Foreign

Diaspora pressure cannot force Azerbaijan to change its political course

Interview of “Moskovsky Komsomolets” newspaper’s political commentator, well-known Russian journalist Alexander Budberg, with APA’s Moscow correspondent Farid Akbarov

– Alexander Petrovich, what is happening in Russia-Azerbaijan relations? After the downing of the AZAL plane over Grozny, the tension reached its peak with the Yekaterinburg events this June. It would be interesting to know your opinion.

– It seems to me that the tension that arose between the two countries a few months ago has now somewhat subsided. On both sides, too. One can expect normalization and calming of relations. Probably, it will not be the same as before – that is, the strategic allied relations as they were before the plane crash and the events in Yekaterinburg. However, these relations will remain friendly-neighborly, businesslike, I would even say allied.

If, after the plane crash, Russia had immediately apologized and paid compensation, then the subject would have been closed immediately

– It seems that Russia is avoiding responsibility for the plane crash. Despite the evidence presented by the Azerbaijani side, Russia does not even want to make a simple official apology and pay compensation. In your opinion, what is the reason for this?

– It seems to me that contradictions had been piling up between the two countries. The actions of each side irritated the other. It’s about the different approaches of the parties to certain processes. In my opinion, a tragic incident occurred. This incident was not committed deliberately, intentionally. Most likely, when the plane belonging to Azerbaijan Airlines was landing in the city of Grozny, it was fired upon by Russia’s Air Defense Systems. After that, the pilots acted heroically by flying to the Kazakh shore of the Caspian Sea. There, they attempted to land the aircraft. Of course, this is a great tragedy. It cannot be interpreted in any other way. It was not a deliberate act. That is why I think it would have been proper to immediately apologize and pay compensation. Then the issue would have been closed right away. But it seems to me that certain forces within Russia, for some reason, chose another path. These forces did not want to admit the obvious. This, of course, caused irritation on the Azerbaijani side. At some point, the known reaction of the Azerbaijani side began to irritate our “ultra-patriots.” These “ultra-patriots,” in a certain way, wanted to “show Azerbaijan its place,” so to speak. They wanted to demonstrate that we are not equal countries. That the smaller partner cannot demand an apology from the larger partner, from a giant country like Russia. This, in turn, provoked great anger in Baku. Moreover, in Baku, they believed that Moscow actually understood very well what had happened. Later, the absence of Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev from the May 9 parade… and then the events that followed.

What is happening in relations with Azerbaijan is the result of the absence in Russia of a single center responsible for relations between Moscow and Baku

– After the plane incident, a campaign was launched in Russia against Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijani diaspora in the country was attacked. Who do you think is behind this? In general, what was the purpose of this action?

– Russia wanted to show Azerbaijan that it has levers of pressure, especially against the Azerbaijani diaspora in Russia… In fact, this is a complex subject. The complexity lies in the fact that all those people are Russian citizens. We cannot divide Russian citizens based on their nationality. This contradicts the law, the constitution, and common sense. Nevertheless, Moscow tried to exert pressure on this issue. In my opinion, this was a very crude step. Azerbaijan, in turn, reacted very harshly. But then the situation began to calm down to some extent. Perhaps this is connected with who is responsible for Azerbaijan-Russia relations in Baku. In Azerbaijan, it is clear that the strategic line in relations with Russia is determined by President Ilham Aliyev. But in Moscow, the situation is different. In Russia, various institutions and different individuals are responsible for relations with Azerbaijan. They have different positions. We observed this even in the processes that unfolded within a single day. First, one decision was made, and then the same decision was canceled. It is clear that there is no single position in Russia regarding relations with Azerbaijan – there are different positions.

Russia must understand that it cannot rudely order a partner: “you must do this, not that”

– Which decision are you talking about?

– In Perm, there was an art expert named Naile Allahverdiyeva, of Azerbaijani origin. She worked at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Perm. She had a “problem” there related to “contemporary art.” She left the country. Within a single day, the Perm court put her on the international wanted list. Then, the regional court canceled the search decision that very same day. It was evident that within one issue there were different positions. I think what is happening in relations with Azerbaijan is the result of the absence in Russia of a single center responsible for relations between Moscow and Baku. It seems to me that the emergence of such a center now will lead to a decrease in tensions between the two countries. The sides will have to collectively discuss certain activities. They will have to accept different positions. In my opinion, it must be understood that law enforcement structures cannot always determine political policy. In this sense, I think tensions will decrease. Because there are many mutually beneficial economic, political, and other factors between the two countries that will not allow Russia and Azerbaijan to step aside. Otherwise, it will be a loss for both sides. Neither Azerbaijan will fly to the moon, nor Russia… We are neighbors. We have always had good relations. In Baku, Russian is spoken better than in any other CIS capital. Therefore, we have no other way but to build mutually beneficial, friendly-neighborly relations. Russia simply must understand that it cannot rudely order a partner: “you must do this, not that.”

