Tweet
news.az, Azerbaijan
April 10 2010
Solution to Karabakh conflict should not be expected soon - Finnish expert
Sat 10 April 2010 | 05:15 GMT Text size:
Dr. Igor Torbakov News.Az interviews Dr. Igor Torbakov, Senior
Researcher, Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
Russia and Turkey have recently strengthened bilateral cooperation in
almost all directions of interaction and continue growing them. How
can this factor influence the stability in the South Caucasus?
Potentially, the coordinated actions of Russia and Turkey in the
region could promote stability in the South Caucasus and regulation of
regional conflicts, Naturally, Russia is a more influential player in
the Caucasus: Ankara has to coordinate its actions with Moscow for
implementation of any tasks of its Caucasus policy. The recent
decision of the two countries about the creation of the interstate
mechanism-the Supreme Council of Cooperation-on the basis of the
political leadership is dictated not only by the intention to develop
bilateral relations but also by the understanding of the need to
coordinate efforts on stabilization of the region.
Russia has historically had a traditional influence on the South
Caucasus. Is it timely to speak here of the jealous attitude toward
intensification of another big regional superpower-Turkey?
Naturally, Russia is cautiously watching the activist external policy
of Turkey. The ideologists of Ankara's new course speak of the
strategic depth and historical responsibility which motivate Turkey's
interest to the South Caucasus. Meanwhile, Russia considers itself to
be the Caucasus superpower and the main guarantor of regional
security. There is an element of `jealousy' here, but Russia also
understands that Ankara's capacities are extremely limited.
How do you think Turkey has advanced in the attempts to reduce
tensions in the South Caucasus?
The modest achievements of Turkey in raising stability in the South
Caucasus prove both the extreme complicacy of problems and limited
potential of Ankara. The new regional forum proposed by Turkey-the
Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform-remains a low effective
mechanism for the resolution of regional problems. Frankly speaking,
it should be noted that the leading Turkish politicians understand the
difficulties of implementation of their initiatives. Turkish FM Ahmet
Davutoglu has recently said that `existence of conflicts is a ground
for appearance of such a structure and the main obstacle in the
process of implementation of the idea'.
Turkey has made it clear that it will improve relations with Armenia
only after this country withdraws from the occupied lands of
Azerbaijan. People in Yerevan, as well as Russia and the West,
consider that both problems should be settled in separate. What do you
think about this?
Thinking realistically, it is possible to say that these two problems
(really not bound in the Turkish-Armenian protocols) can be settled
only in process of parallel settlement.
Azerbaijan and Armenia interpret the regulations of the Helsinki final
act differently: Baku speak of the supremacy of the principle of
territorial integrity as basic in international law, while Yerevan
demands for the execution of the rights of Karabakh Armenians for
self-determination not inside Azerbaijan's framework but as a
formation of independent state at the occupied lands. How do you see
the resolution of the problem?
The appeal of the parties to a more profitable principle of
international law should not be surprising ` this is a normal event.
On the abstract level the problem of correlation between the two
principles is just unsolvable as they are (like other eight `Helsinki
principles' completely equal. However, as specialists on international
law say, a principle is an abstraction not working beyond definite
historical circumstances. Thus, the issue is not which principle must
prevail but which of them is more applicable in the said definite
circumstances. It is quite clear that the conflict settlement is
possible only if both sides are ready for serious compromises.
Do you think the Karabakh conflict settlement is close?
As the parties seem not to be ready for serious compromises, the
soonest solution to Karabakh conflict should not be expected.
U.U.
News.Az
April 10 2010
Solution to Karabakh conflict should not be expected soon - Finnish expert
Sat 10 April 2010 | 05:15 GMT Text size:
Dr. Igor Torbakov News.Az interviews Dr. Igor Torbakov, Senior
Researcher, Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
Russia and Turkey have recently strengthened bilateral cooperation in
almost all directions of interaction and continue growing them. How
can this factor influence the stability in the South Caucasus?
Potentially, the coordinated actions of Russia and Turkey in the
region could promote stability in the South Caucasus and regulation of
regional conflicts, Naturally, Russia is a more influential player in
the Caucasus: Ankara has to coordinate its actions with Moscow for
implementation of any tasks of its Caucasus policy. The recent
decision of the two countries about the creation of the interstate
mechanism-the Supreme Council of Cooperation-on the basis of the
political leadership is dictated not only by the intention to develop
bilateral relations but also by the understanding of the need to
coordinate efforts on stabilization of the region.
Russia has historically had a traditional influence on the South
Caucasus. Is it timely to speak here of the jealous attitude toward
intensification of another big regional superpower-Turkey?
Naturally, Russia is cautiously watching the activist external policy
of Turkey. The ideologists of Ankara's new course speak of the
strategic depth and historical responsibility which motivate Turkey's
interest to the South Caucasus. Meanwhile, Russia considers itself to
be the Caucasus superpower and the main guarantor of regional
security. There is an element of `jealousy' here, but Russia also
understands that Ankara's capacities are extremely limited.
How do you think Turkey has advanced in the attempts to reduce
tensions in the South Caucasus?
The modest achievements of Turkey in raising stability in the South
Caucasus prove both the extreme complicacy of problems and limited
potential of Ankara. The new regional forum proposed by Turkey-the
Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Platform-remains a low effective
mechanism for the resolution of regional problems. Frankly speaking,
it should be noted that the leading Turkish politicians understand the
difficulties of implementation of their initiatives. Turkish FM Ahmet
Davutoglu has recently said that `existence of conflicts is a ground
for appearance of such a structure and the main obstacle in the
process of implementation of the idea'.
Turkey has made it clear that it will improve relations with Armenia
only after this country withdraws from the occupied lands of
Azerbaijan. People in Yerevan, as well as Russia and the West,
consider that both problems should be settled in separate. What do you
think about this?
Thinking realistically, it is possible to say that these two problems
(really not bound in the Turkish-Armenian protocols) can be settled
only in process of parallel settlement.
Azerbaijan and Armenia interpret the regulations of the Helsinki final
act differently: Baku speak of the supremacy of the principle of
territorial integrity as basic in international law, while Yerevan
demands for the execution of the rights of Karabakh Armenians for
self-determination not inside Azerbaijan's framework but as a
formation of independent state at the occupied lands. How do you see
the resolution of the problem?
The appeal of the parties to a more profitable principle of
international law should not be surprising ` this is a normal event.
On the abstract level the problem of correlation between the two
principles is just unsolvable as they are (like other eight `Helsinki
principles' completely equal. However, as specialists on international
law say, a principle is an abstraction not working beyond definite
historical circumstances. Thus, the issue is not which principle must
prevail but which of them is more applicable in the said definite
circumstances. It is quite clear that the conflict settlement is
possible only if both sides are ready for serious compromises.
Do you think the Karabakh conflict settlement is close?
As the parties seem not to be ready for serious compromises, the
soonest solution to Karabakh conflict should not be expected.
U.U.
News.Az