Caspian issues were debated in Aktau behind closed doors: expert

Day.Az: Why Iran was not invited to the Aktau meeting. Was it because Caspian Sea status was not discussed at the meeting?

Aleksei Vlasov: I think despite one reason included in public statements, in fact there are probably some hidden factors, which are designated primarily in the quartet format. There is no doubt that officials said that the Caspian issue was not discussed and so the absence of Iran had nothing to do with the desire of the quartet to address the serious issue of the Caspian Sea without participation of Tehran.

But I think that after all, the Caspian Sea issues were debated in Aktau behind closed doors and purpose of these closed discussions was that the troika (Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan) would persuade Turkmenistan to create a new configuration of the negotiations on the Caspian issue. I think this was the task for the heads of state.

Q: There is suggestion that the Aktau summit was a kind of preparation for the upcoming negotiations on the status of the Caspian Sea. Given the dissatisfaction by Iran, what one can expect from the upcoming meeting of presidents of the Caspian littoral states?

Q: First, I think prior to the summit every effort will be made to show Tehran that in fact there were no questions regarding the status of the Caspian Sea that can be solved without Iran. There is a need to sweeten this meeting by information so as not to engage with Iran in excess confrontation. Steps in this direction are already being made at official level. I think a strong information impetus will be given to rapprochement. But more important is a proposal to address these issues within the overall approach and whether it will be format of the Caspian economic cooperation organization or some other model.

For now, two main points are important for Moscow, one - enter other Caspian littoral states in mode of one-sided dialogue within an organization and second point - to prevent interference by outside forces with the solution of the Caspian issues. And in fact, and in another case, Iran can be persuaded that such a dialogue format is more acceptable.

Q: The option of building Nabucco pipeline through Armenia is not considered currently. In Armenia there is an opinion that the cost of the project can not be "Armenian genocide" and the independence of Nagorno-Karabakh. May Armenia change this position taking into account the importance of Nabucco?

A: Both initiators of the Nabucco project and Russia and Armenia are in a very difficult situation for various reasons at a moment when the fate of this project would be decided. The issue of Armenia it exists in the context of the Nabucco project, more precisely, in a particular route of the project. But here the position of Armenia in Yerevan and attitude to participate in this project is not the main thing. That is why for now Yerevan is limited to fairly vague and not very specific terms.

Armenia’s involvement with Nabucco project will be skeptically perceived in Moscow. On the other hand, there are certain economic preferences that Armenia would like to receive. Hence the desire to wait until the situation around the Nabucco will unfold further. Again, I stress that the Armenian issue in the Nabucco exists. But it is not crucial or decisive for the fate of this project.

/Day.Az/