Tweet
RUSSIA CAN GRADUALLY BECOME KEY PLAYER IN CAUCASUS: AZERBAIJAN DIPLOMATIC ACADEMY FOREIGN POLICY PROGRAMS DIRECTOR
Today.Az
07 December 2009 [11:57]
Trend News interview with the director of foreign policy programs of
Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy Fariz Ismailzade.
You attended one of the most prestigious political forums Wilton park.
What are your impressions of the forum? What issues were on the focus
of attention at this conference?
Wilton park conference, conducted since 1946, is one of the most
prestigious forums in the world, uniting well-known experts, political
scientists and representatives of the political elite at different
times. The current conference was devoted to the South Caucasus. It
was attended by Deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Araz Azimov, the
ambassador of Azerbaijan to the UK Fakhraddin Gurbanov, Deputy Prime
Minister of Georgia, Minister for Reintegration Timur Yakobashvili,
First Deputy Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of
Georgia Tamara Berchuashvili, EU Special Representative for South
Caucasus Peter Semneby, Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia Karina
Kazanyan, well-known experts Svante Cornell, Brenda Shaffer, Oksana
Antonenko, Sabina Fraser, John Roberts. The main topics of discussion
at the conference were conflicts, the main issue - the opening of
Turkish-Armenian border and the consequences of the Georgian war.
I was surprised by the position of the Turkish side, particularly
the Professor of Turkish Middle East Technical University Hussein
Bakhcha, who claimed that the border between Turkey and Armenia should
be opened. However, the Azerbaijani delegation insisted that exactly
closing borders is a stimulus for Armenia to solve the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict and liberate the occupied territories. This view was supported
by Brend Shaffer and Svante Cornell. The Armenian delegation insisted
that the issue of opening the borders should be considered separately
from the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh settlement.
Regarding the statement by the Armenian delegation that the people
of Karabakh have the right to self-determination, the British expert
Stephen Bolt noted that the right to self-determination belongs to the
African and Asian countries, which fought for independence in 1960,
and is not acceptable to the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Much attention was also paid to the Georgian war in 2008. The Georgian
side presented its plan to resolve the situation. The first step
to resolve the situation should be the demilitarization of the
territories, the second - it is people's diplomacy, the third -
to find ways of cooperation between Georgia and South Ossetia.
The last panel of the forum was devoted to questions of democratization
in South Caucasus countries. Negative aspects of democratization in the
region were reflected in the speech by the head of the International
Crisis Group Sabina Fraser. My speech focused on the fact that the
process of democratization in South Caucasus is a long way, which
can not be performed for 18 years of independence of these countries.
During the forum, were also made recommendations for the EU for
cooperation with countries of South Caucasus.
Upon completion of the conference, I made a number of conclusions.
Firstly, the EU does not understand our realities and our internal
problems. Secondly, in my opinion, the West is too optimistic about
the opening of Turkish-Armenian border, believing that it is even
useful for the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
All our arguments that the situation is only getting worse from
obstinacy of Armenia have not led to results. In my opinion, the
forum took place on a too optimistic note and the West does not
understand how Armenia is ill with nationalism and creates problems
in any negotiation process.
What is the role of the West in the South Caucasus now, after the
war in Georgia, where many geopolitical accents were removed?
After President Obama came to power, a certain lowering is felt in
the U.S. interest in Georgia. Bush relied on Georgia, but now the U.S.
fully focuses on the normalization of relations between Turkey and
Armenia, giving preference to this project in the region. Both the
U.S. and the EU and Russia are ready to support processes that will
help Armenia in the future leave the economic isolation. With regards
to the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh, still the West does not insist
on the liberation of Azerbaijani territories occupied by Armenians,
believing that this can be achieved after the opening of borders.
According to the West, to solve two issues at once is more difficult
than one after the other, and therefore, yet our position on the
linkage of opening borders and the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is not in
their understanding and support.
