Tweet
Vetsnik Kavkaza, Russia
April 6 2013
South Caucasus in nearest future
6 April 2013 - 8:12pm
VK talked to political scientist Andrey Areshev and doctor of history,
senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences Alla Yazkova.
Alla Yazkova
I think that, in general, results in Azerbaijan, most probably, to
some extent, are pre-set, because there is a succession of generations
and a continuity of government there, therefore, most likely the
situation will remain the same as now. However, it must be said that
there are opposition groups in Azerbaijan, which most probably will
become more active on the eve of the elections. Although at the
present time, indeed, when it comes to Russia and Azerbaijan,
relations are generally stable, there are a number of problems. They
are becoming more and more distinctive, particularly in the sphere of
energy. These problems, certainly, will be touched upon in the run-up
to the elections. The problematic issue of the Caspian Sea... I think
that in general, the question of the legal status of the Caspian Sea
has been on the agenda certainly not for one year and even not for a
decade now. But so far it has been very difficult to solve it
precisely due to certain reasons which are shared by the Caspian
states, including reticence between Russia, Azerbaijan and
Turkmenistan. In this regard, the position of Iran would certainly be
very significant if it were possible to somehow begin to address this
issue on a legal basis.
Andrey Areshev
In connection with the continuing presidential cycle in all the three
countries in the region, in the South Caucasus... We know that while
elections in Armenia have already taken place, they are still to take
place in Georgia and Azerbaijan. These elections are an important step
in the political processes in the South Caucasus, in a certain
reconfiguration of social forces. Of course, any political event
directly affects the economic situation in the region, because, as I
said, the elections are the focal point, which actualize the diverse
demands of different groups, allow different groups to advance their
claims. Against the background of a number of unresolved conflicts,
above all, of course, of Nagorno-Karabakh, the process and
preparations for elections in several countries have a direct impact
on the current situation regarding the unresolved conflicts. On the
one hand, this is politics. On the other hand, this is economics. The
issues of economic integration become more significant in relation to,
if not directly competing, then, at least, alternative integration
projects that are offered by external forces, are advanced by external
forces - forces which are involved in the events in the South Caucasus
and are somehow interested in their specific dynamics. On the one
hand, there is the Eurasian Union which is promoted by Russia, and, on
the other hand, in various forms, there is the Eastern Partnership and
the Association Agreement, which accordingly are promoted by the EU.
It should be said that both projects, in my opinion, are not fully
articulated, because Russia is experiencing some problems, and the EU,
as we know, is in crisis. It certainly impacts on their approach to
cooperation with partners in the South Caucasus.
In my view, there is a tendency for all these projects, the Eurasian
and European ones, to be viewed without any high expectations, to be
considered from a pragmatic perspective and the perspective of
specific benefits that they can offer to the countries' economies.
Thirdly, there is certainly the humanitarian, cultural, informational
aspect. Not everything comes down to economic pragmatism - it is
certainly OK, but economic pragmatism and economic projects should go
hand in hand with cultural and information-oriented communication,
with a dialogue between societies, which are of great importance. It
is particularly important, on the one hand, for Russian-Georgian
relations, because in the absence of diplomatic relations and given
the current situation of the inability to solve the directly opposite
views of the sides on the issue of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, a
social dialogue and a partial restoration of economic ties is a
channel which in the end will help normalize relations between the two
countries. It is a very difficult task to, for example, gather
deputies of the three or, according to some estimates, of the five
independent states, and if we take into consideration the existing de
facto Nagorno-Karabakh, then even more so. In addition, you need to
realize, in my opinion, that the political structure of each of the
three countries of the South Caucasus is not limited to the
parliaments and other bodies of the executive and legislative
branches. There are numerous very developed representative bodies of
the civil society, there are different strata in a number of countries
- social, religious and national. In my view, their participation in a
hypothetical All-Caucasian forum must be considered and secured, while
the goals and objectives that could underline the event must be
defined. The task is serious, but, in my opinion, with good will and
interests, as well as organizational support and, most importantly,
with a clear understanding of the goals and objectives, it might be
very successful. This is an idea which in the conditions of tensions
in the region could increase a certain level of constructive
cooperation and at least partially diminish the existing tension.
