APA, Azerbaijan
May 30 2009

Russian political analysts’ views on prospects of Nagorno Karabakh
conflict settlement ` ANALYSIS

[ 30 May 2009 14:32 ]

Moscow. R. Metleboghlu ` APA. The next round of the negotiations on
the settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict will be held between
Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents within the framework of the 13th
international economic forum in St. Petersburg.

The process of settlement of the conflict, which arose as a result of
Armenia’s military aggression against Azerbaijan and occupation of 20
percent of the territories of the sovereign state, is attentively
followed in Russia, co-chairing country of OSCE Minsk Group.

But Russian political analysts do not assess the St. Petersburg
meeting of Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sargsyan unambiguously. Experts’
assessments range between pessimism and optimism. The majority of
Russian political analysts consider that the process of negotiations
is positive, almost all consider that real and significant results
will not be achieved in St. Petersburg. APA’s Moscow correspondent
learned the opinion of political analysts on the prospects of
settlement on the eve of the meeting and Russia’s mediating role.

Sergei Mikheyev ` Vice-president of the Center for Political
Technologies

There has not been and is no improvement in the settlement of the
conflict. I consider that we only witness intentions and statement on
paper, there is no real improvement. Armenia does not accept the fact
that Nagorno Karabakh and the surrounding occupied regions are a part
of Azerbaijan, and Azerbaijan does not and will not agree to give
independence to Nagorno Karabakh.

The positions of the sides do not coincide and I do not see any sings
of compromise. It is especially difficult to perceive what compromise
may be achieved in this situation. As is known, such kind of conflicts
remain unsolved for a long time, for example, the problem of Cyprus
remains unsolved, though enough sides have been involved in the
process of settlement. I think Prague meeting and forthcoming
St. Petersburg meeting have already confirmed ineffectiveness of the
process. The positions of the two states do not coincide.

It is impossible to support the position of one of the sides,
either. The mediators, including Russia, should support either
Azerbaijan or Armenia. There is no third variant, because the
positions of the sides are so unambiguous that either Azerbaijan’s or
Armenia’s position should be fully supported. There is no other
choice. The mediators do not want to make this choice, as such a
choice does not meet the interests of Russia, US or France. It favors
the mediators to keep more or less normal relations with both Armenia
and Azerbaijan. That’s why the root of the conflict is not in the
mediators, but in the noncoincidence of the positions of the
sides. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan put the mediators before the choice
` either Baku or Yerevan. It is obvious that the mediators have few
opportunities to manoeuvre in this situation.

Alexander Konovalov ` President of Institute for Strategic Assessments

No significant improvement can be expected from the meeting of
Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents. Continuation of the negotiations,
the leaders’ meetings mean much in itself. Russia’s mediation in the
process is an important factor, too. The words that Azerbaijan agrees
to establish corridor between Karabakh and Armenia are noteworthy. I
do not know to what extent these thoughts display the already passed
decisions, but the fact shows that the leaders are seeking ways to
move the process off dead center. The main thing is that the two
presidents perceive it is impossible to advance the process of
settlement through military way, war can destroy the whole process,
the work done up to now. Though there are no strategic expectations, I
am satisfied with the continuation of the process. The process will
have an end sooner or later. I think the process will not end with
war, because in order to wage war there is no need to meet, agree on
something. With some exceptions war never begins with negotiations. If
the leaders discuss the problem, this in itself denies the supposition
of military conflict.

Vladimir Jarikhin ` Deputy Director of the Institute of CIS countries

I am sure that permanent relations, such high-level meetings are of
great importance. In the end, this is a long, tiring process leading
to compromises. Positions are always strict in the negotiations.
Azerbaijan’s position is principled, because the question is the
national interests. No one promised that such a complicated problem
will be solved at one stroke. I want to underline once more that
negotiations are better than lack of negotiations. Both sides should
welcome any mediation, particularly the mediation of Russia, one of
the greatest states of the world. I consider that this problem is
complicated because peace agreement is possible only through serious
compromise of the sides. Of course, this compromise will not be
assessed unambiguously by Armenian and Azerbaijani people. In both
countries they will say `we lost’ and we should be ready for it. And
only the mediation of the big neighbor Russia will help the leaders to
find variants for compromise.

Kirill Tanayev ` Director General of Foundation for Effective Policy

The problem is that Azerbaijan-Armenia relations are very
complicated. There are no decisions that will fully satisfy the
sides. That’s why every meeting between Serzh Sargsyan and Ilham
Aliyev is of great importance, such steps play important role to move
the situation off the dead center. I think attempts of Russia and
other mediators aim to achieve some improvements. Actually, pessimism
will have negative influence on the process of negotiations. But
thinking patiently we will see that the process of negotiations is
good. There is no war, bloodshed, victims ` this is already good. And
everything gives ground to say that the situation is improving. It is
not known when the process will end, but Petersburg meeting of the
presidents is of course very important.

Andrei Areshev – Deputy Director General of Strategic Culture
Foundation

After the Prague meeting of Azerbaijani and Armenian Presidents,
Armenia made its position much stricter. Unless the conflicting
parties and mediating states have achieved compromises, there will be
no improvement in the process of negotiations, as well as
Aliyev-Sargsyan meeting in St. Petersburg. I am sure that military
solution to the conflict favors none of the sides. Principle
improvements are noticed only in the mediators’ activity, and
political freezing of the conflict. Increase of military clashes
between the sides, frequent violation of ceasefire, military exercises
of both sides should not be ignored.

Grigori Trofimchuk ` Vice-president of Strategic Development Modeling
Centre

If Russia does not use all opportunities in cooperation with
Azerbaijan, it will possibly not find such a chance once
more. Everything, or at least much depends on Russia in these
relations. If Moscow does not normalize the relations in
Russia-Armenia-Azerbaijan triangle, the situation may move up to war
like in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Russia should determine its
position and to determine the position in favor of Azerbaijan favors
Moscow. Unfortunately, Russia does not use formats of unique
cooperation with Azerbaijan. Moscow should not be afraid of putting
forward the initiatives on releasing the occupied Azerbaijani
territories, Turkey bravely does it. In case of inactivity, other
players can drive Moscow out. Russia should also determine what status
of Nagorno Karabakh is favorable for it. Otherwise it is useless to
deal with the settlement. Azerbaijan is pursuing a very successful
varied policy, but this variety will end for official Baku when there
is a need to determine the position concerning Iran, Nabucco
etc. Armenia needs to establish relations with Azerbaijan, because
Azerbaijan is the leading country of the region. Establishing good
relations with the neighboring state meets the interests of
Armenia. But unfortunately, Armenia and Azerbaijan is the best couple
to create an everlasting conflict like Arab-Israel in the Caucasus.