Azerbaijani political expert: U.S. may be interested in “blitzkrieg” in Karabakh

In your opinion, how great is the possibility of resumed military action in Nagorno-Karabakh?

I do not see a situation that could prompt the parties to resolve the territorial dispute by force. Such a solution to the conflict is not favorable for Armenia, because it has occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s territory.

As for Azerbaijan, I think that Azerbaijan will not start the war. Although Azerbaijan makes such statements from time to time, I think that they are aimed mostly at the powers whom Azerbaijan calls for stronger action to resolve the Karabakh conflict. I think that the recent statement by U.S. National Intelligence was associated with this.

I believe external forces may be interested in a war in Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia does not need it at the moment, because it has somewhat damaged its credibility after the war with Georgia, but on the other hand, it already has high influence in our region. The EU does not want war, too, because it does not support a military solution.

As to the United States, it has advanced the idea of creating a "Greater Middle East" from Baghdad to Karachi. Theoretically, it may be interested in a "blitzkrieg" in Karabakh. South Caucasus and the Caspian Sea basin play a very important role in U.S. plans of "Greater Middle East", and the U.S. may be interested in violation of the existing status quo in the Caucasus.

In this case, Armenia is out of the game, because important energy flows bypass this country. Azerbaijan, in turn, is in such an important geopolitical position that not only fate of the South Caucasus, but also Central Asia depends on it. The United States knows very well that the power which will control energy flows from East to West will rule the modern world. That is why, on the one hand, Azerbaijan’s significance is great, but on the other hand, in some circumstances the U.S. might be interested in some "blitzkrieg" in Karabakh.

Another reason for escalation of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can be external destabilizing facts in neighboring countries such as Iran. This could potentially lead to the most unexpected consequences in our region.

In your opinion, what does the appointment of Karabakh separatist Oleg Yesayan as new Armenian ambassador to Russia mean given the fact the Armenian and Azerbaijani embassies in Moscow have developed some contacts?

Oleg Yesayan is one of the hardcore and rabid secessionists. Therefore, his appointment to the post of Armenian Ambassador to Moscow demonstrates Yerevan’s loyalty to separatism, aggression towards the Azerbaijani lands. Yesayan is one of those who made its choice in favor of separatism in the late 1980's waiting for the right moment the Soviet Union disintegrates.

Aggressive and rectilinear people are rarely able to exercise an ambassadorial diplomacy. Actions of the embassies are coordinated from Yerevan, therefore, fate of any further contacts of diplomatic representatives of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Moscow will be decided there. Time will tell how Yesayan will replace Smbatian who had displayed diplomatic flexibility..

In your views, may Turkey resume diplomatic ties with Armenia without opening of the Armenia-Turkey border?

Such scenario is not ruled out given the outside pressure. This is another step in a phased implementation of the Armenia-Turkey protocols. In fact, Armenia-Turkey borders cannot be consider closed since there is brisk trade between the two countries. There is no need to accept the Armenia-Turkey protocols right away. Establishing diplomatic ties between the countries will be some kind of interim resolution of the issue.

Is the U.S. Congress likely to recognize the “Armenian genocide” before April this year?

I do not tend to exaggerate influence of Armenian diaspora on the U.S. and Congress’ adherence to principle in this respect. This is leverage that Washington needs to put pressure on Turkey in many issues.

Lately,  Turkey has become some sort of secular and democratic leader of the Muslim world. Given the complex situation around the Iran’s nuclear program and U.S. problems with the Muslim world, I believe recognition of the “Armenian genocide” will be a good solution.

Z. Ahmadov