Azerbaijan will Transmit an Impulse, that Moscow Strives to Settle the Issue by the Variant, which Pleases Aliyev: Konstantin Kalachev

Interview with Konstantin Kolachev, head of Political Expert Group (Russia).

Mr. Kalachev, it’s planned to sign an agreement on military-technical cooperation during the visit of Russia’s president Vladimir Putin to Baku. What new document is being touched upon? Hasn’t the April war changed anything for Russia’s authorities? Wouldn’t that agreement escalate the situation in the region?

During the meeting in Baku not only Russia-Azerbaijan relations will be covered. As it’s known, on August 8 leaders of Baku, Russia, Iran and Azerbaijan will touch upon the Caspian topic, and the main agenda includes issues of cooperation of Caspian region. It’s clear that Russia, Azerbaijan and Iran are interested in making use of Caspian resources. It’s also obvious, that the issue of five Caspian states—Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Russia, trilateral Iran-Azerbaijan-Russia and bilateral Russia-Azerbaijan issues are existent as well. Obviously Russia considers developing its relations with Azerbaijan proper, including militarily. Currently Russia’s strategic ally Armenia has more reasons to express its discontent.

I consider, this discontent is rather proper, however, this is real policy, and policy is the art of possibilities. Russia does what the Azerbaijani side allows. Besides the ‘wailing’ in Azerbaijani media outlets, there is no any threat from expansion of economic cooperation and deepening of the military ties.

And it’s rather logical, that Russia intends to sit simultaneously on two chairs, i.e. developing relations both with Armenia and Azerbaijan, and for which the situation is beneficial too. In fact, Azerbaijan hopes to return territories near Karabakh, and Armenia has no other choice, as it’ can’t find another strategic ally. Basically one point is important, no matter how Russia-Azerbaijan military cooperation will develop, Russia’s social opinion is in favor of Armenia.

Yes, but it doesn’t help, when the Russian weapon shoots on Armenia-Azerbaijan border.

I think cooperation with Azerbaijan will be rather moderate, i.e. it won’t surpass the borders, which may lead to the loss of an ally. Russia doesn’t have a ready formula of Karabakh conflict settlement, nobody obliges ready formulas, however, it’s clear, that in Karabakh issue Russia calls on to come to an agreement without external pressures, Russia has the possibility to build its relations both with Azerbaijan and Armenia. Conditionally said, it turned out, that Armenia put itself in this situation.

Centuries-old friendship, peace in the region are clear, however, the issue is, that the very Karabakh thematic makes Armenia vulnerable to the sense that whether you want or not Russia won’t definitely make a choice in favor of any side, but will attempt, as I mentioned, to sit on two chairs. This possibility will be as long as Armenia and Azerbaijan will ‘tremble on it.’ I repeatedly state that the problem is in your authorities. Russian authorities function within the framework of possibilities that Armenia’s authorities provide, including president Sargsyan.

After Putin’s visit to Baku Serzh Sargsyan will visit Moscow to meet Russia’s president. In your opinion which will be the key point of that meeting?

To build ties with Azerbaijan in the future as well Russia should show that it supports consensus in Karabakh conflict settlement, i.e. it supports bilaterally acceptable settlement. We and you perfectly realize that such a settlement lacks, however, movement is everything, and final goal is nothing, it’s important to show that the process continues. And generally, as a person living in Moscow, the best variant, which may occur after Sargsyan’s visit to Moscow, is opening of Armenian stores here, for instance, “Artsakh.”

Thus, development of trade is the best solution to improve relations. Of course, during the meeting Karabakh issue will be touched upon with politically correct expressions, moreover, at a war that Azerbaijan is conveyed an incitement that Moscow strives to settle the issue through a variant, which would please Aliyev. However, at the same time, the issue won’t be settled. Soluble topics are trade and economic relations, and it seems to me that trade turnover of the two may be drastically raised, Armenian commodities in Russia have demand, personally I’m always ready to buy Armenian wine, Artsakhi cheese and etc.

Some Armenian social figures consider that the process of reaching from Russian orbit to Armenia has been initiated, evidence to which are recent developments in Yerevan, regarding “Sasna Tsrer” group.

These are endless talks, and such figures are beneficial for Sargsyan, as he can say Moscow that we have people, supporting the West, Georgia’s example. However, everybody understands that unsettled issues deprive Armenia of the choice between Russia and Europe. It’s clear that generations are changing, Russian influence may decrease, but as long as Russia is the guarantor of the status-quo, Armenia can’t escape anywhere.

And regarding the talks on influence of the USA our pro-Azerbaijani political scientists will explain better, according to them the biggest U.S. Embassy in the region is in Armenia, and Americans spread wide activity there and etc., and Russia should protect Azerbaijan. Thus, American factor is used as a proof for these or those arguments. The Armenian side uses that factor to put forward its claims, i.e. basically, this is a great game.

In this regard a comparison is made with Turkey, where the reverse process has been initiated.

At first Turkey debated, then got along with Russia, however, it’s not clear what it has gained throughout recent years. I consider a serious issue is existent, Armenia builds its relations with Russia’s political elite less actively and successively, than Azerbaijan. In your country names of those experts living on Baku’s money are perfectly known. The point is that the role of the offended may be always played, but it’s a deadlock, it’s necessary to develop relations on the level of both democratic diplomacy and elites. It should be perceived that Aliyev seems much more serious, than Sargsyan, and is more respected by Putin. However, this is my personal standpoint.

“Sasna Tsrer” group called Armenia’s citizens to fight against decolonization from Russia. Some analysts observe Russian tracks in these developments. What do you think was this rebellion beneficial for Russia?

What decolonization may be touched upon? I think, it’s a myth, which has no connection with the reality, however, it’s beneficial for these or those political powers. Sorry for my sincerity, but people in Baku speak Russian much better, than in Armenia. What decolonization may be touched upon—cultural, economic? Armenian people have both positive and negative peculiarities, which prevent their development, in particular, in any place, in anything seeking for problems, but not in their own person. I’d say the whole problem is in the choice of civilization, i.e. maybe Armenia needs to think less about Russia and more focus on itself. The best example is Georgia. Today half of Moscow is in Tbilisi, and tickets to Georgia are more expensive, than to the Maldives.

Russia-Georgia relations are again built, Georgians have forgotten about big policy, and they do what they are good at—treating, tourism, cultural ties, cuisine and etc. As soon as Armenia starts to do politics less and more work on its attractiveness, I think many issues will disappear for themselves. Let me repeat once again, that Russia does with Armenia what the latter allows.

By Gayane Khachatryan