Tweet
RUSSIA'S WESTERN "PARTNERS" MAY HANG A NEW IRON CURTAIN OVER POST-SOVIET STATES
ArmInfo's interview with Alexander Skakov, Working Group Coordinator
at the Research Center for Central Asia (Caucasus and Volga-Urals
Region, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Science)
by David Stepanyan
Tuesday, December 16, 13:59
The Russia-West confrontation seems to grow with every coming day. Do
you anticipate any improvements in 2015 given the emerging trends in
the EU countries?
One can and should hope for positive breakthroughs in the so far
growing confrontation of the West and Russia in 2015. Neither Russia
nor the EU gains from that confrontation, as both the parties are
experiencing financial- economic and political losses.
I anticipate no drastic changes of the situation so far. The point is
that the U.S. is gaining from the Russia-EU discrepancies that are
weakening both the parties. The United States has all the levers of
influence on the European Union. Not only these are the countries of
the former Eastern Europe, but also some influential forces, power
elites, in the key EU countries. It is the U.S. with its satellites
like Carl Bildt and Donald Tusk that has created the idea of Eastern
Partnership and Associate membership that is fundamentally unsound.
They are well aware that none of those associate member-countries will
ever become a full member of the EU. The United States has achieved
its major goal i.e. it has spoiled the relations of Russia and the EU.
The U.S. has finally broken Moldova and Ukraine from Russia, though
it has pulled Ukraine to pieces, but it was the cost of that all.
Consequently, the U.S. will do its best not to mend the rift between
Russia and the EU. European Union in alliance with Russia is too
serious a challenge to the U.S. Washington will never allow a second
China to emerge.
What are the potential consequences of this confrontation for the
post-Soviet area?
The global West-Russia confrontation may result in even deeper
borders between spheres of interest, blocs and worlds. Borders are
gradually turning into frontlines. One example is Ukraine's plan to
build a 'wall' on its border with Russia or the de facto closure
of the border between Georgia, from one side, and South Ossetia
and Abkhazia from the other. And this tendency will continue. The
post-Soviet area tends will be structured according to the principle
"who is not with us is against us" - quite a dangerous tendency that
may lead to new - at best local - wars. The current activities of
Russia's western "partners" may result in a new iron curtain and
growing authoritarianism in "outlaw" states. On the other hand,
there will be growing impunity in the countries that are currently
acting as Brussels' and Washington's satellites as they will start
behaving according to the principle once formulated by Roosevelt:
"Somoza may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's our son-of-a-bitch."
The relations of Russia and Turkey have attained a new quality
recently, which, however, cannot be called economic amid the
Russia-West confrontation. What are the prospects of these relations
for the parties? What consequences may it have for Armenia and
Azerbaijan?
Turkey is famous for its ability to maneuver between centers of force,
to get what it wants and to give little in exchange. Just remember
how the Turks made use of the illusions cherished by Lenin and the
Bolsheviks. Now too they may get from the Russians much more than
the Russians may get from them. Turkey's key advantage today is that
it will be able to maneuver between Russia and the West and to get
preferences from both. So, it is not a surprise that the old idea of
Turkey's EU membership has suddenly come back to life. Armenia is not
among Turkey's priorities. Of course, you better have good relations
with neighbors but you may well have no relations at all. The key
reason Turkey prefers Azerbaijan is not so much the Turkic sentiments
as the fact that the Azeris have energy resources. And it was this
very factor that once helped them to torpedo the Turkish-Armenian
rapprochement. Turkey will continue developing special relations,
strengthening ties with Georgia and ignoring Armenia, and this
situation will not change even if Turkish- Russian relations are
improved.
It is widely rumored that Moscow hinted Ilham Aliyev that Western
security services are preparing a state coup in Azerbaijan. Do you
think it's true? Why are they so uncomfortable with Aliyev? Does
it explain the latest repression - unprecedented even for Aliyev's
regime - against local journalists and human rights defenders?
