Tweet
Andrey Ryabov:Transference of the Karabakh conflict to the military
stage is the main threat for Russia's influence in the South Caucasus
Interview of Andrey Ryabov, a member of the Moscow Carnegie Center
Research Council, with ArmInfo News Agency
arminf
by David Stepanyan
Sunday, December 4, 11:02
What threats to the Russian interests in Armenia and Azerbaijan do
you observe?
Undoubtedly, the main threat for Russia in the South Caucasus is
defrosting of the Karabakh conflict and its transference to the
military stage. The point is that today Russia is forced to combine
close geo-political relations with Armenia and its energy interests,
in which Azerbaijan plays a serious part like a transit and
oil-producing country. Today these problems are becoming more and more
relevant for Russia, taking into account the fact that Russia did not
manage to make an arrangement with its Western partners on transit of
energy resources via the South Caucasus. At the same time, the fact
that during Dmitry Medvedev's presidency 6 trilateral meetings of the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan were held says that
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a priority for Moscow.
In this context, they in Russia believe that in conditions of neither
peace nor mutual understanding in the region, the best choice for
everyone is maintenance of the post-military status quo. After the war
08.08.08. there were too many concerns about Russia's becoming a
revisionist super power changing the borders in the region. But Russia
has no such idea acceptable to all the conflicting sides. Neither has
it an opportunity to realize such ideas. In this context, Moscow made
quite a reasonable decision to maintain the status-quo, I think. Today
the relations between Russia and Georgia look more or less stable and
have no pre-condition for changing of the situation established by the
results of the war 08.08.08. For this reason, Russia is more anxious
about resumption of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The fact that Azerbaijan is building up its military potential and
forming its own not so big military and industrial complex is the main
threat. In Russia they strictly understand that transference of the
status-quo around the Karabakh conflict to the military conflict will
have very hard and probably irreversible consequences for the Russian
policy and its influence in the South Caucasus.
Let's talk about the reasons...
There is no doubt that in case of resumption of the Karabakh conflict
Russia, as a partner, will lose its significance for both parties to
the Karabakh conflict. This is the reason of such great efforts of
Moscow and President Medvedev to preserve the status-quo, which
President Putin will probably continue as well.
Do the OSCE MG other co-chair states really support Russia's efforts
to resolve the Karabakh conflict?
I have got an impression that over the last years the USA and Europe
have realized that Russia also has exclusive possibilities to maintain
peace in the region. Interaction between Russia, the USA and France in
this context has been improved certainly. Nevertheless, I do not trust
in the scenarios saying that Azerbaijan will get a permission to break
the status-quo in the Karabakh conflict zone in exchange for provision
of its territory for attacks on Iran. President Aliyev's rather shaky
positions require, at least, more confidence and no mistake from him.
In addition, resumption of war is so risky that it is within the
interests of both the USA and France to maintain the status-quo. In
this light, interaction with Russia has been enhanced over the last
few years. Russia is allowed to display activity in maintenance of the
status-quo. At the Summit in Astana in 2010 all the member-states and
super powers "proved" their inability to resolve the Karabakh
conflict. The status-quo is the best solution in the given situation.
It cannot last forever, indeed, but it has no alternative.
So you don't share the opinion that in an attempt to gain leadership
in the region Russia and the United States may play the Iranian card,
do you?
I don't believe that the "controllable chaos" theory is possible now
that the Arab spring has come. The situation in the Greater Middle
East is getting increasingly uncertain, and this uncertainly has
already covered one of the key countries of the region - Syria. Nobody
can predict what will come of it, so, it will hardly be reasonable for
anybody - whoever they are and whatever resources they have - to stake
on the controllable chaos scenario. The economic crisis has limited
the great powers' foreign policy capacities. So, I don't think that
the US Government will take such a risk.
What logic do the `Arab revolutions' meet then?
Should there be a revolution in Syria, countries like Qatar and Saudi
Arabia (with their moderate Islam and tendency for modernization) may
suggest that they may become better regional partners for the United
States than Israel is now.
What about Libya?
While in Tunisia and Egypt everything was spontaneous, in Libya and
now in Syria the West is playing a specific consistent game. Whatever
it is, this game is dangerous and unpredictable, and the European
Union has very limited power to keep it on the positive track.
Back on the Karabakh conflict. What probable scenario of the Karabakh
conflict resolution can be predicted given the day-to-day realities?
I agree with the opinion of most analysts saying that there is a
threat of resumption of the military phase of the Karabakh conflict.
