Author: Dabaghian Diana

[Armenian News note: the below is translated from the Russian Edition of Turan]

An Azerbaijani news agency has offered several theories as to why Norway has decided to shut down its embassy in Baku. She said that Norway sought to support Georgia’s integration with Europe, to have more “freedom of action” to promote reform in Armenia and that it may have concluded that it is “unproductive” to continue to seek democratic reform in Azerbaijan. The following is text of report by independent Turan news agency on 10 November headlined “Norway leaves to stay”; subheadings inserted editorially:

10 November: The Norwegian Foreign Ministry announced on 9 November that it would close down its embassy in Azerbaijan in 2019. The embassy has been the kingdom’s only diplomatic mission in the South Caucasus since July 1998 when the kingdom opened the diplomatic mission in Baku. The Norwegian diplomatic centre in the region will relocate to Georgia. Norwegian-Azerbaijani relations are [to be] transferred to the jurisdiction of the Norwegian embassy in Ankara.

Public surprised, but not government

In Azerbaijan, this news came as a surprise for the public, but not for the government. There were no prior statements about this. Even the actual announcement of the shutdown of the diplomatic mission was made in passing in the context of a more detailed statement by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry about the opening of an embassy in Tbilisi.

“Georgia is one of our main partners in the Eurasia region. For many years it has followed the path of reform which has drawn it closer to European and Euro-Atlantic organisations. Based on an overall assessment of Norwegian interests and our ties with the South Caucasus countries, Norway has decided to open an embassy in Georgia. Owing to a permanent representation in Tbilisi, it will be convenient for us to follow developments in the entire region,” Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Soereide said.

And then: “At the same time, the embassy in Baku will be shut down. Then, the embassy in Ankara will be responsible for Norway’s relations with Azerbaijan. However, Norway plans to set up an honorary consulate-general in Baku. These changes to Norway’s representation in the South Caucasus will be implemented in 2019.”

The Azerbaijani government, in the shape of the acting chief of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry’s press service, Leyla Abdullayeva, expressed regret about the decision of the Norwegian government.

‘Cautious’ conclusion

So, the brief but comprehensive statement by Ine Eriksen Soereide still does allow one to draw a cautious conclusion – which, however, is a necessary one amid an information vacuum – about Norway’s motives and goals in the region that made it take the decision.

1. Norway decided to relocate the embassy to Georgia which has made a transaction into the system of European values and Euro-Atlantic cooperation which the latest presidential election in the country showed, too. Support for Georgia’s Europeanisation is becoming a main and important factor that plays the role of a driving force for the advancement of the South Caucasus into the Euro-Atlantic space.

2. The assessment by the Norwegians of their interests and ties with the South Caucasus countries is a second ground for the decision, and it has to do with two factors: 1) the Georgian scenario for the reforming of Armenia which started in spring 2018 will require a more active involvement on part of Oslo in Armenian reforms, 2) which would have been less effective while the embassy was based in Baku and which to a certain extent constrained the freedom of action for Norwegian diplomats.

3. The form of the Norwegian Foreign Ministry statement, which pays special attention to the pro-European Georgia and drily notes the shutdown of the diplomatic mission in Azerbaijan, may indicate that Norway thinks it unproductive and prospectless to conduct further dialogue with Baku regarding democratic reform. This aspect of the matter has always been a stumbling block in the Norwegian-Azerbaijani relationship.

Numerous attempts by the Norwegians to build relations with the Azerbaijanis within the system of European norms and values via energy, cultural, public and educational projects have not produced anything. And one can say that the current decision had been brewing for many years within the context of a disproportionate development of the political vectors of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan is sliding increasingly further toward the establishment of absolute authoritarianism.

Energy cooperation vs democracy

In December 2013, the striking power of Norwegian policy – Statoil company, a participant in the Azerbaijani ACG [Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli] base oil agreement, refused to participate in the project to build the Trans-Anatolian gas pipeline (TANAP) which is planned to deliver gas from Azerbaijan to Europe, and announced the sale of its 10-per-cent share in the Shah Deniz gas project. In May 2014, shareholders in the company decided to pull out of oil and gas projects in Azerbaijan. In April 2015, Statoil sold its 15.5-per-cent share in the Azerbaijani gas field Shah Deniz, including in the Azerbaijani gas supply company (12.4 per cent) and the South Caucasus Pipeline Company (15.5 per cent) to the Malaysian oil and gas company Petronas.

These oil and gas decisions were taken in a period when the government of Azerbaijan stepped up pressure on civil society and efforts to restrict democracy. At the same time, talks were under way on democracy-related problems both at a high official level and at the level of Baku with Norwegian democracy foundations which, as the latest developments show, proved to be ineffective and prospectless. These may have been coincidences, if we take into account the fact that on 30 May 2018 the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan (SOCAR) and Statoil Azerbaijan, which is part of the Norwegian group Equinor, signed, within the framework of the oil and gas exhibition, a risk service agreement (RSA) on the Karabakh field in the Azerbaijani sector of the Caspian Sea and a production-sharing agreement (PSA) regarding the Ashrafi-Dan Ulduzu-Aypara [field] which is in also in the Caspian.

