Heydar Jemal

Do you think the USA's position in the South Caucasus has weakened?

I would not say that US positions are weakening in the South Caucasus. I think it is more appropriate to speak of deliberate US policy in the region. Only the naïve can think that US policy is aimed at restoring justice and order in the world. The real goal of the United States is surviving as a unipolar empire. In order to attain this goal, it needs destabilization in the rest of the world, allowing the United States to be the referee. In this connection, it would be an unforgivable mistake to suppose that the United States is interested in a just resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. The United States backed the emergence of the conflict, achieving its goals through its agents - Gorbachev and other USSR leaders. In addition, the unresolved Karabakh conflict makes it easier to control the parties and keep them in a state of dramatic tension which is also consonant with US interests. This superpower needs wars not to happen whenever it wants but whenever it can benefit from them.

And when might the US benefit from a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war in Karabakh?

Considering the interests of US conservatives, they would benefit more from an Armenian-Azerbaijani war in Karabakh closer to the next presidential elections in the United States, for example by the end of 2011, which will give them an opportunity to make use of anti-Russian rhetoric in 2012, when the US presidential elections are held, and to accuse Obama’s administration of mistakes in relations with Russia. Accordingly, the US president would benefit if a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war in Karabakh did not take place close to the presidential elections so that its implications were less painful for the Democrats.

What would be the position of the current leadership of the United States and Russia if a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war started in Nagorno-Karabakh?

It is quite obvious that the start of a new Armenian-Azerbaijani war in Nagorno-Karabakh would create conditions for US and NATO intervention. It is timely to note that the main objective of the United States would not be the restoration of the status quo but the direct involvement of Russia after which the United States could start a series of actions in this respect: from destabilization of the situation inside Russia up to inciting conflicts throughout the CIS. We have already seen the events in Kyrgyzstan and I suppose the intensification of the problems in Tajikistan. There is one more circumstance which must be taken into account. US President Obama is unable to start hostilities against Iran, since he has the image of a peacekeeper. Therefore, the current leadership of the United States strives to sow discord between Russia, on the one hand, and Iran and Turkey on the other. The final and desirable goal for the Americans would be the start of a military conflict between these countries. The United States needs it to remove Russia from the geopolitical chess board and not to be considered the initiator of aggression against Iran.

What political action should Azerbaijan take to ensure that a new war would liberate the land occupied by Armenia? 

Naturally, in the event of a new war with Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan should rely on its allies. It is quite clear that Russia and the United States would not support Azerbaijan. The US sees Azerbaijan as the next location for a military contingent for possible further action against Iran. Iran itself will also not take Azerbaijan’s side since Armenia is a nuclear channel for it. Today Turkey is not interested either in supporting Azerbaijan in the event of an Azerbaijani-Armenian war in Karabakh. Turkey currently has good relations with Iran and Russia, while support for Azerbaijan in the event of an Armenian-Azerbaijani war in Karabakh might thwart its plans to create a big bloc in the Middle East. Azerbaijan can, therefore, see only the Arab world as its ally. If Azerbaijan manages to get their support, as well as the support of at least some of the leading EU states, rapid and determined action on the battle field - a strong and well-organized blitzkrieg - would help it settle the issue in its favour.

Akper Hasanov
News.Az