NAGORNYY KARABAKH CONFLICT: POTENTIAL FOR REVENGE IN THE LIGHT OF THE US-RUSSIAN CONFRONTATION
by Vuqar Masimoglu

Azeri Press Agency
Aug 27 2008
Azerbaijan

How will the recent events in the South Caucasus affect the Nagornyy
Karabakh conflict settlement? This question has become particularly
urgent after both houses of the Russian parliament recognized Georgia’s
separatists regions as independent states.

The main damage from the recent military conflict has been caused
not to Georgia but to the existing public opinion with regard to
the "frozen conflicts" in the former Soviet Union. The former Soviet
republics’ belief in the possibility of solving the "frozen conflicts"
militarily has diminished after Russia’s latest steps. This can be
felt in different comments, overviews, interviews and news on the
Georgian events. Is it true that the military settlement of the
"frozen conflicts" has been removed from the agenda? In fact, this
wording of the question is incorrect and it should be put as follows:
"Is the resolution of conflicts in the former Soviet Union possible
without considering Russia’s will?"

It is known who this question is addressed to. The West should
respond this question. In order to answer this question in the
affirmative, the USA and the European Union should achieve progress
in the resolution of at least one of the "frozen conflicts" in the
former Soviet Union. The West has restricted the opportunity to
choose conflicts in Georgia for revenge. Russia has taken concrete
steps in regard to South Ossetia and Abkhazia and has demonstrated
that it could resort to a military confrontation to protect its own
interests. Hence, the West will have to choose between the Dniester
and Nagornyy Karabakh conflicts if it wants to change public opinion
in its favour. The first option is less likely and if we take into
account that US interests in the South Caucasus are superior to those
in Moldova, Washington’s choice of Nagornyy Karabakh for the revenge
is more likely. This is one of the scenarios of how the processes in
Georgia might affect the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict.

How can the USA realize the plan for revenge? First, Washington may
reject the use of double standards on the Nagornyy Karabakh problem
and totally support Azerbaijan. In contrast to the Georgian-Abkhaz
and Georgian-Ossetian conflicts, the USA’s position in the Nagornyy
Karabakh conflict is as vital as Russia’s. At the same time, by
contrast to Georgia, Washington has the opportunity to fight on equal
footing with Russia in Azerbaijan. Namely, by contrast to Abkhazia
and South Ossetia, the USA has the opportunity to influence both
sides in the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict. Therefore, if the struggle
over interests in the South Caucasus becomes aggravated, the USA may
take revenge in Nagornyy Karabakh.

So far, the USA has been hesitating to intensify the confrontation in
the South Caucasus and has been interested in maintaining the status
quo. Yet, the situation is dictated by Moscow not by Washington and
the USA has to consider alternative options. US Vice-President Richard
Cheney’s scheduled visit to Azerbaijan shows that Washington intends
to delegate to Azerbaijan the main role in its plans. Richard Cheney
may spend the same amount of time on discussing the resolution of
the Nagornyy Karabakh problem as on ensuring the security of energy
corridors.