STORM IN A TEACUP

The latest, 66th, session of the UN General Assembly, is over but the media and experts continue to vigorously debate the questions raised there. Each of these questions carries its share of grief, encouragement and disappointment, and each is different in its approach, interpretation and appraisal. But difference of approach and interpretation is one thing, distorting the essence, taking words out of context and "juggling" with other people's quotes, either for reassurance or in order to delude others, is another.

However, such things are to be expected in conflict situations. For example, the Armenian authorities took the opportunity to use the statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the UN to create a storm in a teacup, to play on public opinion in the country and, perhaps, try to intimidate neighbouring Azerbaijan. It was as if they were saying: don't you dare try and get back your land or you'll have to deal not with Yerevan, which has enough problems of its own, but with Moscow. After all, that's what it did with Georgia in 2008. That's what virtually all the comments by Armenian and pro-Armenian observers and politicians boil down to. It might have been possible to believe all of them had it not been for the verbatim record of Lavrov's speech at the General Assembly session.

"…In the Nagornyy-Karabakh settlement process we call upon all the parties to take advantage of the additional possibilities which have arisen as a result of the efforts taken under Russia's mediation. We will promote confidence-building and cease-fire enforcement measures within the framework of the 'troika' of the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group, together with our American and French partners.

"We hope that the decision on a resumption of official talks on a Transdnestrian settlement, adopted in Moscow on 22 September, will encourage the parties to seek mutually acceptable agreements.

"We are strongly committed to doing our utmost to prevent a repetition of the scenario of force in the Caucasus as occurred in August 2008 as a result of the reckless adventures of the ruling regime in Tbilisi. Russia is ready to act as a guarantor of arrangements on the non-use of force between Abkhazia, Georgia and South Ossetia, taking into account the earlier relevant statements on this subject made by the leaders of these three parties. We would welcome it if the United States and the European Union made similar commitments… As guarantors we would be ready to take steps to prevent a resumption of violence in the region, and in the event of wrongful use of force by either side, to work towards an early settlement to the situation on the basis of existing norms of international law," says the text of the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, published on the Russian Foreign Ministry's official website.

In voicing Russia's attitude to all the long-standing problems of world politics, Lavrov could not help but dwell on the conflict situations in Moscow's immediate zone of interest. At the same time, as is clear from the text of the speech, the Russian foreign minister concisely set out the problems in the following sequence: Nagornyy Karabakh, the Transdnestr Region, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In other words, he did not group these problems by regions. The Transdnestr Region, in any event, has nothing to do with the Caucasus. Accordingly, Lavrov made his statement that Russia is determined to prevent a repetition of the scenario of force in the Caucasus exclusively in the context of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Now let us see how the Armenian newspaper Azg presents this statement by the Russian foreign minister: "…Sergey Lavrov's statement that "in the event of the use of unlawful force by either of the sides involved in the NK conflict (although Nagornyy Karabakh is not actually mentioned in this sentence by Lavrov - Region+), Moscow is prepared to use all means to establish peace in the region." Or this is how the first Armenian news website interpreted the Russian foreign minister's words: "A few days ago Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov addressed the UN Security Council, saying: 'In the case of unlawful use of force by either side in the conflict Russia is ready to take all means to establish peace in the region.' His statement could, of course, be seen as a message to Azerbaijan…" The Armenian army newspaper Aysor also interpreted Lavrov's words, with military expert Artsrun Hovhannisyan urging the leading states to articulate such statements, allegedly addressed to Azerbaijan, more frequently.

All this could serve as a significant illustration of Armenia's behaviour in the system of international relations as a whole. But more specifically, when the whole world is speaking about the need for a speedy change in the status quo in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, Yerevan is laying emphasis on the need for a peaceful settlement. In other words, it is trying to deflect attention from the heart of the problem to secondary matters. Or when Azerbaijan makes it clear that it is in favour of the updated Madrid proposals by international mediators, Armenia takes up a position of "neither yes, nor no", trying to extend the status quo that suits it for as long as possible.

Meanwhile, Yerevan should be no less interested in a change in the situation in the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict. Remember this! 2011 is significant in that both Azerbaijan and Armenia are celebrating the 20th anniversary of their independence. But how will they celebrate this jubilee? One wouldn't wish to cast a shadow on our neighbours' holiday, recalling how many people leave Armenia in a year in search of a crust of bread and, conversely, how many come to Azerbaijan from abroad with this same purpose. Even by no means pro-Azerbaijan minded experts have been forced to recognize the truth of this.

"In the period from 1991 to 2011 post-Soviet Azerbaijan has been able to prove that it is not a weak and dependent geopolitical entity: it is playing an important role in the South Caucasus, in Central Asia and in the Near East. It is arguably the only example in the CIS of a state with a successfully diversified foreign policy. Few of the former republics of the USSR are able to maintain equal relations with Russia, the European Union and the USA, Israel and the Palestinian Autonomy. In the period of the first republic the Azerbaijani elite at first played the part of Turkey's younger brother and then as Great Britain's 'oil derrick'. The 'second Azerbaijan' is operating much more subtly, trying not to 'keep all its eggs in one basket'," Sergey Markedonov, visiting fellow of the US Centre for Strategic and International Studies, writes in an article on the Politkom.ru website.

What is more, Azerbaijan's self-sufficiency in the economic aspect strengthens even more its positions as a full-fledged player in international relations. Therefore, unlike Armenia, Azerbaijan poses no threat to anyone, and when it says that it will recover its lands "by any method" it is relying only on its own forces.