Michael Gunter: Given Armenia's geographical isolation, the long run favors Azerbaijan

You, along with others, attended the Khojaly related conference, held in Hinckley Institute, in Utah. How, in your opinion, is the informing of Americans on this Azerbaijani tragedy going on?

The American public never even heard of Khojaly, let alone the massacre that occurred there in 1992. Azeri authorities should continue to try to inform world public opinion on this issue, especially when Armenians engage in anti-Azeri propaganda.

At present, the negotiations for the Nagorno-Karabakh problem still go on, although without any big steps forward. Baku doesn’t exclude the possibility of military solution of this problem. Do you yourself see the problem solved via the military actions?

Although the military option is always there, Azerbaijan would be best served by continuing to try to solve the problem peacefully. Azeris should continue to emphasize the principle of territorial integrity when arguing their case as this principle is supported in their own interests by practically every other state in the world that does not want to be partitioned or suffer from secession. Turkey remains a strong ally of Azerbaijan, so the Azeris should not alienate Turkey over this issue as Turkey pursues its rapprochement with Armenia. Given Armenia’s geographical isolation, the long run favors Azerbaijan.

The OSCE Minsk Group has been working on the Armenian-Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for many years. Many analysts and experts agree on one thing – the Minsk Group has done very little to actually progress the resolution of the conflict. Do you agree with that?

Many deep problems in international politics take years to solve or are never solved. The Arab-Israeli, Kashmiri, and Cypriot issue come readily to mind. It is not surprising that the OSCE Minsk Group has made little progress. However, Azerbaijan should continue to pursue the Minsk process, but do not ignore other opportunities. Problems like Nagorno-Karabakh sometimes just gradually are solved by time and the changing international situation.

As you already know, the US House Committee of Foreign Affairs adopted 23 votes to 22 the resolution on “Armenian Genocide” on March 4.  What, in your opinion should be expected next? Will it go any further?

I do not think the “Genocide Resolution” will go any further as it is clearly a one-sided attempt to legislate history as well as being against U.S. foreign policy interests. I expect President Obama to use his influence to block any further progress. Actually the Committee vote was more favorable to Turkey this time (23-22) compared to the previous most recent attempt to pass such a resolution on October 10,  2007 when the House Committee on International Affairs passed an almost identical resolution 27-21, only to see it then blocked by President Bush.

How do you see the U.S.-Turkish relations after this resolution was adopted?

The  “Genocide Resolution” momentarily set US-Turkish relations back, but if the Resolution proceeds no further as I expect, the entire matter will be but a brief bump on the road of US-Turkish relations which have so many more important aspects with which to deal.

Can we assume, that, this adoption will badly affect the Turkish-Armenian border opening?

In the short run yes, but in the long run it is in the interest of all parties to reach an agreement on the two protocols Turkey and Armenian signed last October to establish diplomatic relations, establish an historical commission to examine the events of 1915, and open the Turkish-Armenian border.


T. Teymur