On March 5, the Russian, Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents met in Sochi to seek a settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders agreed to exchange all prisoners-of-war in the nearest future, to solve all disputes by peaceful means and to investigate possible cease-fire violations on the contact line.
ValdaiClub.com interview with Orietta Moscatelli, New Europe Project Chief at the Apcom Press Agency
The meeting demonstrated that there are clear-cut preconditions that must be met in order to reach a compromise on the issue. What is the foundation for a successful compromise?
The March 5 meeting in Sochi between the Russian, Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents resulted in a joint declaration on the need to solve disputes in a peaceful manner and to investigate ceasefire violations on the so called contact line. This is too insignificant an outcome for the eighth round of talks in the trilateral format, with President Dmitri Medvedev both personally and actively involved in the last two years of the mediation process.
At this stage, Armenia seems to be the more reluctant side, although Azerbaijan noted a more positive approach from their counterparts after the last meeting. However, de facto, both Yerevan and Baku have been acting for years on an all or nothing principle, which makes a compromise virtually impossible. And although the 2008 war in Georgia and the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement have given the mediation process a sense of urgency and necessity in terms of overcoming the stand-off, very little has been achieved and no real Armenian-Azerbaijani reset seems to be around the corner. Over the last year, ceasefire violations have become more frequent, with at least 28 people having been killed, including three soldiers. This might not be a definite sign of a new war approaching, but it shows that both sides are using weaponry more and more often.
This is the eighth meeting of its kind. How do you see Russias role as a mediator? Is it enough to continue holding these trilateral talks, or does it make sense to bring the other co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group into the negotiating process?
Now, this puts into question Russias role as a mediator as well. The Kremlins involvement seems at the same time both necessary and complicating. As the major power in the region, it has to play its cards carefully, considering a multitude of aspects in terms of its relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan, ranging from energy aspects to commercial interests.
Last year, rumours that Moscow was selling new missiles to Baku sparked an outcry in Armenian media. This complicated scenario suggests that Russia might ultimately prefer an eternally frozen conflict, aiming to preserve its influence in the region. At the same time, we can be sure that Dmitri Medvedev never would have become personally involved in the process had he not believed that some kind of breakthrough was not only possible, but also in sight. Promoting a solution can actually be another way to enhance Russian influence, and a breakthrough in an old conflict would be a major score for the young leader, as well as for his nation.
Full version of the interview was published on valdaiclub.com
ValdaiClub.com interview with Orietta Moscatelli, New Europe Project Chief at the Apcom Press Agency
The meeting demonstrated that there are clear-cut preconditions that must be met in order to reach a compromise on the issue. What is the foundation for a successful compromise?
The March 5 meeting in Sochi between the Russian, Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents resulted in a joint declaration on the need to solve disputes in a peaceful manner and to investigate ceasefire violations on the so called contact line. This is too insignificant an outcome for the eighth round of talks in the trilateral format, with President Dmitri Medvedev both personally and actively involved in the last two years of the mediation process.
At this stage, Armenia seems to be the more reluctant side, although Azerbaijan noted a more positive approach from their counterparts after the last meeting. However, de facto, both Yerevan and Baku have been acting for years on an all or nothing principle, which makes a compromise virtually impossible. And although the 2008 war in Georgia and the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement have given the mediation process a sense of urgency and necessity in terms of overcoming the stand-off, very little has been achieved and no real Armenian-Azerbaijani reset seems to be around the corner. Over the last year, ceasefire violations have become more frequent, with at least 28 people having been killed, including three soldiers. This might not be a definite sign of a new war approaching, but it shows that both sides are using weaponry more and more often.
This is the eighth meeting of its kind. How do you see Russias role as a mediator? Is it enough to continue holding these trilateral talks, or does it make sense to bring the other co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group into the negotiating process?
Now, this puts into question Russias role as a mediator as well. The Kremlins involvement seems at the same time both necessary and complicating. As the major power in the region, it has to play its cards carefully, considering a multitude of aspects in terms of its relations with Armenia and Azerbaijan, ranging from energy aspects to commercial interests.
Last year, rumours that Moscow was selling new missiles to Baku sparked an outcry in Armenian media. This complicated scenario suggests that Russia might ultimately prefer an eternally frozen conflict, aiming to preserve its influence in the region. At the same time, we can be sure that Dmitri Medvedev never would have become personally involved in the process had he not believed that some kind of breakthrough was not only possible, but also in sight. Promoting a solution can actually be another way to enhance Russian influence, and a breakthrough in an old conflict would be a major score for the young leader, as well as for his nation.
Full version of the interview was published on valdaiclub.com
