Q: To your mind, what developments are expected in Karabakh peace process after Sargsyan-Aliyev and Co-chairs meeting in Krakow?

A: The developments depend on number of factors. What matters are the Co-chairs objectives. There is a goal to achieve an intermediate solution and sign an interim document for further deployment of peacekeepers in the conflict zone. They clearly understand that currently Karabakh conflict cannot be settled. Why? Because approaches differ. Karabakh status is the core issue, and Aliyev has already stated that he views Karabakh only as part of Azerbaijan. That is why the development depends on the position of Armenian side.

Q: In the interview with NEWS.am OSCE MG CO-Chair Matthew Bryza stated that seven regions will be returned to Azerbaijan. How can you comment on this statement?

A: I am confident Matthew Bryza just expressed his wish and policy aimed to withdraw troops from the region and bring in the peacekeepers. In should be regarded in the context of regional conflict (where we all are aware what is going on). Karabakh status is protracted through referendum, and it is unclear when, where and under what terms the referendum will be held. So it is evident, there is no objective to settle Karabakh conflict. U.S. aims at bringing in peacekeepers and extending influence in the region.

Q: What are the possibilities of war resumption, that today everyone speaks of?

A: One should always be ready for war. There should be corresponding preconditions for war resumption, having nothing the like at the moment. Azerbaijan should provide military advantage that it unavailable today, and will hardly get in the near future despite the amount it allocates. Azerbaijani army cannot be regarded as powerful due to its current moral and psychological state, it can be named only a group of people and technology.

War is not in the interests of great powers, as Nabucco, gas and oil mains will be annihilated in a flash. During the war enemy’s economical potential is destroyed first. Under such crisis, when the worsened economy is recessing, this will have disastrous consequences. They regard warlike statements as an information war source to influence Armenian side and force it to make concessions.

Q: What is your opinion on Armenian and Karabakh authorities position in peace process?

A: I consider the assent to Madrid Principles a wrong strategy. In this case Armenian sides’ interests will be affected. Armenia should raise the issues of Shahumyan, Getashen and of 400 thousand refugees. There is not a single word about Armenian territories like Artsvashen, etc., and withdrawal of Azerbaijani troops from Martakert (Karabakh territory) in the Principles. All points in Azerbaijan’s interests are clearly stated, whereas those advantageous for Armenia are either not there, or just an unclear and vague wording of status.

Q: What is the way out?

A: There are some crucial issues: reinforcement of internal policy, restoration of society’s confidence in authorities and clear up of the points on foreign policy. Overall the approach in negotiations has to be altered. Even the format is unclear in this trilateral conflict. Armenia is an equal negotiator, just like Azerbaijan and Karabakh are. At that, Armenia should voice only issues relating to itself, while on Karabakh issue to appear as the guarantor of security.

Interviewer Artak Yeghiazaryan