Menu
Latest
Menu
Latest
Interview

OPINION: NATO: They in Baku reaffirm Azerbaijan’s commitment to find a peaceful solution to Karabakh conflict

13 March 2012

NATO Secretary General's Special Representative for the Caucasus and Central Asia, James Appathurai, has given an exclusive interview to ArmInfo News Agency about the results of his visit to the South Caucasus region in mid February

Will you please tell me about the most significant results of your visits to Baku and Yerevan?
 
In the run-up to the Chicago Summit in May, the NATO SG wants to have a strategic-level dialogue on security issues of common interest with Armenia, Azerbaijan and a number of other key partners. The intention of my visit was to explain NATO’s current priorities and to listen to the views from Armenia and Azerbaijan on domestic developments, regional security and the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. I think the visit has been a success and enhanced our mutual understanding. The visit also allowed us to prepare for President Aliyev’s visit to Brussels on 15 February and the recent visit of President Sargsyan.
 
Baku has increased its military rhetoric threatening with a new war in Karabakh. Did you speak on the topic with the Azerbaijani leadership?
 
Yes, I listened to the views of President Aliyev on the situation in Nagorno Karabakh as well as the stalled peace process. They reaffirmed Azerbaijan’s commitment to find a peaceful settlement.
 
What will NATO do in case of the war strikes in Karabakh? In which case may NATO intervene?
 
There is no military solution to the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. A resumption of violence will set all sides back. I believe most people in the region understand this. I believe NATO will continue to support the efforts of the Minsk Group co-chairs.
 
As regards Iran’s nuclear program, Teheran seems to have no intention to suspend the program; on the contrary, it has hastened the implementation of the program. So, how will NATO respond to Iran if Teheran does not stop it?
 
NATO as an organization is not involved in the Iran question. However, NATO expects Iran to live up to its international commitments.
 
How can the situation around Iran and any repercussion bound with the problem affect the geopolitical system of the region? Did you speak about Iran’s problem in Baku and Yerevan? Will NATO need any kind of support from Baku and Yerevan in case of an attack on Iran?
 
As I said, NATO as an organization is not involved in the Iran question. It would therefore also be unhelpful if I would speculate here on future developments. We discussed regional security issues, and I listened to the views in Baku and Yerevan on their relations with their neighbours, including Iran. I believe the Governments in Armenia and Azerbaijan understand very well that NATO is not involved in the Iran question.
 
How do the tensions between France and Turkey over the Armenian resolution in France affect the work between these two partners in NATO?
 
I am of course aware of the debate, but I have not witnessed any direct repercussions on the relations between the two countries within the Alliance. As Members of the Alliance, France and Turkey interact on a daily basis in Brussels and within the military command structures. It is up to the two capitals to consider the best way forward in their bilateral relations.

By Oksana Musaelyan

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma
Trending

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

20 October 2026
Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031
Trending

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

17 October 2026
Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov
Trending

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

15 January 2026
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)
Murad Muradov
Lauri Nikulainen interviews Murad Muradov