Gayane Novikova: “The US wants to balance Russian activity in the South Caucasus”

Interview by David Stepanyan, Yerevan. Exclusively to VK

The director of the Center of Strategic Analysis ‘Spectrum’, the guest researcher of Davis Center on Russian and Eurasian Research of Harvard University, Gayane Novikova, told VK about the role and prospects of Russia and the CSTO in settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

-          What mechanisms of calming the sides of the conflict exist today? Are Armenia and Azerbaijan able to stop bloodshed in the context of progressing militarization of the region or this problem demands efforts by mediators?

-          To stop bloodshed at the cross-line between Armenian and Azerbaijani military forces not only will of the sides is required, but also understanding of nonsense of bloodshed. It doesn’t happen in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, as Azerbaijan has to demonstrate resolution to return the territories controlled by Armenians at any cost. Thus, for Baku this tactics is reasonable: the Azerbaijani authorities emphasize priority of the conflict’s settlement and support this attitude in the society, but don’t get an opportunity to accuse Armenia of an aggressive behavior. Regarding acts of sabotage, till the full-scaled peacemaking treaty is absent, they are inevitable. The main problem is that the more acts of sabotage are committed, the more people died both from Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The international society has a lot of other problems, and settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh is not a priority. Thus, sink or swim. I think the Armenian defense is tested. At the same time, Russia’s reaction as a leader of the CSTO on a possible military campaign is checked. I speak about Russia only because I except support of Armenia by Central Asian countries and Kazakhstan which will take a neutral position in case of military activities between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

-          Some analysts in Yerevan and Baku believe that only Russia has a possibility to influence significantly the sides of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, imposing its variant of settlement on this or that side. Is this view appropriate, considering the change of the president in Russia and geopolitical situation in the Big Middle East?

-          In general the idea that Russia is the only country which is able to settle the conflict has certain grounds, as Russia is the most serious player in the South Caucasus. Moscow considers the South Caucasus as the zone of its interests. It is no secret that the Kremlin has certain working leverages on internal and external political processes of each state. Russia is building relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan relying on pragmatics and strategic interests of Moscow. I cannot say that the Kremlin has its clear plan of the conflict’s settlement. Moscow is not interested in defining its position, as in this case it has to stand for Armenia or Azerbaijan. By this step Moscow would narrow its strategic partnership and get another “uncomfortable” neighbor (along with Georgia) in the region. Therefore, Moscow seems to feel comfortable in the situation of ambiguity which was formed after 1994. The co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group have many times stated that only direct participants of the conflict can settle it. I think they are right.

-          What is the aim of American diplomacy in the region ahead of the presidential elections in the US?

-          It is obvious that ahead of the presidential elections the American diplomacy needs achievements in the foreign political arena which can be reached by providing stability in real and potential trouble spots. I think Hilary Clinton’s visit was aimed at meetings and discussions in Turkey. While visits to Armenia and Azerbaijan were PR-actions which had to show American interest in stability in the South Caucasus and desire to balance Russia’s activity in our region. The main task of our authorities is preservation of the military-political balance in the region. It is unacceptable to incline on this or that side of non-regional centers – Russia, the US, the EU.

-          Today a lot is said about the possibility of Moscow’s realization of the scenario of the August war with Georgia in case of military operations over Nagorno-Karabakh…

-          I don’t think these talks have any ground, as Russia at the moment is focused on prevention of escalation of the conflict which might lead to unpredictable consequences. First of all, it would be very difficult for Moscow to choose what side to support. Secondly, the August war in 2008 had two reasons for intervention – presence of Russian peacemakers in the South Ossetian conflict zone; and 96-97% of South Ossetian population has Russian citizenship.