"THE AGE OF A BIOPOLAR WORLD HAS PASSED"

-There is still a feeling abroad that people are insufficiently informed about Azerbaijan. To what extent do you think Azerbaijan has succeeded in conveying information about itself to the world public?

Azerbaijan has, since 1990, been increasingly enhancing its identity. It is being more widely recognized internationally as an independent sovereign entity, clearly separate from its neighbours, despite the long history of domination by Russia, the USSR, and Iran. There is no question that the Heydar Aliyev and Ilham Aliyev administrations have been able to position Azerbaijan very carefully politically between the country's neighbors, while building links to Europe, the US, and the Asia-Pacific region.

Of course, the surge in oil revenues has helped give Azerbaijan the tools it needs to assert a strong independent character internationally, including popular events like the Eurovision Song Contest, and such prestigious diplomatic events as the International Humanitarian Forum - so that today the republic is seen as a modern, independent, stable, and prosperous state. The first European Olympic Games will be not only a significant sporting event but will also show that Azerbaijan has reasserted its European orientation.

The next challenge will be to position the country during a period when the entire region will be undergoing significant strategic change. We could be at the threshold of a re-birth of strong US-Iranian relations and this will change the perceived value of Azerbaijan in the eyes of both Washington and Tehran, and, of course, in the eyes of Moscow. So it will be a time which will challenge Azerbaijani diplomacy to make the most of this new situation.

- Armenia relies almost totally on Russia, Georgia relies on the West, Azerbaijan tries to maintain a balance between superpowers and regional countries. What is the best choice for the small republics of the South Caucasus: choose only one strategic power to rely on or conduct a multi-vector policy?

Examples of a country putting all its emphasis on a single ally are nothing new. The age of a bipolar world has passed, and as the United States is losing its status as the only superpower we are seeing an acute need for a fluid multi-polar world. As a result, there is no one alliance partner capable of safeguarding the interests of a country such as Azerbaijan. Western Europe and the United States, which are experiencing certain problems, are today being pressured by other priorities. They remain important for Azerbaijan, of course, but Baku is now in the fortunate position of being able to talk on more balanced terms with Russia and Turkey, as well as with the People's Republic of China. It has become mature, economically important, geo-strategically significant, and has demonstrated a commitment to fairness. All of this will be important in the coming few years.

One of the most important aspects of the modernization of independent Azerbaijan has been the creation of professional and well-funded national security institutions: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Defence Ministry in particular. And, with the country's energy wealth and the options it has for the export of its energy resources Azerbaijan now can talk on much more balanced terms with, say, Moscow and Ankara. But more care and professionalism will be needed in the future to continue the strengthening of Azerbaijan's diplomacy with all major states.

- Don't you feel, then, that the US is not giving enough attention to the region in which Azerbaijan is situated? And what do you think about future of relations between Baku and Washington?

US policy in the South Caucasus is indeed weak at present, and Washington is attempting to address a wide range of issues with dwindling resources and damaged prestige. However, a revival of US-Iranian relations will either boost or re-engage the US and the West in the Persian Gulf, bringing with it new ways to link into the Caspian and Central Asian regions.

It seems clear that, as the global strategic balance changes, Iran will once again be more important geo-strategically than, for example, Turkey, especially if the "normalization" of Tehran's ties with the outside world enables Mediterranean trade to travel via Syria and Iraq through Iran into the Caspian and Central Asia and on to China.

In all of this, Azerbaijan should continue to be of key importance to Washington, and, indeed, to Europe.

- The US is one of the OSCE Minsk group co-chairs. How can you explain that the US refrains from more active engagement in the regional security issues, the Karabakh settlement process in particular? 

US policy toward the Nagorno-Karabakh issue depends on the activities of the expatriate Armenian community in the US. This community is committed to two things:  primarily, getting recognition of Turkish "genocide" against Armenians, and, secondly, protecting the status quo in the Nagorno-Karabakh situation. As a result, every US administration, as well as the US Congress, is subject to enormous pressure not to take a neutral view on the Nagorno-Karabakh settlement issue.

Nonetheless, Azerbaijan has been of vital help to the US and the West generally in maintaining trade access to the Caspian and Central Asia, whereas Armenia has not been strategically important. So what we see is that US policy is held hostage by domestic political demands which actually run counter to US national interests.

At the same time, this is no reason for Azerbaijan to believe that its key ally, the United States, should favor Armenia, which has done little to support the US.

- The commander of a Russian base in Armenia said recently that the base, according to the conditions of the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization] would be pressured into intervening in the Karabakh conflict if Azerbaijan decides to restore jurisdiction over Nagorno-Karabakh. How would you comment on that?

The statement, if it was not reported out of context, is dangerous and unnecessary, and was clearly intended to support the Armenian audience. Right now, it is not in Russia's interests to engage in military hostilities with Azerbaijan. Of course, the consequences of this could be serious. Military options supported by Moscow could backfire. 

What benefits the Russian Federation is a stable and cooperative trade and energy flow from the Caspian region, both into Russia and through to European markets, and military action could disrupt that to the detriment of all. Moscow knows that, but the statement attributed to the Russian commander in Armenia could have the effect of encouraging Armenian adventurism, and discouraging a willingness by Armenia to participate in meaningful negotiations. All the Russian commander's statement did - if it was as he was quoted - was to make the diplomatic process more difficult.