Color revolutions are the scariest phantoms for most of the post-Soviet
countries, and the fight against them has become their favorite thing
to do. This is true not only for Azerbaijan where nothing actually
threatens Aliyev's power. The latest large-scale repressions were
organized for warning 'so that it doesn't become a habit'. There
was no threat of a state coup, particularly, 'a color revolution,'
in Azerbaijan in the given case. Meanwhile, an imaginary threat can
scare people for a long time and quite successfully. I think, Aliyev
is young enough and Azerbaijan is successful enough not to yield to
such games. Evidently, the best way to fight the threat of 'color
revolutions' is the successful fight against overall corruption. It is
corruption rather than 'foreign agents' that creates conditions for
such revolutions. I believe that the West is not keen to overthrow
Aliyev so far, even if it were possible. I don't understand why they
are so uncomfortable with him, given that he is quite easy to deal
with. Nevertheless, it should be admitted that psychosis is growing
in Azerbaijan. Not only I mean the Armenophobia, but also the fear of
foreigners, freedom in all its displays, including the predominance
of the security services. What are you talking about if they do not
allow to Azerbaijan the Russian scientists invited to their country
just because of the Armenian stamps in their passports, leaving aside
the Nagorny Karabakh stamps.
The year 2014 saw unprecedented upsurge of tension on the border
Armenian and Karabakh border with Azerbaijan. The peace process is
being protracted as never before. Was the recently downed Armenian
helicopter part of that all? What are your forecasts for the coming
year 2015?
The growing tensions on the contact line may sooner or later grow
into a war, at least, because the conflicting parties may lose
control of the situation at one point. But for the time being this
is just a reconnaissance. The parties just want to see what they can
do and how the enemy will react to what they do. Their principle is
'you see we can shoot down helicopters and go unpunished.' But one
more reason why the tensions are growing is that the OSCE Minsk Group
is facing a crisis due to no accord among its members. On the other
hand, Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union will give
it additional military-political guarantees and this may become a
restrictive factor for Azerbaijan, who is ruled by quite a pragmatic
regime. In 2015 the situation in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone
will not change unless any external disasters occur. For the time
being I see no prerequisites for this but as you have seen this year
things in the world can change very quickly.
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=8C252E70-8512-11E4-A5760EB7C0D21663
ArmInfo's interview with Alexander Skakov, Working Group Coordinator
at the Research Center for Central Asia (Caucasus and Volga-Urals
Region, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Science)
by David Stepanyan
Tuesday, December 16, 13:59
The Russia-West confrontation seems to grow with every coming day. Do
you anticipate any improvements in 2015 given the emerging trends in
the EU countries?
One can and should hope for positive breakthroughs in the so far
growing confrontation of the West and Russia in 2015. Neither Russia
nor the EU gains from that confrontation, as both the parties are
experiencing financial- economic and political losses.
I anticipate no drastic changes of the situation so far. The point is
that the U.S. is gaining from the Russia-EU discrepancies that are
weakening both the parties. The United States has all the levers of
influence on the European Union. Not only these are the countries of
the former Eastern Europe, but also some influential forces, power
elites, in the key EU countries. It is the U.S. with its satellites
like Carl Bildt and Donald Tusk that has created the idea of Eastern
Partnership and Associate membership that is fundamentally unsound.
They are well aware that none of those associate member-countries will
ever become a full member of the EU. The United States has achieved
its major goal i.e. it has spoiled the relations of Russia and the EU.
The U.S. has finally broken Moldova and Ukraine from Russia, though
it has pulled Ukraine to pieces, but it was the cost of that all.
Consequently, the U.S. will do its best not to mend the rift between
Russia and the EU. European Union in alliance with Russia is too
serious a challenge to the U.S. Washington will never allow a second
China to emerge.
What are the potential consequences of this confrontation for the
post-Soviet area?
The global West-Russia confrontation may result in even deeper
borders between spheres of interest, blocs and worlds. Borders are
gradually turning into frontlines. One example is Ukraine's plan to
build a 'wall' on its border with Russia or the de facto closure
of the border between Georgia, from one side, and South Ossetia
and Abkhazia from the other. And this tendency will continue. The
post-Soviet area tends will be structured according to the principle
"who is not with us is against us" - quite a dangerous tendency that
may lead to new - at best local - wars. The current activities of
Russia's western "partners" may result in a new iron curtain and
growing authoritarianism in "outlaw" states. On the other hand,
there will be growing impunity in the countries that are currently
acting as Brussels' and Washington's satellites as they will start
behaving according to the principle once formulated by Roosevelt:
"Somoza may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's our son-of-a-bitch."
