Matthew Bryza on NKR Negotiations, Statements by Zakaharova and Tense Developments in Yerevan

Interview with Matthew Bryza, former US Ambassador to Azerbaijan, Former US Assistant Secretary of State for the South Caucasus, former OSCE MG U.S. Co-chair, Director of the International Center for Defence studies in Tallinn, Estonia.

Mr. Bryza, U.S. Ambassador to Armenia Richard Mills recently informed that the next presidential meeting on NK conflict peaceful settlement is under discussion, which will be held in August under the umbrella of Russian president Vladimir Putin. In case, when after the presidential meeting in St. Petersburg France appeared with a proposal to initiate likewise meeting. Why again in Russia and what should be anticipated from the results of the forthcoming meeting?

I can only positively assess it. If two Co-Chairs of the Minsk Group intend to host a meeting in their countries, it’s perfect. I previously mentioned, that a bigger progress was recorded, rather than many of us were expecting as a result of the meeting in St. Petersburg, held under the umbrella of Vladimir Putin. A new process seems to be initiated, which will direct all these to more content negotiations, which is only positive. The most important circumstance is that other Co-Chairs had their part in St. Petersburg discussions. I hope that president Putin will continue his efforts with the same spirit. If president Hollande also intends to host a meeting, it’ll be very good, president Obama also had such meetings in Washington D.C. in April.

There are concerns in Armenia, that Russia will maintain its leading role of a mediator in the negotiations, which may have unpredictable implications. Do you have such concern as well?

I always expressed my concern over that issue. But this time I should be frank and say that I insisted that Russia’s president doesn’t want total settlement of the conflict, however, I should judge from the results of St. Petersburg meeting, and during that meeting progress was recorded. If it continues with that spirit, then it’s positive.

After the meeting in St .Petersburg information was being circulated in Armenia that the Armenian side started to discuss the issue of the withdrawal of territories, which raised a serious concern among the society. In your opinion, were such content negotiations recorded during the meeting in St. Petersburg?

I don’t know what they have discussed. But I saw the statements from the Azerbaijani side, that maybe the issue of conceding territories instead of elimination of trade and transport restrictions for Armenia. I don’t know whether it’s true or not, as I wasn’t present there. However, we can’t exclude that it’s possible. The essential, conceptual issue is which settlement variant should be available—step by step or systemic, when all issues are settled simultaneously. Seemingly, some people consider step by step, i.e. phase-to-phase variant is more proper, but I know that this approach is not acceptable for the Armenian side. And at this phase the Co-Chair and the president should clarify which agenda is appropriate. Maybe this very issue will be discussed in August. I don’t know, I hope it would be so.

In your opinion, which is the most important issue for the settlement of NK conflict and conflict settlement process? The Armenian side claimed on presidential level that guarantees are important for our side, that there won’t be provocations on the contact line and under these conditions the Armenian side may move forward in negotiations.

This is traditional position of the Armenian side. I think it’s the formula to go ahead, if Armenia is safe, then negotiations will be developed. I suppose in Vienna and in St. Petersburg the presidents discussed how it’ll be possible to provide and Armenia will launch negotiations around political settlement.

RF MFA official representative Maria Zakharova stated that Turkey may provide a positive assistance to NK conflict settlement process, if it wishes. How do you imagine Turkey’s support? What does this statement mean?

I consider this confusing. Obviously, Armenia won’t feel comfortable, if Turkey assumes the role of a mediator out of obvious reasons. Zakahrova knows it. I think, that the statement was made for another reason. Russia intends to alienate Turkey from NATO to approach it. Zakharova wants to keep the direction of all Russian media flow, attempting to prove that Russia is Turkey’s real partner, and not the USA. Soon Russia’s president Putin will pay a visit to Turkey and will attempt to approach Turkey as much as possible.

How will the developments in Yerevan, to which you partially followed, be reflected on NK conflict peaceful settlement negotiations?

It’s important for me to understand who they oppose, and to what they oppose. There are talks on being against Serzh Sargsyan’s intentions on compromises. I don’t know the real reasons. If they oppose to the intentions of conceding the territories, answer to your question will be obvious. If they have other concerns and attempt to solve other issues,  this is not in favor of regional stability. This, however, was a negative development.

By Araks Martirosyan