The leader of “Free Democrats” party, the Deputy of the National Assembly, Khachatur Kokobelyan, believes that Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s words of praise, addressed to Azerbaijan and its authorities, is not a coincidence considering also that Zhirinovsky’s current statement differ completely from his previous statements. In an interview with Tert.am Khachatur Kokobelyan said he doesn’t think the Russian-Azerbaijani arms deal makes Armenia’s future Eurasian integration efforts realistic. According to him, Armenia has an alternative which as a serious lever is always ignored.
Mr. Kokobelyan, lately much is spoken about the Russia’s favored policy towards Azerbaijan explaining such a policy by Russia’s attempt to involve also Azerbaijan into the Eurasian Economic Union. How would you comment Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s statement of praise towards Azerbaijan that indeed differ completely from his previous statements.
“We have repeatedly stated that Russia is carrying out an arms trade with Azerbaijan, a non-member states member of CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization), whose armament is targeted against Armenia, a country which is considered Russia’s strategic ally. So, it is an open secret that the Russian-Armenian strategic relations have from now on turned into a farce; likewise it is obvious that Russia has been ignoring both the political-military and economic interest of Armenia for quite a long time, guiding itself absolutely by its own interests as a superpower, and this is not surprising. Moreover, the Armenian authorities should have long ago drawn corresponding conclusions rather than tried to justify Russia’s each action more diligently than Russian state officials do.
-I am surprised that some politicians do not want to understand up to this point that the delay in Armenia’s joining the European Economic Union is associated with the political trade between Russia and Azerbaijan. As to Mr. Zhirinovsky’s statement of praise toward Azerbaijan, I am sure that those, who are more or less familiar with Russia’s foreign and domestic policy, should have known that Zhirinovsky is expressing those approaches of Russia’s government that may be perceived more acutely. Therefore, such issues are being raised by Zhirinovsky or other politicians like him in order to check public reaction and then implement the state policy. This is extremely a troubling process, and I am of the opinion that Armenian authorities and particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should have demanded proper explanations from Russia for such its behavior. Moreover, the Armenian authorities should have reached the suspension of Azerbaijan’s armament process by Russia.
You mentioned that our authorities tried to justify Russia’s each action. Judging by the President Serzh Sargsyan, Prime minister Hovik Abrahamyan and other politicians’ statements that Armenia has concerns about arms trade between Russia, our strategic ally, and Azerbaijan, do you think that our authorities emphasized the importance of that issue and reminded Russia about its own obligations.
“I have had the occasion to address the issue before and said that Serzh Sargsyan’s statement, as that of a president, was necessary but belated. Instead of restricting themselves with statements of the kind, both Serzh Sargsyan and the authorities, including the prime minister, have to urge Russia to stop behaving in a way not suiting a strategic ally. The Armenian Foreign Ministry was obliged to send a protest note to Russia to have the country make a public statement and suspend Azerbaijan’s arms supply. It’s an open secret that Azerbaijan acquires 80 percent of its weapons from Russia today, with Belarus being the second country. So given the role which Belarus and Russia play in the EaEU, the Armenia-Russia relations and the entire process turn into a farce; that’s just nonsense,” he noted.
How do you estimate the compliance of Russia-Azerbaijan current relationship with the West’s interests?
It is inconsistent with the West’s interests, but that is another issue. First we need to understand which are those countries and super powers that consider such relations, including Azerbaijan’s armament, unfavorable to them, and be able to use that lever too.
Do you consider such armament as the incitement to the war? In other words, is there a peril of war?
We can never exclude the peril of war; however, currently I do not see any threat of war, fortunately, and I consider Russia-Azerbaijan current relationship mostly a political project that aims at involving Azerbaijan into the Eurasian Economic Union which currently is inconsistent with Armenia’s interests.
And what is the object of the trade? Is it Nagorno-Karabakh?
Of course the most important issue for Azerbaijan is the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and we witness the claims in the Azerbaijani press (although at the expert levels, it then becomes a state policy), where azeris put forward the condition that if Russia is able to ensure the return of at least two regions, Azerbaijan will discuss its joining the Eurasian Economic Union. But I think that Russia, having its own obvious interests, understands that the Nagorno-Karabakh authorities and the defense forces fully control the borders and the violation of the current balance may lead to such a situation in the region that Russian military bases, thereafter, will be completely unnecessary in Armenia.
And then what can Russia offer to Azerbaijan, if not Karabakh?
Russia makes an obvious offer to Azerbaijan which cannot be ignored anymore. Russia sells exclusively attacking weapons to Azerbaijan which is great support to Azerbaijan.
-Does Armenia have an alternative in such circumstances?
Armenia’s current policy and actions emphasize its way to Russia. And the capacity of domestic economy and the handover of Armenia’s strategic objects, including railway, the communication channels, the distribution networks, gas sphere to the various Russian structures, confirm Armenian government’s short-sighted policy, whereas such a policy is unacceptable and impermissible in Armenia’s current situation. Moreover, it is impermissible to depend on one superpower, in this case on Russia. Unfortunately, it is already clear for the international community that Armenia is no longer an independent player in the international arena. Consequently, it reduces our abilities to solve all of our problems, including the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
–And what can Armenia offer the EaEU members in their interest and then be able to use that offer as a lever for balancing the situation?
– Armenia has a very serious lever on Russia that is always ignored, and it seems that Armenian authorities are taking such ignorance for granted. The Russian military bases are located in Armenia, and Russia should make a conclusion that it’s the only country in the region where its military bases are represented. In addition, this is the NATO-Russia border in the face of Turkish border, and Russia should make a clear conclusion that by continuing such behavior, it can’t be considered a strategic ally anymore, and in that case Russia’s military units have nothing to do in Armenia.
Mr. Kokobelyan, The withdrawal of Russian troops from Armenia is a threat for us from the Turkish side; isn’t it? Moreover, much is already spoken that some part of Russian troops were withdrawn from the Armenian-Turkish border.
– I want our society and especially our politicians to assess the situation soberly making the necessary conclusions, and some Armenian circles not to support the anti-Armenian views that are putting forward by some Russian structures. I exclude the possibility of the withdrawal by Russia of its troops without any major arrangements, terms and conditions arising out of the major military-political trade. And the information about the withdrawal of Russian troops is used to create inner mood in order to show that the safety of Armenia’s citizens depends on Russia. This is absolutely nonsense.
