VK talked to political scientist Andrey Areshev and doctor of history, senior researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences Alla Yazkova.
Alla Yazkova
I think that, in general, results in Azerbaijan, most probably, to some extent, are pre-set, because there is a succession of generations and a continuity of government there, therefore, most likely the situation will remain the same as now. However, it must be said that there are opposition groups in Azerbaijan, which most probably will become more active on the eve of the elections. Although at the present time, indeed, when it comes to Russia and Azerbaijan, relations are generally stable, there are a number of problems. They are becoming more and more distinctive, particularly in the sphere of energy. These problems, certainly, will be touched upon in the run-up to the elections. The problematic issue of the Caspian Sea... I think that in general, the question of the legal status of the Caspian Sea has been on the agenda certainly not for one year and even not for a decade now. But so far it has been very difficult to solve it precisely due to certain reasons which are shared by the Caspian states, including reticence between Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. In this regard, the position of Iran would certainly be very significant if it were possible to somehow begin to address this issue on a legal basis.
Andrey Areshev
In connection with the continuing presidential cycle in all the three countries in the region, in the South Caucasus... We know that while elections in Armenia have already taken place, they are still to take place in Georgia and Azerbaijan. These elections are an important step in the political processes in the South Caucasus, in a certain reconfiguration of social forces. Of course, any political event directly affects the economic situation in the region, because, as I said, the elections are the focal point, which actualize the diverse demands of different groups, allow different groups to advance their claims. Against the background of a number of unresolved conflicts, above all, of course, of Nagorno-Karabakh, the process and preparations for elections in several countries have a direct impact on the current situation regarding the unresolved conflicts. On the one hand, this is politics. On the other hand, this is economics. The issues of economic integration become more significant in relation to, if not directly competing, then, at least, alternative integration projects that are offered by external forces, are advanced by external forces - forces which are involved in the events in the South Caucasus and are somehow interested in their specific dynamics. On the one hand, there is the Eurasian Union which is promoted by Russia, and, on the other hand, in various forms, there is the Eastern Partnership and the Association Agreement, which accordingly are promoted by the EU. It should be said that both projects, in my opinion, are not fully articulated, because Russia is experiencing some problems, and the EU, as we know, is in crisis. It certainly impacts on their approach to cooperation with partners in the South Caucasus.
In my view, there is a tendency for all these projects, the Eurasian and European ones, to be viewed without any high expectations, to be considered from a pragmatic perspective and the perspective of specific benefits that they can offer to the countries' economies. Thirdly, there is certainly the humanitarian, cultural, informational aspect. Not everything comes down to economic pragmatism – it is certainly OK, but economic pragmatism and economic projects should go hand in hand with cultural and information-oriented communication, with a dialogue between societies, which are of great importance. It is particularly important, on the one hand, for Russian-Georgian relations, because in the absence of diplomatic relations and given the current situation of the inability to solve the directly opposite views of the sides on the issue of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, a social dialogue and a partial restoration of economic ties is a channel which in the end will help normalize relations between the two countries. It is a very difficult task to, for example, gather deputies of the three or, according to some estimates, of the five independent states, and if we take into consideration the existing de facto Nagorno-Karabakh, then even more so. In addition, you need to realize, in my opinion, that the political structure of each of the three countries of the South Caucasus is not limited to the parliaments and other bodies of the executive and legislative branches. There are numerous very developed representative bodies of the civil society, there are different strata in a number of countries - social, religious and national. In my view, their participation in a hypothetical All-Caucasian forum must be considered and secured, while the goals and objectives that could underline the event must be defined. The task is serious, but, in my opinion, with good will and interests, as well as organizational support and, most importantly, with a clear understanding of the goals and objectives, it might be very successful. This is an idea which in the conditions of tensions in the region could increase a certain level of constructive cooperation and at least partially diminish the existing tension.
