Tweet
RUSSIA 'CANNOT FULLY RELY' ON AZERBAIJAN'S SUPPORT IN UN
news.az
Oct 27 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az interviews Dr Yevgeny Volk, deputy director of the Yeltsin
Foundation (Moscow).
How can you comment on Azerbaijan's election as a non-permanent member
of the UN Security Council?
This decision reflects Azerbaijan's recognition as a leading regional
power since the list of the non-permanent members of the UN Security
Council is expanded by rotation based on the representations of
separate regions. The fact that Azerbaijan gained the opportunity
reflects the growing role of Baku in international relations, the
important role of Azerbaijan in the settlement not only of regional
problems but also of global problems dealt with by the UN.
>From the very beginning Russia declared support for Azerbaijan's
candidacy. What caused this support?
Russia is not interested in worsening ties with Baku during the current
tough fight for energy sources and influence in the South Caucasus
and in the former USSR space. Russia is seeking to consolidate its
position, including in Azerbaijan, and does not want to worsen its
ties with Baku.
Meanwhile, Russia has repeatedly rejected Azerbaijan's initiatives in
the UN on Karabakh. Some believe that this time Russia wants to put
forward some of its own initiatives via Azerbaijan in the UN Security
Council. What do you think about that?
I don't think that Russia can fully rely on Azerbaijan's support,
since Baku is not so politically close to Moscow, especially because
Moscow allies with Armenia in this region, since the latter is part
of the relevant structures of the CIS and is closer to Moscow in this
respect. All the same, certainly, Moscow hopes that its position will
be close to Baku's on a number of issues that attract Baku's attention,
especially on the situation in the Middle East.
Can the institution of non-permanent membership of the UN Security
Council be an effective mechanism for the implementation of the four
resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh?
I would not establish such a direct connection between non-permanent
membership of the Security Council and the implementation of the UN
resolutions. Though the status of a non-permanent member gives some
advantages, it is not the key to solutions to issues that have been
on the agenda for a long time, have not been resolved earlier and
even have no prospects for settlement in the foreseeable future.
Azerbaijan, Russia and most other countries support reform of the
UN to improve the effectiveness of the resolutions taken by this
organization. Can this work be consolidated through Azerbaijan's
new status?
I think that the issue of reform of the UN is an eternal one. Much has
been spoken about reform for decades, since the very beginning of its
existence. But nonetheless, this issue is so complex and contradictory,
it is bound to the interests of so many influential political powers
and separate countries, that I would not be too optimistic about the
possibly of rapid reform of the UN, especially the use of current
leverage such as non-permanent membership of the Security Council to
achieve this.
All countries have their views on this organization. Russia has
a special outlook and so does the US leadership. And it is very
difficult to bring these two points closer.
news.az
Oct 27 2011
Azerbaijan
News.Az interviews Dr Yevgeny Volk, deputy director of the Yeltsin
Foundation (Moscow).
How can you comment on Azerbaijan's election as a non-permanent member
of the UN Security Council?
This decision reflects Azerbaijan's recognition as a leading regional
power since the list of the non-permanent members of the UN Security
Council is expanded by rotation based on the representations of
separate regions. The fact that Azerbaijan gained the opportunity
reflects the growing role of Baku in international relations, the
important role of Azerbaijan in the settlement not only of regional
problems but also of global problems dealt with by the UN.
>From the very beginning Russia declared support for Azerbaijan's
candidacy. What caused this support?
Russia is not interested in worsening ties with Baku during the current
tough fight for energy sources and influence in the South Caucasus
and in the former USSR space. Russia is seeking to consolidate its
position, including in Azerbaijan, and does not want to worsen its
ties with Baku.
Meanwhile, Russia has repeatedly rejected Azerbaijan's initiatives in
the UN on Karabakh. Some believe that this time Russia wants to put
forward some of its own initiatives via Azerbaijan in the UN Security
Council. What do you think about that?
I don't think that Russia can fully rely on Azerbaijan's support,
since Baku is not so politically close to Moscow, especially because
Moscow allies with Armenia in this region, since the latter is part
of the relevant structures of the CIS and is closer to Moscow in this
respect. All the same, certainly, Moscow hopes that its position will
be close to Baku's on a number of issues that attract Baku's attention,
especially on the situation in the Middle East.
Can the institution of non-permanent membership of the UN Security
Council be an effective mechanism for the implementation of the four
resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh?
I would not establish such a direct connection between non-permanent
membership of the Security Council and the implementation of the UN
resolutions. Though the status of a non-permanent member gives some
advantages, it is not the key to solutions to issues that have been
on the agenda for a long time, have not been resolved earlier and
even have no prospects for settlement in the foreseeable future.
Azerbaijan, Russia and most other countries support reform of the
UN to improve the effectiveness of the resolutions taken by this
organization. Can this work be consolidated through Azerbaijan's
new status?
I think that the issue of reform of the UN is an eternal one. Much has
been spoken about reform for decades, since the very beginning of its
existence. But nonetheless, this issue is so complex and contradictory,
it is bound to the interests of so many influential political powers
and separate countries, that I would not be too optimistic about the
possibly of rapid reform of the UN, especially the use of current
leverage such as non-permanent membership of the Security Council to
achieve this.
All countries have their views on this organization. Russia has
a special outlook and so does the US leadership. And it is very
difficult to bring these two points closer.