Tweet
POSSIBILITY OF A NEW WAR IN KARABAKH IS MINIMAL
news.az
Nov 23 2009
Azerbaijan
Stanislav Chernyavski News.Az interview with Stanislav Chernyavski,
chief of the Center of Post-Soviet Studies under MGIMO.
What do you think is the main problem in the resolution of Nagorno
Karabakh conflict?
I would like to speak of the prehistory. In late 1993 Azeri troops
started successful attack at all fronts. The attack failed in January
1994. In March Russia offered its mediatory services. An oral agreement
on ceasefire was reached in Bishkek on 12 May 1994 just after Heydar
Aliyev's visit to Great Britain where he expected London to support
Azerbaijan. But it did not happen. The sides concluded an agreement on
ceasefire that was not confirmed in any document. After it, the case
was transferred to the OSCE's Minsk Group. The CIS interparliamentary
assembly ceased to be a mediator and Russia ceased to be the only
mediator. In the result, the talks came to a deadlock.
Does it mean that today the success in negotiations depends on mutual
understanding between Russia and the United States?
No I do not think so. Primarily, it depends on mutual understanding
between the ruling elites of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Meanwhile, Baku continues voicing dissatisfaction with the mediators'
position saying 'Agree yourself and we will support any agreement'. If
the parties could agree, they would have done this without mediators.
This was especially stated by chief of department of foreign ties
under presidential administration Novruz Mammadov at a conference on
security in the South Caucasus held in Baku.
Novruz Mammadov, whom I respect greatly, has more ground to say so.
But I have no such grounds.
How did last year's war in Georgia influence the Karabakh settlement:
has it been a stimulus or complicated it?
It has no influence at all. I, like everyone in Russia, regret much
about the conflict with Georgia. But this paradoxical situation was
inevitable. On the one hand, there were too many people with Russian
passports in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and Russia was responsible
for them. On the other hand, attacks on peacekeepers occurred. When
Georgian started to kill people, Russia had no other way out. It was
obliged to take steps. Thus, Russia did not intend to attack Georgia.
I am not a president but I can guarantee this. We were not going
to attack.
Is the resumption of war in Karabakh possible?
It is difficult to say. I think the possibility of a new war is
minimal, if not zero.
There is an opinion that the keys to the Karabakh conflict lie in
the Kremlin.
I do not agree with this. The post-Soviet elites are so powerful
now that they settle all their national, international and interstate
issues independently. And no elite would make concessions contradicting
to its sovereignty for the sake of any other state. This is a matter of
Azerbaijanis and Armenians. I think both parties should involve their
diasporas more actively. Both Diasporas are strong, they should be
involved, they should realize that both countries will have economic
benefits from reconciliation. Population will benefit and settlement
of most social issues will be facilitated. Both countries and the
whole region will benefit and it is incorrect to say that the keys
to the settlement lie only in Moscow or in Washington.
news.az
Nov 23 2009
Azerbaijan
Stanislav Chernyavski News.Az interview with Stanislav Chernyavski,
chief of the Center of Post-Soviet Studies under MGIMO.
What do you think is the main problem in the resolution of Nagorno
Karabakh conflict?
I would like to speak of the prehistory. In late 1993 Azeri troops
started successful attack at all fronts. The attack failed in January
1994. In March Russia offered its mediatory services. An oral agreement
on ceasefire was reached in Bishkek on 12 May 1994 just after Heydar
Aliyev's visit to Great Britain where he expected London to support
Azerbaijan. But it did not happen. The sides concluded an agreement on
ceasefire that was not confirmed in any document. After it, the case
was transferred to the OSCE's Minsk Group. The CIS interparliamentary
assembly ceased to be a mediator and Russia ceased to be the only
mediator. In the result, the talks came to a deadlock.
Does it mean that today the success in negotiations depends on mutual
understanding between Russia and the United States?
No I do not think so. Primarily, it depends on mutual understanding
between the ruling elites of Azerbaijan and Armenia.
Meanwhile, Baku continues voicing dissatisfaction with the mediators'
position saying 'Agree yourself and we will support any agreement'. If
the parties could agree, they would have done this without mediators.
This was especially stated by chief of department of foreign ties
under presidential administration Novruz Mammadov at a conference on
security in the South Caucasus held in Baku.
Novruz Mammadov, whom I respect greatly, has more ground to say so.
But I have no such grounds.
How did last year's war in Georgia influence the Karabakh settlement:
has it been a stimulus or complicated it?
It has no influence at all. I, like everyone in Russia, regret much
about the conflict with Georgia. But this paradoxical situation was
inevitable. On the one hand, there were too many people with Russian
passports in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and Russia was responsible
for them. On the other hand, attacks on peacekeepers occurred. When
Georgian started to kill people, Russia had no other way out. It was
obliged to take steps. Thus, Russia did not intend to attack Georgia.
I am not a president but I can guarantee this. We were not going
to attack.
Is the resumption of war in Karabakh possible?
It is difficult to say. I think the possibility of a new war is
minimal, if not zero.
There is an opinion that the keys to the Karabakh conflict lie in
the Kremlin.
I do not agree with this. The post-Soviet elites are so powerful
now that they settle all their national, international and interstate
issues independently. And no elite would make concessions contradicting
to its sovereignty for the sake of any other state. This is a matter of
Azerbaijanis and Armenians. I think both parties should involve their
diasporas more actively. Both Diasporas are strong, they should be
involved, they should realize that both countries will have economic
benefits from reconciliation. Population will benefit and settlement
of most social issues will be facilitated. Both countries and the
whole region will benefit and it is incorrect to say that the keys
to the settlement lie only in Moscow or in Washington.