"Its much more favorable to negotiate with Baku than with Yerevan"

As of late, experts have widely discussed the stepped up U.S. efforts in our region, in particular in respect to Azerbaijan. In your opinion, why the United States has been so active lately?

Americans love and know how to say good words, but talk like that, when these words do them benefit, and when they feel that they are losing initiative. They feel that Russia and Turkey have increased its efforts in the South Caucasus. Turkey is not with which Americans are accustomed to deal with before.

So, the United States realized that the attempt of diplomatic or political isolation of Azerbaijan weakens U.S. foothold in the South Caucasus. They understand that the initiative in resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will be held by those who will be most directly involved in its resolution.

The United States understands in what direction Yerevan will swim once it faces a choice - Russia or the U.S., and especially Turkey. In case with Azerbaijan, its not so clear. Baku pursues multi-faceted policy despite the fact that Russia is a strategic partner of Azerbaijan. Therefore, its much more favorable to negotiate with Baku than with Yerevan.

In your opinion, may these increased U.S. efforts in the region speed up the resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

I was in Yerevan two weeks ago to attend a roundtable on the situation in South Caucasus. There were participants from Georgia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and etc. Unfortunately, there was no one from Azerbaijan. I was also invited as an expert versed in all of these problems.

For me, it was not important what they say during the plenary sessions. This may be interesting, but I think everybody understands what they would say in such an event in Yerevan.  Much more interesting are the backstage talks. And there I felt a tendency towards a certain unawareness of Yerevan political experts on what is happening in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as some confusion. Confusion and recognition that Armenia’s foreign policy leads to dead end is a very interesting trend.

As for what will accelerate resolution to the Karabakh conflict, let focus on OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs. Russia, France and the United States are more than the best countries for Armenia. All these three countries are home to strong Armenian diaspora organizations. At the same time, all three countries have repeatedly told Armenia that a decision to liberate occupied territories around Nagorno-Karabakh should be made as a first step. Moreover, there are four UN resolutions, the resolution of European Parliament and other international organizations. Today there is even stronger pressure on Armenia.

But it is rather hard to predict whether it will result in a sensible and earlier resolution of the conflict because current Armenian government with Karabakh roots retains power only thanks to the Karabakh theme. It will be immediately overthrown once it makes a step in line with real resolution process.

You said that in Yerevan definite stratum of political elites are not so sensitive towards the Karabakh issue as before. Can we say that today the Armenian society is ready for liberation of Azerbaijan’s ancestral lands?

Not everybody in Armenia believes that all occupied territories should be returned to Azerbaijan’s control. But many agree with liberation of territories around Nagorno-Karabakh. True, they see it as some element of a bargaining. That is, if we give away lands, we should get something in return. This is what those in Armenia think.

While in Armenia, I often heard that Nagorno-Karabakh and adjacent occupied territories are considered as a single entity there. In response, I told the Armenians: "You will not deny that it was Azerbaijanis who lived in all these occupied territories, right? Armenians also lived there. Let’s hypothetically consider the scenario in which you agree to return of all refugees, both Armenians and Azerbaijanis, or their descendants to their homes as a humanitarian action. And then three years later we hold a referendum in which population of all occupied lands will decide under what state they will live.”

And what did Armenian experts say?

They said Azerbaijanis will outnumber Armenians and outcome of the referendum in this case is predetermined. Then I ask, "Do you want to hold a referendum where Azerbaijanis would be outnumbered?"

This suggests that the idea of Armenians and the ability to compromise has exhausted itself. No new ideas are available. My opponents still refused all scenarios I suggested. That is, any equitable solution, which implies preferences toward Azerbaijan, is immediately rejected by Yerevan.

I remember when Arkady Volsky was heading a special subcommittee on Nagorno-Karabakh, Karabakh residents of Armenian origin turned to him with a request to resolve the conflict "honestly and fairly in our favor." Today Armenian authorities are of the same positions. So, they will show extremely tough resistance.

In a period prior to Dmitry Medvedev’s trip to Yerevan, Armenian media reported that he will submit a new plan to bring an earliest resolution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to the Armenian leadership. The plan allegedly calls for liberation of three occupied regions of Azerbaijan at an early stage. What are your views on this plan?

I think that this plan is not realistic not because that Russia and its government cannot put forward any option. In my opinion, anyone who deals with this problem can have an option. I just do not think that Armenia and Azerbaijan will agree to the option that suggests placement of peacekeepers in de-occupied territories, especially Americans in areas that border with Iran.

Of course, Americans want this very much. But this option still is hardly possible especially because only connection to the world for Armenia lies through Iran. It should be noted that greater part of Iranians who run factories, shops and engaged in trade in Armenia are ethnic Azerbaijanis.

However, I think there will be numerous attempts to persuade Armenia. Russian President shows interest and flexibility in resolving the conflict which has caused U.S. to intensify efforts. The pressure on Armenia is growing with no any tangible results. Armenians should themselves decide who will lead their state and how they see future of their country.


/Day.Az/