Norway draws a line between energy interests, political interests

However, this may also be evidence of the fact that Norway has decided to draw a line between its energy and political interests in the South Caucasus, promoting the former through its projects in Azerbaijan, and [promoting] the latter by expanding its operations in Georgia. Considering the fact that due to the Karabakh conflict, Georgia has since the early 1990s always been a venue for discussing South Caucasus projects involving Azerbaijan and Armenia, it is not hard to continue the line of expansion of informal public contacts among the three countries in which the West, including Norway, is interested.

Speaking in favour of this is the fact that the embassy in Ankara, not the one in Georgia, will be responsible for [Norway’s] relations with Azerbaijan. In effect, the Norwegian mission in Tbilisi will not be in contact with the Azerbaijani government. That mission will be partly assumed by the honorary consul-general, possibly in the shape of Equinor in Azerbaijan.

Marianna Mkrtchyan. This is not the first time Iran has voted for documents or resolutions within Islamic organizations that are contrary to the interests of Nagorno- Karabakh, but this has never reflected on its policy on this issue. On November 7, Kiro Manoyan, ARF Dashnaktsutyun Bureau’s Hay Dat and Political Affairs Office Director, expressed this opinion at a press conference in Yerevan, commenting on the adoption of the Istanbul Declaration by the foreign ministers of Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan.

Manoyan noted that such items as respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, non-violation of internationally recognized borders and peaceful settlement of all conflicts were included in the declaration, but there was not a word about the right of peoples to self-determination.

“In fact today a contradictory situation has developed in Iran, and a number of radical forces are already making statements regarding changes in the political line, including on Nagorno-Karabakh. And this should worry us. Maybe today there is an attempt to flirt with Azerbaijan, but it is unpromising, since Baku’s foreign policy is absolutely anti-Iranian, “Manoyan added, while stressing the need to focus on internal political discrepancies in Iran.

To note, on October 30, Istanbul hosted the VI trilateral meeting of the foreign ministers of Turkey, Azerbaijan and Iran – Mevlut Chavushoglu, Elmar Mammadyarov and Mohammad Javad Zarif, at the end of which the Istanbul Declaration was adopted.

The joint declaration expresses the commitment of Ankara, Baku and Tehran to the declarations adopted at the previous tripartite meetings of the Urmii, Nakhijevan, Van, Ramsar and Baku. In addition, the ministers reaffirmed their commitment to further strengthen the solidarity and cooperation among the peoples of the three countries based on ancient historical roots, religious and cultural community, serving peace, security, welfare and cooperation in the region. “The parties agreed to continue close consultations on regional and global issues of common interest for strengthening regional and international peace, security and stability at various levels and platforms, as well as within international and regional organizations. At the same time, they emphasized interest in strengthening peace and security in the region, and in this context declared commitments on the principles of international law, including respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity not-violation of internationally recognized borders and the peaceful settlement of all conflicts. In this context, the ministers reiterated the importance of an early resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict based on the above principles, stressed the importance of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), reflecting the success of multilateral negotiations and diplomacy; recognized that the successful implementation of JCPOA and the full utilization of the benefits provided by JCPOA require full observance of obligations by all the parties “, the declaration reads.

Marianna Mkrtchyan. In Armenia, 28% of respondents believe that the Amulsar deposit should be closed. Director of the Gallup International Association office in Armenia Aram Navasardyan reported this on October 31 in Yerevan, presenting the results of a survey conducted from September 3 to 11 of this year.

At the same time, Navasardyan stated that another 26.5% of respondents are convinced that the field should continue production, presenting more benefits to surrounding communities, another 18.9% believe that Amulsar should continue activities under intensive monitoring of local communities, 5.2% are convinced that the field should be exploited local companies, another 19.4% found it difficult to answer.

At the same time, on the question of what problems in their opinion could damage the ecology of Armenia, 43.6% of respondents were convinced that these are problems of garbage removal and disposal, 41.2% pointed to the problem of Lake Sevan, 37.8% – deforestation in Dilijan, 35.5% – the operation of the Amulsar deposit, 23.9% – the operation of the Kajaran copper-molybdenum combine, 10% found it difficult to answer the question, another 12% named other reasons.

To the question of how they relate to the draft law on the closure of betting offices and casinos in the country, 62.7% answered positively, another 14.2 responded positively, and only 13.8 negative, 9.2% of respondents could not answer this question.

When asked to express their attitude towards the movement “New Armenia, new spiritual leader” – 16.8% of respondents said they were negative about the movement, 26.9% said they support the goals of the movement, but against the methods, 38.3% supported the initiative and methods of their actions, another 18 % found it difficult to answer.

1106 people took part in the survey all over Armenia – 33% in Yerevan and 67% from the regions. The fault of the pulling is 3%.