LAWRENCE SCHITZ:"AZERBAIJAN CANNOT EXCLUDE RUSSIA FROM THE MINSK GROUP, SINCE RUSSIA IS A BIG REGIONAL POWER WITH ITS OWN SECURITY INTERESTS IN THE CAUCASUS"

Today.Az
politics/50264.html
Jan 23 2009
Azerbaijan

Day.Az interview with director of program of International Crisis
Group on Caucasus Lawrence Schitz.

– In the end of 2008 Russia supplied Armenia with military hardware
of a total of $800,000,000 free of charge. How might the given fact
affect settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

First, we should not rush to conclusions on this issue. The claim
has to be studied and independently verified. If confirmed, Russian
arms transfers to Armenia could be considered as a move undermining
the peace process in the region, and putting at risk Russia’s
credibility as a mediator in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The
alleged arms transfers would risk further stimulating an arms race
between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and diverting scarce public funds
away from social needs.

– How you think, what purposes are pursued by Russia, on the one hand
initiating signing of the Moscow declaration, acting as the co-chairman
of the Minsk group of OSCE, and on the other hand arming Armenia –
one of the conflict parties?

– Again before jumping to conclusions, we need to clarify all of
the allegations. As regards the Moscow declaration, this seemed
primarily a move by Russia to strengthen its position in the South
Caucasus and present itself as a regional peace-broker, thus also
improving its international image, which was tarnished by the August
war in Georgia. This is not to say that the Moscow declaration is
unimportant. Although the document is rather general and vaguely-worded
in its content, it nonetheless is an important document in which the
Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents pledged to work towards a political
resolution of the conflict based on the principles of international law
and taking into consideration the Madrid proposals of the Minsk Group.

– The international organizations including International Crisis Group
periodically condemn Azerbaijan because of increase in the military
budget of the country several times. Why does International Crisis
Group not condemn actions of Russia and Armenia as the military
arsenal exceeds the double size of the military budget of Armenia
after supply of Russian military hardware to it?

– In its past reports, the Crisis Group criticized both Armenia and
Azerbaijan alike for sharing the responsibility for the unfolding
arms race between them. The last Crisis Group briefing on Azerbaijan
published in October 2008 was dedicated to Azerbaijan’s defense
sector reforms. In this briefing we even mentioned that Azerbaijan is
less militarized country than Armenia, in a sense that it actually
spends a lesser percentage of its GDP to army. In our 2005 report
"Nagorno-Karabakh: Viewing Conflict from the Ground" we criticized
both Armenia and Azerbaijan for arms race, and even called present-day
Nagorno-Karabakh "the most militarized society in the world". As you
see, we were not criticizing only Azerbaijani side. So, I do not find
your argument against Crisis Group justifiable.

– The Azerbaijan analysts support an exclusion of Russia from OSCE
Minsk Group. Do you think it would be correct to exclude Russia from
MG of OSCE and is it possible to replace with any other state?

The exclusion of Russia from the Minsk Group process would
not be a prudent policy and would not serve Azerbaijan’s
interests. Realistically, Azerbaijan cannot exclude Russia from
the Minsk Group, since Russia is a big regional power with its own
security interests in the Caucasus.

– The supply of the Russian armament of Armenia once again confirms
the well known opinion that the key from the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
is in Moscow. Russia today is not interested in the settlement of
the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, because the frozen conflict allows
it to put pressure on Armenia and Azerbaijan. If a conflict will be
well-regulated, in this case Russia will lose all South Caucasus. Do
you agree with such opinion?

– Statements to the effect that Moscow alone can decide whether the
Karabakh question is resolved effectively ignore the responsibility
that both Armenia and Azerbaijan bear for the continuation of this
conflict. It is true that Russia has increasingly pursued a foreign
policy based on its doctrine of limited sovereignty with respect to
countries it views, because of history and geography, as within its
natural sphere of influence. However, it is in the interests of Russia
to be viewed as a responsible and cooperative international actor. So,
the best possible option is to engage with Russia and, in cooperation
with US and EU members, urge Russia to conduct responsible policies
in the region. Stability in South Caucasus is fundamentally in the
interests of Russia. A stable and peaceful South Caucasus will also
bring benefits helping prevent conflicts in the North Caucasus region
of Russia.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress