Zardusht Alizade: There are no physical walls between Armenians and Azerbaijanis. There are, walls built from the outside, mental and psychological

ArmInfo.Azerbaijani political scientist Zardusht Alizadeh in his interview to ArmInfo shares his vision of the causes of the walls between the Armenian and Azerbaijani peoples, the vision of modern peacekeeping, the essence of the Karabakh conflict. He talks about the role of external factors in fueling him, predicts possible scenarios for further developments around the conflict.  

To what extent do you share the content of the recent publication of human rights defender Georgy Vanyan "The Armenian in Azerbaijan: About the walls that do not exist." Do you also think that today, after a 30-year conflict, there are no walls between our peoples? What is the most direct way in the direction of their destruction? 

Georgi and I are like-minded in everything that concerns the essence, origins, causes, progress and prospects of the conflict. The walls are real, physical, no. There are mental, psychological walls that are built by the beneficiaries of this conflict. Who are they, these conductors of the conflict, what are their intentions and possibilities, is already clear to all who have a bit of common sense. Georgy and I believe that it is useless to appeal to external actors about changing their position, about turning predators into herbivores. All of them in one form or another benefit from the conflict and are not going to refuse this opportunity. The only ones who are undoubtedly losing the conflict are the peoples themselves. The Armenian and Azerbaijani peoples bear not only material, spiritual, but human losses, and this is irreplaceable. Georgy and I believe that there are no visible walls between our peoples, and those invisible walls that are erected between our peoples by political scammers are destroyed and disappear with direct, living human intercourse. The Tekala process demonstrated this most visibly. That is why the enemies of the world so zealously took up arms against this small and modest project. For the sake of organizing direct communication between ordinary citizens of Armenia and Azerbaijan, we work together with him. Unfortunately, our possibilities are limited, and the enemies of the world do everything to avoid them at all.

  To our greatest  regret, peacemaking in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, the so-called. Track 2 over the years due to a number of objective and subjective reasons it became more like a kind of business, a fiction than a humanitarian mission. In your opinion, what are the reasons, and what is the extent of our own responsibility and the responsibility of donors, in particular the EU? 

You are right in the overall assessment of peacekeeping today. But the first peacekeepers had and still have a glorious and honest history of great achievements: the release of prisoners of war and hostages, the fight against torture, the building of bridges for live communication of children, women, scientists, writers, journalists ... The sources of the current low effectiveness of peacekeeping lie in the might of opponents of these initiatives, in the usual indifference and meanness of officials of various donor organizations, their disunity, the absence of a unified and coordinated strategy for peacekeeping. Not only the economy and ordinary consumers of the EU suffer from bureaucracy, but also peacekeeping. Our responsibility? It is that the masses are ignorant, live by myths, believe in scammers, do not foresee the consequences of their actions. In short, it is we who are to blame for being so ignorant and allowed to drag ourselves into this absolutely counter-productive conflict, which is contrary to our national interests. 

Has the "velvet revolution" in Armenia become the first small step on the path towards peace between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, are similar changes possible in Azerbaijan? Or the full-fledged world will be seen only by future generations?

  Honestly, the question made me laugh. Our peoples sit in the cage of conflict, what kind of freedom can there be within the cell? The fact that Nikol Pashinyan is announcing about Karabakh is much more extreme than Serzh Sargsyan's position. As far as I understand, this is not his sincere views. This is the message of Russia, its President Putin, special services, military. "Look, I'm yours, I'm yours too, and according to your rules I play your game called" Karabakh conflict ". And if this is his sincere views, well, it remains for me to sympathize with you and myself ... For myself, because I approve of the anti-corruption orientation of his slogans and activities. 

Today, the absence of a settlement of the Karabakh conflict still predetermines the presence and influence of Russia on Armenia and Azerbaijan. Is the change of power in Armenia capable of leading at least some transformation of Russia's role in the Karabakh conflict? Judging by the publications in the media, Baku once again hopes to drag the Karabakh cable, again with the help of Moscow ...

No, the new Armenian government can not transform Russia's role in the conflict. Sitting in a cage, it is difficult to change something in reality. And the new power of Armenia has proven its fidelity to the cell of the conflict. Maybe it's forced? To hold power? To speculators with national interests did not begin to urge the hurray-patriots to the new government? I can not say for sure. Anyway, Pashinyan has already cast his lot, and I do not expect his ability to change something in the Karabakh issue for the better. As for the changes in Azerbaijan, I can say that negative tendencies are growing, but in the society there is also growing determination to put an end to the mess that has reigned in the country. Yes, there is a note of hope in the Azerbaijani media that "the Kremlin gentleman will pat and caress." But we must always remember the lowest, terribly low level of intelligence of our provincial political scientists. Personally, I do not give a penny for the calculations of these political scientists. Life, as always, will teach them a bitter lesson.

What is the main threat, the factor in favor of the resumption of large-scale military operations around Karabakh. How likely is a big war in the conditions of the existence of the geopolitical status quo, not only between the immediate parties to the conflict, but also between its moderators and regional powers?

I do not see the risk of resuming a large-scale war. Not because Armenia or Azerbaijan does not want this or want, but because the owner of the region already keeps his vassals on a short leash and there is no need for additional shackles. And so, a war type like the April 2016, can start. In order to bring someone to life. Effectively, and completely safe. "Well, several hundred black bust…s will die in this meat grinder, so what?" Those who control the region through a controlled conflict think so, I think those who have concluded the consciousness of two neighboring peoples in the cage of myths and rule over them.