In my view, the idea that governments and societies of the region can
do it on their own, without the participation of external actors, is
certainly tempting, but currently hardly realizable, because based on
what has been happening in the South Caucasus for the past 20 years,
all the processes were directly linked to the strengthening of the
influence of foreign players, which manifested itself in many forms,
which were often not constructive. For example, we all remember the
situation related to what happened in Georgia in the early 2000s
before the second Chechen war. It has also had a significant external
impact. I think that here we need to talk about optimization and
harmonization of external participation, about reaching an agreement
between the non-regional powers, certainly, with the direct
involvement of the states and political actors of the South Caucasus,
about the rules of the game, the breaking of which could cause huge
problems due to the complexity, the composite character of the region,
due to the fact that it is directly linked to the North Caucasus.
There is a boundary, of course, but it is very arbitrary, and what is
happening in the South Caucasus directly affects the interests of
Russia. Russia cannot remain indifferent to what is happening in the
lands of its southern neighbors. Accordingly, the framework should be
strictly and clearly spelled out. As for the integration model, the
European Union may be active, but the EU is not always able to back up
the promises it distributes, concrete actions. Without the speeding of
the economic and industrial development of countries in the region, of
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan... And I will stress that in the
Soviet era, Armenia was to some extent a technological leader of the
South Caucasus, which in many ways, by the way, preconditioned the
survival of the republic in the difficult early and mid-1990s, during
the blockade and in the war with Azerbaijan to mutual exhaustion. I
think that nevertheless the South Caucasus was fully integrated into
the general Soviet economic system. It gives priority to European
integration, its greater effectiveness, of course, provided that the
Eurasian project becomes more nuanced, more comprehensive and of
greater interest to the societies of the South Caucasus.
The post-election processes in Armenia were associated with the
activation of the "silver medallist" of the elections, Raffi
Hovanisian. They also seem to be coming to an end. The present day
important task for Armenia is the formation of a new government and
objectives in the socio-economic sphere, because the situation in
Armenia is quite complicated, and in fact no one is concealing it.
Migration processes that are an indicator of the state of the society,
not only of the economy but also of social consciousness, are
continuing to develop. Therefore, it is very important what the
question of what the new government of Armenia will look like and how
the current power system, which many observers in the country
characterize as clan-oligarchic, will be reformed. There are some
positive changes, and I would like to hope that changes will become
even more apparent in the near future.
Mikhail Saakashvili and his UNM are unlikely to recover from their
defeat, largely because the legitimacy of Saakashvili's regime relied
on external and not internal factors. Accordingly, having lost
external support, which he would have definitely lost anyway with
time, it was clear, he automatically turned into a "lame duck." So I
do not think that the current Georgian president will take any drastic
steps to dissolve the parliament or dismiss the government, which he
will be able to do, as you know, in April, in April which has just
started. Moreover, Georgia also faces very serious problems. Its
problems are largely similar to the problems of Armenia, despite the
fact that Georgia has a much more favorable geopolitical position, is
the communication core of the region, has access to the sea and is
integrated into a great number of communication projects with
Azerbaijan and Turkey. By the way, this results not only in advantages
but also in disadvantages: the Georgian leadership is becoming a
hostage to a large extent. The new Georgian leadership inherited the
problems of its predecessors: having completely broken off relations
with Russia, including economic relations, they have become dependent
on their neighbors, stronger and more assertive in economic matters
and not only. As for Azerbaijan, in my opinion, there is little chance
of the presidential election, which are going to take place in
October, having an unusual scenario. This will certainly not happen.
But the current events, those public speeches, those corruption
scandals that regularly appear on the surface, suggest that certain
processes are taking place in Azerbaijan that might have an impact on
the neighboring countries as well, the neighbors of Azerbaijan. This
is important for Russia, because there is a distant... the most
problematic subject of the Russian Federation which has a long border
with Azerbaijan. We know that in the past there have been several
tendencies indicating a certain cooling in the relations and the
dialogue between Moscow and Baku. One of the indicators is the Gabala
NPP, but not only. I think that Russia will benefit if the events in
Azerbaijan, the election campaign, the electoral process itself and
all the possible post-electoral processes, certain protests which
cannot be overlooked, are dealt with in a peaceful, democratic and
constitutional manner.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/politics/38934.html
April 6 2013
South Caucasus in nearest future
6 April 2013 - 8:12pm
VK talked to political scientist Andrey Areshev and doctor of history,
senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences Alla Yazkova.
