FRAGILE SECURITY

The situation in the Middle East, the financial crisis, the gas row between Russia and Ukraine - these have been the main topics of the start of 2009 so far. World attention is concentrated on them today. Meanwhile, the situation remains complicated in the Caucasus which was the main subject of the news in the second half of last year. This region is packed with explosive points, and political experts warn that the slightest flicker here could make the world forget the Middle East once more. Frozen, open, diplomatic, energy - call it what you like but the war for the Caucasus continues. This is pretty much the opinion of Frederick Starr, the director of the Johns Hopkins University's Central Asia and the Caucasus Institute, whom we asked to comment on the situation in and around the region. 

- Mr Starr, during your last visit to Baku you said that "the USA's foreign policy positions will change and concretize and then a more concrete policy will be asked of Azerbaijan too". What's your assessment of Azerbaijan's policy in the region today?

- Azerbaijan keeps to a sufficiently balanced foreign policy. This is a very wise position. Relations between America and Azerbaijan are also at a good level. But one thing worries me. The USA and Europe should not go over Azerbaijan's head in building or trying to build their relations with Russia, that is, they should take account of the country's position. To keep it short, the major states should take account of Azerbaijan's interests and Georgia's too, otherwise this policy could be very dangerous. Azerbaijan is taken very seriously in the USA and its interests are taken into account. I am sure that this is how it will be in future too.

- What's your assessment of the regional situation overall in 2008? 

- Recently, events in the region have stepped up noticeably. Of course, this is a question first of all of Russia's attack on Georgia. At the same time, several political events occurred too, of which the normalization and development of relations between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan attract attention. The factors serving interests in the region include the expansion and improvement of relations between Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. The expansion of the State Oil Company's projects abroad is a plus for Azerbaijan. But out of all this, I still think it necessary to look more closely at Russia's aggression towards Georgia and in particular at the position taken by Azerbaijan in the conflict. Azerbaijan's thoughtful conduct on this issue was part of that balanced foreign policy. Against the backdrop of the tense Russian-Georgian relations, Azerbaijan has managed to neutralize their negative consequences for the region.

- All the same, events in Georgia showed that regional security remains fragile. When will the situation finally normalize?  

- The current state of affairs does not let us talk about normalization of the situation. Tension remains in the region. But I would like to stress one thing. In the short-term, military context Russia conducted a very successful operation and seized two provinces of another country - South Ossetia and Abkhazia. But overall Russia lost, because no-one supported it. Today Russia is trying hard to get the support of the Central Asian countries, but the latter are in no hurry. From this point of view, the turn of events shows that Russia has lost, rather than won.

- There is another threat to the region's security - the Karabakh conflict. Who has such an interest in it remaining unresolved?

- I can say with complete certainty that the USA is interested in resolving this problem. America understands that using this conflict as a tool in competing with Russia has produced no benefit whatsoever. As for Russia, it is still using this conflict to keep the region under its influence. But in the long term, this will do nothing for Russia or any other state. No-one should profit from others' problems. If we look at the position of Europe, we can see that it has been involved for a long time in pointless and unproductive talks on Karabakh together with Russia and the USA. Europe is doing this as it hopes to resolve the problem of its energy security at the expense of the region. And the conflict, of course, gets in the way of these intentions.

- What could Turkey's involvement in settling the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict bring? 

- This concerns me somewhat. It is known that historically Turkey has been active in processes under way in the Caucasus and played an important role in settling problems in the region. Of course, this is only to be welcomed. At the same time, one aspect has been concerning me of late. It seems to me that Turkey is simply trying to settle the "genocide" issue with Armenia and has stepped up efforts in this regard. I hope that Turkey will not solve its problem at Karabakh's expense.

- But it's not only a question of Karabakh, is it? Turkey has put forward the initiative to create a platform of stability in the Caucasus as a whole.

- I would assess Turkey's initiative on a platform of stability in the Caucasus as a good but very na?ve proposal. It is obvious even to the untrained eye that Turkey is actually trying to strengthen its influence in the region. It wants to divide the Caucasus between itself and Russia. But the truth remains that Turkey is still energy-dependent on Russia, so it cannot compete with Moscow in the struggle for the region, especially on Karabakh. On the other hand, suppose that Turkey's initiative comes into being. This would mean that Europe and America were distanced from the processes and their interests in the region, which in reality is impossible. You will remember that the USA took on the risk of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project. The aim was to ensure Turkey's energy security and reduce its dependence on its neighbours. It follows that Turkey cannot take any steps in the region without taking account of the interests of the USA and other countries.

- Realization of Turkey's initiative also requires domestic political stability in the countries of the region. But there is no stability in Armenia, for example. How do you see the influence of this country on the situation in the region?

- The Caucasus region plays the role of a transport corridor between East and West. Unfortunately, a lack of stability in any of the countries creates instability in the region. In this context, the political tension in Armenia played a negative role in the region, like the events in Georgia. Armenia should understand that it needs to reconsider its policy if it is to take part in regional projects. And this does not refer only to energy projects. I mean international trade as a whole. For this, Armenia should try to settle the Karabakh conflict taking the interests of Azerbaijan into account.

- But today's authorities in Armenia take no account of the interests of their neighbours or their own people. The domestic political instability in the country is the result.

 - The political atmosphere in Armenia causes concern and gives pause for thought. Following the progress of events, we can see that today changes are being made in Armenia and pragmatism is beginning to gain the upper hand. This gives grounds to think that Armenia will reconsider its policy in the near future, because the country has clever and competent people who understand the real future of their country and their voices are getting louder.