Confederation in South Caucasus unreal yet - Ali Hasanov

1news.az interviewed Ali Hasanov, Head of the public policy department of the Presidential Administration of Azerbaijan.

Creation of confederation of Azerbaijan-Turkey or Turkey-Azerbaijan-Georgia or even the Confederation Georgia-Azerbaijan has been discussed intensively lately. For example, in his recent statement to Georgian mass media, Deputy Foreign Minister of this country Nino Kalandadze stated readiness of her state to unite into a confederation with Azerbaijan. What do you think about it, as an official representative of the presidential administration?

You know, it is not an easy question. Certainly, such ideas exist, in different periods they were voiced by these or those politicians and it became the object of discussions. The example of confederation has been earlier in the South Caucasus. At that time, before three South Caucasus countries joined the USSR in separate, there was the South Caucasus confederation. Similar ideas were voiced in the next periods.

The European Union also voices ideas that after the South Caucasus countries settle all conflict situations between them and join into a single confederation, make the borders transparent and facilitate their customs issues, entry-exit issues and so on, the future integration of these countries to EU is quite possible.

Today the experience of confederations of interstate unions is either studied or applied in different parts of the Earth. Such issues are being discussed but they are not that simple. In case such issues became pressing, they will require serious discussion. This issue must become an object of serious discussions by the public, parliaments, sociopolitical circles of the state and it is necessary to define all of its positive and negative aspects. In this view, it is currently impossible to say clear ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to this idea. There are ideas, discussions are underway, future will show whether this idea is true, whether the probability of its implementation is high and which positive or negative features it may have.

Do you think that if the process comes close to being realized, it may cause a stiff reaction and pressure of our northern and southern neighbors?


I do not want to give any predictions about what is inexistent yet. This issue is unreal so far and there is no serious reaction to it. Certainly, in case this idea is realized, some circles will take actions based on their interests.

For example, at the recent conference in Batumi, I stated existence of definite circles and powers that are not interested in peace, stability and international friendship between the South Caucasus and keen on constant conflicts between these peoples and states. But after peoples and nations and states define the clear circle of their interests and come to a definite solution, external powers will not be able to influence them. Therefore, I don’t want to comment on what does not exist. We’ll see.

By saying external powers, do you imply official circles or any power centers?

I wouldn’t like to specify them. Among them, there will be either states or sociopolitical circles and groups. For example, let’s say, in every country there are different communities. There are nationalists, internationalists and there are those who sacrifice the interests of separate countries in favor of their own.

There are also those who offer to occupy the whole world and again divide it between 3-4 powers of influence. There may be different powers, but I wouldn’t specify them.

1news.az

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

Israeli parliament votes to bring back the death penalty, but only for Palestinians

srael’s parliament approved a bill on Monday that would allow the execution of Palestinians convicted on terror charges for deadly attacks, a move that has been criticized as discriminatory and immediately drew a court challenge. Sixty-two lawmakers, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, voted in favor and 48 against the bill, championed by far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir. There was one abstention and the rest of the lawmakers were not present. Ben Gvir in the run-up to the vote had worn a lapel pin in the shape of a noose, symbolising his support for the legislation. “We made history!!! We promised. We delivered,” he posted on X after the vote. The bill would make the death penalty the default punishment for Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank found guilty of intentionally carrying out deadly attacks deemed “acts of terrorism” by an Israeli military court. The bill says that the sentence may be reduced to life imprisonment under “special circumstances.” Palestinians in the West Bank are automatically tried in Israeli military courts. Meanwhile, under the bill, in Israeli criminal courts anyone “who intentionally causes the death of a person with the aim of harming an Israeli citizen or resident out of an intention to put an end to the existence of the State of Israel shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.” Criminal courts try Israeli nationals, including Palestinian citizens and residents of east Jerusalem. The bill sets the execution method as hanging, adding that it should be carried out within 90 days of the sentencing, with a possible postponement of up to 180 days. - ‘Parallel tracks’ - The bill appears to conflict with Israel’s Basic Laws, which prohibit arbitrary discrimination, and shortly after it was passed, a leading human rights group announced that it had filed a petition with the Supreme Court demanding the legislation’s annulment. “The law creates two parallel tracks, both designed to apply to Palestinians,” the Association for Civil Rights in Israel said in a statement. “In military courts — which have jurisdiction over West Bank Palestinians — it establishes a near-mandatory death sentence,” the rights group said. In civilian courts, the law’s stipulation that defendants must have acted “with the aim of negating the existence” of Israel “structurally excludes Jewish perpetrators,” the group added. The association argued the law should be annulled on both jurisdictional and constitutional grounds. During the debate in parliament, opposition lawmaker and former deputy Mossad director, Ram Ben Barak, expressed outrage at the legislation. “Do you understand what it means that there is one law for Arabs in Judea and Samaria, and a different law for the general public for which the State of Israel is responsible?” he asked fellow parliamentarians, using the Israeli name for the West Bank. “It says that Hamas has defeated us. It has defeated us because we have lost all our values.” - ‘Discriminatory application’ - Lawmaker Limor Son Har-Melech from Ben Gvir’s party, who years ago survived an attack by Palestinian militants in which her husband was killed, urged fellow parliamentarians to approve the bill. “For years, we endured a cruel cycle of terror, imprisonment, release in reckless deals, and the return of these human monsters to murder Jews again ... And today, my friends, this cycle has come full circle.” The Palestinian Authority condemned the law’s adoption, saying that “Israel has no sovereignty over Palestinian land.” “This law once again reveals the nature of the Israeli colonial system, which seeks to legitimize extrajudicial killing under legislative cover,” it added. In February, Amnesty International had urged Israeli lawmakers to reject the legislation, citing its “discriminatory application against Palestinians.” On Sunday, Britain, France, Germany and Italy expressed “deep concern” over the bill, which they said risked “undermining Israel’s commitments with regards to democratic principles.” While the death penalty exists for a small number of crimes in Israel, it has become a de facto abolitionist country — the Nazi Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann was the last person to be executed in 1962. Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967 and violence there has soared since Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel triggered the Gaza war. (read more by clicking the image above).

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)