Alla Yazkova
I think that, in general, results in Azerbaijan, most probably, to
some extent, are pre-set, because there is a succession of generations
and a continuity of government there, therefore, most likely the
situation will remain the same as now. However, it must be said that
there are opposition groups in Azerbaijan, which most probably will
become more active on the eve of the elections. Although at the
present time, indeed, when it comes to Russia and Azerbaijan,
relations are generally stable, there are a number of problems. They
are becoming more and more distinctive, particularly in the sphere of
energy. These problems, certainly, will be touched upon in the run-up
to the elections. The problematic issue of the Caspian Sea... I think
that in general, the question of the legal status of the Caspian Sea
has been on the agenda certainly not for one year and even not for a
decade now. But so far it has been very difficult to solve it
precisely due to certain reasons which are shared by the Caspian
states, including reticence between Russia, Azerbaijan and
Turkmenistan. In this regard, the position of Iran would certainly be
very significant if it were possible to somehow begin to address this
issue on a legal basis.
Andrey Areshev
In connection with the continuing presidential cycle in all the three
countries in the region, in the South Caucasus... We know that while
elections in Armenia have already taken place, they are still to take
place in Georgia and Azerbaijan. These elections are an important step
in the political processes in the South Caucasus, in a certain
reconfiguration of social forces. Of course, any political event
directly affects the economic situation in the region, because, as I
said, the elections are the focal point, which actualize the diverse
demands of different groups, allow different groups to advance their
claims. Against the background of a number of unresolved conflicts,
above all, of course, of Nagorno-Karabakh, the process and
preparations for elections in several countries have a direct impact
on the current situation regarding the unresolved conflicts. On the
one hand, this is politics. On the other hand, this is economics. The
issues of economic integration become more significant in relation to,
if not directly competing, then, at least, alternative integration
projects that are offered by external forces, are advanced by external
forces - forces which are involved in the events in the South Caucasus
and are somehow interested in their specific dynamics. On the one
hand, there is the Eurasian Union which is promoted by Russia, and, on
the other hand, in various forms, there is the Eastern Partnership and
the Association Agreement, which accordingly are promoted by the EU.
It should be said that both projects, in my opinion, are not fully
articulated, because Russia is experiencing some problems, and the EU,
as we know, is in crisis. It certainly impacts on their approach to
cooperation with partners in the South Caucasus.
In my view, there is a tendency for all these projects, the Eurasian
and European ones, to be viewed without any high expectations, to be
considered from a pragmatic perspective and the perspective of
specific benefits that they can offer to the countries' economies.
Thirdly, there is certainly the humanitarian, cultural, informational
aspect. Not everything comes down to economic pragmatism - it is
certainly OK, but economic pragmatism and economic projects should go
hand in hand with cultural and information-oriented communication,
with a dialogue between societies, which are of great importance. It
is particularly important, on the one hand, for Russian-Georgian
relations, because in the absence of diplomatic relations and given
the current situation of the inability to solve the directly opposite
views of the sides on the issue of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, a
social dialogue and a partial restoration of economic ties is a
channel which in the end will help normalize relations between the two
countries. It is a very difficult task to, for example, gather
deputies of the three or, according to some estimates, of the five
independent states, and if we take into consideration the existing de
facto Nagorno-Karabakh, then even more so. In addition, you need to
realize, in my opinion, that the political structure of each of the
three countries of the South Caucasus is not limited to the
parliaments and other bodies of the executive and legislative
branches. There are numerous very developed representative bodies of
the civil society, there are different strata in a number of countries
- social, religious and national. In my view, their participation in a
hypothetical All-Caucasian forum must be considered and secured, while
the goals and objectives that could underline the event must be
defined. The task is serious, but, in my opinion, with good will and
interests, as well as organizational support and, most importantly,
with a clear understanding of the goals and objectives, it might be
very successful. This is an idea which in the conditions of tensions
in the region could increase a certain level of constructive
cooperation and at least partially diminish the existing tension.
