Armenia isn’t Going to Concede Even a Few Heights: G.Trofimchuk
Interview with Grigory Trofimchuk, foreign affairs, security and defense analyst.
Mr. Trofimchuk, after statements appeared in name of the Armenian Diaspora about U.S. agents in Armenia, urging the latter’s authorities to undertake steps against those persons, Stepan Grigoryan, head of the Centre for Globalization and Regional Cooperation, was barred to enter Russia until 2030. Grigoryan explains this by political instigations, as he actively cooperates with Western organizations. Do you observe new policy by Russia in all these? There are also opinions that Grigoryan’s case may have connection with that of Mironov. What do you think?
Grigoryan also reminded that there is a principle of symmetric reply in diplomacy. In this case, that principle was applied towards him, as a non-official reply to the arrest of Russian citizen Mironov in Yerevan’s airport. This is more than simple, in particular, when those two actions basically took place one after another. Russia, naturally, is Armenia’s strategic ally, however, the latter showed for the future, that likewise scenarios, by the way—political and not economic or humanitarian, and it’s clear for everyone: such things are unacceptable even among friends.
However, under this ‘symmetry,’ in any case, answer to the question wasn’t clear—was Mironov’s arrest a U.S. request, as the Department of State didn’t comment on it? If there were such a liaison, then against the background of deportation a more insignificant reply would be observed. As for “U.S. agents in Yerevan,” then this is a separate topic, which slowly, but constantly raises amid Russia and Armenia. Russia and Russians are predisposed as if Armenia is becoming anti-Russian. This is a different, more complicated issue. However, regarding this or that citizen as a pro-American figure in Armenia (like Grigoryan) would be strange, as we all know, fortunately or unfortunately, we no longer live in the Soviet Union, where issues were perceived differently.
Stepan Grigoryan said this is a message not only to himself, but to Armenia’s authorities, the public, the civil society, from Russia, moreover, there are opinions, that Russia decided to fight against European ambitions in Yerevan. Do you agree?
I think this case really has ‘pedagogic’ importance as a message for the future, as Mironov’s private case is a part of a main issue, which, as I mentioned, is in instigation of anti-Russian moods in Armenia. It’s enough to study Russia’s information field to be clear that its concerns in Armenia with likewise indications are also conditioned by the activity of various NGOs. I consider, If Russia intends to seriously eliminate tendencies linked to Armenia’s possible ‘Westernization,’ then it should act differently: firstly, growth in the quality of life of countries’ population should be provided. I should directly say that all banal activities will even more irritate moods of Armenia’s public, including through people like Stepan Grigoryan, who obtains personal motive for the so-called selfless struggle.
What’s your assessment to the military-political situation around NK conflict on account of recent regional developments: Russia-Turkey rapprochement, then development of Russia-Iran-Azerbaijan-Turkey axis? How will this be reflected on NK conflict peaceful settlement process?
Revival of Russia-Turkey dialogue, as well as active processes, that very North-South project influence on the atmosphere existent around NK conflict settlement process. However, I can’t say that this economic activeness will calm Armenia down, as economy never diverted anyone from the main—politics and geopolitics. Especially that NK conflict, as I consider, is neither regional, nor even political, but already a direct geopolitical conflict. Turkey will strive to participate in NK conflict settlement process, as it realizes that today its positions and those of its partner are much stronger, than even a year ago.
In fact, Azerbaijan considers, that it won in the April war, and Turkey considers that it strengthened as a result of the attempted coup on July 15, i.e. among Armenia’s main opposition new energy has emerged for further activities. Iran’s position is interesting and finally unclear against this background, which is ready to develop whole complex of bilateral relations with Armenia.
It turns out that Iran is becoming a new, extra balancing power, Armenia’s security guarantor in this historical period. With Russia, which, it should be noted, didn’t renounce its partner and allied responsibilities towards Yerevan. As for Karabakh, as you may see, activeness of negotiations is gradually declining, April developments remain in the shadow of new, ongoing issues. All these speak of the fact, that at any moment Baku will be ready to raise an issue what has concretely been agreed during intensive negotiations, lasting for a few months. Who does Karabah belong to as a result? If Turkey shows active approach towards NK conflict settlement as a participant and a mediator, I don’t exclude,that NKR will return to the negotiation framework for keeping balance.
OSCE MG Co-Chairs will hold consultations in Moscow today. Talks, that Russia had a settlement program, didn’t fade in Armenia, which supposes concession of territories, which, according to the talks, has been denied. In your opinion, what’s currently going on in negotiations and what kind of a development will prevent another war in Karabakh? What decision should the parties to the conflict make?
Russia didn’t have any plan of conceding territories. Moreover, there couldn’t be any pressure against Yerevan. If such pressure really existed, then we’d edify real protests in the streets of Armenian cities, and not separate weak actions by the opposition. The so-called ‘Russian plan’ was a special, targeted filling for the Armenian society to sharpen moods towards Russia. OSCE MG Co-Chairs may have many meetings to continue prolonging negotiation of ‘post-April’ process, some people still believe in productivity of those negotiations.
By the way, such a state of affairs is beneficial for Armenia. Thus, Yerevan could seek, find additional negotiation formats, which, on account of their being new could have prolonged the pause. From Azerbaijani perspective the war could have been prevented by launching the process of returning territories only—package or phase-to-phase. From Armenia’s perspective it’s difficult to imagine a situation, which can prevent such war, as Armenia isn’t going to concede even a height: Turkey’s engagement with negotiations will prolong the process, without settling the main issue of Karabakh and its adjacent provinces, and it’ll be extension of time.
Pursuant political theory, the only realistic variant to prevent this war is the trusted union of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, it’s impossible under liberal-trade systems, functioning in the three countries for their own exhaustion. However, this is another topic. I don’t know why everybody has forgotten what was said and proposed by the Russian president on compromise between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Here different interesting variants may exist, however, even the word ‘compromise’ has been removed from negotiations.
By Araks Martirosyan
