Radar Armenia‘s interlocutor is Shahan Gantaharyan, an international scholar.
– Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office announced that the Israeli Cabinet will hold a meeting to approve the ceasefire agreement with Hamas and the release of hostages. How do you interpret such a development?
– There will be a ceasefire in Gaza, followed by negotiations on the conclusion of a political agreement. Israel has internal government problems. Some ministers threaten to resign if the agreement is signed. Netanyahu is facing a difficult choice. However, I think the US pressure will be adequate, and a ceasefire agreement will exist.
– In your opinion, why was it possible to reach such an agreement only now?
– This moment is connected to the transition period of the US administration. It will be Biden’s last act, necessarily in agreement with the new administration. After Syria and Lebanon, it is Gaza’s turn. This is another interconnected link in redrawing the Middle East’s political map.
– Armenia and the USA signed a document on strategic cooperation. Will this document provide Armenia with real peace guarantees?
– This is not a last-minute agreement and has its history. They arrived at this document after various circumstances. Azerbaijan worries about Yerevan’s security, economy, and energy diversification policy. The US move is a response to Azerbaijan, both in terms of territorial integrity in general and exclusion of the status of the corridor. The message is mainly addressed to the Russian Federation regarding renewing the nuclear power plant or, in general, having a new nuclear power plant. This is the agreement on the first steps to eliminate energy dependence.
– Will the Trump administration remain faithful to the agreements reached with this document? Will it be put into practice rather than stay only on paper?
– The policy will not change, although there will be stops and stylistic differences. This is within the limits of US regional geopolitics, and it is not due to administration changes. Instead, this policy is related to the American system of determining long-term strategic directions.
– Against this background, it was officially announced that Armenia and Azerbaijan will start demarcation works from the northern part. How do you interpret this agreement, considering that a few days ago, the president of Azerbaijan gave speeches using bellicose rhetoric?
– The rhetoric and the events recorded on the ground are contradictory. Azerbaijan threatens on the one hand and negotiates on the other, which is traditional behavior for Baku. The parties go to such negotiations, not necessarily independently. Various key players are involved in these issues, on which the peace train depends. Threatening is Baku’s decision; negotiating is not necessarily only Baku’s.
