ArmInfo. Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, former Foreign Minister of Artsakh Arman Melikyan, in an interview with ArmInfo, shares his vision of the latest geopolitical trends in the South Caucasus. He also analyzes the latest processes around Armenia in the light of the main regional and extra-regional geopolitical players.
- Based on the current activity of the main geopolitical players in the South Caucasus: Russia, Turkey and Iran, one gets the impression of the impending change in the post-war status quo, formed as a result of the 44-day war. Moreover, we are talking about changes on the scale of the entire region, and not only in relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. A characteristic background of everything that is happening is the lack of information from the Armenian government about the ongoing and future processes. Please, share your assessment of what is happening and, most importantly, the possible prospects for current processes.
-The breakdown of the status quo established in 1994 in Artsakh following the 44-day war and subsequent trilateral agreements should be considered in the context of advancing the global process of reformatting Eurasia. In this case, the overlapping of interests and the resulting close interaction of a number of states in the region and influential extra-regional forces led to disastrous consequences for Artsakh and the Republic of Armenia. This catastrophe was prepared not only by external forces, but also by internal ones - the absolute helplessness, incapacity of the Armenian political leadership and military command in organizing and conducting hostilities indicates that the Armenian side lost long before the start of hostilities at the end of September 2020. The reason for this was the absolute lack of understanding of the essence and direction of the current regional and global processes and, as a consequence, the inability to identify and adequately assess the risks they generate for the Armenian vital interests. Moreover, the Armenian leadership ignored all warnings regarding the likelihood of such risks and the necessity and possibilities of neutralizing them. As for the motives and the imposition of efforts necessary for the interaction of external forces, they have many levels. For Azerbaijan, the war provided an opportunity to take control of about 10,000 square kilometers of territory previously controlled by the authorities and the Artsakh Defense Army. For Turkey, the war opened an era of a full-scale military presence on the territory of Azerbaijan with the prospect of absorbing the latter through a possible "Anschluss", which will mean a gradual transformation of the South Caucasus into NATO territory, and at the same time a consistent strengthening of Turkey's positions in the countries of post-Soviet Central Asia. For Israel, the next stage of the operation to neutralize hostile regimes has come - in this case, after the "neutralization" of Iraq, Libya, Syria and the partial collapse of the foundations of Egyptian statehood, it is the turn of the elimination of the Iranian theocratic regime. I hasten to say that this is a description of only part of the interests of some of the participants involved and only a small part of the current process of political reformatting of the continent.
- Are the Turkish intentions of Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan an independent initiative or is it part of the implementation of Russian communication initiatives from November 9, 2020 and January 11, 2021? And what cost their implementation may have for Armenia?
- The Russian side has been openly conducting a constant dialogue with Ankara for five years about the possibilities of normalizing Armenian-Turkish relations and unblocking regional communications. Of course, the most important precondition for moving in this direction was the settlement of the Artsakh problem. At some point, some Russian political and expert circles introduced the formula "territories in exchange for a reduction in tension on the line of contact ". Based on the foregoing, it can be argued that Russian approaches to unblocking communications and linking the process to the Artsakh problem were voiced long before Pashinyan came to power. Nevertheless, Nikol Pashinyan will bear the responsibility for any decisions made today by the Armenian leadership in the field of Armenian-Turkish relations, the opening of communications or corridors and for any of their consequences.
-Based on the statements made during the meetings of the Prime Ministers of Armenia and Georgia and the Prime Minister of Georgia with the President of Turkey, we have to state Georgia's interest in the current processes with the participation of Armenia, Turkey, and, not in last place, Azerbaijan. Can it be noted that this interest is by no means limited to mediation? What can Georgia get from the unblocking of the region, which benefits mainly from the Armenian, Turkish and Azerbaijani transit through its own territory?
-Possibly, Georgia proceeds from the fact that parallel to the radical strengthening of the military-political positions of Turkey in Azerbaijan, the role and influence of Russia in the South Caucasus as a whole will decrease, and it would be good to take advantage of this. And this can be used, for example, if Tbilisi can successfully replace Moscow in the process of establishing a positive political dialogue to begin with between the leaderships of Turkey and Armenia. At the same time, it is important to note that influential non-regional players - world centers of power - will be interested in such a replacement.
-Do you consider it possible to harmonize and simultaneously implement transport and communication projects "North-South" and "East-West" - (Meghri corridor) or are they two fundamentally contradictory geopolitical projects?
- I would not particularly focus on communications now - they can only indicate certain contours of real or possible influence in relation to any territory and at the same time not work in a free mode. Only deciphering the real interests and intentions of the initiators of the global reformatting and determining the appetites of their "assistants" on the ground will make it possible to distinguish false, deceitful actions from steps aimed at achieving their true goals.
- It is already known that the main topic of the Sochi meeting between Putin and Erdogan on September 29 will be Syria, in general, and Idlib, in particular. Are Syria and Artsakh part of the same chain in the Russian-Turkish contradictions, or are they fundamentally different cases? And in this light, can we expect changes in the settlement of the conflict over Artsakh if an agreement is reached between Moscow and Ankara on the issue of northern Syria?
-I am not inclined to directly link Syria and Artsakh in the context of Russian-Turkish relations. However, let's not forget that it was after the crisis that erupted as a result of the destruction of a Russian military aircraft by the Turks and the demonstrative murder of a pilot that an unexpected honeymoon began in Russian-Turkish relations. Apparently, it was this period at the same time that created the basis for voicing Russian initiatives to normalize Armenian-Turkish relations, and even in connection with the solution of the Artsakh issue.
-The last month has become a period, accompanied by mutual threats, periodic verbal duels between various secondary representatives of the authorities of Iran and Azerbaijan. All this is accompanied by the accumulation of the Iranian military on the border with Azerbaijan. What is wrong today in the relations between Baku and Tehran, does Israel play a role in this, and what is Iran seeking from Azerbaijan?
- For Israel, the overthrow of the theocratic regime in Iran is an existential issue. In this light, the conduct of intelligence activities directed against Iran from the territory of Azerbaijan has been and will continue. By the way, it is possible that, for a long period of time, reconnaissance drones purchased by Azerbaijan, having completed their tasks in the sky of Artsakh, then flew into the airspace of Iran. It seems that Tehran understands the threat to itself arising from Israel's actions and the risks arising from its close military cooperation with Azerbaijan. In my opinion, Tehran missed the time and opportunity to effectively counter the emerging threat from the north. Most likely, the development of an unfavorable situation around Iran should seriously concern China as well. Apparently it will not take long to wait for the denouement.