Russian political scientist Sergey Markedonov: The United States and Russia are currently satisfied with the quo status around Nagorno Karabakh

- How should the outcome of negotiations between the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Saint Petersburg be evaluated?

- I think there are no unexpected turns. Sorry for the tautology, they agreed to continue to continue negotiations. Honestly, I did not expect any great progress and breakthroughs, as an expert. Because some valid compromise figures were, in fact, not suggested.

- And how right are those who have always expected that next meeting of the presidents to be a breakthrough?

- They are wrong! The question is always trivial - what are those conclusions rely on? You know, before stating about something, you need to have some evidence. And what do they rely on? Perhaps that the presidents talked for two hours tete-a-tete? Well, it's too little to talk about some breakthrough. Thus, we see that the key resolutions are treated differently by the parties.

- What do you think about a possible meeting between Presidents Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sargsyan in July?  The co-chairs announced that the two presidents have agreed to it ...

- I think that this meeting will not give any better results, and I am going to explain why. Negotiation is a process of professional diplomats who are seeking for some compromise positions cynically, calmly and in the routine regime. Presidents do not negotiate.

To be honest, this format seems to be quite strange, and it concerns not only Nagorno-Karabakh settlement. Everybody has a job. A presidential task is to assume responsibility in a difficult moment for the country and back any necessary decisions for the nation, probably not always popular, with their own influence.

- Which of the countries co-chairing the Minsk Group, is now clearly making more efforts to resolve our conflict - the U.S. or Russia? It seems that France is more passive against their background.

- Well, I would not say that France is passive. Everyone has his own resources, and they are not limitless. This is a big illusion that Washington and Moscow can resolve the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh. Washington and Moscow can only help them to resolve this issue. Or they could limit the negotiation process in one way or another. Then after all, any negotiations, any peace is not struck just for abstract goals. This is also one of the most important, fundamental principles of diplomacy. The agreement is a contract, not because some men want real peace between the peoples.

There are national interests. The United States and Russia are currently satisfied with the quo status around Nagorno Karabakh for very different reasons. But anyway, their interests coincide in this. Therefore, one should base on this while speaking whether Russia or the United States act correctly or incorrectly.

- Do you agree with the statement of one of the candidates for president of Iran Mohsen Rezai that "Iran's active diplomacy in foreign policy can guarantee a significant breakthrough in the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement"?

- Let us, first, make an amendment that June 12 was the day of presidential elections in Iran and this statement is made in the pre election context. This is a minimum. In addition, I also think that the keys to the solution to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict are not in Tehran, for the same reasons why the keys of the Karabakh peace are not in Washington or Moscow. On the other hand, any candidate from four applicants of Iranian campaign shares the values that Iran should be a regional superpower and must have a role in this Caucasus-Middle Eastern concert.

/Day.Az/