Russian expert pointed to strategic mistake of Baku on the eve of possible negotiations with Yerevan
09/15/2020 – Region: Armenia, Karabakh, Azerbaijan – Topic: Politics, Analytics:
If the OSCE Minsk Group manages to organize a meeting of the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan, then this, of course, will be a great achievement and may become an intermediate way out of the crisis, but I do not see the prerequisites for a positive assessment of the situation.
This was stated by Russian political scientist, expert on the problems of the countries of the Middle East and the Caucasus, Stanislav Tarasov, in an interview with Novosti Armenia-NEWS.am on September 15.
According to him, both after the April 2016 war and after the fighting in Tavush, one would expect a special meeting to be organized at which a new peace agreement would be signed.
“This is due to the fact that if earlier clashes took place in the zone of the Karabakh conflict, now it directly affected the territory of Armenia and Azerbaijan, however, it was not possible to sign a new agreement or a temporary truce. During this period, the Minsk Group worked actively, primarily the Russian co-chairman Igor Popov, who managed to resolve this conflict, but the Russian proposals to organize the meeting were not implemented due to Azerbaijan’s refusal.
Now MG has acted as a mediator to resume peace talks. Baku, which during this period replaced the Minister of Foreign Affairs, sharply criticized the activities of the Minsk Group, hinting that everything should be started almost from scratch. Therefore, the agenda of the negotiation process became uncertain and the question arises:
Should we return to the previous format and the previous agenda, which was between Mamedyarov and Mnatsakanyan, or start with something new. After the visit of the new Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan to Moscow, it became clear that Baku was not inclined to negotiate on the previous agenda, so the issue of a meeting between the two ministers (Bayramov and Mnatsakanyan – ed.) Was hanging in the air. Now we see the activation of the MG, there were reports that the co-chairs held separate talks by telephone with the foreign ministers of the two countries and seemed to have agreed on a meeting. However, since these negotiations are being conducted behind the scenes, and the information is not made public, it is absolutely unclear what agenda the ministers will meet with.
First, this meeting needs to be prepared, and secondly, there are no prerequisites for such negotiations yet. They can only be if the MG pushed through one side according to its scenario. But the Armenian side, as far as I know, did not change its position after the Tavush crisis, unlike Azerbaijan.
If Baku returns to its previous position, that is, it continues the scenario that was outlined during the dialogue between Mamedyarov and Mnatsakanyan, then this indicates that Azerbaijan is not inclined to a forceful scenario and is ready to negotiate, ”he said.
Tarasov explained that for Baku the prospects for negotiations are also very vague, since he made a serious strategic mistake by activating Turkey during the Tavshu crisis. “Earlier, during the period of the Armenian-Azerbaijani exacerbation, Ankara made some statements, but it did it“ in the background, ”but now it showed activity and even readiness to take part in a possible conflict.
This led to the fact that the Karabakh conflict ended up in a zone of potential confrontation between two military blocs – the CSTO (which includes Armenia) and NATO (which includes Turkey). This means that the possibilities and prospects for the settlement of the Karabakh conflict are still hampered by the previous scenario, and Azerbaijan, trying to integrate Turkey, among other things, let Ankara down, ”the political scientist said.
Tarasov stressed that both the April war and the Tavush crisis remain mysterious, since there are many ambiguities, there are no international observers, and the initiator of the clashes is unknown. “The opinion that the Armenians are trying to seize some area is complete nonsense. Why would they? It’s another matter if, for example, Azerbaijan seeks to take at least one or two regions in order to somehow signify its victory.
It can be assumed that Baku seeks to change the status quo. Hence the question: who is the initiator of the conflict? The second point, I repeat, is that Azerbaijan makes serious strategic mistakes by integrating this conflict into global geopolitics, which risks escalating into a second long-running “Palestinian conflict”.
As events develop, its settlement according to the previous scenario becomes more and more difficult, in addition, MG resources begin to shrink. To avoid such a situation, it was necessary to go to intermediate negotiations, ”he added. The expert expressed confidence that the problem is in Azerbaijan, which dismissed Mamedyarov, who advocated the continuation of the dialogue.
“Now the dialogue has been disrupted, and Bayramov is trying to resume it from a maximalist position, which is not working. What will the ministers talk about then? Everything is still at the level of “negotiations on negotiations”. It is possible that the new minister received instructions from Aliyev to negotiate in order to announce a new closed-type agenda.
The question is whether Azerbaijan, which wanted to start negotiations from a “blank slate” and found itself in international isolation, including due to the strengthening of the alliance with Turkey, is ready to conduct a dialogue, ”Tarasov said.
As for the criticism from Baku regarding the supply of Russian arms to Armenia, as the political scientist noted, this may be related to the data of Russian intelligence on the intensification of the Turkish military presence in Azerbaijan and the decision to restore the balance.
Recall that the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs held separate telephone talks with Armenian Foreign Minister Zohrab Mnatsakanyan and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov and invited the ministers to personally meet with the co-chairs in the coming weeks to further clarify their positions in order to resume serious substantive negotiations without preconditions.
news.am/rus/news/602288.html
English translation – LOUSAVOR AVEDIS:
