Radar Armenia‘s interlocutor is Shahan Gantaharyan, an international scholar.
– Azerbaijan and Russia seem to have started a demarche against France. Both countries benefit from the inactivity of the OSCE Minsk Group. How vital is France’s role in the conflict’s settlement, and is it not exaggerated?
– In this regard, there is an overlap of interests between Russia and Azerbaijan. The OSCE Minsk Group’s dysfunctional state implies France’s expulsion because the Russian Federation and the USA are already carrying out a mediation mission. France has been replaced by Brussels, whose negotiations Paris actively participates in. Negotiations are going on in three separate directions. At the same time, however, it allows Paris to voice its accusations more directly and make demands towards Azerbaijan.
– The Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia is in Washington. This visit followed the Washington negotiations. Because the second round was ineffective, how do you interpret Armen Grigoryan’s visit to the USA?
– The parties discussed the regional and broader extra-regional security situation and challenges at the meeting you mentioned. This implies that geopolitical agendas were on the table. When “broader extra-regional” is mentioned, it implies the capacity of the agenda; why Washington gave such capacity to the discussion circle is remarkable. Armenia is considered a springboard for implementing policies in the region. In terms of energy, the USA made it clear several times that it aims to achieve energy independence in Armenia, equivalent to the American policy of not depending on the Russian Federation.
– The situation in Nagorno-Karabakh is getting worse. Against this background, it is announced that a meeting at the level of the country’s leaders will be held soon on the Brussels platform. What are your expectations?
– Azerbaijan is in a hurry but has yet to achieve its goals. There is no corridor they cherish; there is no agreement on demarcation and demarcation. Azerbaijan also rejects the Stepanakert-Baku direct negotiation format and needs to come to terms with involving international instruments. He shoots, threatens, and violates endless agreements based on all these circumstances. This is the traditional behavior of Azerbaijan.
– Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova, commenting on Artsakh President Harutyunyan’s statement that the Russian side requested that three villages of Lachin be handed over to Azerbaijan as soon as possible, replied that she does not know such an official. What does this mean?
– Zakharova’s statement is tantamount to denial and non-recognition of official Stepanakert. Denial may be favorable to the Armenian side and non-recognition to Azerbaijan. It applies the rule of the mediator game with the principle of equal distance implementation.
– In this way, isn’t Russia giving the green light to Azerbaijan to avoid negotiations with Stepanakert at all costs?
– Moscow will only agree to the launch of the Baku-Stepanakert format once it is stipulated by a neutral international guarantee, equivalent to the counterbalancing of the Russian Federation or its expulsion altogether. If Stepanakert-Baku were only through Russian mediation, then Russia would agree. This gives meaning to the Baku-Stepanakert direct negotiations; the condition is the introduction of international tools.
– There is talk about the possibility of a new escalation in Artsakh. Will there be new actions ahead of the Brussels negotiations?
– Baku stated that it is always ready for escalation in pre-, negotiation, and post-negotiation periods. Armenian diplomacy and the lobbying system are faced with the imperative to use the Azerbaijani escalation fully. It should be emphasized to the international family that Artsakh cannot live within Azerbaijan.
