Opinion - UNPEELING THE ONION: Dennis Sammut wonders why Vladimir Kazimirov is focussing on a very narrow part of the Karabakh story.

This website (commonspace.eu), today published an interview with Vladimir Kazimirov the veteran Russian diplomat who for many years was the key Russian point man on the Karabakh conflict. Kazimirov in today’s interview strongly criticises Baku for the way it is handling the conflict settlement process. The interview is unprecedented in its tone, given who is giving it.

I met Kazimirov on many ocassions, and have found him to be an able and charismatic diplomat of the old school. He came to Baku a few years ago at the invitation of LINKS to speak about the Karabakh conflict. It was an odd affair, attended by senior Azerbaijan government officials including Novruz Mammedov the president’s foreign policy advisor and a number of western ambassadors. As Kazimirov was about to speak five members of the so called “Karabakh Liberation Organisation” KLO disrupted the meeting and started haranguing Kazimirov. This went on for fifteen minutes. There was no violence, and they left quietly, even apologetically after they made their point, and the meeting continued as if nothing had happened.

Meetings attended by Senior state officials are not interrupted in this way often in Baku, and later on I wondered why everybody  remained so calm and composed. But then I have learned a long time ago not to take things at face value in the Caucasus. There is always another angle of the story that one has to look at. In any case it was clear that there was no love lost between Kazimirov and Azerbaijan, and things seem to have taken a turn for the worse this summer as the propaganda war heated up after the failure at Kazan.

But back to Kazimirov’s interview. It sheds light on one or two asspects of the Karabakh conflict settlement process. Kazimirov in this regard has provided a mini Russian version of Wikileaks. Unusually for a Russian diplomat he has written and spoken about his days as the key Russian diplomat dealing with the issue much more than his western counterparts ever did. The commonspace interview is in this mode too, as was an earlier interview he gave to the website in June. In as much as Kazimirov is opening up what has been nearly twenty years of secret negotiations on Karababkh one can only welcome his contribution.

Kazimirov however goes further. He takes exception to the way Baku has been spinning the conflict and conflict settlement process, and in rather strong language. A lot of what he says may or may not be true – I can only judge on the public side of things since unlike Kazimirov I was never directly involved in the negotiations. But what he is saying is clearly a very narrow part of the story. It is not what Kazimirov is saying that I am worried about, it is what he is not saying. And I wonder why?

The Karabakh conflict is like an onion. You unpeel one layer only to find that there are many others left to go. Kazimirov has unpeeled one layer of the onion and thinks that the job is done. Far from it.

 

(c) commonspace.eu

Dennis Sammut is the Executive Director of LINKS and a regular contributor to the international media on issues related to the Caucasus and European security. he may be contacted at www.links-dar.org

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.

Popular