Vice President of the United States Joe Biden’s phone conversations with the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan on May 21 of the current year were an attempt to prevent the aspiration of Moscow and Baku to continue the joint “tradition” when during the negotiations, you say what the opposite side wants to hear and then you do what you want. By the results of the discussions held in Vienna by the initiative of the OSCE Minsk Group, a tripartite statement was signed on 16 May this year, which reads that the Presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan have agreed: “To reduce the risk of further violence, they agreed to finalize in the shortest possible time the OSCE investigative mechanisms.
The Presidents also agreed to the expansion of the existing Office of the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairperson in Office.” But a few days later, when Russian military-industrial sector coordinator, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, again visited Baku, Azerbaijan was uttering thru the lips of the Head of the foreign relations department of Aliyev’s administration, Novruz Mammadov, that Baku has not assumed any commitment over the expansion of the existing Office of the Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairperson in Office, Andrzej Kasprzyk’s mission mandate “can not” be changed. The readouts of Biden’s phone calls are summarized in a brief release of the White House, according to which the leaders anyway “agreed on the importance of quickly following through on the pledge to expand the existing OSCE mission and to finalize an OSCE investigative mechanism.” In other words, it turns out that Azerbaijan took on this commitment very well, and there is no refuting from Baku in the statement of the White House, which will insist the opposite. The simple logic suggests that if you are going to a peaceful solution and have no intention or are not interested in deviating from this path, then these moves simply do not have any alternative. It is beyond doubt that this does not fit into the intentions of Baku, however, Baku will have to follow this path and simply cannot arbitrarily deviate from it if there is a real consensus between the mediators. The aforementioned tripartite statement shows that this consensus apparently exists.
However, the backward step allowed by Baku shows that yes, one of the three co-chairs of the Minsk Group encourages Azerbaijan to feel itself “free” both from enshrined commitments and on continuing it stance obstructing the security and stability in the region. Biden’s phone call shows that Washington is closely watching the situation in the region and is determined to suspend the “free” interpretation of commitments assumed by Baku. “Annulling” the agreements reached in Vienna failed, Washington will not allow. It is common to say that in the Karabakh settlement process, Russia and the West unlike other regions and despite the current relationships are operating together. However, as we can see, the reality is more “complicated”, rather say, just the opposite.
Moscow against the West and the United States has launched a “simultaneous game session” on several “chessboards” and at the same time, adds the number of these “chessboards”: Arctic, Baltic Sea, Central Europe, Ukraine, Moldova, the Black Sea, Georgia, the Middle East. In all of these mentioned regions, Moscow acts as a pronounced opponent of the US strategy, the great portions goes to the campaign resistance. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, i.e. the highest military officer Lieutenant General Joseph Dunford calls Russia revanchist, an obviously antagonistic state, and declares that the US intends to “show muscles,” of which it has avoided since the end of the Cold War.
Read also
NATO announces a dual approach towards Moscow: defense and dialogue which is aimed at restraining Russia directly. And the West, however, is able if not to disrupt then at least to substantially limit and restrain Moscow’s opportunities by making the political price of aggressive behavior unacceptable high for Moscow. But we also see that in the case of Nagorno-Karabakh, the situation is different by one important fact. Here, Moscow can hide behind “the Western energy partner”, “self-reliant”, “sovereign” Aliyev’s regime and carry out its own game through him. Functionally, number one ally and “transmitters” of Moscow in the Caucasus, in fact, is Baku rather than Yerevan as it might seem from a superficial glance. Basically, the four-day war was kicked accordingly. Armenia’s posture with its pro-Russian reputation, handing over everything to Russia, its accession to the CSTO, “detention” into the EaEU and pushed to the corner facilitates Moscow’s affairs. Therewith, Moscow received a broad field for its maneuvers, by keeping the West in misleading and delusion, by continuing blackmailing the parties to the conflict and simultaneously acting as a “constructive partner” to the West on the background of Armenia’s passivity, passive and timid policy, and its unilateral dependence from Moscow. The task of Yerevan is not to allow a new war and in this respect, Armenia’s interests totally coincide with the West rather than with Russia which at any convenient moment may again give its “approval” and give a few days to Baku for initiating a new attempt by force and essentially change the status quo. Let us consider this simple fact, once again repeating that without Russia’s multi-billion supply of arms, without Moscow’s moral-political encouragement, Aliyev is just unable and will not be able to run an aggressive policy that it runs today, and it will not do it unless it directly stems from the interests of Russia. Armenia’s diplomacy in the process launched in Vienna must solve several issues, the most important of which is to make the political price for unleashing a new war unacceptable for Moscow and Baku. Therefore, in parallel with the Vienna process, Yerevan must take action to free its neck and hands from Russian “alliance”, “age-old friendly”, “strategic” and other handcuffs. It is necessary to re-evaluate the threats and opportunities to overcome them, to revise the political strategy of who our true enemies are and who our potential allies are on this way. This is the only way to avoid war and new losses. Let us repeat once again: Azerbaijan can allow itself to make a mistake and lose a few more times while Armenia and Artsakh never and in no way.
Ruben MEHRABYAN
“Aravot” daily