Such a policy of the West and Turkey can get into question the
existence of such a strategically important project as Nabucco, and
Azerbaijan gradually can increase the volume of gas supplies to Russia.
Do you think Turkey is not afraid of losing Azerbaijan?
According to Turkey, Azerbaijan should not be jealous for rapprochement
of Ankara and Yerevan, but in my opinion, there is a potential threat
for Turkey to lose Azerbaijan.
It needs to understand that Ankara's foreign policy priorities are
changing and Azerbaijan is no longer the only strategic ally in the
region. In my opinion, Turkey is connected with Russia by even closer
partnership than with Azerbaijan.
Why does the process of ratification of the protocols by the Turkish
Parliament is delayed?
Turkey underestimated Azerbaijan. The Turkish government thought that
it would easily pass the protocols through parliament, not expecting
such an active and sharp reaction from Azerbaijan. In my opinion,
this was an absolutely correct position of official Baku, because
after such a reaction, the Turkish government had to reckon with the
opinion of Azerbaijan.
The mistake of the ruling Turkish party was that they expected progress
in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. They did not consider that Armenia
will not make compromise in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Closer to
April, pressure on Turkey will increase and eventually, Ankara can
give up its positions and open borders, changing the tone of its
political statements.
What is Russia's role in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement
and in the South Caucasus?
Azerbaijan's mistake is that we still believe that Russia can somehow
influence on Armenia. However, Armenia plays its game, and as far
as we do not count on the support of President Medvedev, Armenia is
unlikely to make compromise in the issue of status of Nagorno-Karabakh
in the coming months. However, in the near future, Azerbaijan can
really get closer with Russia and the situation in the region can
change. If earlier in the Caucasus there were clear alliance ligaments:
Russia-Armenia, Turkey - Azerbaijan, West - Georgia, after the Georgian
war, the accent changed. And now Azerbaijan considers Russia as a
strategic ally. At the moment everything is going to ensure that Russia
becomes stronger, and the West's position in the South Caucasus is
weakening. Now, Turkey and Russia become major players in the Caucasus.
Today.Az
07 December 2009 [11:57]
Trend News interview with the director of foreign policy programs of
Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy Fariz Ismailzade.
You attended one of the most prestigious political forums Wilton park.
What are your impressions of the forum? What issues were on the focus
of attention at this conference?
Wilton park conference, conducted since 1946, is one of the most
prestigious forums in the world, uniting well-known experts, political
scientists and representatives of the political elite at different
times. The current conference was devoted to the South Caucasus. It
was attended by Deputy Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Araz Azimov, the
ambassador of Azerbaijan to the UK Fakhraddin Gurbanov, Deputy Prime
Minister of Georgia, Minister for Reintegration Timur Yakobashvili,
First Deputy Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of
Georgia Tamara Berchuashvili, EU Special Representative for South
Caucasus Peter Semneby, Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia Karina
Kazanyan, well-known experts Svante Cornell, Brenda Shaffer, Oksana
Antonenko, Sabina Fraser, John Roberts. The main topics of discussion
at the conference were conflicts, the main issue - the opening of
Turkish-Armenian border and the consequences of the Georgian war.
I was surprised by the position of the Turkish side, particularly
the Professor of Turkish Middle East Technical University Hussein
Bakhcha, who claimed that the border between Turkey and Armenia should
be opened. However, the Azerbaijani delegation insisted that exactly
closing borders is a stimulus for Armenia to solve the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict and liberate the occupied territories. This view was supported
by Brend Shaffer and Svante Cornell. The Armenian delegation insisted
that the issue of opening the borders should be considered separately
from the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh settlement.
Regarding the statement by the Armenian delegation that the people
of Karabakh have the right to self-determination, the British expert
Stephen Bolt noted that the right to self-determination belongs to the
African and Asian countries, which fought for independence in 1960,
and is not acceptable to the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh.
