Radar Armenia‘s interlocutor is Shahan Gantaharyan, an international scholar.
– The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan stated that setting conditions for dialogue instead of encouraging the reintegration of Armenian residents to Azerbaijan is a step against Azerbaijan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, especially since Armenia has recognized Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. How relevant and understandable are the claims of the Azerbaijani side to the international community?
– Azerbaijan is trying to dictate the rules of the game unilaterally. Calling it an exclusive reintegration agenda torpedoes the entire process. Baku is alone in this task. The Russian Federation, the USA, and the EU separately say that there is a problem of status, guarantee of security, and rights in Nagorno Karabakh. Although the collective West and Moscow perceive and interpret it differently. The Russian Federation recently spoke about the need to continue Russian peacekeeping. The USA is discussing the introduction of international instruments. PACE even suggests the involvement of UN institutions.
– In the conditions of such rhetoric, implementing the Stepanakert-Baku dialogue is becoming more blurred. Will the international community pressurize Azerbaijan so that the conference takes place in the end?
– There will be pressure when the international community discusses embargo or sanctions policy. Otherwise, all statements and formulas are declarative. Baku ignores the decisions of the International Criminal Court or the International Court of Justice. Pressures will be effective when sanctions are adopted. That moment has not yet come.
– In this context, let’s note that after the Brussels meeting, EU Council President Charles Michel spoke about Azerbaijan’s readiness to transport cargo via Aghdam to Stepanakert road. What risks does announcing this road from the Brussels platform brings for Artsakh?
– Presenting the problem purely as a humanitarian crisis involves dangers. Unblocking should be required to prevent ethnic cleansing. The Armenian side should present the humanitarian alarm as a means of tribal cleansing and complete depopulation. If the focus is only on humanitarian, then Baku will offer another way to send humanitarian aid, to which Brussels or any other center will respond.
– In general, how do you evaluate the meeting in Brussels, considering there are contradictory disagreements on key issues and whether the process still has chances and opportunities to succeed?
– The parallel processes speak about the diversification of the mediation mission. And it is a fact that there will be contradictions and counterbalancing processes. All this will lead to a lack of geopolitical consensus, which will lead to stretching the status quo. Until then, specific changes are visible in the region, especially regarding the manifestation of Moscow-Ankara contradictions. The problem is that the Armenian side should gain time due to this delay rather than making unilateral concessions. And contrary to this, the Turkish-Azerbaijani tandem is in a hurry.