The relations of Russia and Turkey have attained a new quality
recently, which, however, cannot be called economic amid the
Russia-West confrontation. What are the prospects of these relations
for the parties? What consequences may it have for Armenia and
Azerbaijan?
Turkey is famous for its ability to maneuver between centers of force,
to get what it wants and to give little in exchange. Just remember
how the Turks made use of the illusions cherished by Lenin and the
Bolsheviks. Now too they may get from the Russians much more than
the Russians may get from them. Turkey's key advantage today is that
it will be able to maneuver between Russia and the West and to get
preferences from both. So, it is not a surprise that the old idea of
Turkey's EU membership has suddenly come back to life. Armenia is not
among Turkey's priorities. Of course, you better have good relations
with neighbors but you may well have no relations at all. The key
reason Turkey prefers Azerbaijan is not so much the Turkic sentiments
as the fact that the Azeris have energy resources. And it was this
very factor that once helped them to torpedo the Turkish-Armenian
rapprochement. Turkey will continue developing special relations,
strengthening ties with Georgia and ignoring Armenia, and this
situation will not change even if Turkish- Russian relations are
improved.
It is widely rumored that Moscow hinted Ilham Aliyev that Western
security services are preparing a state coup in Azerbaijan. Do you
think it's true? Why are they so uncomfortable with Aliyev? Does
it explain the latest repression - unprecedented even for Aliyev's
regime - against local journalists and human rights defenders?
Color revolutions are the scariest phantoms for most of the post-Soviet
countries, and the fight against them has become their favorite thing
to do. This is true not only for Azerbaijan where nothing actually
threatens Aliyev's power. The latest large-scale repressions were
organized for warning 'so that it doesn't become a habit'. There
was no threat of a state coup, particularly, 'a color revolution,'
in Azerbaijan in the given case. Meanwhile, an imaginary threat can
scare people for a long time and quite successfully. I think, Aliyev
is young enough and Azerbaijan is successful enough not to yield to
such games. Evidently, the best way to fight the threat of 'color
revolutions' is the successful fight against overall corruption. It is
corruption rather than 'foreign agents' that creates conditions for
such revolutions. I believe that the West is not keen to overthrow
Aliyev so far, even if it were possible. I don't understand why they
are so uncomfortable with him, given that he is quite easy to deal
with. Nevertheless, it should be admitted that psychosis is growing
in Azerbaijan. Not only I mean the Armenophobia, but also the fear of
foreigners, freedom in all its displays, including the predominance
of the security services. What are you talking about if they do not
allow to Azerbaijan the Russian scientists invited to their country
just because of the Armenian stamps in their passports, leaving aside
the Nagorny Karabakh stamps.
The year 2014 saw unprecedented upsurge of tension on the border
Armenian and Karabakh border with Azerbaijan. The peace process is
being protracted as never before. Was the recently downed Armenian
helicopter part of that all? What are your forecasts for the coming
year 2015?
The growing tensions on the contact line may sooner or later grow
into a war, at least, because the conflicting parties may lose
control of the situation at one point. But for the time being this
is just a reconnaissance. The parties just want to see what they can
do and how the enemy will react to what they do. Their principle is
'you see we can shoot down helicopters and go unpunished.' But one
more reason why the tensions are growing is that the OSCE Minsk Group
is facing a crisis due to no accord among its members. On the other
hand, Armenia's accession to the Eurasian Economic Union will give
it additional military-political guarantees and this may become a
restrictive factor for Azerbaijan, who is ruled by quite a pragmatic
regime. In 2015 the situation in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone
will not change unless any external disasters occur. For the time
being I see no prerequisites for this but as you have seen this year
things in the world can change very quickly.
http://www.arminfo.am/index.cfm?objectid=8C252E70-8512-11E4-A5760EB7C0D21663