Tweet
NOW WASHINGTON AND ANKARA WILL NOT GO THE CAUCASUS WITHOUT PERMISSION OF MOSCOW
Oksana Musaelyan
ArmInfo
2010-09-10 12:31:00
Interview with Eugene Chausovsky, Eurasia Analyst at Stratfor
(www.stratfor.com)
Will, you, please, comment on the visit of the President of Russia to
Armenia ? How may the results of this visit influence the situation
development in the region?
Medvedev's visit to Armenia solidified the military deal that has long
been discussed between the two countries. Russia now officially has
much greater control over the country from a military and security
standpoint, expanding the term of the lease to Russia's military base
in the country to 49 years and allowing Russian troops to move anywhere
they want within the country. Russia has therefore strengthened its
presence in Armenia and its leverage throughout the Caucasus.
In the course of the visit, Medvedev pledged the support of Yerevan
in the Moscow 's proposal on the "New European security Treaty". How
much weighty is the stance of Armenia in the issue that is certainly
the subject for discussions between NATO, OSCE, Russia and other
security bodies? What is the purpose of Moscow ? What is the interest
of Yerevan ?
The pledge of support from Armenia for Moscow's European security
treaty proposal was a show of loyalty from Russia's ally, but it
has little to do with Armenia directly. One of the country's that
has become a focus within the context of the new security treaty is
Moldova, particularly its breakaway region of Transniestra, as a test
of European security cooperation with Russia - and this is an area
which Russian relations with Germany are a key factor.
How do you estimate a possibility of Moscow sales C-300 to Baku ?
Won't it change the power balance in the region? Is there any danger
for Yerevan ?
It doesn't appear that Russia has sold the system to Azerbaijan
as of right now, and this has been a topic of debate between Baku
and Moscow for many years. While there is much speculation that the
S-300s would be used against Armenia, the system is meant to defend
against modern aircraft, which Armenia simply doesn't have. But the
symbolic nature of signing such a deal with Baku would be something
that Yerevan would not be happy with.
Russians and Armenians signed a Treaty on building new energy units
in the nuclear energy station. How do you estimate this strive of
Armenia to develop its nuclear energy?
Russia signs many nuclear deals with many countries, but frequently
these deals are long term with little traction in the foreseeable
future. One case in point is the Bushehr nuclear plant that Russia
has been constructing in Iran, which also took many years and had many
delays to deadlines. But this was a much more political and strategic
project than any nuclear plans for Armenia, and so has now actually
come online. However, Russia already runs Armenia's main nuclear plant
and so either modernizing that plant or creating new ones is not as
difficult as starting from scratch in other foreign countries. Also,
Rusisa holds major pieces of Armenia's nuclear industry, which would
allow Russia to more easily build new infrastructure.
How much in your opinion a prolongation of the military base of Russia
in Armenia for 49 years will facilitate its key task - support of peace
in the South Caucasus ? How will the fact impact on the geographic
policy of the region?
The extension of the military base lease in Armenia - along with
other moves Russia has made in the Caucasus, such as the placement of
S-300s in Abkhazia - shows that Russia is expanding its presence and
influence across the Caucasus. Russia wants to make sure its foothold
in the Caucasus is strong, and any potential conflict in the region,
as well as other outside powers like the US and Turkey making their
own overtures without coordinating with Russia, are directly against
Moscow's interests.
Medvedev's visit cleared up also a stance of Russia in Nagorno Karabakh
process settlement. It became obvious that the very mediating efforts
by Russia are the mainstream in the resolution of the problem.
Do you agree with the statement?
Russia is the biggest and most important player in the region,
and that applies to the Nagorno Karabakh talks as well. Moscow's
strategy is to use these negotiations to advance its interests -
building influence in both Armenia and Azerbaijan - and be the ultimate
decision maker as far as how other players, namely Turkey but also the
West, can go in this region. It is in Russia's interests to prevent an
escalation of tensions or possible war between Armenia and Azerbaijan
as that would destabilize the region and possibly spread beyond into
Russia proper, but a resolution the problem is not likely in the
near future, not one that Moscow would push too far. In the end,
this is about Russia controlling the situation as a whole, whether
it be to improve relations or allow them to further deteriorate--
Moscow wants to ensure whatever the future is in Nagorno Karabakh
that it will be according to Russia's agenda.
Do you envisage any progress in the process of finding final solution
to the Karabakh problem in the light of recent developments in
Russia-Armenia relations? Where are the interests of other mediators -
USA and France here?
Any progress on resolving the Nagorno Karabakh problem is not likely
to materialize in the near future, and the recent military agreement
between Russia and Armenia will only affect talks negatively, as it
is viewed by Azerbaijan suspiciously. As far as other players, US
is simply too distracted with other engagements in the Middle East,
and France does not have the kind of clout that Russia does in the
region, despite its ties to Armenia.
