Challenges to the Security of the South Caucasus Countries and NATO - 2016: Page 7 of 9
19 Июля, 2016
poorly thought out, shortsighted and immoral in terms of allied relations.
Sergey Markedonov - With the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia by Russian Federation and with deepening of cooperation between Georgia, USA and NATO, the status quo marked eight years ago is strengthening. And the strengthening is happening from the both sides. It will change only if there will be some changes in South Ossetia status, but I do not think that Moscow will accelerate this process if Georgia does not get NATO MAP or full Alliance membership.
Sergey Markedonov - Status quo in Karabakh is the best option for Russia. And the reason is obvious. The country that has multiple complex challenges would not want a multiplication of the additional risks and in case of defrosting of the Karabakh conflict that would be inevitable. Yes, Azerbaijan follows another logic. But nobody said that Russia will be playing in pairs with Turkey. There are no grounds for that. As well as there are no grounds for thinking, that Kremlin will spur the negotiation process. The important thing is to keep it from unfolding into war, and then we will see. It is probably a bit cynical, but politics in general assumes cynicism in large scale (this is not my position; I am just describing the kind of reality). At the same time Russia does not want to start open confrontation with Azerbaijan (I already explained why yesterday and the day before). This is a complicated behavior, I do agree. As for NATO, besides the reluctance to interfere with the mediators I have seen no projects or at least drafts. What prevents the intellectuals working on different research project under the auspices of NATO or EU to present such a draft?
Laura Baghdasaryan -When I wrote about NATO's precise position of noninterference to the affairs of the official mediators, I meant the official level. However, if you mean also the non-official level, than at least this project of our center financed by NATO, within the frameworks of which we discuss Karabakh case and the role of NATO in the security issues of our countries, serves as an evidence that those attempts are made, if not in form of drafts but at least discussions.
… I have never once met at the official level any statement neither from NATO nor the EU on the ineffectiveness of the OSCE Minsk Group. On the contrary, every time there is almost tedious reference to the OSCE Minsk Group, where representatives of NATO and the EU make any comments on Karabakh. Moreover, if I am not mistaken, Azerbaijan and periodically Turkey are the ones to fiddle around with formulations on non-effectiveness of Minsk Group, but not Armenia or any international organization.
Sergey Markedonov – I did not mean that someone is broadcasting about the ineffectiveness of the OSCE Minsk Group from the NATO stands. In addition to the documents and statements there are closed roundtables, there is the Chatham house rule and so on. And there they have enough of that kind
Pages
- « первая
- ‹ предыдущая
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- следующая ›
- последняя »
+37410 563363
ул. Бузанда 1/3, 8-й этаж, Ереван, Армения