Russian media speculates on longevity of Karabakh truce

Russian media has given plenty of coverage to the meeting in the Kremlin on Monday (11 January) between the president of Azerbaijan and the prime minister of Armenia under the auspices of the president of Russia. The four hour meeting appeared to have been successful and the three sides signed a document agreeing some next steps for the implementation of the 10 November trilateral agreement which halted the Karabakh war and opened a new chapter in relations in the South Caucasus.

There appears however to be considerable scepticism about the longevity of the truce established by the 10 November declaration. The newspaper Izvestya asked Russian experts on the Caucasus to comment, and it says that they believe that the threat of resumed hostilities has not completely vanished, "since radical elements on both sides and the position of Turkey can play a destructive role".

A new working group led by the vice-premiers of Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Russia will meet by the end of the month and will form a list of key areas for work on Nagorno-Karabakh, including plans for the development of transport infrastructure and the region's economy. This was noted in the statement on the development of the situation, signed in Moscow on January 11. Following the recent negotiations in the Kremlin, Russian President Vladimir Putin positively assessed the resolution of the conflict, since it was possible to prevent any further escalation.

Experts interviewed by Izvestia believe that the threat of resumed hostilities has not completely vanished, since radical elements on both sides and the position of Turkey can play a destructive role, and among those holding this view is political analyst Azhdar Kurtov.

He noted that first and foremost, the political situation in Armenia is very unstable, it does not offer any reason to believe that the agreements would be unconditionally implemented. In addition, the situation in the region may worsen once the question of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh is raised, he added. Now this topic remains on the back burner due to the urgent need to resolve more important issues.

"If the problem cannot be sorted out through diplomacy, then a resumption of hostilities is possible," Kurtov noted.

Another thing to keep in mind is the role of Turkey, which is interested in boosting its own influence in the region. "Ankara has already pushed Azerbaijan to more decisively aggressive actions against Armenia. In the future, this is not just possible, but it should be expected," the expert summed up.

The current truce in Karabakh is very fragile and any careless moves can destroy it, Director of the Institute for Peacekeeping Initiatives and Conflictology Denis Denisov noted. The fact that many residents of Armenia still perceive the trilateral agreement of November 9 as a defeat is a problem, he believes.

"It is necessary to present specific positions with a strategic vision in an accessible form so that radical elements do not come to power in Armenia and the conflict does not arise with renewed vigor," Denisov added.

source: commonspace.eu with Izvestya (Moscow) Tass (Moscow) and agencies
photo: The meeting of the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan with the president of Russia on 11 January 2021.

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