"KEEP GOING DOWN THAT PATH"

East year an even greater rapprochement was observed between the Balkan countries and Azerbaijan, as a result of which Azerbaijani foreign policy strategists particularly focused on Croatia. How does Croatia regard the co-operation with Azerbaijan? Former Croatian president, Stjepan Mesic answers this and other questions put by R+.

- Mr Mesic, how would you describe the state of relations between Croatia and Azerbaijan today?

- These ties were being developed back in my term in office, so I was very interested in making sure they were going in the right direction. At the present time, the political ties between us are good ones, but this does not mean that we have to agree on every issue that we discuss. The economic component in our ties is by no means as good as it ought to be. This is what we need to work on. When I say "we", I'm talking about both sides, although I feel almost certain that the Croatian side is responsible for the present situation.

- This means that you think Azerbaijan should play an important part in your region?

- Azerbaijan can play a key role in the region and is already doing that to a certain extent. Naturally, the unresolved border issues and the problems with some neighbouring states prevent Azerbaijan from playing the part it ought to, which is damaging not only the country itself, but also the entire region.

- The "Eastern Partnership" summit in [the Lithuanian capital] Vilnius has shown that the EU is not ready to fight for your interests in the area previously occupied by the Soviet Union. How important do you think Azerbaijan is to Europe?

- There can be no doubt that Azerbaijan is important to Europe, but its significance should not be reflected in the rivalry between the EU and Russia over gaining a sphere of influence in your region. Azerbaijan's foreign policy is a very wise one. You are aware that Europe is important to you, but at the same time you know that you cannot ignore the existence of Russia, a strong power with its own interests. Thus, you are maintaining a balance between these two important factors in the international arena. In my opinion you should keep going down this path.

- European policy on the southern Caucasus and in Azerbaijan in particular is frequently determined by numerous discussions about the great significance of the country while at the same time taking a fairly feeble attitude to the threat to regional security. And this is taking place when the European Parliament has adopted quite a few resolutions relating to Nagornyy Karabakh over the last few years. Do you think that the Europeans can have a hand in settling the Nagornyy Karabakh problem?

- Yes, the Europeans should be able to play their own part in settling the Nagornyy Karabakh problem. But it has to be acknowledged that they cannot do that. What is frequently referred to as "European foreign policy" still does not exist. Yes, we do talk about that, but when it comes down to specific issues, each EU-member country takes care of its own interests first and foremost. In other words, up until now Europe has not managed to assert its own identity in foreign policy. As long as this situation persists, it will never be a strong factor in international relations.

- In the recent past Croatia itself was subjected to  suffering owing to the Balkan conflict. In this sense it would be interesting to learn your view of how the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict will be resolved. In particular, what would a president, who has experienced the bloody conflict in Croatia say to people like the ex-president of Armenia, Robert Kocharyan, who states that there can be no such thing as peaceful coexistence between Azeris and Armenians in a single region? 

- Forgive me for being so frank, but that is absolute nonsense. There is absolutely no reason why these two peoples cannot live alongside one another. Ultimately, neither the Azeris nor the Armenians want to wage an indecisive war, nor live the rest of their lives in a situation of neither war nor peace. You need to negotiate with one another. Drawing on Yugoslavia's experience, I always say that it is better to negotiate for 10 years than wage war for 10 days. Ultimately, just follow the European Union's example. Its purpose is to unite a continent with very differing states, which often waged war against each other in their history, peoples who thought that they would never be able to live alongside each other in peace. But they can. So why can't you manage to do it?