“Obama-Kerry Regime isn’t Able to Obstacle Russia in Karabakh”
Interview with Andrei Piontkovsky, Russian oppositional politician, publicist.
Mr. Piontkovsky after the four-day war unleashed in Nagorno-Karabakh 1.5 month ago, the first noteworthy event was Sargsyan-Aliyev meeting in Vienna organized due to the efforts of OSCE MG Co-chairs. After the April outbreak Russian media outlets reported on the meeting to be organized by Vladimir Putin, RF president, which was failed after Lavrov’s visit to Yerevan, however, the presidents met in Vienna and agreed on a range of issues. There are opinions, that Russia withdrew its leading position to the West, and the process was returned to international platform. On account of recent developments and the dynamics of West-Russia relations, in your opinion, what’s going on around Karabakh?
If likewise opinions are really heard in Armenia, that Russia is yielding it positions, in fact, it’s an attempt to turn the desired into a reality, moreover, an attempt to increase the role of American and French diplomacies. However, we observe, that every day Putin’s Russia in Syria publicly “wipes its feet” on the USA, doing what it wants: bombs civilians, bombs rebels, who cooperate with the West, moreover, each Kerry-Lavrov meeting is a humiliating interrogation, a spate of requests to exert pressure over Assad, which Moscow is not going to do. This is the present-day modus of relations of weak and defenseless Obama-Kerry office and the Kremlin’s Moscow.
In my conviction if Moscow “wipes its feet” in Syria, moreover, it’ll ignore and oblige the USA what it wants in the Caucasus, which it considers its zone of influence. Aliyev-Sargsyan meeting didn’t have a significant outcome, Lavrov is a military criminal, bearing responsibility for aggression against Ukraine, who was proudly sitting there as a leading participant of the conflict. Conflict settlement has extended for 25 years, Baku and Yerevan should have understood long ago that Moscow pursues one goal—prolonging of this conflict, so that it might have influence leverages towards both Yerevan and Baku, blocking Western structures to approach.
We observed such a policy towards Armenia, when the latter’s hands “have been twisted”. Thus, I can say for sure, that Moscow will go on with that policy, and the April four-day war is also beneficial to Moscow, as the latter makes use of that conflict and more constructively moves forward the issue of deploying its own peacekeeping mission in Karabakh. All this is implemented for another reason as well: for the purpose of implementing more control over Georgia, as elections are to be held, which may have negative results for Moscow, thus, any tension in Karabakh will help Moscow to put forward the issue of its strategic presence. Moscow has pursued this purposes for 25 years, and will go on with its policy for more 25 years.
What role may the West have here, i.e. doesn’t the USA possess influence leverages towards Armenia and Azerbaijan?
Current U.S. office isn’t able to obstacle Russia’s actions in Karabakh. The USA doesn’t possess tools for leverage against Russia, and when Kerry and Lavrov meet, Lavrov gets what he needs, and he appears in that talk as a “leading male.” Look what’s going on in Syria, it’s a shame for American diplomacy. They even joke, if Lavrov and Kerry stay in one room together for four hours, during those negotiations Alaska will be returned to Russia. What may we say of Karabakh in this situation?
On account of factors mentioned by you, Russia’s present-day policy and weakness of the West, what exit do you observe for Armenia and Azerbaijan for the settlement of this conflict?
It’s seems improper to discuss that issue. There were situations, when Armenia and Azerbaijan were close to the settlement. I thoroughly introduced Russia’s purpose, thus, I consider that the conflicting countries may settle the conflict only bilaterally. The sides simply are far from that. There was a time, when they were close to that, I mean Ter-Petrosyan and Ilham Aliyev. Do you remember what outcome did that process have?—A revolution in Yerevan and dramatic developments in Azerbaijan. After that I don’t recall Baku and Yerevan approach to the settlement.
Currently “Lavrov’s plan” is being much touched upon. It hasn’t been publicly introduced anywhere, however, some information flow has been recorded. We observe that it refers to the fact, that lands out of the territory of Karabakh will be returned to Azerbaijan, which Armenia keeps as a defense guarantee for Karabakh, and to somewhat calm down Armenia and Karabakh, Moscow will raise the issue of deploying a peacekeeping mission. Armenia is offered to withdraw form its own guarantees, and pass them on to Russia.
How should Armenia oppose to those plans?
Giving lessons to Armenia’s authorities isn’t in my abilities. Armenia’s authorities and citizens should make decisions. However, I consider, there is perception in Armenia, that Armenia-Russia strategic relations are on the right way. The policy led by Armenia’s authorities have led Armenia to a deadlock, in complete dependency from Moscow. And Azerbaijan, I’d say, has more freedom, than Armenia.
By Araks Martirosyan
