Eldar Jahangirov: "Azerbaijan's return to the orbit of Russia domination is not too promising for us"

- What do you expect from the official visit of President of Russia Dmitri Medvedev to Azerbaijan, scheduled for July 3-4?

- Though Dmitri Medvedev can not be considered a newcomer in big politics - he is familiar with the post-Soviet area, hydrocarbon and energy specifics- he had been controlling Gazprom, was a permanent member of the Security Council, nevertheless his visit will be mostly of acquaintance.

The main points of the agenda of Azerbaijani-Russian relations have already been designated by Vladimir Putin and Ilham Aliyev: diversification of energy sources supplies to Europe, issues of pipeline, Turkmenistan's involvement, Russia's position in the OSCE Minsk Group. Georgian issues, xenophobia in Russia, issues of humanitarian and cultural exchange. Certainly, the visit will be interest and important but I would not expect key changes in Russia's position on issues concerning us.

- How do you assess the current level of Azerbaijani-Russian relations?

- The level of mutual dependence of our countries dictates high level of relations, consistency in positions. Following tensions in the Yeltsin's period, I would feature Azerbaijan-Russia relations as balanced, transparent and clear enough.

- A simple analysis of economic and political potential of the South Caucasus countries shows that it is more useful for Russia to put a stake on Azerbaijan, not on Armenia. Why don't we observe it?

- First of all, we should not forget that main trends of Russia's external policy established in the early 18th century in the times of Peter the Great. Eurasian orientation with two key directions on Iran and on the West is careful, in a sense jealous towards the West, interests in the Near East, principal interest in Ukraine, Belarus and Middle Asia, traditional support of pro-Russian minorities are main geopolitical "prizes" which Russia is fighting for. These directions have a doctrine strategic importance and are subjected to insignificant correction depending on the current situation- energy, Chechnya, election cycle in Russia.

Second: is Azerbaijan interested in it? I am sure that Azerbaijan's return to the orbit of Russian domination is not too promising for us. Our country has everything for becoming a key actor in the region and consistent defending of its national interests.

- How do you assess results of external policy, conducted by Azerbaijan within the past five years?

- The external policy makes us optimistic, especially in the past 3-4 years. I consider that the turning point for our diplomacy was toughening position and principal change of the approach-previously we were defending ourselves, but now we are actively attacking.

I hope the lack of real professionals is a temporary shortage of the Azerbaijani diplomacy. Certainly, there are professionals, but they are not sufficient for all areas. In this aspect, I consider consolidation and efficiency of various foreign nongovernmental organizations and movements to be a gratifying fact. Youth communities are active in the key directions: Western Europe, the United States and Russia. The role of such associations is great.

I would especially like to note the activity of youth organizations in California-the most pro-Armenian state. As for results of the external policy, despite our traditional maximalistic approach, according to which if Karabakh is not hours, no results can be spoken of, there are results and there are evident even for Armenians. Here, I would like to remind that the position of a conflicting country is assessed for three key criteria: official position, established and voiced on the state level, position of experts and public opinion. Thus, on all the three criteria, the game is targeting the Armenian goals.

- Can you speak in details: which steps should Azerbaijan take for the world society to take pro-Azerbaijani stance in case of resumption of hostilities in Nagorno Karabakh?

- Well, first of all, even if the world society does not take the pro-Azerbaijani position, but will adhere to common sense, logics and international law, it would be enough for us. Unfortunately, international relations today are too far from the principles of justice and logics.

I would like to draw your attention to an important detail-the politicians are growing younger throughout the world. If earlier the age "older than 60" was considered the flourishing age, today the people at the age of 40-50 are on the pick of the political career. The "chieftains" are being replaced by armchair technocrats. I think this specifies a number of features of work, which should be taken into account. The politics has become more dynamic, inertia has reduced in the process. Technologies of political lobbying and influence have been through the past 2-3 decades. Talented specialists appeared in these sphere. These technologies should be assimilated, effectively applied and experienced specialists should be attracted.

As for actions, which would allow minimizing pressure in case of hostilities, this is a multi-plan work. It is necessary to attain approval of documents with necessary formulations in the international instances, work from open tributes and corridors and form just position of observers.

I think the main burden should be as follows: "you had everything to avert the war, but you left us no choice". Position of western politicians mostly depends on public opinion. Therefore, we should cooperate with the leaderships of main world mass medias and separate key influential journalists. This is a huge, expensive work, requiring filigree technique of talks and attraction of experienced specialists. But this work should have been conducted beginning from "yesterday".

/Day.Az/