AFTER ENCOURAGEMENT OF CHERNOGORIA'S SOVEREIGNTY, IT IS NECESSARY TO TALK NOT ABOUT PRECEDENT BUT ABOUT THE EXISTING REGULARITY OF IN THE MODERN SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Interview of a political scientist, professor Alexander Minassyan to ArmInfo News Agency.

Mr. Minassyan, some home politicians predict drastic amplification of pressure on Armenia and Azerbaijan by the OSCE MG cochair-countries within the next three months in Karabakh issue. They motivate their opinion by the fact that the OSCE MG Cochairman Stephen Mann had predicted a break-through achievement in the negotiation process for the Karabakh conflict settlement just for summer, 2006. What is your vision of the existing situation?

I cannot say how much strong is the pressure. Those, who put pressure and those who undergo pressure, can shed a light on it. However, I should say that both the Russian, French and American Co-chairmen permanently emphasize in their official statements that they do not want to press down on the parties and they have to reach settlement by themselves. By parties one should imply three parties, as it has already been determined by the OSCE Minsk Group. The third party is NKR. But how many years the meetings of the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan, which cannot be called negotiations, have been taking place. These are meetings which prepare a wide format of negotiations. Many political scientists and many in Karabakh perceive the last negotiations just so. The NKR authorities had made it clear more than once that no issue will be resolved without taking their opinion into consideration and that they are a full-value negotiation party.

As for the pressure, availability of balance of global geopolitical forces on a region scale should be noted. Suffice it to say that the cease-fire regime is maintained since 1994 without interference of outer forces and without presence of peace-making forces. It means that the region is in the area of forces balance and undertaking of drastic steps is favorable to no of any great powers. It is quite another matter that it has been ten years already we observe how each of the great powers, I mean the USA, Europe, Russia, try to enter the region, strengthening their positions by invisible successive steps, prima facie, in order to change the balance of forces in the region.

The official meeting of the Presidents of USA and Azerbaijan, held at the end of April, was in the center of attention of the regional Mass Media. The meeting was followed by the letter of George Bush to Ilham Aliyev. Do you consider this letter as an evidence of realization of the White House's plans with respect to Iran?

The open letters do not coincide with the reality in times and purpose agitation aims in times, though I cannot apply it all particularly to this letter. It's not the first time the Co-chairmen state that some months are left till the Karabakh conflict settlement, however, nothing of the kind happens. Such a tendency gets explanation through the prism of the political line of the USA, European Union and Russia, aimed at the strengthening of own positions in the South-Caucasian region. As for Azerbaijan, one should not forget that the republic itself is an explosive formation, where there are numerous contradictions between the Shiites and non-Shiites, Azerbaijan Turks and non-Turks: Lezghins, Tats, Talyshes, Avars, which can become vitally important for Azerbaijan if Baku undertakes a gamble.

How much important is the Iranian factor in Azerbaijan? I mean a political and religious influence of Iran.

The recent years, Turkey is working more actively in Azerbaijan than Iran. It is quite clear since collision of interests takes place today between Azerbaijan and Iran, there are contradictions in definite programs, in the oil one, in particular. Mosques not for Shiites are built in the present Azerbaijan with special aplomb, it is permanently advocated that Azerbaijanians are Turks, though Azerbaijanians do not represent themselves, even today, as a society with a homogeneous origin. I think, the anti-Armenian hysteria in Azerbaijan is partly explained by a strive to join all these ethnic groups into a united nation under pretence of unification necessity in the face of the common enemy.

If Turkey has an influence in the so-called South Azerbaijan, and in your opinion, if the Turkish special services can be connected with escalation of the situation in Eastern Iran?

Undoubtedly, they are. But I think, Iran is not the country, with respect to whom adventurous steps can be undertaken. Although, the case with Yugoslavia and Iraq indicates that there are forces in the USA, ready to make such crazy attempts. Having not digested Yugoslavia, the United States launched a war against Iraq, having not digested Iraq, they started to undertake steps against Iran. However, it cannot last endlessly. Especially as voices are heard in Europe, which call up to a common sense in order to sober up Washington. Of course, peace is favourable for the whole region and economies of all countries of the region are need of peace.

Contradictory opinions are heard with regard to the geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus. Some people say the great investments in Azerbaijan and the problem of Baku-Tbilisi-Jeikhan oil line safety will force the West to hinder from attempts of destabilization in the region. Others assure that the USA will try to use the security area around Nagorno Karabakh as a base in possible operations against Iran, emphasizing that in view of the Law adopted by Azerbaijan's Milli Mejlis on prohibition of foreign military bases disposal in the country's territory, allocation of peace-makers is the only possibility for the American military men to take stands on the border with Iran.

There are many players in the region, therefore, it can be affirmed that political forecasts concerning the regional development are an ungrateful thing. The matter is that each side has its scenario, and not one but tens of possible scenarios and it is difficult to say which scenario will be used by either. In my opinion, sober analysis of events for the recent two years indicates that Azerbaijan does not want to have peacemaking forces in its country, Baku understands the danger of such a step. It proceeds from the vital interests of Azerbaijan, since it is obvious that blood was inevitably shed where the so-called peacemaking forces were allocated. The fact that official Baku shows caution and even adopted a Law on prohibition of foreign military bases disposal, allows to hope that one will be sober enough in Azerbaijan not to make drastic steps, in the issue of peace-makers allocation, in particular. Although, I have to repeat that it is not easy to make forecasts regarding such an intricate region.

One question more, which had bored to death but which did not loose its urgency, nevertheless. A precedent, created by separation of Chernogoria from Serbia and, in future, gaining of independence by Kosovo autonomy. What can the Armenian party undertake in this direction?

Undoubtedly, efforts are required from us to give a correct comment to the events in the former Yugoslavia for the welfare of Nagorno Karabakh. Certainly, the President of Russia and other high-ranking persons stated that the approach to the Kosovo problem should become universal for the conflicts in the post-Soviet territory for recognition of unrecognized states. We have to activate our efforts and I treat with comprehension those means of agitation and those state officials who emphasize the significance of Chernogoria precedent. However, I should note that encouragement of Chernogoria was a political decision. I think it's incorrectly to make a political precedent a corner stone. We should permanently emphasize legal aspects of the Karabakh problem and to represent these events as legal precedent. However, I should note that gain of sovereignty by countries based on a political decision cannot be considered as a precedent. A precedent is, first of all, a category of law and not politics. Therefore, we have to emphasize, first of all, the legal aspect of the problem to represent the precedent in a worthy manner. Yet, it is evident, the Great Powers say the conflict has its specific character, attaching the conflict resolution to political aspects. There is a great number of such precedents and it is necessary to represent them as a regularity. If we give an example of Eritrea, Eastern Timor, etc., one cannot say there are precedents, but we must say all this is considered a regularity in the modern field of international relations, in which Karabakh should be also included. We have to be guided by this formula. But, at the same time, we must represent the legal bases up to the mark. Undoubtedly, Karabakh has more powerful bases for international recognition, it is a more legitimate state than in all the above-mentioned cases.

Konstantin Martirosyan, ArmInfo, 01.05.06