Tweet
OIL AND GAS ARE MOST RELIABLE ALLIES FOR AZERBAIJAN, RUSSIAN POLITICAL SCIENTIST
news.az
Dec 28 2009
Azerbaijan
Alexander Karavayev News.Az interviews Alexander Karavayev, Russian
political scientist, head of the political forecasting service at
the Centre for Post-Soviet Studies.
Baku has condemned the decision by the US congress to allocate $8
mln to Nagorno Karabakh as a separate assistance beyond assistance
to Azerbaijan and Armenia. What can you say about this step of
the country whose leadership constantly states the support of the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and non-recognition of Nagorno
Karabakh as an independent formation?
The politicians of the global superpower that presents itself as a kind
of a geopolitical "Sun" that gives "light" to all countries without
exception view it as a usual action. Congressmen really believe that
their funds are used for civil social development and strengthen the
US influence.
Another moment is that we should not forget the peculiarity of the
US political system. It is quite pluralistic on the level of the
Congress and often there emerge a situation when the law-making body
undertakes decisions contrary to the policy of the president and the
US Department of State. To a definite extent this fact reflects the
democratic achievements of the US system. External lobbyists are also
making use of it. Therefore, the resolutions in Armenia's favor are
constantly proposed and in the result we can observe decisions about
trenches to Karabakh almost every year, the Congress work group on
Armenian issues has attained an anti-Azerbaijani resolutions on the
Baku-Tbilisi-Kars project; Armenian NGOs also get larger financing
via USAID as compared to Azerbaijan.
Some 400 different NGOs financed from external subsidies and grants
like the ones allocated by the Congress are functioning in Armenia.
Usually, the organizations functioning in legal sphere are perceived
as conductors of external interests. This issue becomes urgent in the
mass media of the CIS countries especially before elections. Armenian
NGOs also had an active influence on the atmosphere of the recent
presidential elections. But the overall situation with Armenian public
organizations is different from the neighbor states- thanks to the
contacts with diaspora, they conduct the interests of "Armenians" in
the world and only after that do they cover their influence on Armenia.
Such influence technologies are not kept secret. The soft power
methods should be used to promote interests. The situation is gradually
changing. The meetings of Azerbaijani delegations with the US experts
and congressmen have become regular and the Center of Strategic Studies
under the Azerbaijani president makes a significant contribution to
this work. But this work will take more than a year.
Armenians are skillfully taking advantage of lobbying and a specific
shortsightedness of the giant as by taking such a decision an ordinary
congressman even not motivated by the Armenian propaganda considers
that he is making this decision to raise US influence in the region
(the funds are allocated for construction of schools, hospitals.
Allocation of grants for NGOs and so on) and he considers that money
are spent on people no matter who controls the region. How can the
idea be changed? The most obvious method is to present arguments. You
should set the question the following way- as you spend much on the
Armenian community of Karabakh, why not assist to the Azerbaijani
community expelled from their homeland? You should especially train
experts to expand the lectures at the US universities. By the way,
this can be applied not only to the United States. Azerbaijani position
will be understood by the impartial politicians of many countries.
Do you consider that Azerbaijan may incline more to Moscow and its
mediation in Karabakh settlement after this step by Washington?
Such an idea in Baku is profitable if we judge from the position of
the Russian expert community. But we also need to disperse definite
illusions connected with such judgments. The disappointment caused
by initial optimism of hopes is not the best motive for building
long-term ally relations while Russia needs a smart ally who defines
its positions without radical changes. The "inclination" towards Moscow
will not raise effectiveness of Russia's mediation for Azerbaijan. It
is an illusion. I understand the factors and the way it strengthened
in the late 90's (under the analogy of Russia's influence on Armenia)
but it is unclear why it is today so strong in Azerbaijan.
Let's take several examples.
Let's take Moldova and separatist conflict in Transdniestria. It
implies not the military escalation but the confrontation of ruling
elites that have their joint business, including a gas company, and
we also know how the profits from export of metallurgic production of
Transdniestria were used. In other words, the situation is different as
compared with the Karabakh conflict. Ex-president Voronin positioned
himself as a leader conducting a pro-Russian geopolitical course
in the second term of his geopolitical course. In addition, Russia
has no especially sensitive issues of security either in Moldova or
Transdniestria. Has the situation been settled in Moldova's favor
during Voronin's reign?
