Radar Armenia‘s interlocutor is Shahan Gantaharyan, an international scholar.
– Syrian President Bashar Assad refused to meet the Turkish President. How can this affect Syria-Turkey relations, and how will it affect the region?
– The freezing of Damascus-Ankara relations, the visibility of de-freezing tendencies, and the current tone of the rhetoric must be considered in agreement with the upheavals of Ankara-Moscow links. Let’s remember the quadrilateral meeting held in Moscow and the strict conditions voiced by the representative of Damascus to Ankara. Damascus now says that the primary agenda with Ankara should be the removal of Turkish troops from Syrian territories. There would be no such increase in the ceiling without coordination with Moscow. And that is already one of the most essential topics of Moscow-Ankara military-political trade.
– Do you see a possibility of resuming the “grain deal,” and what does Russia expect from the resumption of the deal?
– In essence, this is also a humane, global food, but it is a card that can be used for big political trade. Everything depends on the agreement on the cease-fire, the volume of the various assistance that the West continues to Ukraine, and, by and large, the collective West-Russia tensions and, by and large, the Moscow-Ankara “bazaar.” Considering all these circumstances, he will not likely resume the deal quickly.
– Referring to the situation in the South Caucasus, Erdogan noted that at this moment, “an important opportunity for lasting peace has been created in the South Caucasus.” How do you interpret this statement? Who is the message addressed?
– It is not the first time official Ankara has expressed such “optimism.” It is an imitation and, instead, a statement favoring the Turkish-Azerbaijani haste. At the same time, a step to put responsibility on the Armenian side. The process was progressing normally, but the Armenian side needed to implement the expected measures.
– The Azerbaijani side, speaking about the situation in Artsakh, said that the issue is artificially politicized. They say that when you are hungry, you should not dictate conditions and make a difference in how the expected food will arrive. Do not these statements of Azerbaijan make the situation more complicated for Armenia because these formulations are placed in the context of humanitarian problems?
– This contradicts Erdogan’s “optimism” and puts the responsibility for the problems on the Armenian side. The purpose of the manipulation is evident. The humanitarian road plan of Aghdam or Fizuli is simply the integration agenda put forward by Azerbaijan. They are speaking from a humanitarian point of view, but they are trying to implement a purely political plan.