Sitting in Moscow and pretending nothing happened is not foresight

There are always problems between countries, even between allied countries. There have always been problems between Russia and Azerbaijan as well. Undoubtedly, the plane crash became an important emotional trigger in the deterioration of these relations. I personally saw how people in Baku reacted to this tragedy. That is a very important point and must not be forgotten. Sitting in Moscow and imagining that nothing has happened is foolishness. Azerbaijan is a small country. A plane crashed and their people died. It should also be mentioned that the pilots were ethnically Azerbaijani Russians. The attention and care the Azerbaijani leadership showed to the families of those who died in the plane crash was very important. All of this matters for a country like Azerbaijan. Therefore, sitting in Moscow and behaving as if nothing happened is not foresight.

The author of ending the conflict with Armenia and opening the transport corridor is President Ilham Aliyev

– Could there be other factors that caused the deterioration of relations?

– Of course, other problems also lie at the foundation of the contradictions between Russia and Azerbaijan. In my opinion, the main issue is achieving a full peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia and an agreement on opening transport corridors in the South Caucasus. If we recall the November 9, 2020 agreement, we see that it mentioned the opening of the Zangezur corridor and that control over this corridor would be carried out by the Border Troops of the Russian Federal Security Service. That agreement satisfied all parties. However, despite almost five years having passed since the signing of the agreement, nothing was done. Therefore, the Azerbaijani leadership felt a desire to take advantage of the changing international situation. The U.S. administration changed, and the new administration’s approach to settling various problems, including those in the South Caucasus, changed. A request was sent to the U.S. about this. I believe the Americans gave a positive response to that request. It then became possible to attempt, under U.S. rather than Russian patronage, to open transport corridors between Armenia and Azerbaijan and to sign a peace treaty.

The value of peace with Armenia and a corridor to Nakhchivan — a conditional route to Europe — is priceless for Azerbaijan

– Could this irritate someone in Moscow?

– Of course, it could. I think that after the settlement of Azerbaijan–Armenia relations, Russia–Azerbaijan relations will undergo another change. The point is not that relations will simply improve or worsen. The atmosphere of the relationship will change fundamentally, and the attitudes of all participants in this process will change. Undoubtedly, the authorship of the legal termination of the conflict with Armenia and the opening of transport corridors belongs to President Ilham Aliyev. It is understandable that the opening of a corridor to Nakhchivan is a very important aspect for Azerbaijan. A legally established peace agreement with Armenia is a very important matter. I think and am certain that Ilham Aliyev wants to see where his country will be a year or a year and a half from now. Therefore, if we suppose that someone tried to pressure Baku by committing massacres in Yekaterinburg, this is a very mistaken stance. The values do not match. The price of peace with Armenia and opening the corridor to Nakhchivan — effectively a road to Europe — is priceless for Azerbaijan. I believe no pressure will result in Azerbaijan abandoning this.

No one but President Ilham Aliyev could have succeeded in involving the United States in the Armenia–Azerbaijan peace process

I believe that the transfer of the Zangezur corridor to U.S. management is also an Azerbaijani initiative. Of course, I could be mistaken. I do not know this exactly. It was necessary to involve a giant player with resources in the South Caucasus peace process. You had to persuade a giant player to pay attention to this problem. The U.S. is always preoccupied. On one hand there is Israel and Europe, on the other hand the Russia–Ukraine conflict… Trump would have had to spend time and resources on this. Therefore, I think that no one but President Ilham Aliyev could have succeeded in bringing the American side into this process.

Russia has lost the chance to open the Zangezur corridor, to control it, and to take a new position in the new reality between Azerbaijan and Armenia

– So, does it turn out that Russia blames not Armenia, but Azerbaijan for the transfer of control over the Zangezur corridor to the United States?

– Some forces in Russia think that Azerbaijan is showing too much independence, excessive freedom. If Russia had wanted the Zangezur corridor to be opened, it had every opportunity for that, and an agreement had been reached. If Russia had wanted this corridor to become a reality, it would have done so within five years. The point is not that Russia is blaming Azerbaijan for this matter. The point is that the emotional tension between the two countries has been connected with a set of external factors. Both sides understand perfectly well that relations are being rebuilt in accordance with changes in the international situation. I do not believe that Russia is against the opening of the Zangezur corridor. I believe that Russia had a good historic chance to open the Zangezur corridor, to control it, and to take a new position in the new reality between Azerbaijan and Armenia. But for some reason, Russia did not do it and lost this historic chance. Perhaps Moscow did not have enough resources for this. We know that Russia is preoccupied with the conflict in Ukraine. Russia did not use the chance given to it on the basis of the November 2020 agreement. That is already a fact. I cannot say why Russia did not want to use this opportunity. But the fact that it did not is obvious. We see this when we look at the outcome. Nothing happened.