In my view, the idea that governments and societies of the region can
do it on their own, without the participation of external actors, is
certainly tempting, but currently hardly realizable, because based on
what has been happening in the South Caucasus for the past 20 years,
all the processes were directly linked to the strengthening of the
influence of foreign players, which manifested itself in many forms,
which were often not constructive. For example, we all remember the
situation related to what happened in Georgia in the early 2000s
before the second Chechen war. It has also had a significant external
impact. I think that here we need to talk about optimization and
harmonization of external participation, about reaching an agreement
between the non-regional powers, certainly, with the direct
involvement of the states and political actors of the South Caucasus,
about the rules of the game, the breaking of which could cause huge
problems due to the complexity, the composite character of the region,
due to the fact that it is directly linked to the North Caucasus.
There is a boundary, of course, but it is very arbitrary, and what is
happening in the South Caucasus directly affects the interests of
Russia. Russia cannot remain indifferent to what is happening in the
lands of its southern neighbors. Accordingly, the framework should be
strictly and clearly spelled out. As for the integration model, the
European Union may be active, but the EU is not always able to back up
the promises it distributes, concrete actions. Without the speeding of
the economic and industrial development of countries in the region, of
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan... And I will stress that in the
Soviet era, Armenia was to some extent a technological leader of the
South Caucasus, which in many ways, by the way, preconditioned the
survival of the republic in the difficult early and mid-1990s, during
the blockade and in the war with Azerbaijan to mutual exhaustion. I
think that nevertheless the South Caucasus was fully integrated into
the general Soviet economic system. It gives priority to European
integration, its greater effectiveness, of course, provided that the
Eurasian project becomes more nuanced, more comprehensive and of
greater interest to the societies of the South Caucasus.
The post-election processes in Armenia were associated with the
activation of the "silver medallist" of the elections, Raffi
Hovanisian. They also seem to be coming to an end. The present day
important task for Armenia is the formation of a new government and
objectives in the socio-economic sphere, because the situation in
Armenia is quite complicated, and in fact no one is concealing it.
Migration processes that are an indicator of the state of the society,
not only of the economy but also of social consciousness, are
continuing to develop. Therefore, it is very important what the
question of what the new government of Armenia will look like and how
the current power system, which many observers in the country
characterize as clan-oligarchic, will be reformed. There are some
positive changes, and I would like to hope that changes will become
even more apparent in the near future.
Mikhail Saakashvili and his UNM are unlikely to recover from their
defeat, largely because the legitimacy of Saakashvili's regime relied
on external and not internal factors. Accordingly, having lost
external support, which he would have definitely lost anyway with
time, it was clear, he automatically turned into a "lame duck." So I
do not think that the current Georgian president will take any drastic
steps to dissolve the parliament or dismiss the government, which he
will be able to do, as you know, in April, in April which has just
started. Moreover, Georgia also faces very serious problems. Its
problems are largely similar to the problems of Armenia, despite the
fact that Georgia has a much more favorable geopolitical position, is
the communication core of the region, has access to the sea and is
integrated into a great number of communication projects with
Azerbaijan and Turkey. By the way, this results not only in advantages
but also in disadvantages: the Georgian leadership is becoming a
hostage to a large extent. The new Georgian leadership inherited the
problems of its predecessors: having completely broken off relations
with Russia, including economic relations, they have become dependent
on their neighbors, stronger and more assertive in economic matters
and not only. As for Azerbaijan, in my opinion, there is little chance
of the presidential election, which are going to take place in
October, having an unusual scenario. This will certainly not happen.
But the current events, those public speeches, those corruption
scandals that regularly appear on the surface, suggest that certain
processes are taking place in Azerbaijan that might have an impact on
the neighboring countries as well, the neighbors of Azerbaijan. This
is important for Russia, because there is a distant... the most
problematic subject of the Russian Federation which has a long border
with Azerbaijan. We know that in the past there have been several
tendencies indicating a certain cooling in the relations and the
dialogue between Moscow and Baku. One of the indicators is the Gabala
NPP, but not only. I think that Russia will benefit if the events in
Azerbaijan, the election campaign, the electoral process itself and
all the possible post-electoral processes, certain protests which
cannot be overlooked, are dealt with in a peaceful, democratic and
constitutional manner.
http://vestnikkavkaza.net/articles/politics/38934.html