From: A. Papazian
Oksana Musaelyan
ArmInfo
2010-09-10 12:31:00
Interview with Eugene Chausovsky, Eurasia Analyst at Stratfor
(www.stratfor.com)
Will, you, please, comment on the visit of the President of Russia to
Armenia ? How may the results of this visit influence the situation
development in the region?
Medvedev's visit to Armenia solidified the military deal that has long
been discussed between the two countries. Russia now officially has
much greater control over the country from a military and security
standpoint, expanding the term of the lease to Russia's military base
in the country to 49 years and allowing Russian troops to move anywhere
they want within the country. Russia has therefore strengthened its
presence in Armenia and its leverage throughout the Caucasus.
In the course of the visit, Medvedev pledged the support of Yerevan
in the Moscow 's proposal on the "New European security Treaty". How
much weighty is the stance of Armenia in the issue that is certainly
the subject for discussions between NATO, OSCE, Russia and other
security bodies? What is the purpose of Moscow ? What is the interest
of Yerevan ?
The pledge of support from Armenia for Moscow's European security
treaty proposal was a show of loyalty from Russia's ally, but it
has little to do with Armenia directly. One of the country's that
has become a focus within the context of the new security treaty is
Moldova, particularly its breakaway region of Transniestra, as a test
of European security cooperation with Russia - and this is an area
which Russian relations with Germany are a key factor.
How do you estimate a possibility of Moscow sales C-300 to Baku ?
Won't it change the power balance in the region? Is there any danger
for Yerevan ?
It doesn't appear that Russia has sold the system to Azerbaijan
as of right now, and this has been a topic of debate between Baku
and Moscow for many years. While there is much speculation that the
S-300s would be used against Armenia, the system is meant to defend
against modern aircraft, which Armenia simply doesn't have. But the
symbolic nature of signing such a deal with Baku would be something
that Yerevan would not be happy with.
Russians and Armenians signed a Treaty on building new energy units
in the nuclear energy station. How do you estimate this strive of
Armenia to develop its nuclear energy?
Russia signs many nuclear deals with many countries, but frequently
these deals are long term with little traction in the foreseeable
future. One case in point is the Bushehr nuclear plant that Russia
has been constructing in Iran, which also took many years and had many
delays to deadlines. But this was a much more political and strategic
project than any nuclear plans for Armenia, and so has now actually
come online. However, Russia already runs Armenia's main nuclear plant
and so either modernizing that plant or creating new ones is not as
difficult as starting from scratch in other foreign countries. Also,
Rusisa holds major pieces of Armenia's nuclear industry, which would
allow Russia to more easily build new infrastructure.
How much in your opinion a prolongation of the military base of Russia
in Armenia for 49 years will facilitate its key task - support of peace
in the South Caucasus ? How will the fact impact on the geographic
policy of the region?
The extension of the military base lease in Armenia - along with
other moves Russia has made in the Caucasus, such as the placement of
S-300s in Abkhazia - shows that Russia is expanding its presence and
influence across the Caucasus. Russia wants to make sure its foothold
in the Caucasus is strong, and any potential conflict in the region,
as well as other outside powers like the US and Turkey making their
own overtures without coordinating with Russia, are directly against
Moscow's interests.
Medvedev's visit cleared up also a stance of Russia in Nagorno Karabakh
process settlement. It became obvious that the very mediating efforts
by Russia are the mainstream in the resolution of the problem.
Do you agree with the statement?
Russia is the biggest and most important player in the region,
and that applies to the Nagorno Karabakh talks as well. Moscow's
strategy is to use these negotiations to advance its interests -
building influence in both Armenia and Azerbaijan - and be the ultimate
decision maker as far as how other players, namely Turkey but also the
West, can go in this region. It is in Russia's interests to prevent an
escalation of tensions or possible war between Armenia and Azerbaijan
as that would destabilize the region and possibly spread beyond into
Russia proper, but a resolution the problem is not likely in the
near future, not one that Moscow would push too far. In the end,
this is about Russia controlling the situation as a whole, whether
it be to improve relations or allow them to further deteriorate--
Moscow wants to ensure whatever the future is in Nagorno Karabakh
that it will be according to Russia's agenda.
Do you envisage any progress in the process of finding final solution
to the Karabakh problem in the light of recent developments in
Russia-Armenia relations? Where are the interests of other mediators -
USA and France here?
Any progress on resolving the Nagorno Karabakh problem is not likely
to materialize in the near future, and the recent military agreement
between Russia and Armenia will only affect talks negatively, as it
is viewed by Azerbaijan suspiciously. As far as other players, US
is simply too distracted with other engagements in the Middle East,
and France does not have the kind of clout that Russia does in the
region, despite its ties to Armenia.
From: A. Papazian