However, I think that the rational stance of super powers, including
Russia, allows keeping the conflict frozen for rather a long period of
time, even despite Baku's aspirations for changing the military
balance with Armenia. The point is that another conflict in the
Greater Middle East is pregnant with extremely grave aftermaths for a
wide circle of countries, not just for the South Caucasus.
stage is the main threat for Russia's influence in the South Caucasus
Interview of Andrey Ryabov, a member of the Moscow Carnegie Center
Research Council, with ArmInfo News Agency
arminf
by David Stepanyan
Sunday, December 4, 11:02
What threats to the Russian interests in Armenia and Azerbaijan do
you observe?
Undoubtedly, the main threat for Russia in the South Caucasus is
defrosting of the Karabakh conflict and its transference to the
military stage. The point is that today Russia is forced to combine
close geo-political relations with Armenia and its energy interests,
in which Azerbaijan plays a serious part like a transit and
oil-producing country. Today these problems are becoming more and more
relevant for Russia, taking into account the fact that Russia did not
manage to make an arrangement with its Western partners on transit of
energy resources via the South Caucasus. At the same time, the fact
that during Dmitry Medvedev's presidency 6 trilateral meetings of the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan were held says that
settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a priority for Moscow.
In this context, they in Russia believe that in conditions of neither
peace nor mutual understanding in the region, the best choice for
everyone is maintenance of the post-military status quo. After the war
08.08.08. there were too many concerns about Russia's becoming a
revisionist super power changing the borders in the region. But Russia
has no such idea acceptable to all the conflicting sides. Neither has
it an opportunity to realize such ideas. In this context, Moscow made
quite a reasonable decision to maintain the status-quo, I think. Today
the relations between Russia and Georgia look more or less stable and
have no pre-condition for changing of the situation established by the
results of the war 08.08.08. For this reason, Russia is more anxious
about resumption of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
The fact that Azerbaijan is building up its military potential and
forming its own not so big military and industrial complex is the main
threat. In Russia they strictly understand that transference of the
status-quo around the Karabakh conflict to the military conflict will
have very hard and probably irreversible consequences for the Russian
policy and its influence in the South Caucasus.
Let's talk about the reasons...
There is no doubt that in case of resumption of the Karabakh conflict
Russia, as a partner, will lose its significance for both parties to
the Karabakh conflict. This is the reason of such great efforts of
Moscow and President Medvedev to preserve the status-quo, which
President Putin will probably continue as well.
Do the OSCE MG other co-chair states really support Russia's efforts
to resolve the Karabakh conflict?
I have got an impression that over the last years the USA and Europe
have realized that Russia also has exclusive possibilities to maintain
peace in the region. Interaction between Russia, the USA and France in
this context has been improved certainly. Nevertheless, I do not trust
in the scenarios saying that Azerbaijan will get a permission to break
the status-quo in the Karabakh conflict zone in exchange for provision
of its territory for attacks on Iran. President Aliyev's rather shaky
positions require, at least, more confidence and no mistake from him.
In addition, resumption of war is so risky that it is within the
interests of both the USA and France to maintain the status-quo. In
this light, interaction with Russia has been enhanced over the last
few years. Russia is allowed to display activity in maintenance of the
status-quo. At the Summit in Astana in 2010 all the member-states and
super powers "proved" their inability to resolve the Karabakh
conflict. The status-quo is the best solution in the given situation.
It cannot last forever, indeed, but it has no alternative.
So you don't share the opinion that in an attempt to gain leadership
in the region Russia and the United States may play the Iranian card,
do you?
I don't believe that the "controllable chaos" theory is possible now
that the Arab spring has come. The situation in the Greater Middle
East is getting increasingly uncertain, and this uncertainly has
already covered one of the key countries of the region - Syria. Nobody
can predict what will come of it, so, it will hardly be reasonable for
anybody - whoever they are and whatever resources they have - to stake
on the controllable chaos scenario. The economic crisis has limited
the great powers' foreign policy capacities. So, I don't think that
the US Government will take such a risk.
What logic do the `Arab revolutions' meet then?
Should there be a revolution in Syria, countries like Qatar and Saudi
Arabia (with their moderate Islam and tendency for modernization) may
suggest that they may become better regional partners for the United
States than Israel is now.
What about Libya?
While in Tunisia and Egypt everything was spontaneous, in Libya and
now in Syria the West is playing a specific consistent game. Whatever
it is, this game is dangerous and unpredictable, and the European
Union has very limited power to keep it on the positive track.
Back on the Karabakh conflict. What probable scenario of the Karabakh
conflict resolution can be predicted given the day-to-day realities?
I agree with the opinion of most analysts saying that there is a
threat of resumption of the military phase of the Karabakh conflict.
However, I think that the rational stance of super powers, including
Russia, allows keeping the conflict frozen for rather a long period of
time, even despite Baku's aspirations for changing the military
balance with Armenia. The point is that another conflict in the
Greater Middle East is pregnant with extremely grave aftermaths for a
wide circle of countries, not just for the South Caucasus.