– Could it be that Armenia did not want this? That official Yerevan was against Russia controlling the Zangezur corridor?

– I am not ready to say that. Because I am not an expert on Russia–Armenia relations. On the other hand, I can say that the U.S. administration had a different position on the Zangezur corridor. We do not know. With Trump’s re-election as president, the situation changed sharply. It became clear that many issues were already behind us and that it was possible to try something new.

Even breaking off relations with Russia can be imagined in the name of Azerbaijan’s national interests, but it is impossible for Baku to retreat from its political line under pressure

– I would like to return to the topic of the campaign carried out in Russia against Azerbaijanis. Do you really think official Moscow believed it could pressure the Azerbaijani authorities this way?

– Most likely, when Russia started exerting pressure on the Azerbaijani diaspora, which clearly had the character of a campaign, they thought it would be similar to the campaign of pressure carried out against Georgians in Russia during the 2008 war with Georgia. I think there is a difference in the very nature of the Azerbaijani community and the Georgian community in Russia. Even when we speak about crime, these communities are completely different. Therefore, applying the same trick with regard to Azerbaijanis was a mistake. So what happened? Of course, Moscow wanted to show the Azerbaijani leadership that it had significant levers against Azerbaijan, that it could exert pressure. The large number of Azerbaijanis living in Russia, the money they send to their relatives in Azerbaijan, etc. Moscow thought it could put pressure on Azerbaijan even without war or economic blockade. I believe this is not possible today. In the 1990s they tried this and it did not work. As for now, it will not work either. Therefore, I think that at the foundation of the strategic line of the Azerbaijani leadership stands the future of the Republic of Azerbaijan, of the state itself. The Azerbaijani leadership thinks about what geopolitical situation the country will be in two years from now. This is of such great strategic importance for the Azerbaijani leadership that it cannot be sacrificed to pressure against the Azerbaijani diaspora in Russia. Pressure on the diaspora cannot force Azerbaijan to change its political line. In the name of Azerbaijan’s national interests, one could even imagine cutting off relations with Russia, but it is impossible for Baku to retreat from its political line under pressure. The national interests of the state stand at the highest level for the Azerbaijani leadership. There is no need for any other interpretation here.

– Could the signing of a peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia, and its signing under Washington’s mediation, lead to a further deterioration in Moscow–Baku relations?

– I do not think so. Look, we are entering a new era. The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan is over. I know you will laugh, but I am sure that within the next five years, maybe even sooner, joint Armenia–Azerbaijan businesses will emerge. There will be trade. I am sure of it. This is my forecast. Times are changing, and war is losing its potential to be a decisive factor not only in the policies of Armenia and Azerbaijan but also of all their neighbors — Iran, Türkiye, and Russia. Simply put, war as a conditionally important element in relations disappears, losing its significance as an instrument of pressure and influence. It will no longer be necessary to travel to Nakhchivan through Iran. Türkiye will open its borders with Armenia. I am sure that the Azerbaijan–Armenia border will also open. Georgia will breathe freely as well. Many things will change. This will be another reality, and in this reality, war will no longer be an instrument in political relations.

From the perspective of Russia’s state interests, there is no alternative to living in peace and good-neighborliness with Azerbaijan

– Then Moscow will have to reconcile itself to this reality, right?

– Everyone will have to reconcile with this reality. First of all, Yerevan will have to reconcile with it. Because Yerevan has not achieved what it wanted in this historical period. Iran, too, will have to reconcile. We are entering a new era, a new time, and everyone will have to accept it. This is not a reason to be offended by someone. This is a reason to build relations under different conditions. Relations will have to be built. Today, peace between Baku and Yerevan looks like this. The Americans will make money here, control the corridor, and be the guarantors of the peace agreement.

Those calling for conflict or war with Azerbaijan are enemies of Russia

I believe that if we think from the point of view of Russia’s interests, of its state interests, there is no alternative to relations with Azerbaijan that are peaceful, neighborly, and based on mutually beneficial trade. Everything directed toward conflict is anti-Russian, an anti-Russia stance. On television, respected people shout that this will not be the last “Special Military Operation” in our generation’s lifetime. Maybe not in their generation’s lifetime, I do not know, but I do know this: those calling for conflict, for war with Azerbaijan are enemies of Russia. I hope that common sense, the desire to live in peace and to make money will prevail over evil. I hope there is a great chance for this. The calm that we are observing in relations now gives reason to say so.

• Next round of Azerbaijan-Latvia strategic dialogue held
• Bayramov: Azerbaijan and Jordan can jointly access nearby regions by utilizing existing potential
• U.S. congressional delegation visits Alley of Martyrs in Baku