A SIGNAL FOR YEREVAN

A well-known TV personality, the CEO of the international news agency Russia Today, Dmitry Kiselev, has recently interviewed the Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev followed by an interview with the Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan. Since these interviews were taken on the eve of the 25^th anniversary of independence of both countries, both leaders touched on a wide range of issues of international and regional geopolitics, relations with Russia, problems and prospects of social and economic development, and more. For obvious reasons, the settlement of Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was paid special attention to.

In his interview, President Ilham Aliyev noted that historically and legally Nagorno-Karabakh has always been an integral part of Azerbaijan. He pointed out that the four UN Security Council resolutions demanding the immediate, unconditional and complete withdrawal of Armenian occupying forces are the legal basis for a peaceful settlement. Unfortunately, these resolutions, as well as similar appeals from the European Parliament, PACE, OIC, and Non-aligned Movement have not been executed for more than 20 years. The main reason is the reluctance of Armenia. Although the co-chair countries of the Minsk Group, Russia, the US, and France, have repeatedly said through their presidents that the status quo was unacceptable and had to be changed. For President Ilham Aliyev, the solution of the conflict is through ensuring security of the people of Nagorno Karabakh people, their livelihoods, self-government, the implementation of various investment projects by Azerbaijan and peaceful interaction between the two nations on a single condition, which is the liberation of territories outside the borders of the former Nagorno-Karabakh. "There can be no compromise on the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, but we can achieve a compromise on local governance in Karabakh. If we agree, Nagorno Karabakh can be an autonomous republic in the future".

Thus, President Ilham Aliyev outlined not only the principal position in resolving the conflict, but for the first time unveiled the readiness of Azerbaijan to make a compromise regarding the autonomous status of Nagorno Karabakh, which it has been for 70 years of the Soviet period. The Azerbaijani leader has thrown the ball on the Armenian side, which, contrary to the logic of the UN Security Council resolutions and the well-known Madrid principles proposed by the OSCE Minsk group as a basis for negotiations on a peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict, constantly insisted on the issue of Nagorno Karabakh’s status, while on terms favourable to Armenians on.

Unfortunately, an interview with the Armenian President, Serzh Sargsyan, leaves little hope for a positive breakthrough in the peace process. He pronounced many words that were supposed to show him as a moderate, responsible leader, but in fact, he used cunning, cheated facts, falsely dissected international law and the history of the negotiation process, as usual.

Sargsyan surprised the international community saying that Armenia, which has occupied Nagorno Karabakh and seven other regions of Azerbaijan for more than twenty years, "recognized" the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. This was said by a person, who directly supervised the destruction and massive cleansing of Azerbaijanis, and then demonstratively held large-scale military exercises in the occupied territories. Sargsyan claims without any evidence that the first priority of the mediators is the status of Nagorno-Karabakh that must be determined through "free will of Karabakh population", whereas in all the documents the issue number one is specified as the return of the occupied areas outside of Nagorno Karabakh to Azerbaijan.

Answering to a direct question of Dmitry Kiselev about the readiness of Armenia to continue negotiations on the basis of the so-called "Kazan document" rejected in the summer of 2011, Sargsyan began ranting about the lack of trust between parties trying to blame Azerbaijan for the failure of negotiations. He only expressed that there was no alternative to a political settlement and the willingness to negotiate on the basis of three general principles set out by the OSCE Minsk Group back at the early phase of the mediation: non-use of force or threat of force; territorial integrity of states; the equality of peoples and their right to self-determination. In other words, Sargsyan wants to discard previously agreed six key elements of the Madrid principles, which were approved by the presidents of the United States, France and Russia at the L'Aquila meeting in 2009, and resume the negotiation process from scratch. The Armenians are ready to negotiate as long as they want, just to delay the withdrawal of its troops from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

In his interview, Serzh Sargsyan persistently promoted proposals aimed precisely at this. He spend too much time talking about incident investigation mechanism at the line of contact between the parties and agreed to the need for a "hotline" with the Azerbaijani President, which would help to respond quickly in case of violation of the ceasefire. According to Sargsyan, the ministers of defense of both countries had such relations in the past, and it turned to be useful. However, he deliberately kept silent that at that time the talks were more intense and substantive, while at present the Armenian side has been imitating negotiations.

The statements and the behavior of President Serzh Sargsyan show that after the defeat in April, he received Russian "Iskander" missiles and other weapons, as well as military guarantees from Moscow, and now seems in good spirits to continue the infamous "status quo". But we take the words of a former US representative to the OSCE Minsk group, Matthew Bryza, seriously, the Armenians were inclined to accept a proposal by the Russian President Vladimir Putin, who traveled to Yerevan with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. It was about the release of the two areas (most likely, these were Fizuli and Jabrail regions, which Armenians are not able to control considerably after the loss of the strategic Lele Tepe peak) in exchange for the strengthening of security measures and the beginning of intensive negotiations to resolve the conflict.