Let's now take Armenia. The argument of Russian support to Yerevan -
the Russian base played a great role for Azerbaijani community and
the role of Russian investments is hiding Armenia's expansion in
Azerbaijan. This is the way it seems to be.
But in fact the situation is different. Armenia used Russian security
and geopolitical interests to cover its own interests. Any other
superpower could be in Russia's place. For example, the United States.
They have interests in Azerbaijan and probably they could gain control
over Armenian enterprises. This situation is theoretically possible.
But then we cannot expect rapid changes in Azerbaijan's favor. It is
impossible to settle the conflict without deeper interference with
the internal political life of one of the countries in the current
situation of independence of Armenia and Azerbaijan. This script
requires full democratic and forcefully repressive control over the
communities of the two states and the full control over elites. Only
the Soviet Union could execute it in the South Caucasus in the 20th
century. At that time Armenians and Azerbaijanis though having their
national demands coexisted peacefully without killing each other. Here
we can recall the experience of the Russian empire and then there came
a brief moment of democratic South Caucasus republic. It all occurred
as an implication of the fact of the imperialistic obedience or the
disaster of its collapse. Such a situation will not repeat in the
nearest future. One should not have illusions about integration of
Armenia and Azerbaijan in the result of EU's expansion to the East
and creation of a single supranational regulation center, this is
not the creation of a single state built on the principles of justice
and respect to the territorial integrity of its inseparable parts.
Unlike Russia, the United States are far from the South Caucasus and
its problems. Is it correct to speak about the effective participation
of this country in mediation efforts to settle our conflicts,
especially the Nagorno Karabakh issue?
The United States did not participate at the initial stage in the
moment of suspension of war. However, it was possible to speak of
the definite positive motives of Washington's influence. The role of
the United States in the South Caucasus was growing and taking the
positions freed after the USSR collapse and weakening of Communist
Moscow's center. It is today impossible to get rid of the US factor
though it is hard to say whether this influence is effective or no.
I would like to note once again that the conjuncture political steps
of the superpowers do not deserve so much attention. Oil and gas are
rather the best allies for Azerbaijan compared to superpowers and
neighbors. Therefore, to settle the Karabakh conflict the country
should stake on the socioeconomic development raising trust to
Azerbaijan and Azerbaijanis, therefore, traditional political pressure
and the work with the conjuncture allies is applied to this.
news.az
Dec 28 2009
Azerbaijan
Alexander Karavayev News.Az interviews Alexander Karavayev, Russian
political scientist, head of the political forecasting service at
the Centre for Post-Soviet Studies.
Baku has condemned the decision by the US congress to allocate $8
mln to Nagorno Karabakh as a separate assistance beyond assistance
to Azerbaijan and Armenia. What can you say about this step of
the country whose leadership constantly states the support of the
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and non-recognition of Nagorno
Karabakh as an independent formation?
The politicians of the global superpower that presents itself as a kind
of a geopolitical "Sun" that gives "light" to all countries without
exception view it as a usual action. Congressmen really believe that
their funds are used for civil social development and strengthen the
US influence.
Another moment is that we should not forget the peculiarity of the
US political system. It is quite pluralistic on the level of the
Congress and often there emerge a situation when the law-making body
undertakes decisions contrary to the policy of the president and the
US Department of State. To a definite extent this fact reflects the
democratic achievements of the US system. External lobbyists are also
making use of it. Therefore, the resolutions in Armenia's favor are
constantly proposed and in the result we can observe decisions about
trenches to Karabakh almost every year, the Congress work group on
Armenian issues has attained an anti-Azerbaijani resolutions on the
Baku-Tbilisi-Kars project; Armenian NGOs also get larger financing
via USAID as compared to Azerbaijan.
Some 400 different NGOs financed from external subsidies and grants
like the ones allocated by the Congress are functioning in Armenia.
Usually, the organizations functioning in legal sphere are perceived
as conductors of external interests. This issue becomes urgent in the
mass media of the CIS countries especially before elections. Armenian
NGOs also had an active influence on the atmosphere of the recent
presidential elections. But the overall situation with Armenian public
organizations is different from the neighbor states- thanks to the
contacts with diaspora, they conduct the interests of "Armenians" in
the world and only after that do they cover their influence on Armenia.
Such influence technologies are not kept secret. The soft power
methods should be used to promote interests. The situation is gradually
changing. The meetings of Azerbaijani delegations with the US experts
and congressmen have become regular and the Center of Strategic Studies
under the Azerbaijani president makes a significant contribution to
this work. But this work will take more than a year.