Much attention was also paid to the Georgian war in 2008. The Georgian
side presented its plan to resolve the situation. The first step
to resolve the situation should be the demilitarization of the
territories, the second - it is people's diplomacy, the third -
to find ways of cooperation between Georgia and South Ossetia.
The last panel of the forum was devoted to questions of democratization
in South Caucasus countries. Negative aspects of democratization in the
region were reflected in the speech by the head of the International
Crisis Group Sabina Fraser. My speech focused on the fact that the
process of democratization in South Caucasus is a long way, which
can not be performed for 18 years of independence of these countries.
During the forum, were also made recommendations for the EU for
cooperation with countries of South Caucasus.
Upon completion of the conference, I made a number of conclusions.
Firstly, the EU does not understand our realities and our internal
problems. Secondly, in my opinion, the West is too optimistic about
the opening of Turkish-Armenian border, believing that it is even
useful for the peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
All our arguments that the situation is only getting worse from
obstinacy of Armenia have not led to results. In my opinion, the
forum took place on a too optimistic note and the West does not
understand how Armenia is ill with nationalism and creates problems
in any negotiation process.
What is the role of the West in the South Caucasus now, after the
war in Georgia, where many geopolitical accents were removed?
After President Obama came to power, a certain lowering is felt in
the U.S. interest in Georgia. Bush relied on Georgia, but now the U.S.
fully focuses on the normalization of relations between Turkey and
Armenia, giving preference to this project in the region. Both the
U.S. and the EU and Russia are ready to support processes that will
help Armenia in the future leave the economic isolation. With regards
to the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh, still the West does not insist
on the liberation of Azerbaijani territories occupied by Armenians,
believing that this can be achieved after the opening of borders.
According to the West, to solve two issues at once is more difficult
than one after the other, and therefore, yet our position on the
linkage of opening borders and the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is not in
their understanding and support.
Such a policy of the West and Turkey can get into question the
existence of such a strategically important project as Nabucco, and
Azerbaijan gradually can increase the volume of gas supplies to Russia.
Do you think Turkey is not afraid of losing Azerbaijan?
According to Turkey, Azerbaijan should not be jealous for rapprochement
of Ankara and Yerevan, but in my opinion, there is a potential threat
for Turkey to lose Azerbaijan.
It needs to understand that Ankara's foreign policy priorities are
changing and Azerbaijan is no longer the only strategic ally in the
region. In my opinion, Turkey is connected with Russia by even closer
partnership than with Azerbaijan.
Why does the process of ratification of the protocols by the Turkish
Parliament is delayed?
Turkey underestimated Azerbaijan. The Turkish government thought that
it would easily pass the protocols through parliament, not expecting
such an active and sharp reaction from Azerbaijan. In my opinion,
this was an absolutely correct position of official Baku, because
after such a reaction, the Turkish government had to reckon with the
opinion of Azerbaijan.
The mistake of the ruling Turkish party was that they expected progress
in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. They did not consider that Armenia
will not make compromise in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue. Closer to
April, pressure on Turkey will increase and eventually, Ankara can
give up its positions and open borders, changing the tone of its
political statements.
What is Russia's role in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement
and in the South Caucasus?
Azerbaijan's mistake is that we still believe that Russia can somehow
influence on Armenia. However, Armenia plays its game, and as far
as we do not count on the support of President Medvedev, Armenia is
unlikely to make compromise in the issue of status of Nagorno-Karabakh
in the coming months. However, in the near future, Azerbaijan can
really get closer with Russia and the situation in the region can
change. If earlier in the Caucasus there were clear alliance ligaments:
Russia-Armenia, Turkey - Azerbaijan, West - Georgia, after the Georgian
war, the accent changed. And now Azerbaijan considers Russia as a
strategic ally. At the moment everything is going to ensure that Russia
becomes stronger, and the West's position in the South Caucasus is
weakening. Now, Turkey and Russia become major players in the Caucasus.