Foreign

Foreign

Analyst Amanda Paul: It may only be a matter of time before a â€œpot-shotâ€™ or skirmish in Nagorno Karabakh spins out of control and leads to renewed war

03 March 2011 10:58 (UTC +04:00)

Washington. Isabel Levine â€“ APA. APAâ€™s Washington DC correspondentâ€™s interview with Amanda Paul, well-known analyst on Caucasus issues, who currently serves as a policy analyst at the European Policy Centre

- Some say that security situation in the Caucasus region is under risks. Would you agree with that?

- While the situation is Georgia is far from perfect, the South Ossetia and Abkhazia conflicts do not presently represent a significant threat to the security of the region. The biggest threat to security comes from the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict where tensions have significantly increased over the past twelve months. Indeed with a stalling of the peace process, an increase in defense spending by both Armenia and Azerbaijan, increasing talk of war from both countries, and a significant increase of violations of the ceasefire, it may only be a matter of time before a â€œpot-shotâ€™ or skirmish spins out of control and leads to renewed war. The West, however, has not woken up to this fact yet and seemingly continues to mistakenly believe that the current status quo is sustainable.

- What about the US in particular? How much of its involvement do you see in the South Caucasus right now?

- While the US has not disappeared totally from the region it has become less visible. This is not really that surprising given it has had to prioritize its foreign policy activities and the South Caucasus is not near the top of the list. President Obama is far too pre-occupied with Iran, Afghanistan, Middle East and events unfolding in North Africa to spare much time to thinking about the South Caucasus. In fact, I would say the US is increasingly giving the impression that it believes the EU should take more responsibility and beef up its role in the region, particularly given it is the EUâ€™s backyard and part of its neighborhood policies. While the South Caucasus has the potential to be a strategic bridgehead, US domestic policies and relations with the Kremlin have become more important than strategic considerations with little or no understanding of the realities on the ground by the West.

- When speaking about the Nagorno-Karabakh the contradiction between the principle of territorial integrity and the rights of nations to self-determination appears to be a problem. How do you see the way out?

- I think we have to be realistic. Most people have no clue where the South Caucasus is let alone the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Of course further efforts should be made to better inform people about the conflict, the inherent dangers of renewed war and the possible outcomes of such a war.
The right of self-determination does not necessarily include the right of territorial separation from an internationally recognized state as is defined in the Helsinki Final Act. While the decision of the eventual final status of Karabakh is still a long time in the future, further efforts to promote different models should be carried out. For example South Tyrol in Italy and Finlandâ€™s Aland islands. Indeed all efforts should be made by the international community to push for the restoration of the territorial integrity of a sovereign state. The longer the status quo continues the more imbedded it will become, making territorial integrity more difficult to restore.

- This is perhaps creates an obstacle regarding the regional integration. Can Azerbaijan and Georgia become members of the for example, Northern Alliance with the unsettled conflicts in their territories?

- While both Georgia and Azerbaijan cooperate with Russia it is unlikely that either will become a member anytime soon. Georgia, as we all know, desired this but pushed to hard and too fast, which â€œupsetâ€ Russia. At the end of the day the certain key states that are members of NATO seemed to decide that the stress and havoc that would be caused by upsetting Moscow was not worth the trouble. Whether this approach will change in the future remains to be seen; As for Azerbaijan they have never expressed any strong interest in joining NATO, although they have close ties and have been a crucial ally to the West and particularly the US in the war against terrorism, in particular vis-Ã -vis Afghanistan. Russia still views itself as the main security actor in the South Caucasus and would probably like to increase this presence still further given the opportunity. A NATO presence on the ground would almost certainly not be welcome.

- At one point possibility of cooperation between Russia and US in the security sphere was discussed in the media? What would be the role of South Caucasus in that cooperation?

- The US and Russia already cooperate through NATO and Russia has been particular helpful vis-Ã -vis Afghanistan where it shares common concerns. Presently there are no permanent NATO forces in the South Caucasus but a not inconsiderable Russian presence. Russia has created a number of its own security initiatives involving the CIS states, and while not comparable to NATO, Russia (quite rightly) will never give up on what it considers to be its natural right to have a security role in the region that that it views as its zone of influence.