EXPERTISE NEEDED

The ADA [Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy] University has invited the Russian scholar Stanislav Pritchin to read a lecture to Azerbaijani students on current Russian foreign policy. The geographical proximity and historical community of Azerbaijan and Russia provide the conditions for the further deepening of relations between the two countries.

In an interview with Regionplus, S. Pritchin offered his vision for new spheres of cooperation between the two countries.

- The ADA is an establishment of higher education built on the principles of the Western system of education. You are the first Russian scholar to read a lecture at the university. How important is it in your view that precisely the opinions of Russian experts should be heard?

- Taking into consideration that ADA is one of the most prestigious institutions of higher education in Azerbaijan, that a large number of talented young people are studying there who will be determining Azerbaijan's fate in the future, the diversified approach to education is undoubtedly very important. You see, alternative views do exist to those found in purely Western textbooks and courses on political science.

Here I do not just have in mind Russian views, but Azerbaijan has other neighbours like Iran and Kazakhstan which have their own schools of science. In order to train future specialists in international relations, it is important to give students the opportunity to hear different points of view, to be able to comprehend various methodological approaches and learn different ways of tackling things. So, this was a conscious step on the part of the university's management who invited me to read lectures. As far as I have learned from the visit's organisers, the rector of the Diplomatic Academy of Russia is scheduled to come here in the future, as well as Iranian specialists.

- Each side has its own priorities, including those in education. But they do have mutual interests in common, strategic interests, considering our shared past. In your view, what are the priorities in Russian-Azerbaijani relations?

-At the present time, bilateral relations are developing sufficiently dynamically, primarily because the political leadership of Azerbaijan and Russia are having a very good, frank, high-level dialogue on a government level. We are very close to one another historically, culturally and ethnically; we are also linked by joint economic, political and common human factors which cannot be ruled out when forging good-neighbourly relations.

Besides this, the structures of Russia's and Azerbaijan's economies are similar in the sense that the main sectors are the energy spheres. So, both Azerbaijan and Russia are faced with the tasks of diversifying their economies. Here, in my view, insufficient attention is being paid to possible Russian-Azerbaijani cooperation. For example, programmes exist in Azerbaijan to promote the non-oil sector, while some things are being done in Russia in this direction, so this sphere may potentially be of interest in developing our joint relations.

The new economic state of affairs with the sanctions and embargoes that Russia has introduced in response to the sanctions imposed by the Western countries, are also creating sufficiently favourable conditions for Azerbaijan's agricultural sector, with the non-oil sphere targeting the Russian market. Possibilities exist for boosting non-raw materials exports. Naturally, at least coordination and the study of the experience gained by Russia in organising the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), albeit not close cooperation, is of particular interest in this direction.

Yes, there are a number of political factors that do not allow Azerbaijan to consider joining this organisation at this moment. Nevertheless, it seems to me that, in conditions of ever increasing regionalisation, when the parties are trying to bring together their economies in order to create more competitive conditions on the world market, Azerbaijan cannot remain outside the integration processes.

- It is thought that in the modern world almost all problems are being resolved with the help of bilateral relations and that joining some kind of unions becomes the source of problems rather than bringing benefits. So, in this context, it is even more necessary to clearly define relations with the EAEU. Is this an organisation of self-sufficient countries with equal influence or does it have the EU format, where Germany, France and Great Britain form the core of the union and the rest are affiliated to it?

- Naturally, expertise and understanding of how things really work within the framework of the union is needed. To a certain extent, you are right that the EAEU's driving force consists of three major, self-sufficient states - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. But it is impossible to create a more developed situation in Russia and Kazakhstan while, for example, cutting ourselves off from Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and other countries. It is impossible to organise a normal, stable economic system on the southern border of Kazakhstan, when constant instability reigns in Kyrgyzstan.

Another fairly important role is played by the migration issue, when we are talking about multi-million-strong streams of migrants. Unofficial migration is giving rise to social problems and creating conditions for the growth of crime. For Kyrgyzstan which is one of the providers of human resources for the job markets in Russia and Kazakhstan, the rules are being further relaxed regarding the right to work at their chosen profession and obtaining permits to reside in Russia and Kazakhstan. It is more difficult for the man in the street in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, who has to purchase a permit and sit a language examination. You see, everything is working out well and the union's territory is being well organised.

