Recently RIA Novosti held a video link between Moscow, Baku and Washington devoted to the theme: Russia, Azerbaijan, the USA in the context of multi-vector policy. It coincided with the 20th anniversary of the restoration of Azerbaijan’s independence. The chief executive officer of the Caspian Commonwealth Institute, Sergey Mikheyev, and the chief editor of “Problems of National Strategy” magazine, Adjar Okurtov, represented Moscow; the former analyst of the CIA and the State Department, the publicist Paul Goebe, represented Washington; and Baku was represented by the deputy principle of the Diplomatic Academy of Azerbaijan, Fariz Ismail-zade, and the chairman of the Association of American Graduates, Dzheykhun Kyaramov. They discussed the interests of the three states of the South Caucasus region, its problems and ways of settling them.
- How have the interests of Azerbaijan transformed during 20 years and what foreign policy issues are priorities for Baku?
Fariz Ismail-zade (Baku)
These days Azerbaijan celebrates its 20th anniversary of independence having achieved a great deal of economic and social progress. We also have achievements in our foreign politics. Of course, it is connected to our energy resource exports. Living standards have increased. So this anniversary is celebrated in a very positive mood. If you come to Azerbaijan now, you’ll see a lot of positive changes, people live much better than they used to in the 90s.
As for the main goals of Azerbaijani policy, they remain the same: the consolidation of our sovereignty, restoration of Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity, return of the refugees to their homes, the creation of stability in the region to ensure economic progress. We have to stop relying only on oil and gas projects if we want the people to have better lives. These questions are the most important ones for the Azeri government, as well as for the people.
Dzheykhun Kyaramov (Baku)
Economic policy has regard to the energy resources, which belong to Azerbaijan due its geographic location. However, during the last 10-15 years Azerbaijan has strengthened its position in important aspects of providing regional security, especially after 9/11, when the war against terrorism was started.
- What does the South Caucasus mean for the USA? Is it right to treat the region as secondary?
Paul Goebel (Washington)
Over the past two years such conferences touching upon the South Caucasus have been held regularly. There is no other region in Eurasia that has attracted so much attention from the US. And there are many reasons for that. First of all, it’s their oil. Secondly, it’s the geopolitical importance of the region. It’s connected to many other regions that the US is interested in: Iran, Afghanistan and so on.
The possibility of a violent new outbreak in Nagorno-Karabakh triggers a new wave of attempts to prevent it and to strengthen the legal patterns of solving the conflict, which were created during these 20 years. That is why the US has to participate. Besides, the US believes that some progress can be made here, unlike in other conflict spots in Eurasia.
- A number of the world’s major powers now consider the South Caucasus to be a zone of their interests. Moscow aspires to an exclusive status in the matter, but the US and their European allies deny it. However, unlike the US and the EU, Russia isn’t situated far away, and the events in the region have a direct impact on Russia’s security. What is the optimal political strategy for Russia here?
Sergey Mikheyev (Moscow)
I’m not sure I’m qualified to define an optimal foreign policy for Russia. I think it is what it has to be. It is pretty obvious that the South Caucasus is very important for us. It is our southern border. And any instability there has a greater impact on us than on, say, America: as my US colleague said, they are only interested in oil-related issues or with regard to Iran, so it’s a sort of a computer game for them, when you can press any buttons – no real harm would come to you.
Russia is more involved. The more unstable the South Caucasus grows, the more problems we have in our North Caucasus and in the Caspian region. So we are more careful and attentive here. We are concerned about all manifestations of instability. But we are also concerned about America’s actions, because you can’t escape the fact: wherever the US gets involved, any stability perishes. This often hinges on their perception of progress. They have a very specific notion of how progress is to be obtained and what progress actually is.
As for the Caspian region, I think it should be a zone of priority interests of the five littoral states: Russia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Iran. So everything that happens in the region is to be dealt with in these five capitals. Of course, it doesn’t mean that each of these countries isn’t free to pick its economic partners. However, if we are talking politics and security, I’m sure that the ‘Caspian Five’ should try to resolve all such issues internally. By the way, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate our Azerbaijani friends and wish them all the best.
- Is the South Caucasus the main problem of Russian-American relations?
Paul Goebel (Washington)
Both states are great powers and their interests intersect in various regions. And the South Caucasus is one of these zones, and here both countries should be very cautious and diplomatic. If we want Russia to be the only player in the South Caucasus, or the US for that matter, such attempts are destined to fail and would only worsen bilateral relations on all levels. The US knows that Russia has its own interests in the region, and I think it’s time that Moscow acknowledges Washington’s interest too. And this interest isn’t only oil-related. We are celebrating the anniversary of independence, but let’s not forget that the geography hasn’t been changed and that even if state borders are different now, the location of populations, resources, seas and so on doesn’t change that fast. So we have some historical issues to work out.
To be continued
VK