Armenians are skillfully taking advantage of lobbying and a specific
shortsightedness of the giant as by taking such a decision an ordinary
congressman even not motivated by the Armenian propaganda considers
that he is making this decision to raise US influence in the region
(the funds are allocated for construction of schools, hospitals.
Allocation of grants for NGOs and so on) and he considers that money
are spent on people no matter who controls the region. How can the
idea be changed? The most obvious method is to present arguments. You
should set the question the following way- as you spend much on the
Armenian community of Karabakh, why not assist to the Azerbaijani
community expelled from their homeland? You should especially train
experts to expand the lectures at the US universities. By the way,
this can be applied not only to the United States. Azerbaijani position
will be understood by the impartial politicians of many countries.
Do you consider that Azerbaijan may incline more to Moscow and its
mediation in Karabakh settlement after this step by Washington?
Such an idea in Baku is profitable if we judge from the position of
the Russian expert community. But we also need to disperse definite
illusions connected with such judgments. The disappointment caused
by initial optimism of hopes is not the best motive for building
long-term ally relations while Russia needs a smart ally who defines
its positions without radical changes. The "inclination" towards Moscow
will not raise effectiveness of Russia's mediation for Azerbaijan. It
is an illusion. I understand the factors and the way it strengthened
in the late 90's (under the analogy of Russia's influence on Armenia)
but it is unclear why it is today so strong in Azerbaijan.
Let's take several examples.
Let's take Moldova and separatist conflict in Transdniestria. It
implies not the military escalation but the confrontation of ruling
elites that have their joint business, including a gas company, and
we also know how the profits from export of metallurgic production of
Transdniestria were used. In other words, the situation is different as
compared with the Karabakh conflict. Ex-president Voronin positioned
himself as a leader conducting a pro-Russian geopolitical course
in the second term of his geopolitical course. In addition, Russia
has no especially sensitive issues of security either in Moldova or
Transdniestria. Has the situation been settled in Moldova's favor
during Voronin's reign?
Let's now take Armenia. The argument of Russian support to Yerevan -
the Russian base played a great role for Azerbaijani community and
the role of Russian investments is hiding Armenia's expansion in
Azerbaijan. This is the way it seems to be.
But in fact the situation is different. Armenia used Russian security
and geopolitical interests to cover its own interests. Any other
superpower could be in Russia's place. For example, the United States.
They have interests in Azerbaijan and probably they could gain control
over Armenian enterprises. This situation is theoretically possible.
But then we cannot expect rapid changes in Azerbaijan's favor. It is
impossible to settle the conflict without deeper interference with
the internal political life of one of the countries in the current
situation of independence of Armenia and Azerbaijan. This script
requires full democratic and forcefully repressive control over the
communities of the two states and the full control over elites. Only
the Soviet Union could execute it in the South Caucasus in the 20th
century. At that time Armenians and Azerbaijanis though having their
national demands coexisted peacefully without killing each other. Here
we can recall the experience of the Russian empire and then there came
a brief moment of democratic South Caucasus republic. It all occurred
as an implication of the fact of the imperialistic obedience or the
disaster of its collapse. Such a situation will not repeat in the
nearest future. One should not have illusions about integration of
Armenia and Azerbaijan in the result of EU's expansion to the East
and creation of a single supranational regulation center, this is
not the creation of a single state built on the principles of justice
and respect to the territorial integrity of its inseparable parts.
Unlike Russia, the United States are far from the South Caucasus and
its problems. Is it correct to speak about the effective participation
of this country in mediation efforts to settle our conflicts,
especially the Nagorno Karabakh issue?
The United States did not participate at the initial stage in the
moment of suspension of war. However, it was possible to speak of
the definite positive motives of Washington's influence. The role of
the United States in the South Caucasus was growing and taking the
positions freed after the USSR collapse and weakening of Communist
Moscow's center. It is today impossible to get rid of the US factor
though it is hard to say whether this influence is effective or no.
I would like to note once again that the conjuncture political steps
of the superpowers do not deserve so much attention. Oil and gas are
rather the best allies for Azerbaijan compared to superpowers and
neighbors. Therefore, to settle the Karabakh conflict the country
should stake on the socioeconomic development raising trust to
Azerbaijan and Azerbaijanis, therefore, traditional political pressure
and the work with the conjuncture allies is applied to this.