Naturally, it is easiest to resolve everything on a bilateral basis, but, you see, there are fewer opportunities for that; for example, business can only orientate itself 100 per cent on the market in its own country. Naturally, I am not comparing Azerbaijan to Kyrgyzstan. Azerbaijan has a self-sufficient economy, so there is doubly the need for expertise, which means there is something to be gained from joining the union. And, drawing on what could be of mutual interest, negotiations are continuing to be conducted. This is the advantage that the EAEU has over the EU, since in the latter you start off with conditions that have already been prescribed, on which you cannot have any influence. In the EAEU each of the parties defends his own interests, sometimes coming down to a demarche, but, even when sanctions are imposed and there is an enormous complex of problems, no-one seriously talks about leaving the union and ending cooperation. Everyone understands that there are no other alternatives in the long-term.

- Returning to the immigration issue. Now that Russia has made the immigration rules stricter, it turns out that this issue may be "attracting" states into the EAEU, so to speak?

- I don't think so. In actual fact, that is not an artificial barrier. It is simply that the issue of labour migration to Russia did at one time have to be tackled head-on. In a situation when we are dealing with millions of people, it is very difficult to create suitable and workable conditions. Ultimately, no-one asks why you have to take a language test your language to get a job in the EU or the USA. That system is sufficiently exacting there. The prerequisites for legal migration are being created in Russia too.

- The backbone of any project, any union has to be based on some kind of ideology. The idea of Eurasian unity as a philosophical and political teaching is not only attracting attention in Russia. When talking about the EAEU, we mainly discussed economic interest, but what other guidelines can there be? Turkey for example is modelling itself on the EU, when joining that union does in fact stipulate achieving certain standards in the field of democracy, protection of human rights and so forth. What common standards can there be in the EAEU besides the economy?

- The EU is a past-master in polishing up its image, but if we examine the history of its creation, it also started off with the economy. In the case of the EAEU, there is no need to get ahead of ourselves, we are currently going through the initial stage. At the present time, we cannot say that we have a unified approach that we can take as our basis. On the one hand, that may be perceived as a weakness, but, on the other, it can be seen as a plus, because there is no single dominant ideology, so we have an open playing field.

In actual fact, the question of ideology is being discussed intensively on an expert level. But this issue will not be the core one from the point of view of compelling all the members to meet certain standards. The EAEU is being accused of attempting to reintegrate the USSR, of Russia striving to restore its imperial past, but if we examine it a little bit to see how decisions are taken, then out of the 10 ministers Kazakhstan and Belarus currently have three each, and all decisions are taken jointly. Incidentally, many questions may be asked about the EU.

For example, after joining the EU, Bulgaria did not make any economic progress, but, on the contrary, has even retrogressed. Or what about the Baltic countries - their GDP has grown to a certain extent, but the population has declined because people have emigrated to earn a living. Certain questions do arise regarding the migrants who remain in the EU without citizenship, in spite of the stringent requirements in the field of human rights.

- I would like to talk about such a positive element in Russian-Azerbaijani relations as the "Russian factor". This is a matter of Russian-language schools, the Russian-speaking population, about the "little island" of the Russian world which is preserved, it must be noted, as a phenomenon, without any particular assistance and influence on the part of Russia. For example, it is no secret that in Armenia which is in a strategic union with Russia, there are no Russians except the families of the Russian military there. In Azerbaijan the situation is quite different. There are more Russians in Baku alone at the present time than in the rest of the Caucasus put together. What role can this factor play in those integration projects that we are discussing with you?

- If Azerbaijan decides on closer cooperation, then this will be of serious assistance to it. Because, from a language point of view, there will not be any need to learn new languages as is the case with Iran and Vietnam which are examining the possibility of coordinating efforts. That is, this will be a bonus and a plus for Azerbaijan itself. Besides, this is a mutual process, since an enormous number of Azerbaijanis live in Russia. This is at least a link in the humanitarian sphere. Besides all the other things, Azerbaijan and Russia have in common that we are multi-ethnic countries. Another point of contact could be tolerance, the so-called "not politically correct" tolerance unlike what we are currently observing in the West.