The recent instruction of President Putin to the government and the Russian Foreign Ministry in particular on holding talks to set up a joint Armenian-Russian military group also gives rise to many questions. In terms of the balance of forces in the region, the creation of such groups makes little difference, since this does not assume increase in the number of troopers or equipment. As for the military and political aspects of the question, there is already a bilateral treaty between Russia and Armenia, as well as the CSTO agreement, which means Moscow is bound to defending Armenia in case of an attack on Armenian (!) territory.

By the way, the Armenian opposition is not happy with the creation of a united group. According to them, this means that Armenia's last attribute of independence, its army, will pass under the control of Russia. The Russian border guards have long carried the protection of Armenia's borders, and the Russian state-owned companies control Armenian railway, gas and energy networks, telephone and other key enterprises. The Armenians understand that even if the formal command of the united group is entrusted with the Armenian side, it will not change much. It is obvious that the Russian troops will not obey any orders from Yerevan without direct instructions from Moscow or from the command of the Southern Military District of Russia.

Why is this joint group established then? There may be several explanations. Firstly, under the existing political turbulence observed in Armenia and the growing dissatisfaction of the Western Armenian Diaspora with the pro-Russian geopolitical vector of Yerevan, the Kremlin leadership considered necessary to strengthen control over the local armed forces. Secondly, along with additional supplies of weapons, this is presented as loyalty to Russia to its obligations in terms of ensuring Armenia's security. Previously, when the 102 Russian military base in Gyumri covered Armenia from possible military attack of Turkey, the establishment of a joint group comprising partially some Armenian military corps and deployed near the borders with Nakhchivan, must demonstrate Moscow's readiness to support the Armenians in case of Azerbaijan’s retaliatory military action.

Obviously, the delivery of rocket launchers "Smerch" and"Iskander", as well as the establishment of a joint Russian-Armenian military group objectively strengthens Armenia's destructive behavior in the region. All the arguments that Moscow neutralizes concerns about the Armenians’ security and aims to encourage them to agree with the proposals to the release at least part of the occupied Azerbaijani territories are completely unfounded. We see the opposite in practice. The Armenian leadership, leaning to certain concessions after the April skirmish and the delivery of new Russian weapons and other military guarantees, became even more resistant in the negotiations.

The realities force Azerbaijan to take additional measures to strengthen its defense capability. The government announced the holding of negotiations for the purchase of new weapons from Israel and Pakistan. After the recent military exercises, the Armenians fear that they may grow into an operation to liberate the occupied territories. The budget for next year includes adjustments significantly increasing defense expenditures. So, if Armenia believes that it will be possible to force Baku to the peace in accordance with the wishes of Yerevan after a demonstrative Russian military support, they are deeply mistaken.

In this context, the statement of President Ilham Aliyev, which he made on November 12 during the inspection of positions of the Azerbaijani army on the front line, is notable. "If the Armenian armed forces do not draw the right conclusions from the April battles, there will be many successful operations such as the one at Lele Tepe in the future. The political leadership of Armenia must understand that the aggressive actions lead them to a failure", said the Azerbaijani President. this This warning made by the Commander in Chief of Azerbaijan from the peak of the liberated Lele-Tepe should be a serious signal for Armenia.

Meanwhile, the strengthening of Russia's control over Armenia makes intensive dialogue with Moscow even more urgent in order to find a way out of the dead-end in the peace settlement of the Karabakh conflict. It is not unlikely that the parties may hold negotiations passing over the Minsk Group, which has been less active in recent years making just a few occasional visits to the region and holding meetings in cozy European capitals. Especially since it will experience personal changes soon. After a recent change of the French representative, the upcoming rotation of the US co-chair was announced. The current American co-chair, James Warlick, said on Twitter that on 31 December he was going to complete his mission and intends to continue working in a large law firm "Egorov, Puginsky, Afanasiev and Partners" in Russia. Following this announcement, it should come as no surprise that during his tenure as co-chair of the Minsk Group, he looked at the situation not through the eyes of the US representative, but rather acted as re-translator of Russian position.

Given the absence of dialogue between the parties to the conflict, they lead discussions on the Karabakh settlement with high representatives of the mediating countries. Thus, in November, the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia met the US Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, Bridget Brinks. The Azerbaijani Foreign Minister, Elmar Mammadyarov, met with his French counterpart Jean-Marc Ayrault and accepted his offer to hold a ‘3+2’ meeting, i.e. the foreign ministers of Azerbaijan, Armenia and co-chairs of the Minsk Group, within the OSCE Ministerial Council in Hamburg on December 8.

It's hard to say whether the results of meeting will help to resume meaningful negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, but it is obvious that given the absence of other opportunities, the situation may gradually slide towards a resumption of hostilities, which is risky and dangerous not only for the South Caucasus but also in a broader scale.