Radar Armenia‘s interlocutor is international affairs expert Shahan Gandaharian.
– The most notable thing last week was the tension in Russian-Azerbaijani relations. Why did these relations become tense? Was the arrest of Azerbaijanis in Yekaterinburg the real reason that aggravated relations?
– There are probably objective reasons for these arrests. However, there are also political motives that quickly influence the development of events. From a global perspective, these data are related to the weakening or gradual removal of the Russian factor in the region. The South Caucasus was previously considered a Russian sphere of influence. Russian influence in Georgia has moved far from its previous position. A process of gradual withdrawal of Russian border guards is observed in Armenia and Azerbaijan, especially after the Artsakh war, which is making a sharp transition to the Turkish zone of influence. These circumstances should be taken into account when discussing the trends in the changing Russian-Azerbaijani relations.
– How long do you think their tension will continue, and what will be the outcome?
– I think Azerbaijan’s dependence on Turkey will increase. Ankara will mainly influence Baku-Moscow relations. And Ankara, in turn, cannot ignore the rules and red lines specified by the US.
– Will this have any impact on Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, particularly on the issue of signing a peace agreement, considering that the Russian side also made allusions to extraterritorial forces following these incidents?
– Moscow made many attempts to reactivate the November statement, especially its 9th point. It did not work. The 9th point discussed lifting the blockade of the region, and Moscow had assumed a key role in this effort, taking on security control. A consensus is forming to reject the Russian presence and to specify a new format and status for security control. It is no coincidence that the American think tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is once again raising the theory of compromising the security of communications channels opened through an American private company.
– I would also like to touch upon Russian-Ukrainian relations. What did the Putin-Macron phone conversation mean in this context?
– It was our first phone conversation in three years. It is worth noting that France was the most anti-Russian European state. We can take into account several circumstances. First, this conversation is taking place in the immediate aftermath of a possible ceasefire. Second, Macron first spoke with the Ukrainian president and then called Putin. And third, after the conversation, he contacted Trump. This chain of contacts indicates that Macron tried to mediate before a possible ceasefire. He also asked Zelensky whether they were ready to make territorial concessions. The points of the phone conversation were a package. They also discussed the events in the Middle East, particularly the issues surrounding Iran. This is also a message to maintain Moscow’s role in different geographical areas.
– Are there prospects for achieving peace in Russian-Ukrainian relations?
– The moment for peace has not yet arrived. There will still be phone conversations, mediated meetings, appeals, and changing drafts of proposals. Moscow aims to secure additional territories before the ceasefire and the commencement of negotiations.
