions that developed over time hinders the very nature of any
decision making in the region. However, any decision making becomes even
more complicated when one of the parties in a conflict demonstrates open
hatred or zero willingness to negotiate peace and through its actions,
endangers security in the region. The recent deal between Hungary and
Azerbaijan followed by the Azerbaijani president making a national hero out
of a murderer is an example of this
case
.
The sustainable work of the OSCE Minsk Group as a mediator to the NK
conflict has been appreciated in the region. However, the process has led
to what is called “the best way out”, which has since been the proclamation
of the status quo as the best outcome. Today Azerbaijan feels free to show
ignorant hatred toward Armenia and demonstrate zero respect toward all the
parties that have somehow been involved in the age-long NK conflict
resolution process.
The cheap and short-sighted stance of Azerbaijan and the important
involvement of Turkey in NATO should not permit the abovementioned states
to pursue their own policies in their immediate neighbourhood. A powerful
and influential organization should not be about looking at certain
interests of individual states within the alliance but rather subjecting
them to certain pressures if they insist on advocating their own beliefs.
One of the most significant activities that an influential military
organization can partake in is the transformation of the usually long-term
status of a frozen conflict. NATO activities have not been occupied with
mediation but rather with intervention. It is a military and political
organization ready to fight and to defend. But what happens to support and
advocacy in case there are available resources to be enacted for a defined
purpose?
The recent visit of NATO Secretary General to the South Caucasus has
confirmed the importance of partnerships for the Alliance. However, not
addressing an international iniquity will hardly result in advocacy for
better security. Any international error must encounter a greater barrier
of power and influence; most of the time these are important prerequisites
for ensuring security and establishing justice.
It is hard to change history and the geography of countries caught in
potential conflicts, but it is possible to make amendments to the former
and to prioritize the latter, by not renewing conflicts but by generating a
stronger policy that would secure more peace in the region. The determined
involvement of an influential body, for example a transatlantic political
and military alliance, will be essential in contributing to this change and
navigating a better future.
*Valentina M. Gevorgyan holds a master’s degree in Political Science from
the American University of Armenia. She is a member of the Young
Atlanticist Working Group at the Atlantic Council of the United States.
Currently she works at the Turpanjian Center for Policy Analysis as a
researcher.*
**