In my view, the idea that governments and societies of the region can do it on their own, without the participation of external actors, is certainly tempting, but currently hardly realizable, because based on what has been happening in the South Caucasus for the past 20 years, all the processes were directly linked to the strengthening of the influence of foreign players, which manifested itself in many forms, which were often not constructive. For example, we all remember the situation related to what happened in Georgia in the early 2000s before the second Chechen war. It has also had a significant external impact. I think that here we need to talk about optimization and harmonization of external participation, about reaching an agreement between the non-regional powers, certainly, with the direct involvement of the states and political actors of the South Caucasus, about the rules of the game, the breaking of which could cause huge problems due to the complexity, the composite character of the region, due to the fact that it is directly linked to the North Caucasus. There is a boundary, of course, but it is very arbitrary, and what is happening in the South Caucasus directly affects the interests of Russia. Russia cannot remain indifferent to what is happening in the lands of its southern neighbors. Accordingly, the framework should be strictly and clearly spelled out. As for the integration model, the European Union may be active, but the EU is not always able to back up the promises it distributes, concrete actions. Without the speeding of the economic and industrial development of countries in the region, of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan... And I will stress that in the Soviet era, Armenia was to some extent a technological leader of the South Caucasus, which in many ways, by the way, preconditioned the survival of the republic in the difficult early and mid-1990s, during the blockade and in the war with Azerbaijan to mutual exhaustion. I think that nevertheless the South Caucasus was fully integrated into the general Soviet economic system. It gives priority to European integration, its greater effectiveness, of course, provided that the Eurasian project becomes more nuanced, more comprehensive and of greater interest to the societies of the South Caucasus.
The post-election processes in Armenia were associated with the activation of the "silver medallist" of the elections, Raffi Hovanisian. They also seem to be coming to an end. The present day important task for Armenia is the formation of a new government and objectives in the socio-economic sphere, because the situation in Armenia is quite complicated, and in fact no one is concealing it. Migration processes that are an indicator of the state of the society, not only of the economy but also of social consciousness, are continuing to develop. Therefore, it is very important what the question of what the new government of Armenia will look like and how the current power system, which many observers in the country characterize as clan-oligarchic, will be reformed. There are some positive changes, and I would like to hope that changes will become even more apparent in the near future.
Mikhail Saakashvili and his UNM are unlikely to recover from their defeat, largely because the legitimacy of Saakashvili's regime relied on external and not internal factors. Accordingly, having lost external support, which he would have definitely lost anyway with time, it was clear, he automatically turned into a "lame duck." So I do not think that the current Georgian president will take any drastic steps to dissolve the parliament or dismiss the government, which he will be able to do, as you know, in April, in April which has just started. Moreover, Georgia also faces very serious problems. Its problems are largely similar to the problems of Armenia, despite the fact that Georgia has a much more favorable geopolitical position, is the communication core of the region, has access to the sea and is integrated into a great number of communication projects with Azerbaijan and Turkey. By the way, this results not only in advantages but also in disadvantages: the Georgian leadership is becoming a hostage to a large extent. The new Georgian leadership inherited the problems of its predecessors: having completely broken off relations with Russia, including economic relations, they have become dependent on their neighbors, stronger and more assertive in economic matters and not only. As for Azerbaijan, in my opinion, there is little chance of the presidential election, which are going to take place in October, having an unusual scenario. This will certainly not happen. But the current events, those public speeches, those corruption scandals that regularly appear on the surface, suggest that certain processes are taking place in Azerbaijan that might have an impact on the neighboring countries as well, the neighbors of Azerbaijan. This is important for Russia, because there is a distant... the most problematic subject of the Russian Federation which has a long border with Azerbaijan. We know that in the past there have been several tendencies indicating a certain cooling in the relations and the dialogue between Moscow and Baku. One of the indicators is the Gabala NPP, but not only. I think that Russia will benefit if the events in Azerbaijan, the election campaign, the electoral process itself and all the possible post-electoral processes, certain protests which cannot be overlooked, are dealt with in a peaceful, democratic and constitutional manner.
