NO DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION TO KARABAKH ON HORIZON – ANALYST
Leyla Tagiyeva
news.az
Feb 23 2010
Azerbaijan
Janusz Bugajski News.Az interviews Janusz Bugajski, Lavrentiadis Chair
at the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
What are the main threats in the South Caucasus region?
There are three major challenges in the South Caucasus region. First,
the territorial integrity of all states is threatened by separatist
forces supported by outside powers. Second, there is a contest over
the transit of hydrocarbon energy supplies across the region from the
Caspian basin to Europe, with Russia seeking monopoly controls. Third,
the foreign and security policies of independent states are monitored
closely by Russia as the Kremlin does not recognize the sovereign
choice of each country to join the international organizations that
best ensure their security and prosperity.
Are Russia and the US really able to collaborate in providing peace
and stability in the region despite bilateral misunderstandings on
global security?
Russia and the US have differing and often conflicting national
interests and national ambitions in the South Caucasus. While
Washington seeks integrated and stable states to eventually enter NATO
and the EU and become a valuable part of the trans-Atlantic community,
Russia either wants to bring the region back under its political and
economic dominance or to promote weak and divided states that do not
qualify for Euro-Atlantic integration.
Azerbaijan is still arguing with Armenia on the principles of
territorial integrity and self-determination for Karabakh, and there
is no pressure from the international community to put an end to the
conflict. What should be done to move the Karabakh settlement forward?
International attention only focuses intensely on cold conflicts when
they become hot conflicts. Basically, there are one of two solutions
to the Karabakh dispute. Either there is a new war between Armenia
and Azerbaijan over the territory and adjoining areas resulting in
new border configurations, or there is a diplomatic solution generally
acceptable to both sides. The latter would require the understanding
by both Yerevan and Baku that a speedy solution would be in their
long-term national interests. I do not currently see a diplomatic
solution on the horizon.
Russia’s been playing a more active role on the Karabakh settlement
for the last two years, and the role of the US seems to be weakening.
Is Karabakh not a priority for the US after the war between Russia
and Georgia?
Russia has been playing an active and negative role in the Karabakh
dispute since the Soviet Union collapsed. Moscow does not want a
settlement and the restoration of full relations between Azerbaijan
and Armenia as this would limit its "privileged interests" by
moving both countries toward the Wider Europe and trans-Atlantic
institutions. Russia traditionally manipulates territorial and ethnic
conflicts with or between neighbours in pursuit of its expansionist
agenda. The priorities for the Obama administration are in Afghanistan,
Iran and Iraq and, while the Karabakh dispute remains quiet and does
not endanger the security of the wider region, Washington is unlikely
to become deeply engaged in an attempted resolution.
How would you assess the present role of Turkey in a Karabakh
settlement?
Turkey has its distinct interests in the region that do not necessarily
correspond with those of Azerbaijan. In particular its closer ties with
Moscow in order to gain energy, trade and investment benefits from
Russia could lessen its commitment to the territorial integrity of
both Georgia and Azerbaijan. Turkey’s limited prospects for European
Union accession may encourage Ankara to form some kind of Caucasian
condominium with Moscow and limit the role of the US and EU.