Rüdiger Kipke: "Germany has declared the need to change the status quo in the Karabakh conflict"

A meeting between the heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Ilham Aliyev and Serzh Sargsyan, in which should also take part the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairing countries - Russia, France and USA, will take place in Vienna next week. The urgency of the Armenian-Azerbaijani summit has increased in particular after the all cross-border positions of Azerbaijan were subjected to a heavy fire from the large-caliber weapons, mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and guns on April 2nd. In addition, a number of shots were fired at the settlements near the frontline, densely populated by civilians. As a result of the attacks there are killed and wounded among the civilian population, the soldiers were also killed.

The worsening in the conflict zone has alarmed the international community. A political science professor of the University of Siegen (Germany), Rüdiger Kipke, comments the situation in an interview to Vestnik Kavkaza.

-The fighting that broke out between Armenia and Azerbaijan at the beginning of April this year was the most bloody since the 90s of the last century. How do you assess the chances of a peaceful settlement of the situation?

-The military clashes in April this year, on the one hand, worsened the prerequisites for advancing the peace process in the region. On the other hand, it demonstrated clearly once again to the international community that in this case we are not talking about a ‘frozen conflict’, which all the parties are willing to take for granted.

-One of the interim results of the April clashes was the initiative for the recognition of the NKR by the Armenian Parliament. What consequences can such a step have?

-The recent initiative on Karabakh’s recognition as an independent Republic, which came from the ranks of the opposition in the Armenian parliament, will not have any international or legal implications. The international community continues to recognize unanimously the fact that Nagorno-Karabakh is a part of Azerbaijan. In such circumstances any attempt by the Armenian side to exert political pressure through the recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh would be in vain. The adoption of the bill would be no more than a symbolic act, which would only worsen the atmosphere between the direct parties of the conflict.

-Germany, as chair of the OSCE, expressed the need to change the status quo and to work actively on a full settlement of the conflict. At the same time, the idea of introducing mechanisms to investigate the wartime incidents is being put forward. At the same time, it is believed that such mechanisms could ‘cement’ the status quo ...

-We can agree with the German government only if it does not want to make a delay to a resolution of the conflict. The introduction of further mechanisms – for example, the investigation of incidents on the frontline – may be suitable for the stabilization of the situation on the frontline and for reducing the number of victims there. But in this case the fundamental efforts to solve the problem would be more likely to weaken, and peace in the region will remain under threat.

-Can we say that the Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict is a proxy war, where the parties are Russia and Turkey, or does the conflict have its own dynamics?

-Both statements are true. The tensions have marred relations between the Armenians and Azerbaijanis from the beginning of the 20th century, starting with the ‘war’ between the two ethnic groups in 1905-1906. The conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh has been smoldering since 1921, when it was decided to keep the region within Azerbaijan. In the Soviet period the latent conflict was also present.

The recent events also represent a kind of ‘proxy war.’ Russia is a powerful ally of Armenia, and Turkey, which stands behind Azerbaijan, being unloved, is an important member of NATO, and can rely on the alliance in case of a serious problem. This coincidence itself makes clear the urgent need to resolve the conflict.

-What role would you give to the religious factor in the perception of the conflict by the West?

-In public discourse in Germany and other Western countries the religious and cultural differences between the two countries play a very important role, especially in the times of the so-called ‘Islamic terror’. This includes the perception of the territorial conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh and its victims.