Vladimir Socor

Baku thinks that ensuring the security of NATO partner states, including Azerbaijan, is a problem. What can be done about this?

The NATO partner states in the east are in an unsafe situation. NATO mechanisms are not working there. Some countries like Russia and Armenia violate international law and hold under occupation lands that do not belong to them. International law does not work there, though it must. There is a definite security vacuum in this region and even a strategic power vacuum. These factors are hardly taken into account in NATO’s activity. NATO’s new strategic conception is currently being discussed. NATO is likely to specify the role and place of the alliance's eastern neighbours. This is of critical importance for the security of NATO’s allies in Europe too. The operation of the transportation and energy corridor from the Caspian basin to Europe meets the interests of not only NATO's neighbouring states but also Europe and the alliance. The political unity inside the North Atlantic bloc depends on the security of this corridor. And if some countries of the bloc become dependent on Russian oil and gas, the political unity inside the alliance is broken. Therefore, NATO is interested in the security of Azerbaijan and Georgia.

Azerbaijan has not yet applied for NATO membership, but Georgia and Ukraine have and have come under great pressure from Russia as a result. Can NATO neutralize this pressure or are its member-states too dependent on Russian energy sources?

The political unity in the alliance has not  broken, but it might if Russia manages to cut the Caspian basin off from Europe. You were right to say that after Georgia applied for NATO membership, its situation worsened as the United States and NATO had no means, powers or reserves to avert the conflict. Nobody in NATO expected this, as the expectations of Russia turned out to be too unrealistic. Nobody in NATO expected such a war. And when it happened NATO did not react.

You said the US and NATO did not have means. Isn’t this a question of unwillingness?

I cannot say whether it was a matter of unwillingness but there was no expectation. And when there is no expectation, the issue of unwillingness does not arise at all. If there had been expectations, we could have spoken of willingness or unwillingness.

Russia has not fully executed the Medvedev-Sarkozy plan to bring peace to Georgia. Can NATO put pressure on Russia to comply with its obligations?

It is too late to do so, but perhaps it can be done in the future. But now NATO does not want to deal with this situation.

NATO considers Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia its partners. But Armenia is not going to quit the Collective Security Treaty, while Azerbaijan and Georgia are closer partners with NATO. In this context, can NATO be involved in the resolution of the Karabakh conflict in any way?

First, NATO does not want to be involved. But if NATO had had the political will, the alliance could have started negotiations with both parties to mediate in terms of regional security. Yet, relations with Russia are more important for NATO. NATO does not want to compete with Russia to ensure security in the South Caucasus. NATO and the USA have an erroneous opinion that they depend on Russia in combating terrorism and the spread of nuclear weapon as well as in conducting operations in Afghanistan and Iran. Brussels and Washington think that they need Russia’s assistance on these problems. But, certainly, Russia will not help except in exchange for concessions on other problems.

Aliyah Fridman
News.Az