It is enough to compare Azerbaijani, Armenian capitals: American political commentator

Day.Az: President Obama says  that the U.S. supports Georgia's territorial integrity, but against a new war in the Caucasus. Do not you think that this indicates a change in American approach to the resolution of Georgia’s territorial problems?

Jameson Katz: No, I do not think so. I am convinced that the United States have always to say something in defense of the territorial integrity of Georgia. I do not think that Obama has an intention to change these approaches.

Q: Missile shield is still one of the most complicated issues in the U.S.-Russia relations. Are you sure that the missile system which may be deployed in Eastern Europe, in fact, directed against Iran, but not Russia, it as suggested in Moscow?

A: No, I do not think that missiles will be directed against Russia, at least in the predictable future. In the short term target of these systems will involve the threat posed by Iran. I think this threat today is one of the major challenges facing U.S. foreign policy and security interests. So, I think fears of Russia about these systems are not reasonable.

Q: What is it? United States and Russia are the main mediators in the Karabakh settlement. After all, improving mutual understanding between Moscow and Washington should be only for the benefit of solving the conflict?

A: Yes, I think it would be useful for the resolution. Bilateral relations between the United States and Russia are important in many aspects including diversification of energy supply, security and other issues. At the same time, as I already mentioned, Washington is not fully aware of the essence of Moscow’s foreign policy.

Either way, reverting to the question of understanding, I would say that yes, constructive relations between the United States and Russia can help solve the conflict. In any case, the close relationship between the two countries is better than confrontation. It is another thing – whether Russians want the conflict to be resolved. For instance, I am not sure they want it.

Q: Karabakh separatists did not abandon attempts to achieve international recognition. Is there any possibility of separation of Nagorno Karabakh from Azerbaijan and recognition of its independence?

A: Frankly speaking, I do not understand on what grounds the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh expect that they could gain independence. I do not think that this recognition will ever happen. I do not think that anyone in the United States, with exception of the Armenian lobby, would argue for the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh. The opposite would be a big geopolitical mistake by the U.S. and I do not think it will happen. The fact remains: the international community, UN, EU and the United States does not intend to recognize independence of Nagorno-Karabakh. This is an integral part of Azerbaijan and it should remain so.

Frankly, if the Armenians had been wiser, they would not have engaged in self-imposed isolation from the regional integration, but returned the occupied territories and restored good relations with surrounding countries. This is a very promising region with great political and geopolitical importance.

To make sure that what policy by Azerbaijan and Armenia have brought for these countries it is enough to look at capitals of these countries. Today, Baku and Yerevan are simply not comparable for the level of development. Armenia is a country that faces deep economic crisis while Azerbaijan occupies a leading position in the world for pace of economic development. Because Azerbaijan has good-neighborly policy, builds constructive relationship with neighbors, is a reliable trade partner and pursues pragmatic policy unlike Armenia.

/Day.Az/