Tweet
Karabakh resolution requires 'political will' in Armenia, Azerbaijan.
Mon 30 April 2012 10:33 GMT | 11:33 Local Time
Ekaterina Romanova
News.Az interviews Ekaterina Romanova, assistant professor at the
School of International Service, American University.
Do you agree with the view that the August 2008 war with Georgia
undermined Russia's influence as a peacekeeper in the solution of
regional conflicts?
When it comes to assessing Russia's role as a mediator or peace broker
in the South Caucasus, it has never been about Russia being neutral.
The Russian government has always made it clear that it treats the
South Caucasus as its sphere of influence and will protect its
interests in the region. It was a question of the trust which the
countries had in Russia's authority. Georgia had lost that trust even
prior to the August war. Armenia and Azerbaijan still prefer to see a
role for Russia in the conflict resolution process (Armenia more so
than Azerbaijan, but there are other reasons than the 2008 war that
play into that).
How do you assess Russian peacemaking in the Karabakh conflict? Does
it seem effective?
The Nagorno-Karabakh peace process is too stalled to evaluate its effectiveness.
How will Russian mediation on Karabakh be influenced by Putin's
presidency, given that the present Russian leader was very active in
attempts to reconcile Azerbaijan and Armenia?
To answer this question, one has to consider the extent to which the
actions of President Medvedev were independent/or personal decisions
or a reflection of the collaborative work of the Medvedev-Putin tandem
and the stance of the Russian government. Since Vladimir Putin never
left the government, his return to the presidency will not
significantly alter Russia's position and involvement in the region
and in the peace process. It is important for the Russian government
to remain involved in the South Caucasus, including in the peace
processes with Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The EU has stated its intention to begin a role in resolving the
Karabakh conflict. What might be the result of an increased role for
Europe?
The EU has been more active in the conflict resolution processes in
the Caucasus in general for some time now and it would like to
continue this. It can put more pressure on the conflict parties to
consider a peaceful conflict resolution process. But external
pressures have limited effect, if there is no political will and
public support for peacebuilding in the countries. The EU can use its
leverage to encourage the countries' governments to change their
rhetoric about the conflict and build up of enemy images, and to start
implementing confidence building measures through soft power
mechanisms and unofficial citizens' diplomacy.
What might be the implications of the worsening situation over Iran
(even going so far as war in Iran) for the neighbouring South
Caucasus, which itself suffers from armed conflict?
There is potential for an overspill effect and destabilization of the
situation. The broader regional insecurity can have a significant
impact on the economic aspect, but the social one - population
displacement - should not be forgotten. No one will benefit from a
conflict in Iran and, hopefully, that dangerous scenario will be
avoided.
F.H.
News.Az
From: A. Papazian
Mon 30 April 2012 10:33 GMT | 11:33 Local Time
Ekaterina Romanova
News.Az interviews Ekaterina Romanova, assistant professor at the
School of International Service, American University.
Do you agree with the view that the August 2008 war with Georgia
undermined Russia's influence as a peacekeeper in the solution of
regional conflicts?
When it comes to assessing Russia's role as a mediator or peace broker
in the South Caucasus, it has never been about Russia being neutral.
The Russian government has always made it clear that it treats the
South Caucasus as its sphere of influence and will protect its
interests in the region. It was a question of the trust which the
countries had in Russia's authority. Georgia had lost that trust even
prior to the August war. Armenia and Azerbaijan still prefer to see a
role for Russia in the conflict resolution process (Armenia more so
than Azerbaijan, but there are other reasons than the 2008 war that
play into that).
How do you assess Russian peacemaking in the Karabakh conflict? Does
it seem effective?
The Nagorno-Karabakh peace process is too stalled to evaluate its effectiveness.
How will Russian mediation on Karabakh be influenced by Putin's
presidency, given that the present Russian leader was very active in
attempts to reconcile Azerbaijan and Armenia?
To answer this question, one has to consider the extent to which the
actions of President Medvedev were independent/or personal decisions
or a reflection of the collaborative work of the Medvedev-Putin tandem
and the stance of the Russian government. Since Vladimir Putin never
left the government, his return to the presidency will not
significantly alter Russia's position and involvement in the region
and in the peace process. It is important for the Russian government
to remain involved in the South Caucasus, including in the peace
processes with Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The EU has stated its intention to begin a role in resolving the
Karabakh conflict. What might be the result of an increased role for
Europe?
The EU has been more active in the conflict resolution processes in
the Caucasus in general for some time now and it would like to
continue this. It can put more pressure on the conflict parties to
consider a peaceful conflict resolution process. But external
pressures have limited effect, if there is no political will and
public support for peacebuilding in the countries. The EU can use its
leverage to encourage the countries' governments to change their
rhetoric about the conflict and build up of enemy images, and to start
implementing confidence building measures through soft power
mechanisms and unofficial citizens' diplomacy.
What might be the implications of the worsening situation over Iran
(even going so far as war in Iran) for the neighbouring South
Caucasus, which itself suffers from armed conflict?
There is potential for an overspill effect and destabilization of the
situation. The broader regional insecurity can have a significant
impact on the economic aspect, but the social one - population
displacement - should not be forgotten. No one will benefit from a
conflict in Iran and, hopefully, that dangerous scenario will be
avoided.
F.H.
News.Az
From: A. Papazian