Photo by armeniasputnik.am

Sergey Markedonov, politician and leading researcher of the Euro-Atlantic Security Center at the MGIMO Institute, in an interview with Orbeli Analytical Center, spoke about Russia’s position on a possible Turkish military operation in northern Syria, the 3+3 format, as well as key issues related to Armenian-Azerbaijani relations. 

— Turkish President R. T. Erdogan, stated that Turkey will launch a new military operation in northern Syria to complete the establishment of a security zone along the Turkish border, on which it agreed with the United States and Russia back in 2019. What is Russia’s position on this issue?

— Of course, Moscow is not delighted. Recently, Turkish newspapers reported that Moscow and Ankara had not reached an agreement on this issue. It should be noted that the Russian representative gave cautious assessments, that a possible military operation would not contribute to Syria’s security and stability. Earlier it became clear, that the issue will be discussed only between Russia and Turkey, without the West, which pursuing its goals in the first place, could act as mediator.

Russia has balanced relations with Iran, Syria, Turkey, Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, which did not exist during the USSR. Moscow values this and is trying to advance its role as an active player. There have also been crises between Moscow and Ankara, such as in 2015. Nevertheless, the two countries found ways to deescalate the situation. In fact, some experience was gained in resolving acute issues.

— In December 2021, Moscow hosted the first and so far the only 3+3 format meeting without Georgia.  Half a year passed since the first meeting, and despite the official statements, the issue seems to have been pushed to the background. As for you, what is the perspective of the 3+3 format and what problem-solving platform can it become?

— 3+3 format has been discussed for a long time. Many people have forgotten that Iran was the pioneer in promoting this format. In the late 90s, Tehran suggested a format, where the countries of the Caucasus and the three Eurasian superpowers will play a key role in determining the fate of the region. But the problem is that the 3 countries have different interests. It’s hard to imagine that Azerbaijan and Armenia will have common views. Even currently, there are many disagreements and contradictions in the preparatory stage of the peace treaty, demarcation and delimitation. Georgia wouldn’t wish the Eurasian format to prevail in the Caucasus. How to smooth it all out? Big question. I think, that this format would receive additional impulses in case of the stabilization of the situation around Ukraine. Currently, it is hardly possible to expect the revival from the 3+3 format.

— Despite the Russian-Brussels formats, the process of normalization of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan is moving rather slowly. How would you rate the potential impact of these formats on the convergence of the positions of the two countries?

— Despite all efforts, these formats have limited opportunity to influence Baku and Yerevan. The sides should seek for some compromises. If until 2020, Armenia spoke from a position of superiority, now it is the opposite: the two countries have switched places. Here the formats are not so important. They can only help find pragmatic solutions, but everything should be implemented by Baku and Yerevan.

— The issue of unblocking of communications in the South Caucasus can significantly improve the overall atmosphere. Whereas, the difference in approaches to unblocking is quite obvious: on the one hand, Turkey and Azerbaijan, on the other hand, Armenia and interested international players. The “corridor approach” of Baku and Ankara not only delays the implementation of the process, but also creates negative moods in Armenia and in other regional countries. Since Russia has certain obligations in this process, what do you think can be the best model for unblocking communications?

— The issue of unblocking communications cannot be pulled out of the entire existing agenda. I think that without a comprehensive approach, this issue will unlikely be solved. Yes, Moscow is actively advocating a solution to this problem. After 2020, Russia tried to shift the focus from status issues on security to the economy platform. It is the economy, that should do its job, which is based on pragmatism.

Interview conducted by Eduard Melkumyan.